I was thinking about considering Chrome as a solution to my various annoyances with Firefox.
Now, I'm starting to think that's not such a good idea...
It tends to eat a ton more ram when you have a lot of tabs open. So, i'm not ready to switch to it.... plus no Ad-Block?
Firefox, with just a handful of extensions, already takes up a huge amount of memory, which I'm not pleased with. But apparently it gets worse.
Plus, as unpopular as it is to admit, I like using Flash without getting repeated crashing. Come to think of it, I can't think of the last time I had flash crash period.
It's not problematic on FF either. At least not in my experience, and I've been using Firefox nonstop for the last 4 to 5 years.
Synthesis on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited April 2010
I mean how can we even assess "Flash" as a market decision?
I buy a phone or a computer and then I get these scroll-over ads on my internets and stuff that makes my computer crash with no realistic way of disabling it because it's an industry standard.
There basically isn't a consumer option except to hope that a company will offer a flash-free experience. At which point I finally have an option as a consumer.
If this turns out to be a poor market decision then apple will pay the price in sales. Certainly google has announced their continued support for Flash.
But you and I both know that in all likeliness Apple will do okay because Flash is kind of a crappy standard and the market will migrate away from it.
Flash is most stable by far on IE. It's not even a contest.
I'm not exactly sure if this is something worthy of praise...
In defense of IE, it's quite useful for downloading the FF or Chrome installer.
enc0re on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited April 2010
in my experience, flash is best on IE, worst on Chrome, and somewhere in-between on Safari and Firefox.
It pretty much always beats the hell out of my computer though, even when it's working "fine"
and 4/5 of the flash that ends up popping on my browsing is shit that I don't want anyways. banner ads, scroll-overs, hideous computer-crippling layouts on websites (ahem ign/ gamespot), popup pop-out and scroll-over video with sound, all this stuff running in the background inside of other tabs.
I was thinking about considering Chrome as a solution to my various annoyances with Firefox.
Now, I'm starting to think that's not such a good idea...
It tends to eat a ton more ram when you have a lot of tabs open. So, i'm not ready to switch to it.... plus no Ad-Block?
Firefox, with just a handful of extensions, already takes up a huge amount of memory, which I'm not pleased with. But apparently it gets worse.
Plus, as unpopular as it is to admit, I like using Flash without getting repeated crashing. Come to think of it, I can't think of the last time I had flash crash period.
I have a ton of ad-ons and Firefox runs using less memory then Chrome with the same pages loaded.
Default one page use, Chrome is faster but it bloats up fast as you open more pages, and I needs me my ram.
I was thinking about considering Chrome as a solution to my various annoyances with Firefox.
Now, I'm starting to think that's not such a good idea...
It tends to eat a ton more ram when you have a lot of tabs open. So, i'm not ready to switch to it.... plus no Ad-Block?
Firefox, with just a handful of extensions, already takes up a huge amount of memory, which I'm not pleased with. But apparently it gets worse.
Plus, as unpopular as it is to admit, I like using Flash without getting repeated crashing. Come to think of it, I can't think of the last time I had flash crash period.
I have a ton of ad-ons and Firefox runs using less memory then Chrome with the same pages loaded.
Default one page use, Chrome is faster but it bloats up fast as you open more pages, and I needs me my ram.
Well, that rules out Chrome for certain. Though I'm not very pleased with the idea of sticking with FF either. That, and "ad block" increasingly does not do its job, nor do pop-up blockers.
On my windows box, I haven't any issues with flash under Chrome. I have on my Linux box, but I've never actually crashed Chrome with it. YMMV.
Anyhow, I'd probably dislike Apple trying to push people away from Flash, if I didn't basically agree on some of their points (although not necessarily all). Granted, my dislike of Flash is mostly due to my interaction with flash on websites.
I'm somewhat concerned people will do things that annoy me with HTML5, but browsers and their extensions should be able to limit capabilities much better than what you can do with Flash.
End on
I wish that someway, somehow, that I could save every one of us
A little OT but firefox has a plug in called "flash blocker" which replaces all flash apps with a little button so if you want to see what is there you can click it otherwise it disables all those annoying flash apps.
(FlashBlock for Chrome)
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
Alternatively from a developer perspective it is really lame when a third party app or some middle ware has a problem/bug and you get blamed for it. Then again they should be doing proper sandboxing to prevent shitty apps from causing problems with the whole system.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
Is HTML5 their proprietary format?
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
Is HTML5 their proprietary format?
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
I do question apple's motives. They're a business first and foremost. They don't hate flash because it's a proprietary format they hate it because it isn't their format. Part of Jobs' hatred of flash is probably due to it not being a great language but if you think he's being purely altruistic I think you are mistaken.
Is HTML5 their proprietary format?
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
Remember USB and Firewire?
Added emphasis to the part you missed. The industry was already moving to USB when Apple shifted to it - Win95 had some support for it in the end, and 98 shipped with USB support out of the box. As for FireWire, it was a vast improvement over SCSI, and Apple didn't exactly espouse openness with it - there's a reason Sony called it iLINK.
How is Obama gonna use his homebrew "iLaunchNuclearBombAt<Country>" app now?!
I lol'd. I'm neutral on this matter, but honestly I don't GIVE a shit about all these high tech phones, I just want a friggin phone so I can call people, kthx.
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
Remember USB and Firewire?
Added emphasis to the part you missed. The industry was already moving to USB when Apple shifted to it - Win95 had some support for it in the end, and 98 shipped with USB support out of the box. As for FireWire, it was a vast improvement over SCSI, and Apple didn't exactly espouse openness with it - there's a reason Sony called it iLINK.
That reason is that FireWire is an Apple trademark. The interface is IEEE1394. It does not get any more open. Ironically iLink isn't even IEEE1394.
And your examples of proprietary technologies are silly, because AGP and PCI are open standards. Apple used a non-x86 architecture then. That's like saying OpenFirmware is proprietary.
ADC was stupid which is why Apple has abandoned it.
Because Sony's implementation dropped two pins (power) in favor of external power. Sony made their Firewire implementation non-standard (it was added to the standard later on.)
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
Remember USB and Firewire?
Added emphasis to the part you missed. The industry was already moving to USB when Apple shifted to it - Win95 had some support for it in the end, and 98 shipped with USB support out of the box. As for FireWire, it was a vast improvement over SCSI, and Apple didn't exactly espouse openness with it - there's a reason Sony called it iLINK.
That reason is that FireWire is an Apple trademark. The interface is IEEE1394. It does not get any more open. Ironically iLink isn't even IEEE1394.
And your examples of proprietary technologies are silly, because AGP and PCI are open standards. Apple used a non-x86 architecture then. That's like saying OpenFirmware is proprietary.
ADC was stupid which is why Apple has abandoned it.
Except there is a good argument to be made that they didn't actually use AGP or PCI as per the standard because they inverted the endian nature of the bus. And somehow, I think Apple could have made it so that their machines could accept standard add-on cards that conformed to the port format the rest of the world used.
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I'm more than willing to bitch about Apple on a thousand other issues. But the dock connector and trying to drown Flash like the terrible mutant abomination that it is...those I'm fine with.
mcdermott on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
Well, the reason that stopped is because they decided to use those bands to power the interface input mechanisms on the headphone remotes. TBH, I much prefer it this way; It is much more elegant to dock an iPhone/iPod into a cradle on your entertainment center and have the output show up on screen without having to fumble for the headphone jack as well.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
Well, the reason that stopped is because they decided to use those bands to power the interface input mechanisms on the headphone remotes. TBH, I much prefer it this way; It is much more elegant to dock an iPhone/iPod into a cradle on your entertainment center and have the output show up on screen without having to fumble for the headphone jack as well.
Besides, just because iPods used to output video through the headphone jack (to a composite video cable, how long do you think those are going to last?), it means they should get rid of the whole dock connector? What about all the other functionality? Obviously they can't have both input controls and video output all crammed into the headphone jack.
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
Well, the reason that stopped is because they decided to use those bands to power the interface input mechanisms on the headphone remotes. TBH, I much prefer it this way; It is much more elegant to dock an iPhone/iPod into a cradle on your entertainment center and have the output show up on screen without having to fumble for the headphone jack as well.
You could do that with the 5.5 gen iPods as well. And the big question remains - if the 30 pin connector is so great, why hasn't Apple submitted it to the IEEE?
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
Well, the reason that stopped is because they decided to use those bands to power the interface input mechanisms on the headphone remotes. TBH, I much prefer it this way; It is much more elegant to dock an iPhone/iPod into a cradle on your entertainment center and have the output show up on screen without having to fumble for the headphone jack as well.
You could do that with the 5.5 gen iPods as well. And the big question remains - if the 30 pin connector is so great, why hasn't Apple submitted it to the IEEE?
Sometimes companies are allowed to design novel solutions for their products and keep them as a value-added part of their product. Apple is not forcing the 30-pin connector on anyone except for the people who own iPods/iPads.
Anyways, the 30 pin connector spins off into all the standard connections people have come to expect from devices like it (component/VGA video, USB, minijack audio, etc.) without having to put all those ports on the device itself.
All the 30 pin connector is is a wrapper.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Posts
but that's not the reason.
and apple has no control over what the market does outside of their devices.
It's like saying that Toyota is trying to tell the entire industry to kill diesel by not offering diesel options in their cars.
I was just comparing Apple to Sony. Both companies have a habit of making these declarative decisions.
You prefer a world with Flash?
Firefox, with just a handful of extensions, already takes up a huge amount of memory, which I'm not pleased with. But apparently it gets worse.
Plus, as unpopular as it is to admit, I like using Flash without getting repeated crashing. Come to think of it, I can't think of the last time I had flash crash period.
I'm not exactly sure if this is something worthy of praise...
I buy a phone or a computer and then I get these scroll-over ads on my internets and stuff that makes my computer crash with no realistic way of disabling it because it's an industry standard.
There basically isn't a consumer option except to hope that a company will offer a flash-free experience. At which point I finally have an option as a consumer.
If this turns out to be a poor market decision then apple will pay the price in sales. Certainly google has announced their continued support for Flash.
But you and I both know that in all likeliness Apple will do okay because Flash is kind of a crappy standard and the market will migrate away from it.
In defense of IE, it's quite useful for downloading the FF or Chrome installer.
It pretty much always beats the hell out of my computer though, even when it's working "fine"
and 4/5 of the flash that ends up popping on my browsing is shit that I don't want anyways. banner ads, scroll-overs, hideous computer-crippling layouts on websites (ahem ign/ gamespot), popup pop-out and scroll-over video with sound, all this stuff running in the background inside of other tabs.
god it's awful
I have a ton of ad-ons and Firefox runs using less memory then Chrome with the same pages loaded.
Default one page use, Chrome is faster but it bloats up fast as you open more pages, and I needs me my ram.
Well, that rules out Chrome for certain. Though I'm not very pleased with the idea of sticking with FF either. That, and "ad block" increasingly does not do its job, nor do pop-up blockers.
Anyhow, I'd probably dislike Apple trying to push people away from Flash, if I didn't basically agree on some of their points (although not necessarily all). Granted, my dislike of Flash is mostly due to my interaction with flash on websites.
I'm somewhat concerned people will do things that annoy me with HTML5, but browsers and their extensions should be able to limit capabilities much better than what you can do with Flash.
(FlashBlock for Chrome)
Alternatively from a developer perspective it is really lame when a third party app or some middle ware has a problem/bug and you get blamed for it. Then again they should be doing proper sandboxing to prevent shitty apps from causing problems with the whole system.
Is HTML5 their proprietary format?
Apple tends to use open formats only when it's to their advantage. Remember the ADC, or a PCI and AGP bus with inverted endian format?
Remember USB and Firewire?
Added emphasis to the part you missed. The industry was already moving to USB when Apple shifted to it - Win95 had some support for it in the end, and 98 shipped with USB support out of the box. As for FireWire, it was a vast improvement over SCSI, and Apple didn't exactly espouse openness with it - there's a reason Sony called it iLINK.
Let's Play Gunman Chronicles "It's high-noon in Deep Space".
That reason is that FireWire is an Apple trademark. The interface is IEEE1394. It does not get any more open. Ironically iLink isn't even IEEE1394.
And your examples of proprietary technologies are silly, because AGP and PCI are open standards. Apple used a non-x86 architecture then. That's like saying OpenFirmware is proprietary.
ADC was stupid which is why Apple has abandoned it.
Because Sony's implementation dropped two pins (power) in favor of external power. Sony made their Firewire implementation non-standard (it was added to the standard later on.)
it's just like a DVI port only you need to buy a 40 dollar adapter!
Except there is a good argument to be made that they didn't actually use AGP or PCI as per the standard because they inverted the endian nature of the bus. And somehow, I think Apple could have made it so that their machines could accept standard add-on cards that conformed to the port format the rest of the world used.
And it doesn't matter that Apple abandoned ADC - it's still an example of Apple eschewing standards for their own port. But if you want a current example, look at the bottom of a current iPod today.
Talking about the dock connector?
What alternative would you suggest?
Would that alternative also be able to carry line-level audio and video, through a passive cable, as well as other control functions, as the current dock connector does? In the same form factor?
If the dock connector only carried USB data, you'd have a point. Or if it only carried power...like the 8,231 different cellphone power adapters still being used in place of micro-USB. But the dock connector carries a lot of different functionality (some since abandoned, like dual USB/Firewire power/data) that can't (to my knowledge) be replicated with any open standard in a small form factor.
EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I'm more than willing to bitch about Apple on a thousand other issues. But the dock connector and trying to drown Flash like the terrible mutant abomination that it is...those I'm fine with.
Well, a whole bunch of people, not just apple, are switching to DisplayPort, because unlike HDMI, it doesn't have licensing fees.
Just because Apple was first to market doesn't mean it was their idea; a whole bunch of folks think DisplayPort is a good idea.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Older iPods were capable of outputting video via the headphone jack, much like numerous camcorders are able to.
The DisplayPorts on the new MBPs are capable of transmitting audio as well as video; I forget, does DVI have audio?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Besides, just because iPods used to output video through the headphone jack (to a composite video cable, how long do you think those are going to last?), it means they should get rid of the whole dock connector? What about all the other functionality? Obviously they can't have both input controls and video output all crammed into the headphone jack.
You could do that with the 5.5 gen iPods as well. And the big question remains - if the 30 pin connector is so great, why hasn't Apple submitted it to the IEEE?
Anyways, the 30 pin connector spins off into all the standard connections people have come to expect from devices like it (component/VGA video, USB, minijack audio, etc.) without having to put all those ports on the device itself.
All the 30 pin connector is is a wrapper.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
And considering you can get them for like eighteen cents on monoprice, even that's a stretch.