I definately want to get a camera in this form at some point. With the emerging nature of this class of camera, is it worth waiting a couple of years before getting one? Have they started getting them right?
34 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Ok, no worries. I don't think I could work for someone who writes something like "Y U No get it?" on a public forum anyway.
What I was saying is that checking a CV for spelling mistakes is pretty basic stuff, most of it is. For example, why would you even consider highlighting a summer job more than a relevant job to the position you are applying?
I don't know what you've done to yours. I'm using a HTC Sensation. Done nothing to it other than fill it with the apps I use. Very smooth, no lag on anything I do, it's like one of those adverts that says 'sequence shortened' in the small print on the telly. I found what you've been finding with my HTC Magic after having it for two years but no such problems with this lovely bit of kit.
I had an HTC Magic for the past couple of years and by the end I was getting frustrated by the lags and waiting that seem to cripple the device after the upgrade to 2.1. Getting this Sensation has been great. It's nice to see what a modern version of Android can do, and it does it well - super smooth and functional. The HTC sense overlay is beautiful and the screen is super sharp. You cannot see individual pixels on it and it's making my PC screen look a little sad, if I'm honest.
I know that the Samsung is out and better, but I wanted nice casing on my phone and after having held both, the HTC wins hands down for me. It's a better looking bit of kit too, in my opinion.
...which it wont.
IE6 users didn't upgrade to IE7 or IE8. Why would they upgrade to IE9? Oh, wait, they can't anyway wihtout buying a new OS (and probably PC if they're still running IE6).
And I can't test in it either without forking out for a new OS.
Cheers, I'd noticed the trackball and although the phone looked flat-fronted in the images I thought there still might be something subtle there. I find the chin and trackball pretty handy on my phone at the moment so it's a bit of a shame that they're not on this one.
Still want one though :-)
I saw the promo video for this phone on YouTube a couple of months ago and even my iPhone loving/owning girlfriend is telling everybody who'll listen to get one of these. Watch it if you get a chance, they seem to have thought of everything.
I've got an HTC Magic at the moment and will definitely be getting one of these next. I like a phone to be pretty big and solid anyway, being a former Nokia 5100 and Siemens M65 owner.
Does anyone know if it has the 'HTC Chin', like the Magic, Hero etc? Seemed a bit daft at first but it's great at keeping scratches off of the screen.
...not with professional players, anyway. For a start, a 'Human Race XI' doesn't exist as yet and as such there's no reason for clubs to release their players for such a match. The main reason why they wouldn't release them though (as they do for testimonials, charity games etc) is the risk of injury.
A robot player will be able to tackle without fear of getting hurt itself. It would take quite a whack from a human opponent to render the machine 'injured' but would be able to dish out Lee Cattermole and Wes Brown style tackles time after time.
Also, throw-ins would turn into massively attacking set-pieces at all times. You can't be offside from a throw-in and if a robot could be developed to have very strong arms they could turn the most defensive, keep-them-in-the-corner style throw-in into something where they could hit the opposition penalty spot each and every time. JShel, that's why they'd need arms!
So, my view is that robot teams will only ever play against robot teams in any serious way. Lower level teams will play friendlies against them, but only for the coverage and money it would generate, and the novelty wouldn't last long.
I've been using the free version of Dolphin browser for the past few weeks and think it's pretty good. Syncs into Delicious bookmarks which is handy (if you use it) and has the 'awesome bar' (if you must call it that) so you can search, get URLs from history and enter URLs all in one.
Not as quick to load as the default though.
First things first: I've never designed a website specifically for IE6, or any browser for that matter. I design using standards compliant markup and then ensure it works in all browsers by testing the website in various versions of various browsers, adding hacks and filters as I go for the various foibles of each browser and version. I never aim for pixel perfection, browsers all have their own way of doing things (button styles in safari etc) and who am I to say they're wrong ? However, it should all work by following W3C standards, but as we all know, it doesn't.
To answer about not designing for it: Why would I choose to make around 15-20% of my company's prospective or current customers unable use our offerings properly? They'll just go somewhere who will cater for their requirements.
It's no fun designing for IE6, I know that very well, and I'd love to drop support for it entirely but it's not fair on users who are tied to systems they can't change. The amount of "Chrome at home" I hear on the phone shows that people are aware of other browsers and would prefer to use them.
Simply put, designers can't stop designing for IE6 until the share is at a significantly low enough level to not adversely affect enquiries and sales., especially in a B2B environment.
I am a web designer/developer and I got an e-mail from a company do some work for the other day. It said that they were 'considering' upgrading to IE7 but not until at least September. They're quite a large company and have some, but not a great deal, of in-house systems. If they can't do it, there's no way the government can. I'd love to stop designing for it but I'm not in a position to do so. Business to business sales, you see.
Will it ever die?
...it does a whole raft of things fairly well. I block by default all Flash but it's there for when I need it. My main gripe is when video or sound auto-plays when you're on a page but that's not Adobe's fault, it's the developer thinking it's a great idea. It isn't. If I want to watch a video, I'll press play, just like I do on every other device.
Surely in the long term Apple will have to support Flash, if everyone else is. iPhone owners are always going on about how good their phone is. If it does less than the next person's then they'll be complaining about not having the best of the best (in their eyes, anyway). They'll simply abandon their shiny shiny pretty glossy phones and move to an Android-based phone or whoever.
Although I'm a non-Welsh speaking Englishman, I was Sgorio on a regular basis (with subtitles for the punditry). I'll be sad to see it go, if it does.
I bet S4C gets more viewers than BBC Alba. Also, S4C has some great continuity graphics, very stylish compared to most channel's offerings.
...I'm the sole web designer at my place and our site gets 16-17% of total visitors using IE6. The user comes first so I'd best carry on supporting it.
Instead of creating a snazzy site I make them relatively simple and drop in little 'presents' to those who use good browsers afterwards such as transparencies, shadows etc.
The amount of web designers who blindly bitch about IE6 - and stop supporting it - without considering their users is starting to worry me.
Why is it that this is being touted as 'The Googlephone' when it's made by HTC (like the HTC Magic, for example), has a Google logo (like the Magic), runs Android (like the Magic), has Google products pre-installed (like the, well, you get the picture by now) and probably many more things that aren't coming to my mind at the moment.
What makes this one so special that it's above and beyond any other Android phone with a Google logo on it?
Genuinely, I don't know. Can someone tell me? It's obviously a big enough difference to warrant a 5 minute advert on the BBC 6 O'Clock News but I really can't see it. Is it purely down to the fact that Google themselves are selling it?
I can't view my Google AdWords account using it, I get the message:
"Support for Firefox 3.5 is coming soon. Until then, please use an earlier version of Firefox when viewing the new interface."
Does anyone more technical than me have any idea why I can't view this page in this browser?
"...a bit of a gimmick for showing off to your friends..." - The entire phone comes across as that to me.
I've had a play about with one, the original one, and thought that it doesn't really do too much more (useful) than my good old Nokia N70 with Opera Mini on it.
There are some genuinely interesting apps you can get for it, I admit, but it doesn't seem like it's worth the extra money to me. Also, the apps they advertise on telly seem to do the most simple basic stuff, all stuff you can either do with Opera Mini or a calculator (like dividing a restaurant bill by 5 - come on now!). I'm in no rush to go back to O2 either.
Nice toy though, I'd have one if it was given to me.
...aren't words, surely? Otherwise 'Derby County 0' would've got into the dictionary last year. A 2 word phrase such as 'cloud computing' isn't a word either.
Seriously though, when I first read about this 1,000,000th word thing I was quite interested. I didn't realise it was going to be complete bollocks.
I still remember when 'bonk' made it into the dictionary (though not my Firefox spellchecker, I notice, along with Firefox and spellchecker). Now THAT was news.