Member since: Nov 27th, 2007
Feb 8th 2010 9:32AM Adobe loves to turn a blind eye when it can get away with it.You can further disprove the claim by checking out their own public bug tracker at http://bugs.adobe.com. Filter on Flash Player bugs with a severity of Crash/Hang.
Jan 10th 2010 7:58PM Having 3, hour-long late night talk shows on every weeknight was just a terrible idea from the beginning. It's overkill. So much of the time ends up being filler.It was certainly time for a change, but whether you like him or not Conan never got a fair chance. NBC showed a complete like of faith by sticking him with his predecessor as the lead in with a show in what is more or less the same format with a different set. There has been little need for the old audience to transition over to Conan because Jay is still there and earlier (a plus for most people, I'm sure).The whole thing is symptomatic of the whole industry: afraid to take a risk. Rather than trying something different, NBC tried to fall back on a "proven" option. As long as NBC insists on keeping Leno on the air as a lead-in, they will continue to devalue the Tonight Show brand.
Oct 8th 2009 2:39AM It's the usual Burns historical approach to a topic with much effort to make it relateable with a down-to-earth focus on people. This was probably his most difficult subject to cover in that way and I feel that it falls a bit short. It's simply way too long. There was too much time that felt like a drag. It sometimes dwells on unimportant, uncompelling, and/or redundant details rather than moving the narrative along. The subject matter just doesn't offer enough to support the same leisurely pace as others such as baseball or the wars.The history is certainly more interesting that I expected, but could have easily worked at half the length. It is also pretty light on the historical context behind the changes in attitude toward nature that occurred in America. Instead, it is painted more as a struggle between naturalists behind a flag of "democracy" and capitalism (greed). There's much more to it.
Oct 8th 2009 2:03AM Reasonable idea, but not the greatest execution. It also suffers from that not-so-subtle remark about how the user should look for the fastest browser (with respect to what?). The "most important" piece of software bit is misleading too.Having a human factors background, I totally understand how clueless the average user is about browsers, but this video simply isn't helpful enough. It differentiates somewhat and falls way short of explaining the role of browsers in plain language. There is also nothing to aid with a choice by explaining in general terms how browsers may differ. Although for most it surely doesn't matter too much as long as it does the job and its UI can be easily picked up.Many users don't understand the difference between the address bar and search bar. Browsers such as Chrome have merged the two together as a response to this (note: I don't use it). Good design ultimately responds to such issues to limit or end the issues.
Jul 20th 2009 12:42PM Agreed, but it does provide helpful ammo when making a case to budget-conscious, non-tech management. A lot of businesses have internal sites that are designed to work with the mandatory IE6 browser. There are surely some issues to be resolved, but it should be mostly minor CSS fixes. It sucks having to support IE6 and it ends up wasting a lot of time and money.IE8 is a surprisingly decent browser with some real support for standards. It's way easier to write for since you don't have to perform any of the old, crazy tricks out of your hat. I tend to encounter more rendering bugs in Firefox than I do in IE8.
Jul 17th 2009 2:40PM The sheer number of nominations for 30 Rock and Fey demonstrates how much of a joke the Emmys are. Both are insanely overrated. At best, they achieve mediocrity. The show never approaches brilliance. It just doesn't suck. With very few scripted comedies on the air and even fewer halfway decent ones, there isn't a whole lot of competition. For whatever reason, the media laps up Fey and went crazy for her once Palin hit the scene (easier than tracking down hard news, I suppose). From what I've seen, there isn't anything to justify the rabid fanaticism.
Jun 25th 2009 4:08PM I wouldn't get bogged down in the details of equivalent Vista versions. The installer probably doesn't care. Even if it does, I'm guessing that MS hasn't closed the self-upgrade hole present in Vista (you can install in trial mode without activating and then upgrade that).
Jun 17th 2009 6:29PM Opera is my browser of choice though FF3 is very nice. I am a fan of the FF extensability, but I don't use anything in it that isn't found the default Opera feature set all that often (though there are some very nifty tools!). Ad blocking is the essential for me, but I use Ad Muncher which allows me to bounce between browsers and does a better job than AdBlock Plus (though it's certainly not bad). Chrome is great if you're a JS-heavy Google service junkie, but doesn't bring much else to the table other than some good competition to fuel development.Opera sure has developed a tendency to trumpet features of little value to most while neglecting to market its solid core set and updates beyond rendering. Turbo is great for those with very low bandwidth. Remember the big deal they made over the widgets? There's only a handful of useful ones. There's a nice package, but unlike the sparse default FF, you have to take the time to explore what it has to offer.
Jun 4th 2009 11:24AM This was a very public address with absolutely zero indication of any kind of offer restriction. There was no deception on the part of the customer and MS completed the transactions and sent out confirmations, therefore entering into a binding agreement. Revoking on the day of purchase is technicallly deception on the part of MS.Again, no indication of the offer being closed and a public address. Conceptually, this is a much weaker defense than someone distributing a promo code (which probably should have been used since it would facillitate restriction). Real measures could have been taken to restrict and even announce the limitations of the offer. If they are unhappy about having the offer widely distributed, they have to take it up with the likely candidates who did the deed as its possible that they may have been under some kind of agreement not to do so. However, that does not change the fact MS has knowingly broken these agreements themself. Legally, they should be stuck biting the bullet on this one.
May 29th 2009 2:10AM A welcome step in the right direction. Though I would prefer true Windows Media Center integeration, this is quite a usable alternative. It's certainly not without its bugs and poor UI/task design in places, but it does the job and its a lot better than I had anticipated.As per some instructions I read, I used MC Menu Mender to create a menu button to launch the application through Windows Media Center. Very easy to do and works like a charm (although I do have to hit the green button to bring WMC back up after exiting, which is not a big deal).My biggest complaint is that it obnoxiously must play a video on launch. There is no way to disable this and, in general, no way to actually stop the video from transferring. Big waste of bandwidth on their part. The standard transport buttons on the WMC remote are not used so that it matches the simpler Mac remote.It's a Flash-based desktop app, so I don't see a Linux port being a huge endeavor. However, note that I have no Flash development experience.
Save your tabs and Panorama tab groups in Firefox 4
Amazon Appstore for Android hands-on review: Android Market is in trouble