The problem of websites not rendering correctly on non-webkit mobile browsers has nothing to do with vendor specific prefixes, but has everything to do with developers not writing platform independent code.
Even though Microsoft has entered a road towards standardization from IE7 on, their browser remains the weakest one in that regard. No version of Internet Explorer implements HTML5 and CSS3 to the extend the competition does and their rendering engine still includes non-standard behavior in many situations. They might be lagging behind less far than they used to, but IE is still solid in last place when it comes to standard compliance.
The webkit-prefixes is exactly what Microsoft never did. By prefixing attributes, it is clear for everyone these are platform-specific features in need of a cross-platform solution. Microsoft instead always tried to obfuscate what is standard and what is IE-specific by interpreting standard code intentionally different and adding their own attributes and elements without providing any clues to developers that this stuff was not actually part of any standard specification.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with prefixing attributes. Mozilla does it, Opera does it, Webkit does it and it makes it perfectly clear to the world which features are standard and which features are not.
The submitter is referring to Android before it was acquired by Google in 2005. It was entirely vaporware at the time, but it was generating some buzz.
Of course the cloud isn't just a data center. It's the cloud if a data center can go off line and your data is still available.
I understand the investment is a bit larger to set your site up in a geographical redundant manner compared to a locally hosted service, but I thought large websites such as the Gawker group or the Huffington Post would put in that money to ensure availability. I guess not. Maybe I underestimate the extra investment.
I'm really amazed large websites such as the Gawker blogs and the Huffington Post are all hosted in a single data center.
Isn't this the age of the cloud and everything? I would have thought they'd simply serve from another location while the NY host is down, but apparently it's not set up in such a way that that is easily done.
Could Slashdot be wiped out by a single power failure as well?
I'm not British either and English is not my native language. When I watch the BBC, I almost always turn on real time subtitling through their Ceefax service in order to understand everything better.
Now that Ceefax is considered obsolete, those days are over. It sure makes it a lot harder for me to enjoy their broadcasts.
No, I'm not denying the patent, I'm making the patent invalid if the owner doesn't manufacture the patented product. This means you can get a patent for an invention before actually producing it, but if you want to sue an infringer, you have to manufacture the product yourself in order to win in court.
Perhaps the problems of the research centers and sole inventors could be solved with a license?
The main issue with patent trolls is that they're not actually part of the industry at all, they simply buy up other people's patents and sue companies who infringe. I think it would be great if getting a patent granted would make you manufacture your invention.
I'm thinking of new laws like "patents are only valid for products you actually manufacture" and "only specific implementations of ideas are patentable, not the ideas themselves". You know, stuff that actually makes sense. There is none of that going on in the US right now.
The reason Google does this, is because they check if the website is listed as fraudulent and displays a warning if that is the case. But on your own website, you don't have to implement such functionality as you probably have a lot of control over what you link to in the first place.
I get the wish to track outbound links, but seriously, this is not the way to do it.
If it was my job to produce a list of all links, I would scan the site for all links. How about that?
I really can't believe people who come up with stuff like this... I mean, a script with the ability to redirect to anything a user inputs, that just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
Who's to say they won't drop support for -webkit-border-radius once the CSS3 standard is finalized and recommended by the W3C?
The problem of websites not rendering correctly on non-webkit mobile browsers has nothing to do with vendor specific prefixes, but has everything to do with developers not writing platform independent code.
Even though Microsoft has entered a road towards standardization from IE7 on, their browser remains the weakest one in that regard. No version of Internet Explorer implements HTML5 and CSS3 to the extend the competition does and their rendering engine still includes non-standard behavior in many situations. They might be lagging behind less far than they used to, but IE is still solid in last place when it comes to standard compliance.
The webkit-prefixes is exactly what Microsoft never did. By prefixing attributes, it is clear for everyone these are platform-specific features in need of a cross-platform solution. Microsoft instead always tried to obfuscate what is standard and what is IE-specific by interpreting standard code intentionally different and adding their own attributes and elements without providing any clues to developers that this stuff was not actually part of any standard specification.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with prefixing attributes. Mozilla does it, Opera does it, Webkit does it and it makes it perfectly clear to the world which features are standard and which features are not.
The submitter is referring to Android before it was acquired by Google in 2005. It was entirely vaporware at the time, but it was generating some buzz.
I'm not aware of a way to use the Asus Transformer as a laptop (with a keyboard) in portrait mode.
Rotatable monitors on laptops? Seriously?
Linus is talking about laptops. You know, the topic of this discussion.
Yeah, just use your laptop sideways. Kids these days, you have to tell them everything.
Of course the cloud isn't just a data center. It's the cloud if a data center can go off line and your data is still available.
I understand the investment is a bit larger to set your site up in a geographical redundant manner compared to a locally hosted service, but I thought large websites such as the Gawker group or the Huffington Post would put in that money to ensure availability. I guess not. Maybe I underestimate the extra investment.
I'm really amazed large websites such as the Gawker blogs and the Huffington Post are all hosted in a single data center.
Isn't this the age of the cloud and everything? I would have thought they'd simply serve from another location while the NY host is down, but apparently it's not set up in such a way that that is easily done.
Could Slashdot be wiped out by a single power failure as well?
My main method of watching the BBC is through an analog cable signal. With Ceefax gone, that means there simply is no other way to get subtitles.
I do have a digital set top box, but I have yet to try and see if I can get subtitles through that.
I would like things to be better as well. But the reality is that I used to have subtitles and now I don't. It's hard to see that as an improvement.
How? Without Ceefax, I'm not sure if there is way to get subtitling on the BBC from abroad.
The red button does something else entirely on my set top box. The BBC's digital services only work from within the UK.
I'm not British either and English is not my native language. When I watch the BBC, I almost always turn on real time subtitling through their Ceefax service in order to understand everything better.
Now that Ceefax is considered obsolete, those days are over. It sure makes it a lot harder for me to enjoy their broadcasts.
No, I'm not denying the patent, I'm making the patent invalid if the owner doesn't manufacture the patented product. This means you can get a patent for an invention before actually producing it, but if you want to sue an infringer, you have to manufacture the product yourself in order to win in court.
Perhaps the problems of the research centers and sole inventors could be solved with a license?
The main issue with patent trolls is that they're not actually part of the industry at all, they simply buy up other people's patents and sue companies who infringe. I think it would be great if getting a patent granted would make you manufacture your invention.
I'm thinking of new laws like "patents are only valid for products you actually manufacture" and "only specific implementations of ideas are patentable, not the ideas themselves". You know, stuff that actually makes sense. There is none of that going on in the US right now.
Patent trolls will continue to be a problem as long as the patent laws aren't revised. The trolls are merely a symptom, the laws are the cause.
That really is quite ridiculous. But at least don't they don't allow just any url in their redirection script, I guess that's something...
Websites seriously implement such a warning? Wow... I'm truly amazed by the craziness of this entire thread.
The reason Google does this, is because they check if the website is listed as fraudulent and displays a warning if that is the case. But on your own website, you don't have to implement such functionality as you probably have a lot of control over what you link to in the first place.
I get the wish to track outbound links, but seriously, this is not the way to do it.
... but a url which starts with "1.usa.gov" doesn't strike me as particularly trustworthy.
If it was my job to produce a list of all links, I would scan the site for all links. How about that?
I really can't believe people who come up with stuff like this... I mean, a script with the ability to redirect to anything a user inputs, that just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.