Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Penny Arcade (Score 1) 543

by t0y (#44159099) Attached to: Microsoft Reacts To Feedback But Did They Get Windows 8.1 Right?
I also have no use for most of the metro apps, exception maybe to the weather app that gives me a quick overview on the live tile. What I did was remove them from start, fill the slots with desktop apps, and now it works like a fancier start menu. With search as you type now including settings I use it like I used to with the classic start menu, only had to disable the bing integration. The new start button is actually just occupying space as I was already getting used to the hot corner.

Comment: Re:I think there's something wrong (Score 2) 133

by t0y (#41601397) Attached to: Firefox 16 Released: More HTML5 Support
You can also try the built in click to play feature:

1. Disable/remove flashblock
2. Type "about:config" in the address bar and press Enter
3. Say "yes, I know what I'm doing" if asks
4. Search for the setting named "plugins.click_to_play"
5. Set it to "true"

Note: not working 100% yet on version 16 IIRC.

Comment: Re:Memory? (Score 2) 452

by t0y (#37532372) Attached to: Mozilla Foundation Releases Firefox 7
It's a real problem but it doesn't affect everyone the same way. Many of the issues are related to extensions holding on to references in long gone tabs and Firefox 7 is the first version that will see results from the MemShrink project (you can read about the details in the wiki).

I've had Firefox break the userspace memory barrier (3gb on windows x64) and becoming slow many times before, mostly because of Firebug.

Comment: Re:Incredible (Score 1) 495

by t0y (#37472896) Attached to: Mozilla Contemplating Five Week Release Cycle

New development stopped because the devs actually had to go back and FINISH THE SHIT THEY STARTED AND NEVER COMPLETED. A faster release cycle can not solve this problem, only make it worse.

The dropped features ... were features they never finished.

That's my point, actually, except for the part where you say the faster release cycle can not solve this problem. You see, it actually makes development slower (IMO), but everything that makes the cut from a nightly build to a aurora release will be released. You don't get to the point where you have tons of stale, crashy features that need to be finished "yesterday" and keep holding up the release date. Even traditionally unstable nightly can be used as a main browser now because big features are being developed in parallel synched branches (ux, ti, ...) that are only merged to the nightly if they are stable enough.

So it works perfect all the time ... except those times when it doesn't and you have to use 3.6.

I'd love to know why FF6 doesn't work for you.

Stop being such a pathetic fanboy.

Instead of defending them like an idiot, why don't you take a look at the writing on the wall. Everything you've tried to use to defend this release cycle is a shining example of how they don't know how to manage a development project.

You still have FF3.6. What are you complaining about? You still have chrome, opera, IE6~9 as alternatives. Heck, you like stability so much why aren't you using debian? Their fully supported browser version is based on firefox 3.5, and I'm sure you'll prefer lenny's release because it's based on Firefox 3 and fully patched.

This anti-fanboy atitute is what makes me go into fanboy mode.

Comment: Re:Incredible (Score 1) 495

by t0y (#37463104) Attached to: Mozilla Contemplating Five Week Release Cycle

So add a 5th or 6th branch for "FF3", "FF4", etc.

There is one for FF3.6. Firefox 3.6.23 will be released September 27th:
This is being maintained due to user pressure, I think. But it is nonetheless.

So what if a fix in FF73 breaks a feature in FF72, as long as the users of FF72 don't upgrade. There was nothing wrong with the old Mozilla plan.

There were more than a few firefox4 betas and in the meantime all new development nearly stopped. The road to even get to a first beta was full of dropped features, nightly versions that were unusable for a long time. And it took years to release......

In the case of Firefox the changes are not that small between FF4 and FF5 for instance, FF4 was a massive change from FF3. I don't know about FF6 because I'm not upgrading to it (I'm clicking "no" on their pop-up spam asking me to upgrade more than once a day to get it out of my face). I'll downgrade to FF3.6 when I get around to it. I know FF3 was slower and sucked up more memory than FF4 but I'd rather have that than support what they have now.

Unless you need FF3.6 because of some internal website or some specific add-on there are no reasons (other than personal preference) to be using 3.6 instead of 6.

BASIC is to computer programming as QWERTY is to typing. -- Seymour Papert