Er yes, it has Adblock Plus from the same people who make the Firefox Adblock Plus. They are not quite at feature parity, but the Chrome one has been good enough for a couple of years now.
Shit yes. This is especially important when not so obvious bugs force a change in the code. If the why isn't explained through comments, other developers are likely to change it back to the simple solution with the bug.
> new firefox release schedule moved me to Chrome
You do realise Chrome also has a 6 week release schedule?
- A Browser is more adaptable, in general more up to date with new technologies and probably easier to develop/maintain by focusing on smaller steadier releases.
If you accept this then you should also accept:
- With frequent releases, you don't want regular users to be constantly be hassled with updating their browser / add ons and flashing a new version number in their face, especially when there isn't much difference between versions.
And in general, the version number of a browser is just confusing and irrelevant to regular users.
If you use the compatibility reporter plugin they will all run regardless of the version of Firefox. Then you can flag them as compatible or incompatible which notifys the author and prompts them to either make them compatible or flag them as compatible with the new version.
So the sun is farting?
I have been forced to do my development on a virtual machine at work. I can compare the performance well because my home and work machine are almost identical spec except for the virtualized bit. Note they both have an SSD and quad core.
Performance is pretty good, but not good enough to make the switch worth it IMO. At home I never wait for trivial action to complete, like opening an application. At work however, sometimes the machine will lock up for a few seconds, which is enough to distract me. The feeling of, hmm its stuck, when is it going to complete, will usually drive me to check my mail/rss which makes focusing harder.
I very rarely see programming mistakes. There seems to be 2 kinds of programmers.
- Those who care about what they do and try hard.
- Those who don't care about what they do and don't try hard
The later write terrible code, but it is just because they are either lazy or aren't suited to the profession and can't get enthused. Very rarely do you see someone who cares about there work make a big mistake (and if so they are probably just starting out).
In some cases I think you are right, but in other cases the developer is handed a relatively loose concept to implement and the genius in the minor details comes from the developer.
Microsoft is now doing a great job with
Then there are things like WPF and VS 2010 which are great positive steps.
So peg this as a positive one.
Link to Original Source
I think you are missing an element. Black boxes as you say should be more reliable and have less bugs and security issues than code written by a random programmer. Take for example Hibernate. It is used by probably more than a 100,000 apps/websites. Only really obscure bugs are going to go unnoticed. Writing all your SQL by hand however is only used by one application and there is a greater potential for bugs/security issues to exist.