If this really matters at all, besides being slightly cool, it will just lead to more bad db design.
Of course not! They clearly state the importance of "creating so many columns that they are nearly unlimited" in the article:
The ability to create so many columns is valuable because it allows systems to create a nearly unlimited number of columns on the fly, Ellis explained in a follow-up e-mail.
So that's that.
What sorta applications need so many columns? Curious.
From the article:
An open source database capable of holding such lengthy rows could be most useful to big data cloud computing projects and large-scale Web applications, the developers behind the Apache Software Foundation project assert.
So, basically, they don't know either but think (probably rightly so) that this a pretty cool feature. So cool that they made this the heading of their article.
The good thing about Android is that it's open and anyone can add features, customizations, etc. to it. The bad thing about Android is that the manufacturers and the carriers usually end up raping it and making it a worse experience. The ugly part is that Google doesn't seem to care all that much and is perfectly willing to put up with this kind of crap.
The ugly part is not actually as ugly as it sounds.
It is that ugly part which allows me to brew a super-awesome homemade tablet, install Android on it, and then beg people to buy it without getting into the legal mess.
Translation: That Google is willing to put up with it is same as saying that the consumers can choose what is best for them instead of Google deciding it for them. This is a lot more than which can be said for the other platforms out there.
My rule of thumb is to match the speed of other drivers, but never be the fastest driver visible. That way, if a cop does decide to pull someone over, it's unlikely to be me.
Cop: Sir, you were above the speed limit, I'll have to give you a ticket for
You: But, but
Cop: Darn too fast for us, sir.
Just sayin
"If you mess this chance up 3 times, your Game will be irrevocably made unplayable and you'll have to pay us more money to restart."
Though it can probably will be worked around, but then as the article itself says, most things can be anyway and it'll probably be a better shot than the Flash game.
After all, some other ways work too.
With Vimperator, the only good way to use it. Is that what you meant?
+1
Plug-ins make it possible to do other things. Consider something like "chatzilla" which extends firefox's capabilities to that of a functioning IRC client. As a matter of fact, a friend of mine uses firefox solely for its chatzilla functionality because she turned to the "faster" Chrome browser for day-to-day web surfing
Though that is anecdotal evidence, but a little digging of this same survey data (by Firefox 4 beta testers) suggests that a surprisingly large fraction of non-Firefox users who are beta testing Firefox 4 are Chrome users.
That's kind of silly question isn't it? It's a Web browser. People use it browse the Web, obviously. Duh.
How they use it, not what they use it for.
They might be using it to heat the room or power pacemakers, by the stats we see.
Disclaimer: Was one of the participants.
'Cause leaking is always double-plus good.
Indeed. There are arguments for as well as against.
... , I'd tell them (in legal speak of course) to fuck off.
I think you want to refer them to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.
Refreshed by a brief blackout, I got to my feet and went next door. -- Martin Amis, _Money_
