Firefox is not the only web browser than can run extensions, you know. There's also SeaMonkey, Flock, K-Meleon, and a couple others. I'd suggest using the Adblock Plus extension instead, though.
Nah. Firefox 95 will be great, actually working when it comes out without bloat and unnecessary eye candy. The OSR2 release will be even better. Then we get Firefox 98 with an additional browser rammed in that makes for a crash-happy, glitchy version. It will be mostly fixed in Firefox 98 Second Edition.
Pre-1.0 development was much faster and more Gecko releases were pushed out the door. Firefox 0.8 was based on Gecko 1.6, Firefox 1.0 was based on Gecko 1.7.
Firefox 1.5 and 2.0 uses the same platform: Gecko 1.8. It's the same case with 3.0 and 3.1, only with Gecko 1.9.
Don't trust Firefox version numbers. They're just toys to the Firefox developers. Gecko is where it's at.
Actually, Firefox 1.0 to 1.5 was just as big a leap as Firefox 2 to Firefox 3 was. Both had a brand-new, much-improved Gecko version, the core of the web browser.
Firefox 1.0 - Gecko 1.7
Firefox 1.5 - Gecko 1.8
Firefox 2.0 - Gecko 1.8.1
Firefox 3.0 - Gecko 1.9
Firefox 3.1 will be based on Gecko 1.9.1. Firefox developers just like to play with the version numbers.
WMP is a proprietary application, not an open, standards-based platform.
That was just an example. It can open VLC for all I care if that's the player associated with whatever format you're openeing.
The value is in the interface, which lets people make comments, see related videos, search for videos, etc.
But you don't do that at the same time. You watch a video, and then post a comment. I'm not saying the page has to disappear.
What's keeping them from being hardware-accelerated?
Their nature. On Windows, it doesn't hook into DirectX. It's just a regular Windows application.
They reserve a window for a helper application, such as Flash or Quicktime, and that application shows the video. Even WMP can display within a web browser.
They do this through plug-ins, which is not the same as running the native application. I know for certain that Flash is not an application on itself, and is not hardware-accelerated at all.
YouTube is a website where videos are the focus. Hence it's not a good example. And I doubt people who watch YouTube would complain if they got a video link instead that would instantly open their Windows Media Player.
I really don't see what's so bad about that. When you watch a video, you either watch it, or you don't. While with images you give them just a glance, or it's there for aesthetic reasons.
You haven't addressed my point that web browsers weren't made to view such content. They're not hardware-accelerated (certainly not in Windows). It's opening a whole new can of worms.
I'm sure that way back when the WWW first hit the scene there were people complaining that embedding images along with text was a silly idea. Why not just have a link and download the images separately?
I've considered that, because image use on web pages is also done through embedding. However, when I consider that we are talking about web pages, I compare them with regular newspapers or magazine articles. We have images on both of those. But we don't have video.
I find it to be the same for sound and animated GIFs. They're mostly unwelcome distractions.
I don't get why everyone wants to have video in their web browser. Why not just offer to download it and watch it in your dedicated media player, which is actually hardware-accelerated and thus not choppy on 70% of the world's computers?
It's like people want their web browser to be able to view anything and everything. Can we keep to browsing the web, please?
I thought this was Slashdot, not Wikipedia [citation needed]. I read article summaries, sometimes even the whole article, like everyone else. I post because I have a comment. Simple as that.
Because support requests are always about bugs. Oh, wait...
Seriously, this is sad. I remember clearly how a type of request kept reappearing on Peach Princess' BBS in the Help forum. It was about Brave Soul, a bishoujo RPG. It was "How do I save in Brave Soul?".
Most people who asked this question turned out to have pirated the game, and hence did not have a manual to read their answer in.
Eventually it became policy to answer this question with: "Read the manual, page 10.". Of course this was always followed with the user complaining that he/she (most likely he) did not have a manual. Because they had pirated it.
instead everyone has been working on things like database-driven filesystems that never make it to market
I know that was a metaphore, but such a thing actually has made it to market. Look no further than BeOS' BeFS. And it has been open-sourced as OpenBFS.
Did you actually read my entire post? I addressed the fact that not all games get released in every region, and noted it as a valid complaint.
However, Kuru Kuru Kururin? It never came out in the US? That's news to me. I just looked it up on GameFAQs, and indeed, it never came out in the US. However, seeing as Game Boy Advance games don't have region locking, there's less to complain about.
That's not all. If you're a European, Nintendo really screwed you over in the first year by offering the games in the same slower 50 Hz mode as back in the days. Inexcusable. They've had other goof-ups as well, like giving us the German version of Super Metroid. What the hell?
Why not just wait the couple extra months? It's not like you need to play that newest game right now, you know. As for it being cheaper, that's just a by-product of different economies.
But I'll agree that often they make us wait for months for little reason. Just add the PAL 60 mode already and ship it! That is, if you're going to put it in there in the first place! Otherwise, there's no excuse. Well, except for Nintendo titles, as Nintendo tends to translate their games into 4 more languages just to satisfy the dumbasses who refuse to learn English like everyone else.
Can you believe the French complaining about the absence of French voice acting in Shenmue (Dreamcast)? The arrogance!
The real issue, though, is when they either botch the European version or don't release it at all. Then, being able to import is great.
When you speak of Europe as an entity, you clearly are talking about the European Union. Europe the continent is just a bunch of countries with no unified voice or actions.
Slashdot Mirror
That would be this story. You need to register for the article though. Bummer.
Well, my extension is pretty much an application, and runs on Firefox (among others): http://msnmsgr.mozdev.org/ /shamelessplug
Firefox is not the only web browser than can run extensions, you know. There's also SeaMonkey, Flock, K-Meleon, and a couple others. I'd suggest using the Adblock Plus extension instead, though.
Sounds like you'd like SeaMonkey quite a bit.
Nah. Firefox 95 will be great, actually working when it comes out without bloat and unnecessary eye candy. The OSR2 release will be even better. Then we get Firefox 98 with an additional browser rammed in that makes for a crash-happy, glitchy version. It will be mostly fixed in Firefox 98 Second Edition.
Pre-1.0 development was much faster and more Gecko releases were pushed out the door. Firefox 0.8 was based on Gecko 1.6, Firefox 1.0 was based on Gecko 1.7.
Firefox 1.5 and 2.0 uses the same platform: Gecko 1.8. It's the same case with 3.0 and 3.1, only with Gecko 1.9.
Don't trust Firefox version numbers. They're just toys to the Firefox developers. Gecko is where it's at.
Actually, Firefox 1.0 to 1.5 was just as big a leap as Firefox 2 to Firefox 3 was. Both had a brand-new, much-improved Gecko version, the core of the web browser.
Firefox 3.1 will be based on Gecko 1.9.1. Firefox developers just like to play with the version numbers.
That was just an example. It can open VLC for all I care if that's the player associated with whatever format you're openeing.
But you don't do that at the same time. You watch a video, and then post a comment. I'm not saying the page has to disappear.
Their nature. On Windows, it doesn't hook into DirectX. It's just a regular Windows application.
They do this through plug-ins, which is not the same as running the native application. I know for certain that Flash is not an application on itself, and is not hardware-accelerated at all.
IE does hook into DirectX, by the way.
YouTube is a website where videos are the focus. Hence it's not a good example. And I doubt people who watch YouTube would complain if they got a video link instead that would instantly open their Windows Media Player.
I really don't see what's so bad about that. When you watch a video, you either watch it, or you don't. While with images you give them just a glance, or it's there for aesthetic reasons.
You haven't addressed my point that web browsers weren't made to view such content. They're not hardware-accelerated (certainly not in Windows). It's opening a whole new can of worms.
Lastly, where's the semantic value in video?
Do you go around slagging every Slashdot poster who reacts to what the article summary says? You have quite a job ahead of you.
I've considered that, because image use on web pages is also done through embedding. However, when I consider that we are talking about web pages, I compare them with regular newspapers or magazine articles. We have images on both of those. But we don't have video.
I find it to be the same for sound and animated GIFs. They're mostly unwelcome distractions.
I don't get why everyone wants to have video in their web browser. Why not just offer to download it and watch it in your dedicated media player, which is actually hardware-accelerated and thus not choppy on 70% of the world's computers?
It's like people want their web browser to be able to view anything and everything. Can we keep to browsing the web, please?
I thought this was Slashdot, not Wikipedia [citation needed]. I read article summaries, sometimes even the whole article, like everyone else. I post because I have a comment. Simple as that.
Downloading a 500 MB game that I can't and probably won't play? How silly.
I thought articles existed to tell us what you just said.
If they wanted to make it fun for everyone, they should have made it a fun puzzle game or something instead of an FPS.
Right, I'm so new that my Slashdot user ID is lower than yours.
Because support requests are always about bugs. Oh, wait...
Seriously, this is sad. I remember clearly how a type of request kept reappearing on Peach Princess' BBS in the Help forum. It was about Brave Soul, a bishoujo RPG. It was "How do I save in Brave Soul?".
Most people who asked this question turned out to have pirated the game, and hence did not have a manual to read their answer in.
Eventually it became policy to answer this question with: "Read the manual, page 10.". Of course this was always followed with the user complaining that he/she (most likely he) did not have a manual. Because they had pirated it.
I know that was a metaphore, but such a thing actually has made it to market. Look no further than BeOS' BeFS. And it has been open-sourced as OpenBFS.
YOU'RE (YOU ARE)
Did you actually read my entire post? I addressed the fact that not all games get released in every region, and noted it as a valid complaint.
However, Kuru Kuru Kururin? It never came out in the US? That's news to me. I just looked it up on GameFAQs, and indeed, it never came out in the US. However, seeing as Game Boy Advance games don't have region locking, there's less to complain about.
That's not all. If you're a European, Nintendo really screwed you over in the first year by offering the games in the same slower 50 Hz mode as back in the days. Inexcusable. They've had other goof-ups as well, like giving us the German version of Super Metroid. What the hell?
Why not just wait the couple extra months? It's not like you need to play that newest game right now, you know. As for it being cheaper, that's just a by-product of different economies.
But I'll agree that often they make us wait for months for little reason. Just add the PAL 60 mode already and ship it! That is, if you're going to put it in there in the first place! Otherwise, there's no excuse. Well, except for Nintendo titles, as Nintendo tends to translate their games into 4 more languages just to satisfy the dumbasses who refuse to learn English like everyone else.
Can you believe the French complaining about the absence of French voice acting in Shenmue (Dreamcast)? The arrogance!
The real issue, though, is when they either botch the European version or don't release it at all. Then, being able to import is great.
They've always been bad at organisation. Cue quote #279: http://quotes.burntelectrons.org/279
The Wii actually is dual-core. Same CPU family as the other consoles' CPUs, too. But its satellites don't work.
When you speak of Europe as an entity, you clearly are talking about the European Union. Europe the continent is just a bunch of countries with no unified voice or actions.