Javascript is already used for building desktop applications, the most popular probably being Firefox.

Many desktop applications already use scripting languages. For example see the following list of python gtk applications.

Nowadays you can easily write the parts of an application that requires high performance in C and the rest of the program, including the interface, in an interpreted language.

The problem Javascript has to face, though, is that it has very few libraries available for desktop or web applications. And the existing libraries are specifically written for one or the other task. CommonJS would be a common library for all environments and would allow porting code from one to another a lot more easily than it is today.

Recession isn't an excuse to go rape someone dry. Depression is a serious dysfunction, and they aggravated it with their stupid behavior. It may sound weird but I think people's health is more important than money.

A netbook with Chrome OS is the perfect solution for companies with employees that need to access their company's intra/extranet while working in the field. Most of the security is already done, all IT has to do is restrict them to a set of the company's URLs and they're good to go.

I don't see it as anything other than a novelty toy for other consumers, though. But then I don't see the point of netbooks, and people buy them, so I'm probably wrong.

You don't need to, dropbox already uses encryption for both transfer and storage.

https://www.dropbox.com/help/27

It is, but it can also be solved by the browser to a certain extent. For example the Opera mobile and mini browsers include the Opera Turbo technology. It connects directly to Opera servers, compress pages, images, etc. and send you the result. Size is usually reduced by 2 or more, which can be quite significant depending on the website you visit.

The points compared are mostly irrelevant for today's handeld devices.

What I really would like to know is not if it'll take my phone a few more milliseconds to render the page, but rather:

• Is it power-efficient showing pages? Using it?
• Does it *download* pages fast? Because so far, on phones, the main issue I have is the network speed and latency.
• Can I access my bookmarks etc. from everywhere, easily? A web-based bookmark syncing service is fine, but something directly integrated like Opera Link is better IMHO.
• Is it easy to use on the device I am using? Because every device is controlled differently.

Rendering speed will become an issue only after network and power related issues are resolved.

Of note, from the video, at 2:30, we see the actual order to remove the poster. The man giving the order is french, possibly a french representative of the UN. I can't remember his name, but my memory is failing me. The man he's talking to appears to be egyptian. My guess seeing this is that the UN removed it to prevent diplomatic issues with Egypt. It just wasn't the right place to advertise that kind of book.

Many applications do not need 30 fps, though. For example, an house architect software would be able to use this for rendering various shots of the designed house.

An alternative is to setup Windows in a VirtualBox VM that has 3D acceleration enabled, install WineD3D in it, and then install and run your game.

The results vary depending on the game and on your system, but it's worth a try. Some games definitely work better this way than through Wine, and you don't have to reboot.

Of course they started to develop it a long time ago. The question is why release it *now*. Would they really benefit more from many eyes looking at a "broad, well-tested, modular, and cross-browser JavaScript library" or from more applications that Chrome already knows how to run fast?

Of course we can only guess. But Google is a company, not a charity. They don't release software that give them an advantage over the competition without a good reason.

I've been using the original autocomplete plugin for a long time now, it works great. This is the plugin that is used as a basis for the UI autocomplete component. Anything preventing you from using it in the meanwhile?

Looking at the library's source code, I don't find many new things that I can't already find in another library. I'm sure there's interesting components, but this looks more like another case of NIH than anything. If their code really is faster I'd rather have them work on existing libraries and try to speed things up for everyone rather than creating more of the same thing.

Of course, if everyone uses Google's tools and libraries, it makes things easier for them to optimize Chrome, which is probably the whole point.

He did say a 486 CPU in the original submission. The "MHz" part was added by the editor, who should probably forfeit his geek badge.

Internet just wants to get more presents every year.

I can't agree more. Let's take an example with Half Life 2. I don't mind the story, it's pretty cool especially if you have done the first, and I enjoyed my first play of it. And I really love the gameplay.

I started it again a few months later and immediately got stuck in hours of story elements right at the start. It became so boring I stopped playing. Waiting while various characters are talking just isn't fun. I already know the story, why should I have to go through it again? Now if I could just SKIP the story parts I would enjoy playing the game over and over. But I'm instead forced to watch pointless story events scattered throughout the game.