Web performance is a major issue which a lot of web "developers" never consider unfortunately.
FTFY. Add "cutting and pasting large number of of inefficient javascript files (which they only use say 10% )" to my list of things that make you suck at being a web developer.
Android isn't a phone, it's an operating system. You could as easily have said that Microsoft never had a desktop monopoly because ten dozen manufacturers all used Windows.
The fact is, Android is the #1 selling smartphone OS.
If someone passes you on the right here in Springfield, they're the assholes, because they're passing you on the shoulder (and it's way too common, I've even seen cops do it). And in town? I'm not going to be in the right lane when I need to turn left five blocks down the road, I'd never get over in time.
Fujisawa Sensei seems like an idiot with an attitude. Dumbest sig I've seen in a long time.
While the "average" page may be getting bigger, the pages designed for mobile devices are much smaller and usually easier to read and navigate.
That's a faiilure on the webmaster's part; you should NOT have to code for different devices, screens, browsers, or resolutions unless you suck at HTML. Using exact coordinates rather than percentages is just fucking STUPID. You have screen sizes ranging from two inches to seventy inches and resolutions ranging from 1190s WebTV to 1080p and probably better by now. If your text won't wrap, your page sucks. If I have a horizontal scroll bar, your page sucks. If 2/3 of that sixty inch 1080p is blank, your page sucks. If your page won't completely display on any screen using any device and any browser, YOUR PAGE SUCKS. If any of your pages fail at any of the above, you suck as a webmaster.
You cannot exactly control a web page like you can a poster or a magazine. I wish people would get that through their damned heads; I hate pulling out my phone to surf while I'm in a waiting room, and have the first five sites I try to access not display at all.
This is the 21st century. If your page won't render on any internet-capable phone, your page sucks and you suck as a webmaster. Jesus, I just looked up some of my old sites from 1997 on archive.org using my phone, and they all rendered just fine.
Kids, learn HTML (and javascript and CSS if what you want to do demands it), and learn how to write cross-platform code. Jees, kids, this stuff ain't hard, why does everybody fuck it up so badly?
People getting into Linux for the first time pick Ubuntu, because that's what they've heard about, and they have no idea that Kubuntu even exists, let alone what it means, what Unity is, what KDE is, what Gnome is, or anything else that you take for granted.
That's your own fault. The only people in meatspace I know that heve even heard of Linux know that "unlike most OSs, you can pick different desktop environments like KDE or Gnome or XFCE" because I tell them when I clue them in that there's a free, superior replacement for Windows that doesn't need AV. The "free" and "no AV" surprises them much more than "wow, I have a choice?"
That web site gets my award for the very worst site of 2011, and maybe the century so far. The actual content, the talk itself, is in a little bitty two inch wide by two inch tall window that puts each sentence in a separate line; it's as unreadable is it can get. Sorry, but I can't respect any data or opinion that comes from a site that damned bad -- gees, ten year olds had better sites in Geocities.
So I copied the talk to Notepad and read it, and the fucking TALK was content-free!
Whoever came up with that scheme was stupid and I don't know any other player than WMP that ever supported it, since it was 99.99% used for malware and 0.01% for legitimate uses.
It had legitimate uses???
The same problem exists with WiMP and MP3s. MP3s don't support DRM, WMAs do. So you can imbed a trojan link in the WMA file, rename it MP3, and WiMP will play the song AND the malware. Like you say, no other media player does that, and I see no legit use for it EXCEPT malware.
Maybe Norton or McAfee paid MS for this "feature". It sure makes their software more necessary!
Windows doesn't ask what desktop you want, it just gives it to you one. Same for OS X. I don't see why Linux dists should be any different.
Sam Houston's Ice Cream Parlor has vanilla ice cream. Harry Wombat's Parlor has Chocolate. Howard Johnson's has 38 flavors. Which ice cream parlor is best?
I moved from Windows to Linux because in Windows, it's the Microsoft way or the highway. With Linux, I have it like I want it. If my only desktop choice was Gnome, I'd probably have stuck with Windows.
Choice is GOOD. The only people who don't like choice are those who are indecisive to the point of mental illness. Remember those "choice is bad" car commercials with the ditzy woman who couldn't make her mind up whether she wanted cream in her coffee or not, to the point of a nervous breakdown? Windows is for her, no choices necessary, or even available.
I suppose you prefer the Model T Ford -- any color you want, so long as it's black?
Wrong. The first electronic computer (discounting the secret British one -- if it's secret, for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist) was ENIAC, patented in 1946, a quarter century before Apollo 11 and six years before I was born.
I hope you're still in junior high, because if not your teachers REALLY suck.
Which major distributions still come with KDE as the default option.
I've been using kubuntu, but I may go back to Mandriva
There used to be Mandrake/Mandriva, but that's pretty dead now.
Well, I heard that which is why I switched to kubuntu -- but it appears Mandriva's death is greatly exaggerated. I DLed a copy of their newest distro that just came out a couple of months ago. It's been so long since I used it it'll be a test run when I install it. I kind of have to do an OS install, the hard drive on my main computer died.
No, 2002 was the year of desktop Linux... at my house, at least. 2012 is the year I'm eligible to retire. It also may be the year of Android; a few folks posted some good reccomendations for acceptable carriers yesterday, so I may just do it this year.
U of I have had supercomputers for decades. Of course a lot of computation is needed for the Tevatron, from controlling the streams to analyzing the data. U of I is also home to the Tevatron.
Odd that people don't think of Illinois when they think of computing and physics.
Rice and beans are both fattening. Neither are rich in many vitamins. But you're right about fast, convinient food -- which you can't buy on food stamps.
Most people on LINK do, in fact, work full time. Most of America's poor work, often at two jobs.
You might want to get your information about American poverty somewhere besides Fox, the Wall Street Journal, and Rush Limbaugh, all of whom perpetuate the myth that people on LINK (which they still call "food stamps" even though there are no more stamps, which shows you how inaccurate they are) are just fat lazy slobs who won't work. Speaking of fat lazy slobs, why are Limbaugh and Gingrich so portly?
Oh, and I'm neither fat nor poor. I earn about the median income, which allows me to eat real food. The checkout lady at WalMart has no such luxury -- yes, she's on LINK. The guy who cleans the toilets where you work is on LINK. Most of the people bitching about their taxes going to the poor employ people who, ironically, wouldn't work for the cheap bastards without LINK because they'd starve. LINK is subsidizing the same selfish assholes who complain about its existance.
Hunger in America is mostly because of people like Herman Cain; those folks who work in restaraunts are all poor with the possible exception of the manager. The people who created Cain's wealth share almost none of it.
The first google hit was this site. I didn't read the whole thing, but they used rates of chirrosis to determine alcohol consumption. They do mention statistical irregularities, but failed to note that chirrosis doesn't give an indication of alcohol use, only alcohol abuse.
The fact that cirrhosis was substantially lower on average during Prohibition than before or after might suggest that Prohibition played a substantial role in reducing cirrhosis, but further examination suggests this conclusion is premature. First, there have been substantial fluctuations in cirrhosis outside the Prohibition period, indicating that other factors are important determinants and must be accounted for in analyzing whether Prohibition caused the low level of cirrhosis during Prohibition. Second, there is no obvious jump in cirrhosis upon repeal. This fact does not prove that Prohibition had no effect, since the lags between consumption and cirrhosis mean the effect of increased consumption might not have shown up immediately. Nevertheless, the behavior of cirrhosis after repeal fails to suggest a large effect of Prohibition. Third, cirrhosis began declining from its pre-1920 peak by as early as 1908, and it had already attained its lowest level over the sample in 1920, the year in which constitutional prohibition took effect.
My wikipedia editing days were over years ago when I tried to add new (three year old "new"!) information about cataract surgery after I had my implant -- the one I got was FDA-approved in 2003, a high tech gadget that sits on struts and actually lets you focus, unlike previous IOLs. The day after I added it, it was gone. Added again, gone again. It didn't show up until a couple of years later when I mentioned it in one of the many slashdot artices about editing wikipedia and got a +5, after which someone successfully added it.
So someone else will have to edit, I'm not going to waste my time trying.
Also, let me put an end to you never hearing someone say they would try heroin if it was legal. I wouldn't now, but I suffered from some pretty serious depression when I was in my late teens and early twenties and I may well have done so then. At that time I couldn't see any way for life to ever improve, so rational thought about the consequences wouldn't have kept me from it. The future was going to be awful (or short) anyway, so why not try to get whatever short term comfort is available?
That actually parallells drug abusers, including alcoholics I know. What I don't understand is, if you weren't thinking rationally, how did the law keep you from using it? Simply the luck of it not being available? Since you were a teenager it wouldn't have been any more available since it would still be illegal for minors, and actually could be less available; teenagers tell me it's easier for them to get pot than it is to get beer.
That article on Cocaethylene was interesting, thank you for the education.
I think what Obama did wrong was to concentrate on health care before the economy. If the economy had been better last Congressional election, there would probebly be fewer Republicans in Congress. Of course, he may have feared that the economy wouldn't improve.
But his health care plan is a bad one, it will do nothing to reduce costs and is only welfare for the insurance companies, who are only middlemen who do nothing for your health. It's time for the US to join the civilized world.
I do. The internet comes from the phone line, but I'm not paying for landline service, just internet. Sounds strange that we can get that here but not in parts of Europe, I thought you guys were way ahead of us.
The profit is getting elected. The contribution IS a bribe, especially if both mainstream candidates are "donated" to. Just because it's legal doesn't make it moral or ethical, especially when the unethical laws are passed by the politicians who benefit from them.
Oh, and you might find this interesting, as well -- plenty of $$$$$ to be "earned" as a congressman or senator.
I haven't read "No Country" or "Harry Potter"; I'll ask my daughter about Harry. Guess I'll have to make a trip to the library for "No Country", that was a good movie. If the book's half as good it'll still be a good book.
That's the exact specifications of my notebook, and kubuntu runs fine on it. Maybe it isn't your desktop, but your distro that's slowing you down? What distro are you running?
Slashdot Mirror
Web performance is a major issue which a lot of web "developers" never consider unfortunately.
FTFY. Add "cutting and pasting large number of of inefficient javascript files (which they only use say 10% )" to my list of things that make you suck at being a web developer.
Android isn't a phone, it's an operating system. You could as easily have said that Microsoft never had a desktop monopoly because ten dozen manufacturers all used Windows.
The fact is, Android is the #1 selling smartphone OS.
If someone passes you on the right here in Springfield, they're the assholes, because they're passing you on the shoulder (and it's way too common, I've even seen cops do it). And in town? I'm not going to be in the right lane when I need to turn left five blocks down the road, I'd never get over in time.
Fujisawa Sensei seems like an idiot with an attitude. Dumbest sig I've seen in a long time.
While the "average" page may be getting bigger, the pages designed for mobile devices are much smaller and usually easier to read and navigate.
That's a faiilure on the webmaster's part; you should NOT have to code for different devices, screens, browsers, or resolutions unless you suck at HTML. Using exact coordinates rather than percentages is just fucking STUPID. You have screen sizes ranging from two inches to seventy inches and resolutions ranging from 1190s WebTV to 1080p and probably better by now. If your text won't wrap, your page sucks. If I have a horizontal scroll bar, your page sucks. If 2/3 of that sixty inch 1080p is blank, your page sucks. If your page won't completely display on any screen using any device and any browser, YOUR PAGE SUCKS. If any of your pages fail at any of the above, you suck as a webmaster.
You cannot exactly control a web page like you can a poster or a magazine. I wish people would get that through their damned heads; I hate pulling out my phone to surf while I'm in a waiting room, and have the first five sites I try to access not display at all.
This is the 21st century. If your page won't render on any internet-capable phone, your page sucks and you suck as a webmaster. Jesus, I just looked up some of my old sites from 1997 on archive.org using my phone, and they all rendered just fine.
Kids, learn HTML (and javascript and CSS if what you want to do demands it), and learn how to write cross-platform code. Jees, kids, this stuff ain't hard, why does everybody fuck it up so badly?
Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, even though your edit won't last 24 hours.
People getting into Linux for the first time pick Ubuntu, because that's what they've heard about, and they have no idea that Kubuntu even exists, let alone what it means, what Unity is, what KDE is, what Gnome is, or anything else that you take for granted.
That's your own fault. The only people in meatspace I know that heve even heard of Linux know that "unlike most OSs, you can pick different desktop environments like KDE or Gnome or XFCE" because I tell them when I clue them in that there's a free, superior replacement for Windows that doesn't need AV. The "free" and "no AV" surprises them much more than "wow, I have a choice?"
That web site gets my award for the very worst site of 2011, and maybe the century so far. The actual content, the talk itself, is in a little bitty two inch wide by two inch tall window that puts each sentence in a separate line; it's as unreadable is it can get. Sorry, but I can't respect any data or opinion that comes from a site that damned bad -- gees, ten year olds had better sites in Geocities.
So I copied the talk to Notepad and read it, and the fucking TALK was content-free!
Thanks for wasting five minutes of my life. Gees.
Whoever came up with that scheme was stupid and I don't know any other player than WMP that ever supported it, since it was 99.99% used for malware and 0.01% for legitimate uses.
It had legitimate uses???
The same problem exists with WiMP and MP3s. MP3s don't support DRM, WMAs do. So you can imbed a trojan link in the WMA file, rename it MP3, and WiMP will play the song AND the malware. Like you say, no other media player does that, and I see no legit use for it EXCEPT malware.
Maybe Norton or McAfee paid MS for this "feature". It sure makes their software more necessary!
Windows doesn't ask what desktop you want, it just gives it to you one. Same for OS X. I don't see why Linux dists should be any different.
Sam Houston's Ice Cream Parlor has vanilla ice cream. Harry Wombat's Parlor has Chocolate. Howard Johnson's has 38 flavors. Which ice cream parlor is best?
I moved from Windows to Linux because in Windows, it's the Microsoft way or the highway. With Linux, I have it like I want it. If my only desktop choice was Gnome, I'd probably have stuck with Windows.
Choice is GOOD. The only people who don't like choice are those who are indecisive to the point of mental illness. Remember those "choice is bad" car commercials with the ditzy woman who couldn't make her mind up whether she wanted cream in her coffee or not, to the point of a nervous breakdown? Windows is for her, no choices necessary, or even available.
I suppose you prefer the Model T Ford -- any color you want, so long as it's black?
Wrong. The first electronic computer (discounting the secret British one -- if it's secret, for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist) was ENIAC, patented in 1946, a quarter century before Apollo 11 and six years before I was born.
I hope you're still in junior high, because if not your teachers REALLY suck.
Which major distributions still come with KDE as the default option.
I've been using kubuntu, but I may go back to Mandriva
There used to be Mandrake/Mandriva, but that's pretty dead now.
Well, I heard that which is why I switched to kubuntu -- but it appears Mandriva's death is greatly exaggerated. I DLed a copy of their newest distro that just came out a couple of months ago. It's been so long since I used it it'll be a test run when I install it. I kind of have to do an OS install, the hard drive on my main computer died.
No, 2002 was the year of desktop Linux... at my house, at least. 2012 is the year I'm eligible to retire. It also may be the year of Android; a few folks posted some good reccomendations for acceptable carriers yesterday, so I may just do it this year.
U of I have had supercomputers for decades. Of course a lot of computation is needed for the Tevatron, from controlling the streams to analyzing the data. U of I is also home to the Tevatron.
Odd that people don't think of Illinois when they think of computing and physics.
Rice and beans are both fattening. Neither are rich in many vitamins. But you're right about fast, convinient food -- which you can't buy on food stamps.
Hmmm, maybe I do have a smart phone then; they supply apps for it.
*sigh* reading failure. The rich? Taxing them more (to a certain point, of course) does nothing whatever to or for the economy.
Most people on LINK do, in fact, work full time. Most of America's poor work, often at two jobs.
You might want to get your information about American poverty somewhere besides Fox, the Wall Street Journal, and Rush Limbaugh, all of whom perpetuate the myth that people on LINK (which they still call "food stamps" even though there are no more stamps, which shows you how inaccurate they are) are just fat lazy slobs who won't work. Speaking of fat lazy slobs, why are Limbaugh and Gingrich so portly?
Oh, and I'm neither fat nor poor. I earn about the median income, which allows me to eat real food. The checkout lady at WalMart has no such luxury -- yes, she's on LINK. The guy who cleans the toilets where you work is on LINK. Most of the people bitching about their taxes going to the poor employ people who, ironically, wouldn't work for the cheap bastards without LINK because they'd starve. LINK is subsidizing the same selfish assholes who complain about its existance.
Hunger in America is mostly because of people like Herman Cain; those folks who work in restaraunts are all poor with the possible exception of the manager. The people who created Cain's wealth share almost none of it.
The first google hit was this site. I didn't read the whole thing, but they used rates of chirrosis to determine alcohol consumption. They do mention statistical irregularities, but failed to note that chirrosis doesn't give an indication of alcohol use, only alcohol abuse.
My wikipedia editing days were over years ago when I tried to add new (three year old "new"!) information about cataract surgery after I had my implant -- the one I got was FDA-approved in 2003, a high tech gadget that sits on struts and actually lets you focus, unlike previous IOLs. The day after I added it, it was gone. Added again, gone again. It didn't show up until a couple of years later when I mentioned it in one of the many slashdot artices about editing wikipedia and got a +5, after which someone successfully added it.
So someone else will have to edit, I'm not going to waste my time trying.
Also, let me put an end to you never hearing someone say they would try heroin if it was legal. I wouldn't now, but I suffered from some pretty serious depression when I was in my late teens and early twenties and I may well have done so then. At that time I couldn't see any way for life to ever improve, so rational thought about the consequences wouldn't have kept me from it. The future was going to be awful (or short) anyway, so why not try to get whatever short term comfort is available?
That actually parallells drug abusers, including alcoholics I know. What I don't understand is, if you weren't thinking rationally, how did the law keep you from using it? Simply the luck of it not being available? Since you were a teenager it wouldn't have been any more available since it would still be illegal for minors, and actually could be less available; teenagers tell me it's easier for them to get pot than it is to get beer.
That article on Cocaethylene was interesting, thank you for the education.
I think what Obama did wrong was to concentrate on health care before the economy. If the economy had been better last Congressional election, there would probebly be fewer Republicans in Congress. Of course, he may have feared that the economy wouldn't improve.
But his health care plan is a bad one, it will do nothing to reduce costs and is only welfare for the insurance companies, who are only middlemen who do nothing for your health. It's time for the US to join the civilized world.
Can you have broadband without a land line?
I do. The internet comes from the phone line, but I'm not paying for landline service, just internet. Sounds strange that we can get that here but not in parts of Europe, I thought you guys were way ahead of us.
I saw that on Boost's website, but they don't offer the Android phones on the "pay as you go" plan.
The profit is getting elected. The contribution IS a bribe, especially if both mainstream candidates are "donated" to. Just because it's legal doesn't make it moral or ethical, especially when the unethical laws are passed by the politicians who benefit from them.
Oh, and you might find this interesting, as well -- plenty of $$$$$ to be "earned" as a congressman or senator.
I haven't read "No Country" or "Harry Potter"; I'll ask my daughter about Harry. Guess I'll have to make a trip to the library for "No Country", that was a good movie. If the book's half as good it'll still be a good book.
That's the exact specifications of my notebook, and kubuntu runs fine on it. Maybe it isn't your desktop, but your distro that's slowing you down? What distro are you running?
Of course they did. They travelled a full day in only 24 hours.