It's easy to criticize when you conveniently forget that that hello world app has a mouse-supported window wrapped around it complete with an OK and [X] buttons and that it's run without affecting anything else on the machine.
You should try to make such a "hello world" application with exactly the same code with different C compilers that support different Windows versions. The differences are staggering. With each newer compiler and Windows version the executable gets much larger and the memory footprint rises. While still doing exactly the same thing.
It is antics like this that are the reason I remain a PC gamer. To be nickled and dimed for such basic service like online multiplayer and internet chat is ridiculous to me.
There are plenty of PC games that require a subscription to play online. So what are you talking about?
The not so funny thing is, you can back up your downloaded DSiWare games to the SD slot, but you can't restore them to just any DSi, they're tied to the one you downloaded them from.
Same thing with the Wii and its downloadable games. It'll tell you that you're not allowed to play that game if you try to play it on a machine that didn't buy it.
Picking up one of the latest Pokemons here in Sweden will set me back about $55.
Did you get that number by using the current exchange rate? Because we all know that the euro is currently stronger than the US dollar. DS games don't cost 55 euros here. They cost at the very most 45 euros. Often they're 40 euros.
We have less disposable income than the average American.
Why do you think that we do? We don't. We have more because, for example, we don't have to drive long distances just to get to the store.
I have a related experience. See, sometimes I import video games because either the US version is superior (true 60Hz mode), or the game was never released in the EU.
Now, when it comes to the Wii, there are no boot discs available that work thanks to Nintendo locking them out through firmware updates. So what do I do? I hack my Wii so I can play the games I legally bought through a home-brew launcher. Yet in the eyes of Nintendo I'm just yet another pirate, even though I haven't pirated anything.
I like to think that rapid patching of an open-source web browser alleviates most of this. As for 0-days, well, it's not like an anti-virus program will protect you from that either.:)
Heck, in many ways exe's are safer, becuase while you can disable automatic opening of a long list of document typs that you have decided to disapprove of, the default behavior of a typical broswer is to automatically open a broad variety of document types.
The documents that a web browser can open are limited. Everything else is managed by plug-ins. Just disable/remove those.
And once you make that decision to open a PDF, you have no defense against any attack you haven't patched against yet.
Which is why you disable JavaScript, and any other way for the document to interact with the program and/or request for external content.
There's no disappointment to most people when most people would use the amazing information machine in front of them anyway instead of searching for a manual that's likely not detailed enough to cover the aspect of the game you want to know.
Actually, most people don't really use "the amazing information machine in front of them". As in, looking up what they need. No, they visit a message board to ask basic questions that would have been answered more quickly if they'd just bother checking the game manual.
Don't underestimate people's laziness and stupidity.
20 years? The avalaunche of in-game tutorials only started at the end of the 20s.
Forced tutorials suck. I'd rather read the manual, thanks. And if nothing else, they're a useful reference. Who wants to play the tutorial all over again to check something?
The amount of applications that enable documents to interact with its host is not that big. It's certainly manageable. Know your applications, and disable those capabilities.
An executable can't be managed (unless you really go out of your way by implementing appliation policies, but let's not go there), because it's a bunch of binary. For things like PDF files, though, we have viewer that we can configure to disable possible attack vectors. So it's not quite the same thing.
Sure, any site can theoretically be cracked and used to distribute crap like that. The thing is, many sites are well-run enough that the odds of that are relatively miniscule.
Wrong. Shit can hit the fan anywhere. Even if your site is run well by yourself, that doesn't mean your hosting company can't get hacked, for example. As already mentioned, third-party content can serve malware as well.
If you don't trust anything, you may as well cut the cable, remove your network card and disable any removable media.
Hyperbole.
If you want to use the Internet, at some point you're going to have to trust someone.
Bullshit. You don't have to trust anyone as long as you don't download an executable of any kind. You can and should treat untrusted content with care.
And pretty much everyone who knows anything about video formats agree that Theora is sorely lacking and is unable to ever catch up with h.264 as things stand right now.
Canvas is not needed. You can create dynamic, animated graphics using the existing SVG standard.
SVG is a bloated, unwieldy spec that has been mostly dropped. Because of this, no web browser implements it fully or well. Meanwhile the canvas element is simple, well-defined, and supported.
3: xhtml2 is a host language allowing you to embed other xml language elements within.
You can include MathML, SVG, etc with the appropriate namespaces.
This is not really a property of XHTML2, but of XML. The original XHTML could have those too.
As for the feature itself, it just leads to bloat with tons of namespaces. Embedding through files is the way to go.
4: seperation of symantics from styling.
Html5 has predefined css styles and tags used to define symantic meaning in a haphazard fashion.
This is really vague. Examples?
Xhtml2 uses the role attribute to define symantic meaning in a single, clear and consistant way without interfering in document structure markup or styling.
So does HTML5 in some cases. And are you implying that the elements themselves should lose semantic meaning and only be used for style hooks? We already have this phenomenon with div elements and classes, and it's called divitis. It's not pretty.
5: real errors. Invalid documents are invalid and produce an error instead of allowing the browser to randomly attempt to guess the correct fix for bad code.
HTML5 will define how parsing errors are to be handled, so no worries there.
I'm not defending any hyperbole Chris DiBona was spouting off about the internet grinding to a halt but Ogg and Theora are simply not optimal for a "baseline" media format. It's only real feature is the fact it is open source and doesn't require a license. This isn't the most useful feature in today's world because all of the mobile devices that would be served Theora files already have licenses for MPEG-4. Tens to hundreds of millions of phones already support MPEG-4. They're using MPEG-4 to do send video over MMS and e-mail and for watching video on the web. Theora improve any of those experiences.
Right, because we all use a mobile to surf the web and watch video.
(The frozen Theora bitstream format is lacking many features found in H.264 and VC-1.)
The amount of features isn't important. What's important is if they're useful. And it would seem that many features in H.264 (like 8x16 blocks) are barely used/useful in practice.
From my totally no citation experience, If you did a test bed PC and just started browsing random websites on FF, Chrome, IE, and Opera (on a windows system I'm assuming) the vanilla FF would probably be infected just about as quickly now.
Bullshit. Back that up or GTFO with this FUD. This is no IE5.
Slashdot Mirror
You should try to make such a "hello world" application with exactly the same code with different C compilers that support different Windows versions. The differences are staggering. With each newer compiler and Windows version the executable gets much larger and the memory footprint rises. While still doing exactly the same thing.
Actually, because of standardised hardware, the game can be optimised graphically, so it's not really the same thing.
There are plenty of PC games that require a subscription to play online. So what are you talking about?
What's this Dotslash site you're advertising in your subject line?
It's "your". "you're" is "you are". Learn your grammar, you illiterate motherfucker!
Same thing with the Wii and its downloadable games. It'll tell you that you're not allowed to play that game if you try to play it on a machine that didn't buy it.
Did you get that number by using the current exchange rate? Because we all know that the euro is currently stronger than the US dollar. DS games don't cost 55 euros here. They cost at the very most 45 euros. Often they're 40 euros.
Why do you think that we do? We don't. We have more because, for example, we don't have to drive long distances just to get to the store.
Unfortunately, when it comes to shitty digital media laws, we don't own our video games. We own licenses to play them. :(
That's very similar to my experience that I posted somewhere else in this thread. Damn regioning systems!
I have a related experience. See, sometimes I import video games because either the US version is superior (true 60Hz mode), or the game was never released in the EU.
Now, when it comes to the Wii, there are no boot discs available that work thanks to Nintendo locking them out through firmware updates. So what do I do? I hack my Wii so I can play the games I legally bought through a home-brew launcher. Yet in the eyes of Nintendo I'm just yet another pirate, even though I haven't pirated anything.
I like to think that rapid patching of an open-source web browser alleviates most of this. As for 0-days, well, it's not like an anti-virus program will protect you from that either. :)
The documents that a web browser can open are limited. Everything else is managed by plug-ins. Just disable/remove those.
Which is why you disable JavaScript, and any other way for the document to interact with the program and/or request for external content.
Actually, most people don't really use "the amazing information machine in front of them". As in, looking up what they need. No, they visit a message board to ask basic questions that would have been answered more quickly if they'd just bother checking the game manual.
Don't underestimate people's laziness and stupidity.
20 years? The avalaunche of in-game tutorials only started at the end of the 20s.
Forced tutorials suck. I'd rather read the manual, thanks. And if nothing else, they're a useful reference. Who wants to play the tutorial all over again to check something?
The amount of applications that enable documents to interact with its host is not that big. It's certainly manageable. Know your applications, and disable those capabilities.
An executable can't be managed (unless you really go out of your way by implementing appliation policies, but let's not go there), because it's a bunch of binary. For things like PDF files, though, we have viewer that we can configure to disable possible attack vectors. So it's not quite the same thing.
Like you said, some attack vectors got missed. Keep those in mind as well, as you've done, and you should be fine.
Wrong. Shit can hit the fan anywhere. Even if your site is run well by yourself, that doesn't mean your hosting company can't get hacked, for example. As already mentioned, third-party content can serve malware as well.
Hyperbole.
Bullshit. You don't have to trust anyone as long as you don't download an executable of any kind. You can and should treat untrusted content with care.
[weasel words] [citation needed]
SVG is a bloated, unwieldy spec that has been mostly dropped. Because of this, no web browser implements it fully or well. Meanwhile the canvas element is simple, well-defined, and supported.
This is not really a property of XHTML2, but of XML. The original XHTML could have those too.
As for the feature itself, it just leads to bloat with tons of namespaces. Embedding through files is the way to go.
This is really vague. Examples?
So does HTML5 in some cases. And are you implying that the elements themselves should lose semantic meaning and only be used for style hooks? We already have this phenomenon with div elements and classes, and it's called divitis. It's not pretty.
HTML5 will define how parsing errors are to be handled, so no worries there.
You must not have paid much attention to the abomination that was the XHTML2 work.
Right, because we all use a mobile to surf the web and watch video.
The amount of features isn't important. What's important is if they're useful. And it would seem that many features in H.264 (like 8x16 blocks) are barely used/useful in practice.
Bullshit. Back that up or GTFO with this FUD. This is no IE5.