Or maybe there are biological differences between people? And perhaps you graduates second in your class because the combination of biology and stupid school policies didn't screw you over?
I think we'll have less problems with that in the future. The word processor didn't even exist 30 years ago, so it's not surprising that there were a lot of format changes and not all of them are easy to work with anymore. With more recent formats, it's not hard to find something that can open them. I'm pretty sure Open Office and MS Word can both open any format they've ever supported.
I suppose they were phrasing it badly. The point of the thread was convergence failing, and PCI tuner cards are so unpopular that most people don't even know they exist.
I'm entirely aware that Directshow and Quicktime have codecs for them, but that's not the issue. The problem is that they don't support Theora or Vorbis by default, so h264 + aac/mp3 will be the only viable format ("Yeah we could use Vorbis, but 50% of our users won't be able to see it"). What Firefox installs doesn't matter because people running IE9 (as their primary browser) aren't going to have Firefox installed.
Maybe you're getting at how Mozilla could use Directshow and Quicktime on those platforms, and I agree, but that's not the real issue.
What Mozilla wants is for h264 to not be used in the video tag (theora or nothing). They've already failed at that and they're not going to change people's minds. The thing they might be able to win at is getting other browsers to support theora and vorbis (and h264).
This would seem like the obvious choice, and it's actually how Safari works (using Quicktime). There are patches for Firefox, but Mozilla refuses to use them because they want to make this a "Theora or nothing" battle, even though they'll never win. Chrome supports Theora and h264, so it hardly matters what their backend is. I think there are patches to webkit to let it use gstreamer as well though. I assume IE9 will use DirectWhatever.
The problem is that Quicktime and DirectShow don't support theora or vorbis by default, so hopefully Mozilla/Wikipedia/anyone else who cares can get them popular enough that Microsoft and Apple have to finally support some free codecs.
I just think Flash is annoying. It messes with how my browser works. Right click working properly? Nope. ctrl+t (new tab), ctrl+tab (next tab), ctrl+f4 (close tab)? Nope. Mouse gestures? Nope. If Flash acted like it was part of a web page, it wouldn't annoy me. As it is, it reminds me of cutting a hole in my browser and seeing something else through it, and I don't think there's any way to fix that without customizing Flash for every browser.
Also, the video/audio tags make more sense from a programming perspective. If you want to add video to a web page, it makes more sense to have a single, fairly simple video tag than an embed + writing a flash program to display a video.
And there's the problem. Some browsers (IE) only accept XHTML one way and other browsers only accept it another way. Why don't other browsers just pay attention to the doctype?
How about the laws of the country they're in? As in a US law saying: "ISPs in the United States may not peer with ISPs known to not stop virus/spam activity on their networks".
I'm surprised that anyone believes the whole "If you eat fat you'll get fat" thing. How you get fat is pretty simple: You need a certain amount of calories, and if you eat more than that you'll gain weight; if you eat less, you'll lose weight. It's true that some high-fat foods have more calories than low-fat foods (bacon vs salad), but it's not the fat percentage that's making you fat.
I guess it sort of makes sense to think that eating fat would make you until.. at least until you realize that eating salad doesn't turn you into a tree.
And you just described why I don't play MMO's. Why pay to "play" a game that's just designed to keep you playing as long as possible (fun doesn't even enter into the equation)?
The only problem XHTML had is that certain browsers won't accept it unless it's served as XML (and other browsers will only accept it if it's served as HTML).
The benefit is that it allows the Internet to be used the way it was meant to be: by everyone. No more "you're too poor to make Flash games". Seems like a significant benefit to me.
Incompatible file managers cause less of a problem than you might think. Most Linux software is released as a.deb and.rpm, and anyone new to Linux is likely to be using a distro that supports those. The real problem with package managers is that Debian style packages are an incredible amount of work (I have no experience with rpm files). In my prefered distro (Arch), a package is one file that lists the name, version number, dependancies and how to build the file (generally something like "./configure --prefix=/usr; make; make INSTALLDIR=$pkgdir install"). Because of this, installing packages manually means spending the 30 seconds to create a package and then using the package manager (and if you're nice, you'll put it on the Arch User Repository and everyone else can just the source to your package).
What's so insane about having Microsoft distribute updates to all installed software? Maybe the crazy part is that people run an operating system from people they wouldn't trust to distribute software.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe there are biological differences between people? And perhaps you graduates second in your class because the combination of biology and stupid school policies didn't screw you over?
I think we'll have less problems with that in the future. The word processor didn't even exist 30 years ago, so it's not surprising that there were a lot of format changes and not all of them are easy to work with anymore. With more recent formats, it's not hard to find something that can open them. I'm pretty sure Open Office and MS Word can both open any format they've ever supported.
I suppose they were phrasing it badly. The point of the thread was convergence failing, and PCI tuner cards are so unpopular that most people don't even know they exist.
How is an iPad more convenient than a laptop? It's the same thing, but one has a keyboard and one has your fingers.
How many people have those?
That's what I did. Buy all of an expensive product off the auction house, put all of it back up at 10x the price. Made like 100 G a day (at level 20).
Oh my god! Not all of the tabs in the same process! That's the worst security problem I've ever heard of!
Not to mention that if having constant sex was a benefit to the species, they'd already be doing it.
Pidgin (with webcams), Gnome-Do, Banshee, KCacheGrind, GParted, apt-get..
I'm entirely aware that Directshow and Quicktime have codecs for them, but that's not the issue. The problem is that they don't support Theora or Vorbis by default, so h264 + aac/mp3 will be the only viable format ("Yeah we could use Vorbis, but 50% of our users won't be able to see it"). What Firefox installs doesn't matter because people running IE9 (as their primary browser) aren't going to have Firefox installed.
Maybe you're getting at how Mozilla could use Directshow and Quicktime on those platforms, and I agree, but that's not the real issue.
What Mozilla wants is for h264 to not be used in the video tag (theora or nothing). They've already failed at that and they're not going to change people's minds. The thing they might be able to win at is getting other browsers to support theora and vorbis (and h264).
This would seem like the obvious choice, and it's actually how Safari works (using Quicktime). There are patches for Firefox, but Mozilla refuses to use them because they want to make this a "Theora or nothing" battle, even though they'll never win. Chrome supports Theora and h264, so it hardly matters what their backend is. I think there are patches to webkit to let it use gstreamer as well though. I assume IE9 will use DirectWhatever.
The problem is that Quicktime and DirectShow don't support theora or vorbis by default, so hopefully Mozilla/Wikipedia/anyone else who cares can get them popular enough that Microsoft and Apple have to finally support some free codecs.
Unfortunately, the closest thing to a browser my OS comes with is wget and cat, and unfortunately, cat's standards compliance is spotty at best.
I just think Flash is annoying. It messes with how my browser works. Right click working properly? Nope. ctrl+t (new tab), ctrl+tab (next tab), ctrl+f4 (close tab)? Nope. Mouse gestures? Nope. If Flash acted like it was part of a web page, it wouldn't annoy me. As it is, it reminds me of cutting a hole in my browser and seeing something else through it, and I don't think there's any way to fix that without customizing Flash for every browser.
Also, the video/audio tags make more sense from a programming perspective. If you want to add video to a web page, it makes more sense to have a single, fairly simple video tag than an embed + writing a flash program to display a video.
And there's the problem. Some browsers (IE) only accept XHTML one way and other browsers only accept it another way. Why don't other browsers just pay attention to the doctype?
How about the laws of the country they're in? As in a US law saying: "ISPs in the United States may not peer with ISPs known to not stop virus/spam activity on their networks".
Laws? "ISPs in country X may not peer with other ISPs known to be allowing activity prohibited by law x"
It's not like we need to go in those countries. All that needs to be done is force ISPs in other countries to stop peering with them.
I'm surprised that anyone believes the whole "If you eat fat you'll get fat" thing. How you get fat is pretty simple: You need a certain amount of calories, and if you eat more than that you'll gain weight; if you eat less, you'll lose weight. It's true that some high-fat foods have more calories than low-fat foods (bacon vs salad), but it's not the fat percentage that's making you fat.
I guess it sort of makes sense to think that eating fat would make you until.. at least until you realize that eating salad doesn't turn you into a tree.
Anonymous SFTP? Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the point of encrypting data when it's all public?
And you just described why I don't play MMO's. Why pay to "play" a game that's just designed to keep you playing as long as possible (fun doesn't even enter into the equation)?
Uh $700 = free? http://www.adobe.com/products/flash/
The only problem XHTML had is that certain browsers won't accept it unless it's served as XML (and other browsers will only accept it if it's served as HTML).
The benefit is that it allows the Internet to be used the way it was meant to be: by everyone. No more "you're too poor to make Flash games". Seems like a significant benefit to me.
Incompatible file managers cause less of a problem than you might think. Most Linux software is released as a .deb and .rpm, and anyone new to Linux is likely to be using a distro that supports those. The real problem with package managers is that Debian style packages are an incredible amount of work (I have no experience with rpm files). In my prefered distro (Arch), a package is one file that lists the name, version number, dependancies and how to build the file (generally something like "./configure --prefix=/usr; make; make INSTALLDIR=$pkgdir install"). Because of this, installing packages manually means spending the 30 seconds to create a package and then using the package manager (and if you're nice, you'll put it on the Arch User Repository and everyone else can just the source to your package).
What's so insane about having Microsoft distribute updates to all installed software? Maybe the crazy part is that people run an operating system from people they wouldn't trust to distribute software.