Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:security is built in the application, not platf (Score 1) 234 234

And yet again, you still miss the point. The article states that the scope of HTML5 is so huge, that it will be difficult for browser developers to fully secure their browser against exploits. The scope of HTML5 makes securing the browsers more difficult, and as a counter point, they compare it against HTML4, which was far simpler, but exploits are still being found to this day.

This in no way suggests that HTML5 sucks or is evil, it is just something that people need to consider.

Unless in your original point, by developer you meant Firefox, Chrome, Opera or IE dev teams and by application you meant the aforementioned browsers, then your point was, at best, vague.

Comment: Re:security is built in the application, not platf (Score 1) 234 234

You misread the summary; the article is not about an idiot developer building an insecure application that compromises the developer's server's security. It's about malicious developers building seemingly benign websites that compromise a user's home computer

Comment: Re:Rife (Score 2, Informative) 370 370

Looking at Fido's escalation process, 'Step 2' is where it fails all the time. The last time I had a problem that customer service couldn't resolve, I asked to speak to a manager, wherein the rep replied that all the managers were in a meeting and no one could take my call. Every single one. At the same time. And no one could field problems. Took my number down and said a manager would call me in 24 hours. When no one did, I called back, and once again I got the same line that every manager was in a meeting and no one could take my call. That time I insisted, and my rep managed to grab a manager who was 'walking by'. Yeah right.

Comment: Re:Adobe has one target market: (Score 1) 272 272

That's because the CoreVideo API didn't allow to read back the rendered pixels, which the Flash Player kind of requires to be able to put overlays (with transparencies) if needed over the video. You really think Adobe didn't use an API because they "didn't want to"?

Comment: Re:Adobe has one target market: (Score 1) 272 272

Why stop using an API if it's still available and it still works? If Apple has kept them open, they're open for a reason.

And hey, if you want to go down that road, Apple recently criticized Adobe for being late to the game porting their apps to Cocoa. Guess who makes iTunes, which is still stuck in Carbon land?

Comment: Re:Adobe has one target market: (Score 1) 272 272

Apple only recently provided 3rd party API access to hardware acceleration for video in Mac OS X 10.6.3. Six days later, Adobe released a beta preview of Flash Player 10.1 with hardware acceleration for video. So really, is it Adobe's fault? Or is it Apple's fault for locking down their OS and access go important APIs? http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/28/flash-player-gala-brings-hardware-decoding-support-to-mac-os-x/

At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on the computer.

Working...