Well not everyone likes to develop in Javascript and I shudder at the thought of having to develop a large application with it even though there are some promising frameworks like qooxdoo available. While HTML 5 might be more open (oh, except that little video flaw) I am not happy that Javascript is going to be the lingua france for developing complex applications with it. Flash (and even Silverlight) have their place for rich client applications.
The main use for Flash on the web is video. There are much better ways to play video than through Flash.
As for Apps, I have a couple of points for you:
Flash uses ActionScript, which is based on ECMAScript, the same as JavaScript, and has a lot of similarities.
If you want to create a "desktop" like app and you're too stupid to learn JavaScript + CSS, write an app using Cocoa and submit it to the app store.
Ask PPC owners that want to get the latest version of OS X.
No, Apple didn't drop support for Universal Binaries. Most apps available for Mac today are universal binaries and work on PPC or Intel macs, and in some cases support PPC 32, PPC 64, Intel 32 and Intel 64.
Just because a new OS doesn't support an older CPU architecture doesn't mean the functionality for Universal or "Fat" binaries is not supported.
Most of us remember that in 1999, to gain support from key senators for the sale of Telstra, the Government put together a lame duck Internet censorship regime that didn't work, much to the relief of ISPs and porn freaks nationwide.
They wanted to implement central filtering/censorship, just as Conroy does. Yes, they dropped it eventually. My point isn't that labor is oh so much better, it's that people are all too quick to forget the wrongs of the opposition when they have a problem with the party in government.
It's a two part filter. There vague descriptions split it into "illegal" (which we already know is not limited purely to illegal material) and "unwanted" (who knows what that could include.
The "unwanted" part is Opt out, the "illegal" is mandatory, with no public oversight, and no standardised review process.
then again, you can't expect to talk sense with the labor party....
I hate this planned filter as much as the next guy, but don't think this is a labour-only special. The Coalition wanted to do the same thing during the late 90's.
The only ISP of any size who are saying it's all find and dandy is iPrimus. They had the filtering trial as an Opt In.
There is of course also the fact that the company is run by fucking idiots. Before the trial started, when the public debate about the filter was first firing up, the CEO of Primus Australia tried to do a cosy deal with Stephen Conroy to allow Primus to make a profit from the whole thing.
Agreed. XHTML was rather pointless. It didn't add any particularlly interesting features, made pages more difficult to author, and its claim that it made life easier for browser authors was belied by poor support and slow rendering. Making things more "XMLish" with closed tags and quoted attributes was a good idea, but in reality writing XML-conformant CSS/Javascript XML was a pain in the butt and usually not done.
I suppose XHTML might have been useful as part of a document management/transformation system, but it didn't seem to offer much to most web developers.
The ability to parse a web document using native XML methods is pointless?
As for CSS/JS in xhtml. How hard is embedding the content as CDATA? Why are you even embedding CSS/JS in the XHTML?
If web developers don't need the XML parsing functionality, they can keep using HTML 4.01.
As for HTML5 - technically HTML5 consists of HTML5 (using the HTML syntax rules) and XHTML5 (using the XML syntax rules). I think it's great the W3C have "one" standard to work on, but if you think HTML5 is ready to go any time soon, don't kid yourself. Stick with either HTML4 or XHTML for now. It will take some time before it's safe to deploy valid (X)HTML5 documents for general consumption.
I think you missed my point. Browser vendors aren't going to implement things they don't want to, regardless of what the spec says. That' the whole reason CSS2.1 exists. The vendors didn't implement a number of things in CSS2.0 and thus a revised spec was released to more closely match what was actually implemented.
This is the same. The W3C aren't going to release a spec that no one can/will implement fully. Ian Hickson has made that quite clear.
MS haven't even commented on whether they're going to support the tag at all. If the W3 only wrote specs based on what MS will support, we'd all be using frames based HTML3 with inline style attributes.
It hasn't worked in the past, it won't work now. Even the W3C accepts that browser vendors won't support what they don't want to, regardless of what the spec says.
No way will Apple force people to buy their laptops through a phone company.
Steve Jobs stated that they didn't put WWAN into the MacBook Air because he didn't want customers tied to a single Telco.
Have you bought a fucking tv lately? The UI always looks like it was designed by a fucking dog with glasses and intended to be used on a 10" screen.
Yeah, that's what's going to work. A TV company trying to make a usable GUI for something other than "change input" or "adjust volume".
The success of things like the iPhone and iPod, and to a lesser extent, the popularity of the AppleTV (and even things like Windows Media Centre or whatever its called) come down to ease of use. And how do you use something? By interacting with it.
Traditional consumer electronics companies have never been able to make a GOOD UI. They can't even make the things they specialise in (the actual hardware/electronics) easy to use. WHO THE FUCK ships an LCD tv with a remote that has prominent buttons for features not in that TV?
As for the specifics of Flash on a TV: In the words of Lewis Black, KISS MY DICK.
Flash is, and has been for a long time, an over-hyped, over-used, unnecessary POS. There used to be a joke, that if you had a problem developing something, XML would fix it, and if that didn't work, you aren't using enough XML.
The problem is, people seem to treat that joke as some kind of mantra, substituting XML for Flash.
So, the transition plan to go from the nuevo-mysql to oracle, would be dump the DB on nuevo-mysql and import it on oracle. No syntax changes, no modification of source, no column type issues, etc. Could be pretty cool.
Yeah, and then they can go back in time and rename mysql to oraclexe...
The real problem see, is that the wombats all dig up the fibre that gets laid in the ground, and the koalas are constantly climbing mobile ("cell" for you yanks) phone towers and humping the berjesus out of the exposed equipment.
Course thats nothing when you compare it to what the dingos do...
You don't vote huh? Sounds too much like hard work huh?
Besides, why bother, the last guy you cunts elected has REALLY been great for the world.
Spell check is intended to pick up mistakes. Unfortunately it can't deal with the mistake in your case, because YOU are the mistake.
define dependant?
i don't know too many serious sites (that matter) that actually RELY on Flash for anything. 98% of all flash content is either banner ads or YouTube/RedTube/etc
have you seen the list of ISPs?
they're all nobodies that have fuck all customers. Primus is the only "big" one, and they're fucking tiny, and I can tell you right now, they have alterior motives - the CEO tried to do a deal with the Senator who's pushing the filtering, so that Primus would supply filtering tech.
actually, the closest example for Windows is "Microsoft Update", because Windows Update only does the OS components not apps.
And yet Windows Update STILL relies on internet fucking explorer. why the hell do we need to use a web browser to update an OS/App??
Slashdot Mirror
The main use for Flash on the web is video. There are much better ways to play video than through Flash.
As for Apps, I have a couple of points for you:
I think you mean
The greater good.
No, Apple didn't drop support for Universal Binaries. Most apps available for Mac today are universal binaries and work on PPC or Intel macs, and in some cases support PPC 32, PPC 64, Intel 32 and Intel 64. Just because a new OS doesn't support an older CPU architecture doesn't mean the functionality for Universal or "Fat" binaries is not supported.
Read this for more info: http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens1.html
They wanted to implement central filtering/censorship, just as Conroy does. Yes, they dropped it eventually. My point isn't that labor is oh so much better, it's that people are all too quick to forget the wrongs of the opposition when they have a problem with the party in government.
It's a two part filter. There vague descriptions split it into "illegal" (which we already know is not limited purely to illegal material) and "unwanted" (who knows what that could include. The "unwanted" part is Opt out, the "illegal" is mandatory, with no public oversight, and no standardised review process.
Read what i wrote. I said they TRIED to implement this. They realised it's not feasible and chose the software option instead. http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/soa/Porn-wars-episode-II/0,130061791,120273369,00.htm
I hate this planned filter as much as the next guy, but don't think this is a labour-only special. The Coalition wanted to do the same thing during the late 90's.
The only ISP of any size who are saying it's all find and dandy is iPrimus. They had the filtering trial as an Opt In. There is of course also the fact that the company is run by fucking idiots. Before the trial started, when the public debate about the filter was first firing up, the CEO of Primus Australia tried to do a cosy deal with Stephen Conroy to allow Primus to make a profit from the whole thing.
The ability to parse a web document using native XML methods is pointless? As for CSS/JS in xhtml. How hard is embedding the content as CDATA? Why are you even embedding CSS/JS in the XHTML? If web developers don't need the XML parsing functionality, they can keep using HTML 4.01. As for HTML5 - technically HTML5 consists of HTML5 (using the HTML syntax rules) and XHTML5 (using the XML syntax rules). I think it's great the W3C have "one" standard to work on, but if you think HTML5 is ready to go any time soon, don't kid yourself. Stick with either HTML4 or XHTML for now. It will take some time before it's safe to deploy valid (X)HTML5 documents for general consumption.
I think you missed my point. Browser vendors aren't going to implement things they don't want to, regardless of what the spec says. That' the whole reason CSS2.1 exists. The vendors didn't implement a number of things in CSS2.0 and thus a revised spec was released to more closely match what was actually implemented. This is the same. The W3C aren't going to release a spec that no one can/will implement fully. Ian Hickson has made that quite clear.
MS haven't even commented on whether they're going to support the tag at all. If the W3 only wrote specs based on what MS will support, we'd all be using frames based HTML3 with inline style attributes.
It hasn't worked in the past, it won't work now. Even the W3C accepts that browser vendors won't support what they don't want to, regardless of what the spec says.
No way will Apple force people to buy their laptops through a phone company. Steve Jobs stated that they didn't put WWAN into the MacBook Air because he didn't want customers tied to a single Telco.
Have you bought a fucking tv lately? The UI always looks like it was designed by a fucking dog with glasses and intended to be used on a 10" screen. Yeah, that's what's going to work. A TV company trying to make a usable GUI for something other than "change input" or "adjust volume". The success of things like the iPhone and iPod, and to a lesser extent, the popularity of the AppleTV (and even things like Windows Media Centre or whatever its called) come down to ease of use. And how do you use something? By interacting with it. Traditional consumer electronics companies have never been able to make a GOOD UI. They can't even make the things they specialise in (the actual hardware/electronics) easy to use. WHO THE FUCK ships an LCD tv with a remote that has prominent buttons for features not in that TV? As for the specifics of Flash on a TV: In the words of Lewis Black, KISS MY DICK. Flash is, and has been for a long time, an over-hyped, over-used, unnecessary POS. There used to be a joke, that if you had a problem developing something, XML would fix it, and if that didn't work, you aren't using enough XML. The problem is, people seem to treat that joke as some kind of mantra, substituting XML for Flash.
Yeah, and then they can go back in time and rename mysql to oraclexe...
The real problem see, is that the wombats all dig up the fibre that gets laid in the ground, and the koalas are constantly climbing mobile ("cell" for you yanks) phone towers and humping the berjesus out of the exposed equipment. Course thats nothing when you compare it to what the dingos do...
Conversely, for those of us who have jobs and use our computers to get paid, the cost of Apple hardware/software is not an issue.
You don't vote huh? Sounds too much like hard work huh? Besides, why bother, the last guy you cunts elected has REALLY been great for the world. Spell check is intended to pick up mistakes. Unfortunately it can't deal with the mistake in your case, because YOU are the mistake.
and you use Windows?
define dependant? i don't know too many serious sites (that matter) that actually RELY on Flash for anything. 98% of all flash content is either banner ads or YouTube/RedTube/etc
have you seen the list of ISPs? they're all nobodies that have fuck all customers. Primus is the only "big" one, and they're fucking tiny, and I can tell you right now, they have alterior motives - the CEO tried to do a deal with the Senator who's pushing the filtering, so that Primus would supply filtering tech.
the iTune Store isnt HTML. It's XML. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2004_06.html#005666
actually, the closest example for Windows is "Microsoft Update", because Windows Update only does the OS components not apps. And yet Windows Update STILL relies on internet fucking explorer. why the hell do we need to use a web browser to update an OS/App??