Claims W3C standards broken!
I keep sites I manage as W3C strict XHTML not to deal with any browser issues.
I installed IE 8 beta 2 and went to them... All have "Error on page" displayed. I can't believe it at all.
18 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Jan 2008
Right now, people having Moonlight had the first issue.
They couldn't watch Olympics on NBC because it was Silverlight 2 based.
Same people can't enjoy any "big name" NET 3.x software because Mono either doesn't support it or it is not practically the same thing as Java "write once" philosophy.
If you ask MS, they will say they support windows media on Mac too. The fact is, Windows Media player for Mac, actual version is DEAD, it is a security and system stability hazard and performance killer on Intel macs.
I wanted to give an example of how big liar can MS be when they advertise their products multi platform (!) ability.
They have a perfectly working operating system which they even OWN half of it, Symbian UIQ3.
They choose Windows Mobile to please Microsoft and hope for promotion while driving the entire smart phone existing customers mad. Can you imagine they actually gave up posting firmware updates for their existing smart phones? It is like using windows without any updates.
I know lots of people who were definitely interested in X1 _until_ they heard (and got amazed) that it will be a Windows Mobile device.
I hope when they break up, Ericsson will continue to ship actual business phones without such funny decisions. Let them ship Walkman phones, they are good at it.
For people hoping moonlight will get some sort of boost from MS, please be realistic.
What would be the reason to use Windows if everything (to that degree) is OK on Linux? If you look for a company really cares about your platform of choice, look to Adobe. Flash 10 is there right?
If you are a Linux user, you can't watch Olympics. If you are a PowerPC mac owner, you can't watch either.
I can't comment on Silverlight video quality (did they invent a new codec?) since I can't install Silverlight!
That is your "little evil" plugin.
I think folks at The Register should check you editorially, nobody dared to write such an article even on CNET, yes CNET I tell you!
I am terrified by that guys actions since the whole MS drama begun.
First of all, Yahoo and Microsoft cultures doesn't match at all.
It wouldn't be 1+1=2 , it would be 1+1=0.5 making Google a further de-facto monopoly.
As a Yahoo user, I see this fact and Icahn, a billionaire tech investor doesn't see? It makes no sense. That guy should be paid whatever amount he wants and should be sent out of Yahoo at any cost.
Just imagine you are a high end person/developer working at Yahoo for some new projects, you take your coffee and open "The Register", this story appears. What kind of motivation it would give?
That guy will kill Yahoo and it will be bad for everyone even including Microsoft themselves.
Nokia is unfortunately forced to ship a Windows Mobile phone since companies running Windows servers and MS Windows corporate users insist on "Windows Mobile" portable devices. This happens even while "Mail for Exchange" is offered free on E Series business smartphones.
Nokia is not Microsoft or Apple. They are out there to make money and they can't ignore that market too. So don't be surprised or call "Symbian" dead if they ship a Windows mobile smart phone.
Power family chips are very important, nobody can "kill" them since there are billions of them in circulation.
I hope one day at least a person in IT media using "PowerPC" or "POWER" in their article look it up at least on Wikipedia! Forget asking IBM USA/Britain or the entire POWER organisation. Go to that small electronics repair shop and ask them what PA Semiconductor and Power CPU chips mean in industry.
Next time, chat with those The Register Enterprise guys and ask them if enterprise bothers with what CPU Apple uses rather than Sparc/Xeon/Power monsters they use. Ask BMW/Mercedes if they gave up using Power chips since iPod/iMac maker moved to Intel.
Vuze (built on Azureus) and Bittorrent sells copyrighted Hollywood and network TV content to their users. The reason it is possible and cheaper than DVD: There is no need to run/rent a huge datacenter for distributing files over HTTP, a protocol which was NEVER designed to serve that.
So pirates: Go buy movies, they are offered now.
P2P haters: There are people who have ethics and download ONLY paid content, public domain content, GNU Linux etc. ISO.
All I hear about Firefox these days: Looking for excuse to send your private browsing data to Google, Abandoning Thunderbird because some biG mail provider didn't like the fact that people use that client instead of web browser, trying to undermine small company coded browsers.
Open source and free? Limewire is, too.
Not a huge fan of Opera especially because they refuse to support OS X Keychain but, it doesn't deserve this. Try posting a previously unknown, not yet fixed Firefox issue to their "non official" web forums at Mozillazine, see what happens.
Microsoft IE can _only_ run on Windows Operating System or using a complete hack like Wine on x86 (not on PPC for example) or running MS Virtual PC on PPC.
MS wants to make sure everyone needs running IE at some point even OS X only web design shops.
MS is making lots of money from IE by giving it free with the OS and forcing OS upgrades to people who may need latest IE.
Other browsers (Firefox, Opera, Safari) support one thing very exclusively: Published web standards. Making your site or even releasing it without any testing is fairly easy. Stick with standards. I didn't care to test any sites I designed on anything but IE, just knowing they are standards compliant was enough. To run IE on PPC, I had to purchase MS Virtual PC along with Windows to a Quad G5 Mac. It sounds comical yes? That is what happens if your non standard browser dominates the scene.
YDL is one of the "Rolls Royce" choices for massively parallel high performance computing running on Power processors. IBM, massive parallel computing, thousands of power processors. Those aren't things for your usual "Awesome" Linux flavour which drops supporting CPUs based on fashion.
Apple abandoned PowerPC, a "toy" compared to real Power chips and those insanely high number multicore low power chips.
It doesn't make a single change in industry which IBM targets. IBM happily sells Power based Blades, real Workstations, Mainframes, Enterprise servers.
X86 was always popular compared to Power but we are speaking about "real deal" here, not some guys laptop or personal PC. It runs AIX or a massive Linux anyway, not like they will sit and install OS X.
I am not surprised that The Register sees Power architecture as a fading thing after Apple gave up, Ubuntu guys made same mistake and dropped official support. Guess what? Nobody in enterprise cares about Ubuntu.
1) Mov based (sometimes called quicktime based)
2) AVI based.
The end. Nothing else.
A "mov" file is preferred since it is multiplatform, has excellent timecode support, colour correction layers, anything you can imagine on a single file.
When professionals speak about Mov, they are not speaking about the Mov files you see on Net. They are speaking about Terabyte level, uncompressed, RAW videos with seperate timecode track and insane levels of audio channels.
So, if you suggest VLC to them, you make VLC look funny.
I tell you the camps.
AVI Camp: Adobe Premiere Pro, Video Toaster (aka VT). Video Toaster is generally preferred by news guys. Premiere Pro is... Anyway, lets not make its fans mad.
Mov (Quicktime Camp): AVID, Final Cut Pro (Class A TV series like HBO stuff, blockbuster movies, independent movies)
If Apple does end user consumer jokes on Quicktime Framework like that, your TV station or favourite movie director/editor gets hit.
The issue is, those ex-Linux "I know c++, look at my Stanford diploma" guys Apple hires. They have no experience with professional production workflow, they don't know what it means to check a 2K/4K file every 10 min. How would they seperate the file and figure if it is professional or end user? Even size check would be OK yet alone there are hundreds of quicktime headers to give the clue.
OS X is especially preferred on very high bandwidth (2K/4K) projects because you don't have to run a online (e.g. check written files) antivirus, you can disable journaling. Why? Because on such projects, you are at limit of bandwidth current storage technology provides. Read a file every 10 min to check? You can't enable journaling because of 5-10% overhead! You can't run antivirus.
We speak about an industry which ATTO SCSI/Fiber cards having their own CPU is used to handle the storage.
If someone told me Apple would release Quicktime framework on OS X with bugs like this just 1-2 years ago, I would tell him to go away.
Apple should choose what to do with the lack of testing, quality assurance, lack of professional programmers immediately.
Everyone suggests rollback to previous Quicktime but forgets that previous Quicktime means disconnection of a professional Machine from Internet. The security issues are documented now and that thing also has a browser plugin which runs in users level with users own home permissions.
Apple should divide Framework to 2.
1) Quicktime Framework (the usual, DRM functions, iTunes stuff)
2) Quicktime Professional Framework (which will only read/write unprotected files but won't do DRM or any iTunes, iPhone end user junk)
If there is any media professional left in Apple (doesn't seem so), I am suggesting the DAT scheme of doing things. Pro DAT and Consumer DAT.
It is really interesting that many people defending Novell-MSFT deal are using same patterns of sentences and words. Has Web 2.0 marketing come that far?
You use Linux because you choose NOT to use MSFT products, genius. Not like Linux is some accompany Windows utility software. You choose Windows, Linux, BSD, OS X, AIX over some solution. It is up to the MSFT to make their products work, not up to Linux scene. If they don't work fine with Linux, they will be eliminated. No need to buy/bribe CEOs etc. for that.
Linux on servers is de-facto standard, others including IBM, MSFT and even FreeBSD is trying to convince companies to use their solutions. It is NOT Desktop, Linux is the indisputable king on server scene. It is not a favor or anything, you HAVE to make sure your product works with Linux or you are a joke on enterprise.
Just like OS X, it can be called minority but for multimedia scene, if your product doesn't support OS X, you are a joke.
Please point me to a single, enterprise or desktop credible (NOT a tech demo!) product which uses Net 1.x emulator aka Mono.
Mono and its creator puppet is a disgrace to entire open source community.
Any financial people could tell if Novell would continue to exist with their failed business model if money from MSFT didn't arrive? I really wonder that. Their financial boards were full of chapter 11 rumors until MSFT deal was signed.