Don't worry about it, I always get modded troll. I have some guy with a grudge and tons of mod points following me around or something, I dunno. (I had a karma bonus for like 5 solid years, and this guy has removed it in a couple of weeks. Slashdot's karma system is broken beyond belief.)
I guess it would be easy to agree with you if the result hadn't been so destructive to the progress of the whole internet.
IE's been caught up for like... 4 years now. They're not holding shit back anymore, and haven't been for a long time.
Now, companies (and individuals) that refuse to upgrade from IE6-- those are (potentially) holding sites back. But don't blame Microsoft for that! Microsoft's doing everything they can to get people to upgrade, short of sabotaging their own software or weaseling out of support contracts. Depending on your target audience, though, you can probably drop IE6 compatibility-- I mean a lot of large sites like blackberry.com have done that, and it doesn't seem to have hurt them.
Blame where blame is due.
I don't understand what you want W3C to do by the way... they've tried the "let's standardize first and wait for implementations later" before and it's failed miserably.
Yah, we've also tried the: "let's not bother with standards at all and just let browsers do whatever the hell they want" and it worked even *worse*. Or do you simply not remember before IE and Netscape up to about version 5?
So I guess the question is this: do you want to go back to the IE4/Netscape 4 days? Because that seems to be what you're asking for. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it?
All I want from the W3C is this: 1) Stop working on pointless, retarded standards that do nothing but waste everybody's time. Like XHTML2. (Fortunately, they've mostly already done this, too bad all those years were wasted on it previously.) 2) Start moving at the speed everybody else wants them to move at. This they're still bad at-- HTML5 was going great until the W3C got a hold of it, now it's going nowhere slow.
In short, I want them to MOOOOOOOOVE. There's nothing wrong with what they're doing, it's just so. fucking. slow. They introduce a nice cool feature to CSS3, and it's literally a DECADE until browser makers can implement it. Ridiculous.
CSS3 has been in the works since 2005. Chrome has gone from "non-existent" to version 6 in that amount of time.
Look, what it really comes down to is that the only party holding up the web right now is the W3C.
Chrome, Safari, and to a lesser extent Firefox are busy implementing standards that aren't finalized-- kudos to them, but don't act as if they are "caught up" and IE is "behind". The reality is they are "above and beyond" and IE is "perfectly fine".
Last time IE tried implementing standards that weren't finished, they got completely fucked over by the W3C, so I can completely understand their reluctance to do it. There's a non-zero chance that Chrome/Safari could be fucked-over by the W3C changing a standard out from under them, as well.
I guess I had the magic version of XP, where all you had to do was check "automatically download and install updates" in the Windows Update control panel.
Browsers have always supported standards that aren't finished, at least since I started using them in the early 90s; heck, many of the standards themselves co-opted features that browsers had implemented themselves.
Oh, I agree with you completely. But you can't *blame* them for it.
The complaint sums to: "they didn't go as much above and beyond as other browsers have."
What year are you from? IE hasn't been used for Windows Update since... well, hell, it was optional even in Windows XP. Going to the site in Vista (almost 4 years old now) or higher just redirects you to the control panel.
So it doesn't support standards that aren't finished? Wow, how criminal.
Look, if you're going to blame someone for holding up the web, blame the W3C... it's their job. The only reason HTML5 is going ahead at all is because an outside group did most of the work.
It's unfair to gripe at Microsoft for not supporting unfinished standards, considering: 1) How much they got burned by implementing CSS1 early, then having the box model "clarified" out from under them when their implementation was already in released software. 1) Despite that, they *do* have support for both of those in the next version of the browser due... next month? Or really really soon now.
I can verify it's true, but it only applies to ADB keyboards.
The way the Mac worked (and this is all from vague memory of decades ago), it could report a total of about 7 keys simultaneously, but it reserved 4 of those for modifiers (Shift, Control, Command, Option), which left 3 non-modifier keys available. If you were holding down more than 3, you're SOL.
As the grandparent says, that's why most Mac game control schemes heavily featured modifier keys for important functions.
By the way, there was some ACARS info transmitted for Air France Flight 447, which people have talked little about. ACARS seems like the kind of thing that's needed, just ramp up the information being transmitted... can't you do that?
Over the ocean, there's no ground link-- and satellites have limited bandwidth (and are expensive.) Right now, they transmit in short bursts, and (I believe) only when things are abnormal.
I don't know for sure, but it's very well possible that they can not ramp up the information being transmitted, not without launching more satellites or coming up with some kind of "data buoy" system in the oceans.
Personally, I'm not too anxious for constant satellite telemetry to be a mandatory part of the equipment. I don't think too many people would be happy to hear that their flight was canceled/delayed to install a new satellite transmitter on the plane.
Please. I had a flight delayed once because the drain in one of the lavatories was clogged... seriously. It took 45 minutes to get the mechanic to sign off on "just duct-tape the door close and take off."
There's already a billion electronic devices on the plane, and a stuck drain delayed me. Why do you think this particular part would be the straw that breaks the camel's back and keeps planes grounded half the time?
In the novel, it's your 21st birthday. They had to up the age, for pretty obvious (and sensible) reasons.
Also, in the novel the confrontation with the giant computer that runs the world makes sense, instead of Logan destroying it by... uh... what did he do again? Something involving holograms?
As a conservative myself, I think phrasing the argument as "small" vs. "big" government is misleading. What I want is more power vested in the *local* governments, and less in the federal government... I live in a huge western state, I don't need a ton of white men in suits who have never been further west than Chicago, and who have never lived outside of a 2+ million population city butting their laws into my business.
I could see arguing for this being confused with wanting "small" government, when that isn't necessarily the case.
Ok, I'm going to get modded down, but could we stop with the "cough cough" thing? Just say, "like Helvetica 14px." Like a normal human being writing a normal forum post. The "cough cough* thing, assuming it was ever funny, hasn't been funny in years. Now it does nothing but make your post harder to read, and make me think you have no actual sense of humor.
Didn't say they were, just saying that fanboys didn't like you.
Well, ok. Undoubtedly true.
But the thing is that never stopped me from having good karma before. My opinions haven't changed. Which means either: 1) This site has become so much more extremist that it's significantly more difficult to maintain good karma if you're not part of the groupthink 2) I pissed off some single individual who has no problem abusing the mod system to lower my karma
Considering the options, I'd prefer to think number 2 happened.
Besides, I've seen a few of those posts (ranting about linux on a place that grew out of a linux fan site) and it's likely you annoyed
Well, whether they were annoyed or not, they weren't trolls, and they certainly shouldn't be modded as trolls. And if you're telling me I should self-censor because there's one particular fandom that dominates the comments here, then you can go screw yourself. (If you weren't implying that, then nevermind.)
However, there is sometimes the impression that US citizens know more about the geography of their own country than of others around the world.
At the risk of using an American-ism... duh?
I mean, what are you expecting here? I bet Chinese citizens know more about the geography of China than they do about, for example, Guatemala. Isn't that to be expected?
I lost my karma bonus of 6+ years because some asswipe decided he was going to mod all of my posts for a couple weeks -1 Troll. No matter how good the content of them. The mod system is pretty easy to manipulate, really-- especially knowing now that 2 weeks of "random asshole" can undo 6+ years of good karma.
Anyway, point is, don't worry about points. They're stupid, and totally useless for gauging the worth of a poster.
But the project says right there in bold print, "hey, come use this data. It's free."
You can't fault Microsoft for using the data when the project *asks* people to use the data. That's ridiculous. I mean, we can debate back and forth all day, but if there's a sign that says "free apples" and I take an apple, you can't get pissy after-the-fact that I didn't pay you a dollar.
It's really that simple.
If you want Microsoft to do something in exchange for the data, well, fine, but then you can't go around calling it "free" anymore because it ain't. It's really, really that simple.
And Windows isn't a "real" operating system because...?
You know if you ever answer the question, I'll stop asking it. I'm not even going to bother arguing with your more ridiculous statements. I'm just waiting for you to explain *your* *own* *assertion* about Windows.
(I'd love to see an architect get more work done with a CLI than a GUI-- or a musician, or a 3D artist, or pretty much anybody on Earth other than a Linux system administrator. If you honestly believe your last paragraph, that just means you've led a very sheltered life.)
Ok. And Windows isn't "real" by that definition because...?
I'm just asking you to support your own point. It's not like I'm grilling you or anything-- it took like 8 posts just to get you to define "real", now I need to find out why Windows doesn't fit that definition.
If the window manager is the operating system, or even an important part of the operating system, then so is notepad.
Notepad is part of the operating system.
No real operating system requires a window manager to do it's job.
To my knowledge, the only operating system that required a window manager to do its job was Mac Classic, and I might be wrong about that.
Does Windows REQUIRE a window manager to run? You tell me.
No it does not. Wait, you're asking ME? You're the one claiming Windows isn't "real", and now you're admitting you don't even know this about it? Why should I take your authority on what is "real" and what isn't, since you're not even familiar with the product we're discussing?
Is Windows a real operating system, or not?
Since you still haven't explained what "real" means in your little parlance, I'm going to assume you're talking about the definition of "real" and most effectively makes you look like an idiot:
Of course it's fucking real. What do you think, every other person on Earth is hallucinating except yourself?
Slashdot Mirror
Wait a month. IE9 is on-par with every other browser, and ahead of Firefox 3.6. (Not 4, though.)
It's not like Microsoft is 5 years behind, they're at most 9 months behind.
Don't worry about it, I always get modded troll. I have some guy with a grudge and tons of mod points following me around or something, I dunno. (I had a karma bonus for like 5 solid years, and this guy has removed it in a couple of weeks. Slashdot's karma system is broken beyond belief.)
I guess it would be easy to agree with you if the result hadn't been so destructive to the progress of the whole internet.
IE's been caught up for like ... 4 years now. They're not holding shit back anymore, and haven't been for a long time.
Now, companies (and individuals) that refuse to upgrade from IE6-- those are (potentially) holding sites back. But don't blame Microsoft for that! Microsoft's doing everything they can to get people to upgrade, short of sabotaging their own software or weaseling out of support contracts. Depending on your target audience, though, you can probably drop IE6 compatibility-- I mean a lot of large sites like blackberry.com have done that, and it doesn't seem to have hurt them.
Blame where blame is due.
I don't understand what you want W3C to do by the way... they've tried the "let's standardize first and wait for implementations later" before and it's failed miserably.
Yah, we've also tried the: "let's not bother with standards at all and just let browsers do whatever the hell they want" and it worked even *worse*. Or do you simply not remember before IE and Netscape up to about version 5?
So I guess the question is this: do you want to go back to the IE4/Netscape 4 days? Because that seems to be what you're asking for. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it?
All I want from the W3C is this:
1) Stop working on pointless, retarded standards that do nothing but waste everybody's time. Like XHTML2. (Fortunately, they've mostly already done this, too bad all those years were wasted on it previously.)
2) Start moving at the speed everybody else wants them to move at. This they're still bad at-- HTML5 was going great until the W3C got a hold of it, now it's going nowhere slow.
In short, I want them to MOOOOOOOOVE. There's nothing wrong with what they're doing, it's just so. fucking. slow. They introduce a nice cool feature to CSS3, and it's literally a DECADE until browser makers can implement it. Ridiculous.
CSS3 has been in the works since 2005. Chrome has gone from "non-existent" to version 6 in that amount of time.
Look, what it really comes down to is that the only party holding up the web right now is the W3C.
Chrome, Safari, and to a lesser extent Firefox are busy implementing standards that aren't finalized-- kudos to them, but don't act as if they are "caught up" and IE is "behind". The reality is they are "above and beyond" and IE is "perfectly fine".
Last time IE tried implementing standards that weren't finished, they got completely fucked over by the W3C, so I can completely understand their reluctance to do it. There's a non-zero chance that Chrome/Safari could be fucked-over by the W3C changing a standard out from under them, as well.
I guess I had the magic version of XP, where all you had to do was check "automatically download and install updates" in the Windows Update control panel.
Browsers have always supported standards that aren't finished, at least since I started using them in the early 90s; heck, many of the standards themselves co-opted features that browsers had implemented themselves.
Oh, I agree with you completely. But you can't *blame* them for it.
The complaint sums to: "they didn't go as much above and beyond as other browsers have."
What year are you from? IE hasn't been used for Windows Update since... well, hell, it was optional even in Windows XP. Going to the site in Vista (almost 4 years old now) or higher just redirects you to the control panel.
It's not 1998 anymore.
So it doesn't support standards that aren't finished? Wow, how criminal.
Look, if you're going to blame someone for holding up the web, blame the W3C... it's their job. The only reason HTML5 is going ahead at all is because an outside group did most of the work.
It's unfair to gripe at Microsoft for not supporting unfinished standards, considering:
1) How much they got burned by implementing CSS1 early, then having the box model "clarified" out from under them when their implementation was already in released software.
1) Despite that, they *do* have support for both of those in the next version of the browser due... next month? Or really really soon now.
I can verify it's true, but it only applies to ADB keyboards.
The way the Mac worked (and this is all from vague memory of decades ago), it could report a total of about 7 keys simultaneously, but it reserved 4 of those for modifiers (Shift, Control, Command, Option), which left 3 non-modifier keys available. If you were holding down more than 3, you're SOL.
As the grandparent says, that's why most Mac game control schemes heavily featured modifier keys for important functions.
By the way, there was some ACARS info transmitted for Air France Flight 447, which people have talked little about. ACARS seems like the kind of thing that's needed, just ramp up the information being transmitted... can't you do that?
Over the ocean, there's no ground link-- and satellites have limited bandwidth (and are expensive.) Right now, they transmit in short bursts, and (I believe) only when things are abnormal.
I don't know for sure, but it's very well possible that they can not ramp up the information being transmitted, not without launching more satellites or coming up with some kind of "data buoy" system in the oceans.
Personally, I'm not too anxious for constant satellite telemetry to be a mandatory part of the equipment. I don't think too many people would be happy to hear that their flight was canceled/delayed to install a new satellite transmitter on the plane.
Please. I had a flight delayed once because the drain in one of the lavatories was clogged... seriously. It took 45 minutes to get the mechanic to sign off on "just duct-tape the door close and take off."
There's already a billion electronic devices on the plane, and a stuck drain delayed me. Why do you think this particular part would be the straw that breaks the camel's back and keeps planes grounded half the time?
In the novel, it's your 21st birthday. They had to up the age, for pretty obvious (and sensible) reasons.
Also, in the novel the confrontation with the giant computer that runs the world makes sense, instead of Logan destroying it by... uh... what did he do again? Something involving holograms?
I guess I was a geek even at this young of an age. I always wanted one of those two person subs that fired torpedo's.
That was by far the best episode of Get A Life.
As a conservative myself, I think phrasing the argument as "small" vs. "big" government is misleading. What I want is more power vested in the *local* governments, and less in the federal government... I live in a huge western state, I don't need a ton of white men in suits who have never been further west than Chicago, and who have never lived outside of a 2+ million population city butting their laws into my business.
I could see arguing for this being confused with wanting "small" government, when that isn't necessarily the case.
*cough*Helvetica 14px "mnr"*cough*
Ok, I'm going to get modded down, but could we stop with the "cough cough" thing? Just say, "like Helvetica 14px." Like a normal human being writing a normal forum post. The "cough cough* thing, assuming it was ever funny, hasn't been funny in years. Now it does nothing but make your post harder to read, and make me think you have no actual sense of humor.
That said, good, informative, post.
Didn't say they were, just saying that fanboys didn't like you.
Well, ok. Undoubtedly true.
But the thing is that never stopped me from having good karma before. My opinions haven't changed. Which means either:
1) This site has become so much more extremist that it's significantly more difficult to maintain good karma if you're not part of the groupthink
2) I pissed off some single individual who has no problem abusing the mod system to lower my karma
Considering the options, I'd prefer to think number 2 happened.
Besides, I've seen a few of those posts (ranting about linux on a place that grew out of a linux fan site) and it's likely you annoyed
Well, whether they were annoyed or not, they weren't trolls, and they certainly shouldn't be modded as trolls. And if you're telling me I should self-censor because there's one particular fandom that dominates the comments here, then you can go screw yourself. (If you weren't implying that, then nevermind.)
I'll just be over with my transparent file system compression
That's been in NTFS for ages... at least a decade.
and other goodies
If transparent file system compression is the most impressive goodie, then... I'll pass.
However, there is sometimes the impression that US citizens know more about the geography of their own country than of others around the world.
At the risk of using an American-ism... duh?
I mean, what are you expecting here? I bet Chinese citizens know more about the geography of China than they do about, for example, Guatemala. Isn't that to be expected?
Java's death means .NET and Windows in the server arena. Do you really want that?
I hate to break this to you, but they're already in there.
You are right, however, that Java is basically the biggest threat to aspx/.net and Windows in the enterprise space right now.
I lost my karma bonus of 6+ years because some asswipe decided he was going to mod all of my posts for a couple weeks -1 Troll. No matter how good the content of them. The mod system is pretty easy to manipulate, really-- especially knowing now that 2 weeks of "random asshole" can undo 6+ years of good karma.
Anyway, point is, don't worry about points. They're stupid, and totally useless for gauging the worth of a poster.
But the project says right there in bold print, "hey, come use this data. It's free."
You can't fault Microsoft for using the data when the project *asks* people to use the data. That's ridiculous. I mean, we can debate back and forth all day, but if there's a sign that says "free apples" and I take an apple, you can't get pissy after-the-fact that I didn't pay you a dollar.
It's really that simple.
If you want Microsoft to do something in exchange for the data, well, fine, but then you can't go around calling it "free" anymore because it ain't. It's really, really that simple.
And Windows isn't a "real" operating system because...?
You know if you ever answer the question, I'll stop asking it. I'm not even going to bother arguing with your more ridiculous statements. I'm just waiting for you to explain *your* *own* *assertion* about Windows.
(I'd love to see an architect get more work done with a CLI than a GUI-- or a musician, or a 3D artist, or pretty much anybody on Earth other than a Linux system administrator. If you honestly believe your last paragraph, that just means you've led a very sheltered life.)
Ok. And Windows isn't "real" by that definition because...?
I'm just asking you to support your own point. It's not like I'm grilling you or anything-- it took like 8 posts just to get you to define "real", now I need to find out why Windows doesn't fit that definition.
And you still haven't defined "real."
If the window manager is the operating system, or even an important part of the operating system, then so is notepad.
Notepad is part of the operating system.
No real operating system requires a window manager to do it's job.
To my knowledge, the only operating system that required a window manager to do its job was Mac Classic, and I might be wrong about that.
Does Windows REQUIRE a window manager to run? You tell me.
No it does not. Wait, you're asking ME? You're the one claiming Windows isn't "real", and now you're admitting you don't even know this about it? Why should I take your authority on what is "real" and what isn't, since you're not even familiar with the product we're discussing?
Is Windows a real operating system, or not?
Since you still haven't explained what "real" means in your little parlance, I'm going to assume you're talking about the definition of "real" and most effectively makes you look like an idiot:
Of course it's fucking real. What do you think, every other person on Earth is hallucinating except yourself?