|
It was snowing when we arrived at the BlackBerry campus in Waterloo, on a bitterly cold winter day. There were icicles under the bus, and the bare trees and snow-covered fields turned Canada black and white. We were visiting BlackBerry’s home ground to hear the story behind BlackBerry 10, the company’s new operating system and the engine it hopes to power a dramatic turnaround. Two years of work had just ended, and the company was ready to talk about what it had done, how it had done it, and where it wanted to go. Everyone wants to know: what about the keyboard?
|
|
|
|
|
In a surprise reversal, Microsoft has changed the default behavior of Flash content on websites viewed using Internet Explorer in Windows 8 or Windows RT. Previously, sites had to be on a whitelist before Flash would work. The new behavior effectively turns the Compatibility View list into an exclusive blacklist of badly behaved sites. Flash, Silverlight, Java... if it requires a plug-in, it's probably trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft made a bold bet to build its own hardware, competing directly with Apple's iPad, but it was never an easy task to create something new and unique. Microsoft's own tablet is the result of it facing a "big challenge" relying on its hardware partners to create a high quality physical device that could go up against Apple. Project "Georgetown," the codename for Surface RT, started with two simple goals: the tablet couldn't leak and it must ship when Windows 8 is ready.... After months and months of prototyping and tweaking, the end result was unveiled to the world on June 18th of last year. These are a few of the concepts and prototypes that led to that final product. From rough draft to smooth Surface.
|
|
|
|
|
How about the Microsoft Sphere?[^] I likey.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
This is why we can't have nice things[^].
Quote: Almost three years after Google released its WebM video encoding technology as a "free" and open alternative to the existing H.264 backed by Apple and others, it has admitted its position was wrong and that it would pay to license the patents WebM infringes.
--------------
TTFN - Kent
modified 13-Mar-13 10:02am.
|
|
|
|
|
It's about f***ing time that software patents were banned/outlawed/removed/destroyed.
=====
\ | /
\|/
|
|-----|
| |
|_ |
_) | /
_) __/_
_) ____
| /|
| / |
| |
|-----|
|
=====
===
=
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: This is why we can't have nice things[^].
404 Needs an "s" at the end.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/07/google-admits-its-vp8webm-codec-infringes-mpeg-h264-patents[^]
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Ta. Fixed
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
It's probably impossible to create a sane video codec that doesn't infringe any patents. For example, I give you US20020064313[^], which essentially patents the combination of macroblocks and RDO. And US20050238100[^], which patents having I, P and B frames. And US5539467[^], which patents B frames with motion compensation.
Or at least, one could argue that they do, and that's enough to get you in trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
Why Microsoft is like the GOP[^]
Quote: Like the Republican Party, Microsoft’s leadership team never got the message that the landscape was rapidly changing to its disadvantage. The company’s fixation on the declining Windows platform reminds me of the Republican Party’s continuing focus on 18th-Century social values where no Internet existed, long-distance travel was done via horse and carriage, and Social Security and Medicare were not heard of.
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
One of the devs at Khan Academy was wondering how Amazon's avoided the usual "good luck submenu" issues and noticed a simple geometric solution[^]. So, he's made the solution into a jQuery plugin[^]. Just the thing to help us semi-coordinated folk use your Web site.
As many of the people commented, this solution is actually ancient (and Apple). So, why doesn't everyone {cough}Microsoft{cough} use it for all their sub-menus (and sub-sub-menus, and sub-sub-sub-menus)?
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Nice!
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
AWESOME!
R3J5cGhvbnMgYXJlIGF3ZXNvbWUuIEdyeXBob25zIHJ1bGUh
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Microsoft have just made it a lot easier by open sourcing the Kinect[^] code.
|
|
|
|
|
Probably because Microsoft didn't want the open source Kinect project that was released by some other people way before the Kinect SDK was, to overtake the official SDK.
=====
\ | /
\|/
|
|-----|
| |
|_ |
_) | /
_) __/_
_) ____
| /|
| / |
| |
|-----|
|
=====
===
=
|
|
|
|
|
That is "only" the samples and not the full SDK, not?
|
|
|
|
|
There’s a plethora of IoC containers for .NET. They’re all great tools, like StructureMap, Autofac, Ninject, Unity, etc. Don’t get me wrong, they’re powerful and they do a lot of things. But, they do a lot of things. What do I mean by “they do a lot of things”? Well, they’re all effectively designed to work with codebases that are not DI-friendly. They go out of their way to provide features to support DI in any imaginable design. “What’s wrong with that” you say? If you’ve got a brownfield project, that’s great—you can likely get testability with code not designed to be testable—which is a good thing. But, these abilities make us lazy. If you're injecting too much dependency, your control may be inverted.
|
|
|
|
|
A buddy of mine and I were discussing website building while downing some pints of Lucky Bucket the other night... The conversation turned to "should I give a rats patoot about the 3% of people who disable javascript when dipping into the joys of jquery and yui controls, or do I tell'em to eat a fudgicile?". Do you consider JavaScript a web requirement or a nice-to-have?
|
|
|
|
|
Requirement. Every browser worth targeting now has JS, and those who decide to turn it off can probably decide to turn it on if they want to use the site properly.
Same for cookies.
|
|
|
|
|
Far too often you'll be greeted with a blank page. But I don't recall seeing a deprecation notice for the <noscript> tag in any HTML 4.0 book.
Standards and best practices. Where are they?
Q. Hey man! have you sorted out the finite soup machine?
A. Why yes, it's celery or tomato.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice to have it but in current days its quite became a web requirement...
|
|
|
|
|
That's true. However if someone visits your site using the NoScript plugin with Firefox, and they report an error to you.
How do you differentiate a genuine site error (blank page) from plain and simple script-blocking if the visitor isn't made aware that your site requires javascript.
IOW they won't bother reporting a problem, and you won't start hunting down a phantom problem.
Q. Hey man! have you sorted out the finite soup machine?
A. Why yes, it's celery or tomato.
|
|
|
|
|
I can create a asynchronous call using java script and that request will fetch client details with that javascript on flag and if any user report error but i could not found javascript flag on that's mean the guy try to access my web site without enabling JS.
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't server variables provide that (browser capabilities) info as soon as session is made with client?
If you provide non-JS web content that's absolutely great. I wish there were more like you.
Q. Hey man! have you sorted out the finite soup machine?
A. Why yes, it's celery or tomato.
|
|
|
|
|
You miss understand me...
When ever a Request is made by client that context also contains few details about client I was try to mean that.
|
|
|
|