The vast majority of sites don't offer a paid version. Anything I read that lets me subscribe gets a subscription (Ars Technica, several webcomics that have options for recurring donations, Consumer Reports, a very significant donation to Penny Arcade's ad free Kickstarter). I have no sympathy for people who can't be bothered to offer an ad-free experience, but hopefully more people using Adblock and less people clicking on ads will force content providers to start monetizing things in a way that isn't user-hostile.
The microSD was just a phone-industry thing, it has no place in a full sized tablet. The full sized SD makes it easy to use the tablet to view photos and videos directly from camera cards, upload 'em, etc. which is another big and useful thing.
I'm not sure I see the point of full sized SD cards anymore. My phone, tablet and camera all use microSD. I only have the full-sized SD card adapters to connect to my laptop. Considering micro-SD cards come in 64 GB sizes now, I'm not sure what the advantage of normal SD is.
Use the tools to auto-generate the code, and thus save time, but then clean-up the final result to your own personal tastes.
Cleaning up the output from a WYSIWYG takes longer than just writing the page correctly the first time. In fact, making a messy page in a WYSIWYG frequently takes longer even before you take cleanup time into account.
The Nexus 7 is the first tablet that comes with a combination of features that I've wanted:
* Good screen * 7" (notice how everyone claimed no one wanted this right up to the point where rumors started saying Apple was making one?) * Current version of Android * Fast enough processor/GPU (ask anyone who's compared a Kindle Fire or Nook Tablet to the Nexus 7 and you'll see what I mean)
Personally, I think Google could have made it more expensive and it still would have sold.
Any packaging that requires the use of tools to open is not good, user-oriented packaging. You can make packaging tamper-evident without requiring the customer to locate sharp objects.
Except that even if there was no tape on the Nexus 7's box, the cardboard box it shipped in is still sealed with packing tape, so you need a sharp object (like your keys) either way. And no, I don't think we should stop sealing cardboard boxes before shipping them.
Or is there some hope among the US people that a potential non-Obama future president would be able to solve the economical problems of the US in one swift stroke using his magical superabilities?
Yes, our elections revolve around two people taking turns talking about position X, where they are really pro-X while the other guy is anti-X (or generally "soft on X"). When the election finishes, they basically do the same thing and fail because all they've been thinking about what they think is cool, instead of realistic ways to do it (realistic solutions are a synonym for "soft on X"). Then there's a simple rule: If you voted for him, he did absolutely nothing wrong and in fact Jesus himself said his actions were perfect, and if you didn't vote for him, he's intentionally destroying everything because he's literally Satan.
In Firefox, you can see the current memory usage of a page by going to about:memory. I'd argue that peak memory isn't that interesting, since using a huge amount for a tiny amount of time is unimportant; it's the sustained high usage which is annoying.
For anyone who's actually interested, the Memshrink Blog is a fascinating account of how a team of developers have been reducing Firefox's memory usage. Interestingly, Firefox's memory usage has never been particularly bad (it just seems to be because web pages are so much more complicated), but addons have had horrible memory problems for a long time (and unfortunately, that's pretty hard to detect).
I was a proud supporter of FireFox on the desktop, promoted it all the time....untill it got so bloated that pc's hard a hard time running it, so i switched to Chrome.
Firefox and Chrome have pretty much identical performance on the desktop. Recent updates have made Firefox's memory usage much better, and despite loud opinions, it was never actually bad. My guess is that most of the people complaining about Firefox's performance are the idiots who refuse to update after Firefox 3 ("Web browsing takes more memory now, it must be Firefox's fault, not the fact that the web is more complicated now!").
You're missing the point. Obviously there are configurations that won't work, but then it should just fail. Failure to run on one machine/OS should not prevent you from playing on another machine/OS.
Playing a game in a weird configuration has several acceptable outcomes:
* The game doesn't work * The game refuses to start (although this would be stupid) * The creator of the game publically states that they will ban anyone who attempts to use the configuration in question (something which Blizzard has never done, despite the claims of people who don't understand what "support" means).
What the trolls/fanboys are claiming is that this is acceptable:
* Stopping people from ever playing the game they paid for again, for using a configuration which has always worked (and which the creators of the game have *never* even suggested is not allowed, only unsupported).
Should I be pissed off I can't play this on my BeOS machine?
No, but you should be pissed if you attempt to play it on your BeOS machine and your account is permanently banned (ie: you can't play it on any machine).
I'm looking at the box here, and it says right here under "Minimum System Requirements"...
Should I be permanently banned if I try to run the game on a machine with less than a gig of memory, or if I accidentally use a low screen resolution? Or would it make more sense to inform me that the game isn't supported on that configuration and I should upgrade my machine?
They already have their Terms of Use and Policies which plainly say that you are not supposed to run the game in any manner that Blizzard did not intend. And I don't remember seeing any hint of Linux support on the box.
There's a difference between "not supported" and "not allowed". What I'm saying is that if Blizzard didn't want people to use Linux, then they could just clearly say that, and that banning people is pretty much the worst way to handle that situation.
By your argument, they could ban people for attempting to play the game on a machine that's too slow or doesn't have enough memory (it's unsupported!).
1. Pop up a message when Linux users try to log in informing them that Linux is now completely blocked because one of the largest game companies in the world can't be bothered with some minor software. 2. Offer a refund to Linux users and apologize for wasting their time (remember, "no one plays games on Linux", so this shouldn't shouldn't cost them anything).
But you think it's better for their business to take option 3..
3. Ban legitimate users of your game and refuse to refund their money, making sure they never play anything of yours in the future.
I have the same experience with meetings -- people meet, talk about something important, then it never gets documented. This is a separate problem though -- you need to consciously try to document things.
I've found that what works for me is to write READMEs or other documentation as requested, but save it in a standard place, then attach it to the email. The person who asked the question gets the answer they wanted, and the next person can find it again if I get hit by a bus.
* Check email when you're bored or on a schedule * If you find that IM is distracting you, either don't sign in or leave notifications off. Log in whenever someone notifies you by email that they need to talk in real-time.
This way you still have interruptions (like meetings would cause), but they're much smaller.
But meetings do serve a good purpose in a company like the plans on what to do next,
A bug tracker + email is better.
whats going on right now,
Bug tracker + email
the reports,
Email
all those things a boss and other employees can communicate to each other when they don't have time.
Email + Instant messenger
Benefits:
1. Fast responses in general (don't have to wait for the meeting) 2. People can respond when they have time (doesn't disrupt work) 3. Doesn't take any time if you have nothing to say (no pointless meetings)
Slashdot Mirror
Or when we stop spending more money on administration and pointless toys like "Smart Boards" than on teachers.
The vast majority of sites don't offer a paid version. Anything I read that lets me subscribe gets a subscription (Ars Technica, several webcomics that have options for recurring donations, Consumer Reports, a very significant donation to Penny Arcade's ad free Kickstarter). I have no sympathy for people who can't be bothered to offer an ad-free experience, but hopefully more people using Adblock and less people clicking on ads will force content providers to start monetizing things in a way that isn't user-hostile.
The microSD was just a phone-industry thing, it has no place in a full sized tablet. The full sized SD makes it easy to use the tablet to view photos and videos directly from camera cards, upload 'em, etc. which is another big and useful thing.
I'm not sure I see the point of full sized SD cards anymore. My phone, tablet and camera all use microSD. I only have the full-sized SD card adapters to connect to my laptop. Considering micro-SD cards come in 64 GB sizes now, I'm not sure what the advantage of normal SD is.
Use the tools to auto-generate the code, and thus save time, but then clean-up the final result to your own personal tastes.
Cleaning up the output from a WYSIWYG takes longer than just writing the page correctly the first time. In fact, making a messy page in a WYSIWYG frequently takes longer even before you take cleanup time into account.
The Nexus 7 is the first tablet that comes with a combination of features that I've wanted:
* Good screen
* 7" (notice how everyone claimed no one wanted this right up to the point where rumors started saying Apple was making one?)
* Current version of Android
* Fast enough processor/GPU (ask anyone who's compared a Kindle Fire or Nook Tablet to the Nexus 7 and you'll see what I mean)
Personally, I think Google could have made it more expensive and it still would have sold.
Any packaging that requires the use of tools to open is not good, user-oriented packaging. You can make packaging tamper-evident without requiring the customer to locate sharp objects.
Except that even if there was no tape on the Nexus 7's box, the cardboard box it shipped in is still sealed with packing tape, so you need a sharp object (like your keys) either way. And no, I don't think we should stop sealing cardboard boxes before shipping them.
With my fingers, yes it is.
Did you try to cut the packing tape on the UPS box with your fingers too?
Because it's not that simple. I can't explain it, you just have to experience it.
I did experience it. I bought one. The steps I described are exactly how I opened it.
Yeah this story confuses me.
Step 1: Push box out of sleeve
Step 2: Cut two pieces of tape
Step 3: Open box
Step 4: Profit
There's not even a ??? step. Is cutting tape really that difficult?
Or is there some hope among the US people that a potential non-Obama future president would be able to solve the economical problems of the US in one swift stroke using his magical superabilities?
Yes, our elections revolve around two people taking turns talking about position X, where they are really pro-X while the other guy is anti-X (or generally "soft on X"). When the election finishes, they basically do the same thing and fail because all they've been thinking about what they think is cool, instead of realistic ways to do it (realistic solutions are a synonym for "soft on X"). Then there's a simple rule: If you voted for him, he did absolutely nothing wrong and in fact Jesus himself said his actions were perfect, and if you didn't vote for him, he's intentionally destroying everything because he's literally Satan.
In Firefox, you can see the current memory usage of a page by going to about:memory. I'd argue that peak memory isn't that interesting, since using a huge amount for a tiny amount of time is unimportant; it's the sustained high usage which is annoying.
They have stripped the browser to the barebones, moving everything into extensions
Uh what? I can't even figure out what you're claiming they took out.
For anyone who's actually interested, the Memshrink Blog is a fascinating account of how a team of developers have been reducing Firefox's memory usage. Interestingly, Firefox's memory usage has never been particularly bad (it just seems to be because web pages are so much more complicated), but addons have had horrible memory problems for a long time (and unfortunately, that's pretty hard to detect).
I was a proud supporter of FireFox on the desktop, promoted it all the time....untill it got so bloated that pc's hard a hard time running it, so i switched to Chrome.
Firefox and Chrome have pretty much identical performance on the desktop. Recent updates have made Firefox's memory usage much better, and despite loud opinions, it was never actually bad. My guess is that most of the people complaining about Firefox's performance are the idiots who refuse to update after Firefox 3 ("Web browsing takes more memory now, it must be Firefox's fault, not the fact that the web is more complicated now!").
The inquiry report points a finger at collusion between industry executives and regulators
Oh look, government workers aren't magically less corrupt than everyone else..
You're missing the point. Obviously there are configurations that won't work, but then it should just fail. Failure to run on one machine/OS should not prevent you from playing on another machine/OS.
You don't go to the press and write an article about Linux users being banned for using Wine. That's definite proof imho that they were guilty.
Yes, you should just stay quiet like a good victim. It's not like Blizzard has ever made this mistake before.
Playing a game in a weird configuration has several acceptable outcomes:
* The game doesn't work
* The game refuses to start (although this would be stupid)
* The creator of the game publically states that they will ban anyone who attempts to use the configuration in question (something which Blizzard has never done, despite the claims of people who don't understand what "support" means).
What the trolls/fanboys are claiming is that this is acceptable:
* Stopping people from ever playing the game they paid for again, for using a configuration which has always worked (and which the creators of the game have *never* even suggested is not allowed, only unsupported).
Should I be pissed off I can't play this on my BeOS machine?
No, but you should be pissed if you attempt to play it on your BeOS machine and your account is permanently banned (ie: you can't play it on any machine).
I'm looking at the box here, and it says right here under "Minimum System Requirements"...
It also says:
* 1024x768 minimum resolution
* 1 GB RAM (XP), 1.5 GB (Vista/7)
Should I be permanently banned if I try to run the game on a machine with less than a gig of memory, or if I accidentally use a low screen resolution? Or would it make more sense to inform me that the game isn't supported on that configuration and I should upgrade my machine?
They already have their Terms of Use and Policies which plainly say that you are not supposed to run the game in any manner that Blizzard did not intend. And I don't remember seeing any hint of Linux support on the box.
There's a difference between "not supported" and "not allowed". What I'm saying is that if Blizzard didn't want people to use Linux, then they could just clearly say that, and that banning people is pretty much the worst way to handle that situation.
By your argument, they could ban people for attempting to play the game on a machine that's too slow or doesn't have enough memory (it's unsupported!).
So Blizzard could:
1. Pop up a message when Linux users try to log in informing them that Linux is now completely blocked because one of the largest game companies in the world can't be bothered with some minor software.
2. Offer a refund to Linux users and apologize for wasting their time (remember, "no one plays games on Linux", so this shouldn't shouldn't cost them anything).
But you think it's better for their business to take option 3..
3. Ban legitimate users of your game and refuse to refund their money, making sure they never play anything of yours in the future.
I have the same experience with meetings -- people meet, talk about something important, then it never gets documented. This is a separate problem though -- you need to consciously try to document things.
I've found that what works for me is to write READMEs or other documentation as requested, but save it in a standard place, then attach it to the email. The person who asked the question gets the answer they wanted, and the next person can find it again if I get hit by a bus.
If your boss can't leave you alone and let you work, then you have more serious problems than too many meetings.
* Check email when you're bored or on a schedule
* If you find that IM is distracting you, either don't sign in or leave notifications off. Log in whenever someone notifies you by email that they need to talk in real-time.
This way you still have interruptions (like meetings would cause), but they're much smaller.
But meetings do serve a good purpose in a company like the plans on what to do next,
A bug tracker + email is better.
whats going on right now,
Bug tracker + email
the reports,
Email
all those things a boss and other employees can communicate to each other when they don't have time.
Email + Instant messenger
Benefits:
1. Fast responses in general (don't have to wait for the meeting)
2. People can respond when they have time (doesn't disrupt work)
3. Doesn't take any time if you have nothing to say (no pointless meetings)