I -still- go to download.com occasionally. I used to use that site religiously back in the 90s, and even a bit into the 2000s.
I don't download from there anymore; I go to the website of the developer for their copy. However you can't underestimate a large list of software when you're considering alternatives or want to do something new. Just browsing the popular programs can yield you tools you never knew existed.
Uh, dude? He was saying to use -Chromium-, not Chrome. Your whole rant against Chrome has nothing to do with his suggestion to use the open source variant that Chrome is based on.
I've never recently had to view Youtube video ads in Chrome while using Adblock. I'd like to believe I haven't just gotten lucky this whole time. I do remember it being an issue a while back which made me watch Youtube from Firefox, but that has since stopped.
You don't even need a special fork, just Chromium. Chrome is based on Chromium. Google checks in development to Chromium and then when it releases a new version of Chrome, checks it out, adds the tracking bits, the Google branding, the h264 playback, a custom tailored Flash plugin, and releases it to the world.
So let me get this straight. It's just the extension developers being lazy? It's not like extension development is their job or anything. What motivation do they have if the work becomes extremely tedious or time consuming, repeatedly testing against new versions, only to repeat the same process so suddenly?
You do know the "competent ones" you explicitly mention actually make a living off of their extensions, right? They have a vested interest in keeping them up to date and running. It's not the same for everyone else.
This was my thought as well (though I wouldn't say 'ego booster.') Once they've caught up to everyone they'll "cave" into the pressure and go back to slower stabilized release schedules.
What's wrong with paying $1.99 for one track when you would have had to pay $5-10 for the one or two tracks you wanted anyhow?
Just because it had a better cost to track ratio before doesn't mean you were getting a better deal if you never listened to the other tracks. You were essentially paying more for bonus material you didn't care about.
By "HDR rig" I would easily assume he means a camera with HDR capabilities, not some crappy application that just saturates the fuck out of the images.
Wow, that seems extremely shady, especially if your regular pharmacy is aware of your sons volatile reaction to the generic drug and yet still tries to sub in generics when the doctor explicitly specifies name brand. Pharmacists can be sued for negligence in malpractice suits just like Doctors do if they screw up. It's weird they would take the situation so lightly.
What are you suggesting? That they slammed a few beers, got a bunch of chemicals from the local supply store, dumped them into a vat, and out came Lipitor with minimal effort? Or that someone was -this- close to creating Lipitor and Pfizer came in, said "we should move that over there," then patents the whole thing?
Credit where credit is do. I do -not- like Pfizer, in fact you might even say I -hate- Pfizer, but your line of reasoning is absurd, regardless of my exaggerated examples.
I on the other hand seem to be very unlucky with about 20% of generics I get. Many times they're fine, but one in particular is terrible. I'd been prescribed Xanax for severe anxiety attacks, and the generic form actually makes me sick and nauseated to the point the anxiety seemed to be the better option. Originally they covered it but later implemented a generic-only policy. I had to fight my insurance company tooth to nail to get them to cover Xanax, which they did, after an absurd amount of time.
In general I think it's not the worst policy in the world, but don't get them wrong -- insurance companies only do it to save them money, not you.
Haven't dealt with GamePro in ~14 years. I actually wasn't even aware they were still in business, which I guess was part of the problem. I still remember all the GamePro and Nintendo Power magazines I had in the late 80s/early 90s. I probably still have them somewhere...
Probably not but it doesn't hurt when you're thinking of future-proofing your investment in high end graphics card technology. Especially considering how fast it moves.
Aw man, I just know I'm going to get grammar nazi'd on my misuse of "you're" instead of "your" if I don't say something first. Perhaps even after I do.
Nice try, but CarrierIQ isn't a part of Android either so you're point is moot. Android is completely open source, just like you note base Debian is. You're not getting stock Android from Google on your phone are you? No. You're getting the carrier's own personal version with their own personal additions. This is no different than someone creating their own Debian-based distro and putting tracking software in it, then complaining about Debian itself instead of this third party distro.
In amendment to my post, after having read this comment and if it's in fact true, I'm not sure what to make of this whole ordeal. Now I feel silly for going along with the hype. It would certainly still be a large privacy violation (and I still consider the inability to disable/remove puts it in rootkit territory since it is not essential to the functionality of the OS or service) but not close to the scale being trumpeted.
Slashdot Mirror
I -still- go to download.com occasionally. I used to use that site religiously back in the 90s, and even a bit into the 2000s.
I don't download from there anymore; I go to the website of the developer for their copy. However you can't underestimate a large list of software when you're considering alternatives or want to do something new. Just browsing the popular programs can yield you tools you never knew existed.
Dear god man! Just let the little guy feel special for once!
Uh, dude? He was saying to use -Chromium-, not Chrome. Your whole rant against Chrome has nothing to do with his suggestion to use the open source variant that Chrome is based on.
If it's not even public yet, how is it listed among popular frameworks?
I wish I had mod points for you.
I don't think you really understand what a pyramid scheme is.
I don't buy it. Perhaps for casual games you typically find on a Wii, sure.
Hell will have frozen over when everyone is playing pretty much any serious game genre on their phones and only their phones.
You've never had a Opera crash in 12 years? What dimension are you from? Is there cake?
I've never recently had to view Youtube video ads in Chrome while using Adblock. I'd like to believe I haven't just gotten lucky this whole time. I do remember it being an issue a while back which made me watch Youtube from Firefox, but that has since stopped.
You don't even need a special fork, just Chromium. Chrome is based on Chromium. Google checks in development to Chromium and then when it releases a new version of Chrome, checks it out, adds the tracking bits, the Google branding, the h264 playback, a custom tailored Flash plugin, and releases it to the world.
So let me get this straight. It's just the extension developers being lazy? It's not like extension development is their job or anything. What motivation do they have if the work becomes extremely tedious or time consuming, repeatedly testing against new versions, only to repeat the same process so suddenly?
You do know the "competent ones" you explicitly mention actually make a living off of their extensions, right? They have a vested interest in keeping them up to date and running. It's not the same for everyone else.
And then on a completely different Slashdot bandwagon, people see bundling and make it out to be an order of magnitude worse than it really is.
This was my thought as well (though I wouldn't say 'ego booster.') Once they've caught up to everyone they'll "cave" into the pressure and go back to slower stabilized release schedules.
Where does Chrome lack in OS/desktop integration where Firefox succeeds? I'm genuinely curious, not being a smartass.
What's wrong with paying $1.99 for one track when you would have had to pay $5-10 for the one or two tracks you wanted anyhow?
Just because it had a better cost to track ratio before doesn't mean you were getting a better deal if you never listened to the other tracks. You were essentially paying more for bonus material you didn't care about.
By "HDR rig" I would easily assume he means a camera with HDR capabilities, not some crappy application that just saturates the fuck out of the images.
Wow, that seems extremely shady, especially if your regular pharmacy is aware of your sons volatile reaction to the generic drug and yet still tries to sub in generics when the doctor explicitly specifies name brand. Pharmacists can be sued for negligence in malpractice suits just like Doctors do if they screw up. It's weird they would take the situation so lightly.
What are you suggesting? That they slammed a few beers, got a bunch of chemicals from the local supply store, dumped them into a vat, and out came Lipitor with minimal effort? Or that someone was -this- close to creating Lipitor and Pfizer came in, said "we should move that over there," then patents the whole thing?
Credit where credit is do. I do -not- like Pfizer, in fact you might even say I -hate- Pfizer, but your line of reasoning is absurd, regardless of my exaggerated examples.
I on the other hand seem to be very unlucky with about 20% of generics I get. Many times they're fine, but one in particular is terrible. I'd been prescribed Xanax for severe anxiety attacks, and the generic form actually makes me sick and nauseated to the point the anxiety seemed to be the better option. Originally they covered it but later implemented a generic-only policy. I had to fight my insurance company tooth to nail to get them to cover Xanax, which they did, after an absurd amount of time.
In general I think it's not the worst policy in the world, but don't get them wrong -- insurance companies only do it to save them money, not you.
Money and/or discount prices on stocking Pfizer drugs?
Haven't dealt with GamePro in ~14 years. I actually wasn't even aware they were still in business, which I guess was part of the problem. I still remember all the GamePro and Nintendo Power magazines I had in the late 80s/early 90s. I probably still have them somewhere...
Probably not but it doesn't hurt when you're thinking of future-proofing your investment in high end graphics card technology. Especially considering how fast it moves.
Aw man, I just know I'm going to get grammar nazi'd on my misuse of "you're" instead of "your" if I don't say something first. Perhaps even after I do.
Nice try, but CarrierIQ isn't a part of Android either so you're point is moot. Android is completely open source, just like you note base Debian is. You're not getting stock Android from Google on your phone are you? No. You're getting the carrier's own personal version with their own personal additions. This is no different than someone creating their own Debian-based distro and putting tracking software in it, then complaining about Debian itself instead of this third party distro.
In amendment to my post, after having read this comment and if it's in fact true, I'm not sure what to make of this whole ordeal. Now I feel silly for going along with the hype. It would certainly still be a large privacy violation (and I still consider the inability to disable/remove puts it in rootkit territory since it is not essential to the functionality of the OS or service) but not close to the scale being trumpeted.