Re: Anti-phishing could be done in other ways
They still make Safari for Windows?!
6055 posts • joined 28 May 2010
They still make Safari for Windows?!
>>How does being ignorant regarding a certain technology make you feeble-minded?
Nerds like to feel superior to people just like everyone else with self doubt issues, they just have to work harder to find anyone to look down on.
Great point regarding soup.
And I never knew there were so many bread snobs!
It seems slightly bizarre that in the UK, the cheapest staple appears to be rice grown thousands of miles away rather than potatoes or bread which made up the bulk of our ancestors' diets.
So it's a desktop/cmd-line application using HTML5/JS? Presumably they are also planning an actual web version... because that would actually be more useful to me?
They have revenue of $300m a year, nearly all from Google.
.. looks pretty great, actually.
If it's a struggle to deal with the monotony of just a few days' simple diet, think about doing it your whole life!
Well I'll happily stand corrected that such things exist and are affordable. However given that I've NEVER seen anyone use wireless earphones, while I have seen wireless headphones quite frequently - though still a tiny minority - I stand by my other point.
Taking an absolute number of users proves nothing. It's a tiny, tiny niche of the earphone market of interest to a very specific group of people.
Now that being said, one thing Apple are good at is making people decide that suddenly a pre-existing, barely used technology is desirable to the point we have the silly jokes about Apple "inventing" things. So given that BT earphones actually do exist I will also happily change my position on an iWatch to "cautious interest".
As a side question - I'd love BT earphones which were two separate parts without a connecting wire, so you literally just plug in each ear. Do they exist?
What have you got that only lasts 7 hours on a full charge, other than an iPhone running a video loop?
Yeah, I start to see more and more of these. It's just nobody was in a rush to go out and buy a 5c like they were a 5s - but when coming to upgrade people ARE attracted by the cheaper option.
Can you get BT earphones rather than headphones, with sensible battery life? They certainly haven't caught on which suggests nobody wants them.
Also even if you're right, BT earphones would be the reason they cost £150 so he's half right.
Ours has been fine since we switched nearly a year ago. For staying with Sky BB they gave us a free Sky dish and box and a year's free subscription to a decentish package!
No, that is an approximate figure for the calories needed to sustain the same weight. For a week, you'll just be hungry and rue your bad planning.
Well yes. But you buy it dry so presumably he bought 500g of dry rice which when cooked weighs more like £2kg
>>As far as I know most mobile devices do not easily support Flash content.
>>However thr BBC seems determined to ignore this.
Their live sport doesn't require Flash, and this is a welcome improvement. I think it's the same for coverage of music stuff e.g. festivals - I hadn't realised news wasn't the same,
Don't Google already design and sell premium Android phones/tablets? So isn't this essentially the same... which hasn't exactly hurt Samsung so far! Unless they block OEMs from using Android, which doesn't appear to be the idea.
But you're saying it's not better for the majority of people because it's not how you want it to be. That's a very bad assumption. Look at what you're using the main menu bar for in FF, and ask yourself if that's what a regular user who just wants to browse the web would be doing.
For instance I reckon I click the Chrome menu button about once every couple of days, to re-open a recently closed tab or look in my history. That doesn't make a permanent menu bar particularly useful and to me, the Chrome approach IS a better experience.
Neither you or I are typical users though. Our opinions are equally worthless :)
Does adblock on Chrome prevent the blocked elements loading at all now, like on FF? I remember in the early days they were still loaded but not displayed - Chrome didn't expose a way to get in early enough or something like that.
You'd kind of hope a Linux user would know better.
>>you can no longer have the style that you consider decent
Really? What about the ability to apply themes and customize things?
>>Yes, UX is important, which is why you don't go changing it unless you absolutely have to.
That's the stupidest argument I heard for a while. I can see why you post anonymously.
Because most users don't know any better. That's why when you buy a typical camera it has auto-focus and auto exposure settings turned on.
I might not know better for you individually, but as an experienced software designer it is my role to know better than the average user. If you ever worked with your customers and ask them "what do you want" the last think you do is implement what they ask for, or you end up with some god-awful mess of an interface.
Maybe you missed the part where they allow you to change it using themes. So what exactly are you complaining about - to typical users they are trying to present a one-size-fits-all "auto-focus" approach but for expert users you CAN configure it to behave as you prefer.
I disagree. The browser is a window to the internet, a container to let me view the website. I don't want distracting... 99% of the time I only use one button and one text field so why show me stuff I hardly ever use? In fact for non-techy users, all that stuff is just confusing.
Plus, in Chrome you can stick loads of extra stuff under the tab bar if you so desire. So I'm certain you can do to even greater levels in FF.
How hard is it to click the big red X once?
Windows 3.11 worked. Wearing a suit and tie every day worked. The world moves on, either you accept this and move with it or you get left behind, talking about the Old Days and becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Nobody should work in IT if they can't accept a rapid rate of change, regardless if it seems justified.
Menu bars were "modern UI concepts" once you know.
Exactly comparable to music, IMO - most people get 'stuck' at some point and from then on, new music is crap. Prior to that, you rolled with changing genres and styles. It must be a natural part of life - I personally believe that unless you consciously fight this it will happen with music and technology. Whether that's a bad thing or not I can't comment but it's why I quite deliberately expose myself to new music and tech, and try to watch out for myself wanting to dismiss some new website as a "stupid fad".
Maybe you should run Windows, it [FF] works fine on the PC I bought for £400 about 5 years ago.
>>I don't want everything to move around every 3 months as another version gets released!
They said they'd been working on this 5 years. I'd say a total overhaul once or twice a decade is probably about right.
Quelle surprise... the open source Linux crowd don't value UX. That's probably the one remaining drawback of so many otherwise excellent projects - the interface is cobbled together by programmers who think that there's nothing wrong with requiring users to know dozens (or hundreds) or key shortcuts.
I understand things are improving in big-name projects though; tools like Blender and Gimp used to be prime examples of this problem and I seem to recall OpenOffice had a bit of "just put options under a menu, it doesn't matter which one".
UX IS important. Unless all your users are nerds.
They would clearly argue it is not "for no good reason". UX, ease of use and intuitiveness are all pretty important - as important as the functionality hidden behind the interface even (because many users will not invest time understanding how to use the functionality even if it's amazing)
Whether FF's old UX was bad I cannot comment but in principle an overhaul is quite worthwhile.
Everyone's caught up with Microsoft?
Since apple is a multi-national corporation, it doesn't have body parts and you're getting all personal about a corporate entity.
Breaking even means that they brought in enough cash to pay for that massive headquarters, pay a small army of developers, pay massive salaries to their executives, etc.
It's not all about calories. Nutrients and minerals and vitamins and so on are important. And 1500 calories is hardly a starvation diet, assuming you leave a fairly sedentary life.
Costing more than the entire week's budget!
It means it's an incremental update which is good - unlike iPhone where you get nothing between each generation it's good that their PCs gradually improve spec during a generation.
Well if an analysts says it, it must be true. They hardly ever spout utter tripe.
TBH I don't really find day-to-day problems using even WP7.8. But then I'm not a high-end user so I don't expect my 610 to compete with an iPhone. I plan to get a 1020 and am curious how my views will change when running their newest OS on their flagship handset - clearly I WILL expect that to be pretty slick.
I'm pretty sure people said that when Vista and the XBox360 were released. It is far to early to say if this is an IBM-esque slide into consumer anonymity, or merely a dip. They certainly have the resources to weather quite a protracted stormy period and suffer numerous failures on the path to the next Big Thing, whatever that might be.
Except that Nokia has been doing lots of innovation e.g. cameras, maps, etc.
Pepperoni Programming Pizza?
Why the hell not, pizza and late-night R&D go together like nerds and over-earnest opinions on operating systems.
By the time Lumia came out Nokia didn't really have any customers left to speak of... getting new customers was more important.
I like WP8 and the Lumia phones but I will be rather sad not to see NOKIA on my next phone*. Cue downvotes for daring to like something that's not Android.
* well, my next next phone, I'm planning to get a 1020
Surely that's up there in the "defining games" category too?
Yeah, no vulnerabilities in other browsers. Every time they have one of those hack contests, the other browsers emerge untarnished.
Yeah, this rather scuppers the typical comments every time self-driving cars come up in the news "sure it can handle a boring empty road but what about city driving".
Very cool. I wonder how specialised the algorithms are, i.e. can they be transferred easily to all kinds of other areas automation has traditionally seemed too difficult?
Did he seriously complain that by stockpiling money they are creating a shortage, or was that a joke?
Obviously if you create a shortage, the value of money will increase. Burn all the forests, etc.
You don't speak for their userbase. Who upgrades RAM on a laptop except total nerds, who are a tiny minority?
If they are still selling the things, they haven't screwed up.
Where are your contributions Daniel? Stop belittling others from your armchair.
You have that backwards. NS/Nokia use Android only on low-end phones while things like the 1020 are their attempt at a supercar.