Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
You know. You've always known. The things you see, the things you hear, and smell — they aren't any more real than your dreams. You've drifted through life so far wondering when you're going to wake up. But you don't have to wonder anymore. This is your alarm clock. The only decision you have left to make — the only decision you've ever had to make — is whether you want to wake up, or turn it off and drift back to sleep. In exactly two minutes, your phone is going to ring. If you want to open your eyes, to be born into a world more real than you've ever imagined.. answer it.
Firefox is very outdated.
So yes Chrome is better just from an architecture point of view.
Firefox is known to have forks in its database stored in your Firefox profile. This means very slow startups too over time. Chrome and IE do not have this issue.
With sane choices dwindling, I'm starting to ask myself: Is IE really so bad these days? I don't want to use a browser made by an advertising company. Or one being ruined by a bunch of tards.
Spartan is a firefox style rewrite similiar to Firefox from Mozilla a decade ago.
The roles have reversed in the browsers.
Google is notorious into making Google HTML 5, not W3C HTML 5 with sites like www.html5test.com which are Google based.
IS MSE part of W3C?
Speaking of this as Firefox was Netscape reborn after a complete rewrite
IE/trident desperately needs this.
FYI IE was a great browser in the 1990s. Even IE 6 in 2001 had some bugs but was a decent 2000 era compliant and modernbrowser for its time. IE invented CSS, ajax, dynamic html, etc.
It because very buggy, insecure, extremely outdated, and poorly managed FAST last decade and by 2004 it was a POS compared to Opera and Mozilla (pre Firefox).
Spartan is still behind at 2012 levels but man it works well and is fast and has a future if MS keeps adding features into its new base.
Odd I am routing for Spartan not identifying as webkit.
Reason being is if webmasters only see -webkit they will ignore W3C and Firefox will be toast as websites won't look right.
It will be 2004 all over again with a new IE 6. IE and Firefox are the ones fighting which is strange and so opposite of 10 years ago.
Remember the Star Wars prequels?
I don't blame the population supporting the empire after seeing such darkness, corruption, incompetence, and ineptitude of Republican rule in the galaxy.
They were the bad guys and it is mirroring the us senate today. Shoot! No technological innovations and economic malaise for thousands of years. Under the empire shit got done and the galaxy moved forward. The rebels were the ones killing people. Empire would leave you alone as long as you didn't destabilize or rebel the galaxy. Jedi can be twisted to religious fundamentalism too and supporting an outdated system like Is is does with a caliphate.
HTML 5 is too ambitious.
What needs to happen is HTML 5.1, 5.2, etc.
W3C is trying to work this way. Google and Apple have their own organization. Why I welcome some of this I think it is a nightmare to have pictures api, 2 primptives, etc. It is like they want a visual studio + macromedia shockwave experience.
Just crazy for a web browser. It should focus on content and use special tools like codecs for particular jobs. WebGL should be doing the 2d primptives as an example right?
It is frustrating.
Here is a flip side? How would you like to write apps (assuming you are a developer) or shell scripts (if you are an admin) which are source compatible with Solaris 9, 10, 11, Linux (from 2006 - present), AIX, and same with c++? Talk about a nightmare!
IE is an extreme in the other direction and holds back developers 10 years. IN the good old days of the 1990s we had rapid growth and skillsets. If your browser was a year old forget it!
Then the pointed hair bosses started using it for mission critical apps written for IE 5.5 and IE 6. Then it became "Don't alienate customers! You wouldn't open a store and tell 1 out of 10 customers to leave would you! " So the changes on the web you see now are 10 years old from 1998 standards! IE 6 forced you to have an inferior web experience on Linux because PHB's said develop for everyone.
So where do we draw the line?
Shouldn't that be the job of the manager or supervisor to talk to operations and be the so called quarterback instructing everyone else what to do?
Have you made websites recently?
I do not mean to sound critical about you personally? I wrote a kind of bad trollish review below. With that ouf of the way IE 11 is one of the most standard compliant browsers available. It does not support the most features but it supports those correctly. Webkit/blink is the worst. CSS 3 animations is like IE 6 you need hack after hack of -webkit to get it to work.
Why is it we accept Google doing this yet bash IE 6 as the anti Christ when it did the same in 2001? Spartan is a better browser than IE 11 but Chrome and Mozilla accelerating in the last year faster than the project Spartan could catch. So in a sense it is about Chrome in 2012/2013 but with more standards compliant. It still is beta in a rewrite engine stage so I won't bruise MS too much more on this
After the new engine stabilizes they need to add quite a few features like interactive forms, pointer events, drawing primitives, stencil support in webgl, to catch up to the other browsers. However I do not know if the W3C standardized these yet.
Since IE users NEVER EVER UPGRADE the last thing MS wants is to implement a changed feature later on and be stuck for the next 10 years where developers curse them for writing 2 versions of that standard after W3C changes the final spec. This is what happened with IE 6 besides the bugs. CSS 2.1 was very very new and changed final after IE 6 came out. firefox implemented it the other way causing 2 rifts as it was assumed users and corporations would upgrade to IE 7 FAST and quickly. We all know they never happened and kept the damn IE 6 until 2011.
Question for anyone who has tried it, does Project Spartan currently support Vorbis, Opus, VP8, VP9 and the WebM container format? VP8 and Opus are mandatory to implement in the WebRTC spec so hopefully Microsoft will at least conform to the spec for WebRTC, and bonus points awarded if they carry that codec support over to the video tag.
According to www.html5test.com no. Just AAC and MP3.