You are confusing copy/cut and paste with drag and drop, same as the other person who replied. Just because you can cut and paste some things with drag and drop, doesn't mean drag and drop is the same thing as cut and paste. What about dragging something onto a printer or application icon, for example?
Us human beings aren't built to wave our hands around all day long. It's okay when you are mousing because you are resting your hand on a surface, but your arms would get very tired if you had to use a Minority Report style interface for the same amount of time as you use a mouse. It's like voice recognition - sounds good in theory, but sucks in practice.
How screwed up is development over in Redmond that they got it right on the Mac & got it wrong on their own OS?
Dunno, but they did the same thing with Internet Explorer - Internet Explorer for the Mac was the first web browser with reasonably complete support for CSS 1, and it also handles the PNG alpha channel just fine. Meanwhile, five years later, the latest version of Internet Explorer for Windows still can't handle the PNG alpha channel, despite the specification being nine years old.
It must be something specific to the Mac though - their other platform development is as miserable as their Windows development. Witness the abomination of Internet Explorer for UNIX or the dire Frontpage extensions for Apache.
Instead of jumping through hoops with -name "*.[Oo][Oo][Gg]", you can just use -iname "*.ogg". Of course, in this instance, it doesn't matter because Windows matches case-insensitively anyway.
Some jobs do in fact prevent you from working for the competitor. A lot of the time it's part of the non-disclosure agreement.
I've heard in the past that these types of clauses are generally unenforceable. Any lawyers care to chime in?
This prevents you from being able to take your knowledge of a product that you were working on at company A to company B.
Why is that a problem? Trade secrets, patents and copyright are already in place to protect against this type of thing.
This kind of practice is completely ethical.
You think so? Where are you supposed to work for the next three years then? At McDonalds? These types of agreements essentially remove the possibility of you doing anything you are remotely qualified for even after your employment ends. What are you supposed to do for a living?
If a company really thinks that an employee has such valuable knowledge that copyrights, patents and trade secrets aren't enough, then they should write a really long notice period into their contracts and continue to pay the employee for doing what they are told.
Taking your knowledge from 1 company to another is very unethical
This is nonsense. It's called "experience". What, you forget everything you learned at a job when you leave the place? I wouldn't want to employ you.
If a site looks broken in IE6, win2000 users will be annoyed with Microsoft
If significant numbers of websites look broken in IE6, then it will be because there are few IE6 users about. So long as there are a significant numbers of IE6 users about, web developers will make sure their websites work in it. And typically, the user blames the website not the browser anyway. The number of people who are going to be annoyed at Microsoft are going to be in a minority.
We still test in IE5 and that's pretty typical. IE5 was released seven years ago. If IE7 is released this year, then people will still be testing in IE6 in 2012. Probably longer - it didn't require an OS upgrade to switch from IE5 to 5.5 or 6.
No, they royally fucked over Spyglass. They made a deal with Spyglass so that Spyglass would get a cut of all the profits made from Internet Explorer as it was based upon Spyglass Mosaic. Remember, this was back when web browsers were something you could buy in a box. Getting a cut of all sales for a flagship application sold by Microsoft? Spyglass must have thought they really lucked out!
Then Microsoft illegally dumped Internet Explorer on the market for no cost in order to kill Netscape. 5% of zero profits isn't a lot of money, is it? Spyglass no longer exists.
Neither is Internet Explorer. It has no special privileges, it runs with the same permissions as the user, same as Firefox.
Trident, the rendering engine that handles HTML, CSS, etc, is embedded by many programs, including Internet Explorer, but that's no different to any other OS. Many KDE applications embed KHTML - even Amarok, KDE's media player embeds KHTML. Many GNOME applications embed gtk-html or Gecko. The same thing will happen with WebCore on OS X.
The "Internet Explorer is embedded into the OS" criticism is pure horseshit - always has been. Funny how people attacked Microsoft for saying so in court because they thought it was a lie, and once the court case was over, attacked Microsoft because they thought it was the truth.
You can't have it both ways. It's either embedded into the OS or it isn't. And if it is, don't claim Microsoft lied in court, and hold KDE and GNOME to the same standard.
Editing the CSS is in fact worse, becauase integrating and transferring the locations for the CSS tags for upload is even worse than having to deal with single files for single functions.
I've been a web developer for about seven years, first using CSS about five years ago. I have read and re-read that sentence and I can't figure out what on earth you mean. Could you try rephrasing it with normal terminology? I understand all the words, but they make no sense whatsoever when you arrange them in a sentence the way that you did. For instance: what on earth does "integrating a location" entail?
I agree that generated code tends to be awful, but that's not really related to whether it's presentational HTML 3.2 that's being generated or if it's modern HTML 4.01+CSS that's being generated.
I'm not going to stick with Apple! I'll switch to... er... to... er... I'll buy an x86 machine that will run all x86 OSes except for OS X, instead of an x86 machine that will run all x86 OSes. Just to spite them.
It just boggles the mind that people would throw out a Windows machine and then replace it with another! Windows machine which is immediately susceptible and commonly infected within twenty minutes or so of being re-connected to the Internet.
The smarter move would be to migrate to a system that is less affected by worms/virus/security issues.
The majority of people have only been exposed to Windows. They think computers simply wear out. They don't see it as getting infected over and over again by dozens of worms, they see it as "oh well, computer's worn out, better replace it".
In that context, it's perfectly reasonable to go and get something similar to what they already had. They don't think anything happening is wrong. They think this is normal.
Until something happens to teach the average person that this isn't right and can be avoided by switching to something like Mac OS X, this will carry on happening. I have no idea what that something is. Maybe a virus that forces the person to read an explanation of the issues before it gives access of the computer back or something? I dunno.
The writer of this article is a little strange if he considers a P233 old hardware.
Er, no. You are a little strange if you don't consider a P233 to be old hardware.
Think about it. Since then, we've got rid of the old-style keyboard plug and serial mice in favour of PS/2, and then got rid of PS/2 in favour of USB. We've gone from 233MHz as normal to 2333MHz as normal - CPUs are ten times faster. We've gone from 10GB hard disks to 100GB hard disks. We've gone from 32MB or 64MB RAM as standard to a 1GB RAM as standard.
By any reasonable measure, a P233 is old. Sure, you might argue that it's modern in that it uses transistors instead of vacuum pumps, but I don't think a vacuum pump computer is going to run any form of Windows well, do you?
Back when Windows 2000 came out (1999, kids) I was using a P233 as my primary machine.
In 1999, I was using a Celeron 400 (still do, as a file server). Even back then, that was a budget CPU I bought as a student.
And Windows 2000 was released in the year 2000, believe it or not. Did you think the "2000" was just some arbitrary number Microsoft stuck on the end?
I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.
Great. If you go to a geek's house, you'll be able to view your movies, and if you go to any normal person's, you probably won't.
What a stunning rebuttal to the idea of an iPod that can show video in practically any home, aimed at non-geeks.
Everyone on the panel said that every effort was being made to make the movie faithful to the game
Except for the central plot devices, Mars and Hell, right? Compare and contrast:
Now: Everyone on the panel said that every effort was being made to make the movie faithful to the game
Not long ago: HomeLAN has a reprint of a letter written by Doom movie script writer Dave Callaham. In it he (wittily) attempts to explain why the Doom movie is going to be so unlike the game
Somebody's lying, and I think it's the people on a panel in front of a bajillion unhappy fans.
Everything good that style sheets does can be done in PHP.
No. PHP is a server-side language. You still need to generate something, be it old-fashioned HTML 3.2 with cruddy presentational markup or modern HTML 4.01 with CSS.
This creates a slight serverload, but in my experience creates much better, cleaner, fast-to-download web pages.
I can't fathom how PHP could possibly improve download speed compared with CSS. They are both utterly different languages with different purposes. If you are talking about HTML 3.2 versus HTML 4.01+CSS, then you are on the losing side of the equation with HTML 3.2, because it's CSS that speeds things up.
As for cleaner, really. Take a look at the average table layout page. Then take a look at the average CSS layout page.
Which of these formats is expected to get a new version number sometime soon?
Atom 1.0 will be ratified as an IETF standard any day now. RSS is essentially a dead format, the RSS 2.0 specification states that there will be no new versions, only extensions.
The Plasma developers use the Microsoft definition of the word "innovative". I was told that I had bought into marketing lies for daring to point out that innovative meant something new.
It's not anything to do with Slashdot really - the hosting for many KDE projects is abysmal at handling even mediocre loads. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen them fall over. This has been going on for years, I guess they don't think it's enough of a problem to sort it out.
Slashdot Mirror
You are confusing copy/cut and paste with drag and drop, same as the other person who replied. Just because you can cut and paste some things with drag and drop, doesn't mean drag and drop is the same thing as cut and paste. What about dragging something onto a printer or application icon, for example?
Modal doesn't mean what you think it means.
Us human beings aren't built to wave our hands around all day long. It's okay when you are mousing because you are resting your hand on a surface, but your arms would get very tired if you had to use a Minority Report style interface for the same amount of time as you use a mouse. It's like voice recognition - sounds good in theory, but sucks in practice.
So when was the last time you used a keyboard shortcut to drag and drop something?
This isn't merely for switching between windows. If you can't RTFArticle, then RTFSummary at least.
How screwed up is development over in Redmond that they got it right on the Mac & got it wrong on their own OS?
Dunno, but they did the same thing with Internet Explorer - Internet Explorer for the Mac was the first web browser with reasonably complete support for CSS 1, and it also handles the PNG alpha channel just fine. Meanwhile, five years later, the latest version of Internet Explorer for Windows still can't handle the PNG alpha channel, despite the specification being nine years old.
It must be something specific to the Mac though - their other platform development is as miserable as their Windows development. Witness the abomination of Internet Explorer for UNIX or the dire Frontpage extensions for Apache.
Instead of jumping through hoops with -name "*.[Oo][Oo][Gg]", you can just use -iname "*.ogg". Of course, in this instance, it doesn't matter because Windows matches case-insensitively anyway.
You've got it to work in bash.
No, he's got it to work in any Bourne-compatible shell (hine: /bin/sh not /usr/bin/bash), many of which are available for Windows, including bash.
Some jobs do in fact prevent you from working for the competitor. A lot of the time it's part of the non-disclosure agreement.
I've heard in the past that these types of clauses are generally unenforceable. Any lawyers care to chime in?
This prevents you from being able to take your knowledge of a product that you were working on at company A to company B.
Why is that a problem? Trade secrets, patents and copyright are already in place to protect against this type of thing.
This kind of practice is completely ethical.
You think so? Where are you supposed to work for the next three years then? At McDonalds? These types of agreements essentially remove the possibility of you doing anything you are remotely qualified for even after your employment ends. What are you supposed to do for a living?
If a company really thinks that an employee has such valuable knowledge that copyrights, patents and trade secrets aren't enough, then they should write a really long notice period into their contracts and continue to pay the employee for doing what they are told.
Taking your knowledge from 1 company to another is very unethical
This is nonsense. It's called "experience". What, you forget everything you learned at a job when you leave the place? I wouldn't want to employ you.
In MS's case, I think this is obsurd!
Absurd.
Of course there are better career choices. I hear international pop star pays well.
If a site looks broken in IE6, win2000 users will be annoyed with Microsoft
If significant numbers of websites look broken in IE6, then it will be because there are few IE6 users about. So long as there are a significant numbers of IE6 users about, web developers will make sure their websites work in it. And typically, the user blames the website not the browser anyway. The number of people who are going to be annoyed at Microsoft are going to be in a minority.
We still test in IE5 and that's pretty typical. IE5 was released seven years ago. If IE7 is released this year, then people will still be testing in IE6 in 2012. Probably longer - it didn't require an OS upgrade to switch from IE5 to 5.5 or 6.
Microsoft bought Spyglass
No, they royally fucked over Spyglass. They made a deal with Spyglass so that Spyglass would get a cut of all the profits made from Internet Explorer as it was based upon Spyglass Mosaic. Remember, this was back when web browsers were something you could buy in a box. Getting a cut of all sales for a flagship application sold by Microsoft? Spyglass must have thought they really lucked out!
Then Microsoft illegally dumped Internet Explorer on the market for no cost in order to kill Netscape. 5% of zero profits isn't a lot of money, is it? Spyglass no longer exists.
Firefox is not embeded in the OS
Neither is Internet Explorer. It has no special privileges, it runs with the same permissions as the user, same as Firefox.
Trident, the rendering engine that handles HTML, CSS, etc, is embedded by many programs, including Internet Explorer, but that's no different to any other OS. Many KDE applications embed KHTML - even Amarok, KDE's media player embeds KHTML. Many GNOME applications embed gtk-html or Gecko. The same thing will happen with WebCore on OS X.
The "Internet Explorer is embedded into the OS" criticism is pure horseshit - always has been. Funny how people attacked Microsoft for saying so in court because they thought it was a lie, and once the court case was over, attacked Microsoft because they thought it was the truth.
You can't have it both ways. It's either embedded into the OS or it isn't. And if it is, don't claim Microsoft lied in court, and hold KDE and GNOME to the same standard.
Editing the CSS is in fact worse, becauase integrating and transferring the locations for the CSS tags for upload is even worse than having to deal with single files for single functions.
I've been a web developer for about seven years, first using CSS about five years ago. I have read and re-read that sentence and I can't figure out what on earth you mean. Could you try rephrasing it with normal terminology? I understand all the words, but they make no sense whatsoever when you arrange them in a sentence the way that you did. For instance: what on earth does "integrating a location" entail?
I agree that generated code tends to be awful, but that's not really related to whether it's presentational HTML 3.2 that's being generated or if it's modern HTML 4.01+CSS that's being generated.
I'm not going to stick with Apple! I'll switch to... er... to... er... I'll buy an x86 machine that will run all x86 OSes except for OS X, instead of an x86 machine that will run all x86 OSes. Just to spite them.
It just boggles the mind that people would throw out a Windows machine and then replace it with another! Windows machine which is immediately susceptible and commonly infected within twenty minutes or so of being re-connected to the Internet.
The smarter move would be to migrate to a system that is less affected by worms/virus/security issues.
The majority of people have only been exposed to Windows. They think computers simply wear out. They don't see it as getting infected over and over again by dozens of worms, they see it as "oh well, computer's worn out, better replace it".
In that context, it's perfectly reasonable to go and get something similar to what they already had. They don't think anything happening is wrong. They think this is normal.
Until something happens to teach the average person that this isn't right and can be avoided by switching to something like Mac OS X, this will carry on happening. I have no idea what that something is. Maybe a virus that forces the person to read an explanation of the issues before it gives access of the computer back or something? I dunno.
Have you forgotten the age-old maxim? Do not ascribe to greed that which can be readily explained by sheer idiocy.
You should try this thing called 'Google'...
Perhaps you should. All the top hits agree that Windows 2000 was released on Feb 17th 2000. So does Wikipedia.
The writer of this article is a little strange if he considers a P233 old hardware.
Er, no. You are a little strange if you don't consider a P233 to be old hardware.
Think about it. Since then, we've got rid of the old-style keyboard plug and serial mice in favour of PS/2, and then got rid of PS/2 in favour of USB. We've gone from 233MHz as normal to 2333MHz as normal - CPUs are ten times faster. We've gone from 10GB hard disks to 100GB hard disks. We've gone from 32MB or 64MB RAM as standard to a 1GB RAM as standard.
By any reasonable measure, a P233 is old. Sure, you might argue that it's modern in that it uses transistors instead of vacuum pumps, but I don't think a vacuum pump computer is going to run any form of Windows well, do you?
Back when Windows 2000 came out (1999, kids) I was using a P233 as my primary machine.
In 1999, I was using a Celeron 400 (still do, as a file server). Even back then, that was a budget CPU I bought as a student.
And Windows 2000 was released in the year 2000, believe it or not. Did you think the "2000" was just some arbitrary number Microsoft stuck on the end?
I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.
Great. If you go to a geek's house, you'll be able to view your movies, and if you go to any normal person's, you probably won't.
What a stunning rebuttal to the idea of an iPod that can show video in practically any home, aimed at non-geeks.
Everyone on the panel said that every effort was being made to make the movie faithful to the game
Except for the central plot devices, Mars and Hell, right? Compare and contrast:
Now: Everyone on the panel said that every effort was being made to make the movie faithful to the game
Not long ago: HomeLAN has a reprint of a letter written by Doom movie script writer Dave Callaham. In it he (wittily) attempts to explain why the Doom movie is going to be so unlike the game
Somebody's lying, and I think it's the people on a panel in front of a bajillion unhappy fans.
not quite the way I envisioned a similar concept once, but better, definitely better.
What are you, a PHB? What's wrong with saying:
I had a similar idea once, but this is even better.
"Envisioned a concept"? Wash your mouth out.
Everything good that style sheets does can be done in PHP.
No. PHP is a server-side language. You still need to generate something, be it old-fashioned HTML 3.2 with cruddy presentational markup or modern HTML 4.01 with CSS.
This creates a slight serverload, but in my experience creates much better, cleaner, fast-to-download web pages.
I can't fathom how PHP could possibly improve download speed compared with CSS. They are both utterly different languages with different purposes. If you are talking about HTML 3.2 versus HTML 4.01+CSS, then you are on the losing side of the equation with HTML 3.2, because it's CSS that speeds things up.
As for cleaner, really. Take a look at the average table layout page. Then take a look at the average CSS layout page.
Which of these formats is expected to get a new version number sometime soon?
Atom 1.0 will be ratified as an IETF standard any day now. RSS is essentially a dead format, the RSS 2.0 specification states that there will be no new versions, only extensions.
I saw nothing innovative.
The Plasma developers use the Microsoft definition of the word "innovative". I was told that I had bought into marketing lies for daring to point out that innovative meant something new.
It's not anything to do with Slashdot really - the hosting for many KDE projects is abysmal at handling even mediocre loads. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen them fall over. This has been going on for years, I guess they don't think it's enough of a problem to sort it out.