|
I agree about YouTube - it used to be a decent site.
Seems to me an 'ad-less' competitor could sneak in and build a site at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
This happened on Mashable a while back, I dropped them an email telling them to get a grip and they replied they were trying to sort it out as the videos were adverts (for a game) being pumped in automatically from an external ad feed.
There were multiple adverts on the page (due to the continuous scroll) and no sooner than you silenced the ad, when you scrolled down another one appeared and kicked off.
They eventually killed the feed and all was at peace again... 
|
|
|
|
|
I sent an unkind message to the website.
Told them to enjoy life in the dustbin of history if they don't change their tune.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with Sander: Ad Block Plus helps a lot, as does / did FlashBlock - nothing in Flash started without me explicitly clicking on it first. But sites are catching up with HTML5 ... so I'm trying this at teh moment: HTML5 Pause Chrome Extension[^] Looks like it works so far :EvilGrinSmiley:
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
This is hard for me to say so I'll get right to it: IE SUCKS
I don't want to have to switch to Chrome but it seems things are worse with IE when it comes to browsing the web. I'm using IE 11 and some pages STILL don't render properly but they look fine in Chrome. It is beyond me why MS doesn't do something about how suck IE is.... sheesh.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree: it has just never caught up with the competition - probably because MS don't like to admit that there is any competition for any of its products.
I have to use IE occasionally1 for website compatibility testing and it always looks like cr@p in comparison, runs like crap, and feels like cr@p... And has done since FF leapfrogged it and then Chrome bulled it's way past as well.
1My tablet smart type wanted "occasionally" to be "painfully" there... 
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong; I want to like IE in the worst way.
I cannot stand Firefox.
However, Chrome just seems to be everything a browser should be, and more.
|
|
|
|
|
Chrome lets you do this by disabling autoplay. Clickety[^].
Firefox, too. Clickety[^].
Farcebook (regardless of browser): Clickety[^]
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
|
It was my understanding that FF has incorporated flash block[^] like functionality into the browser recently, you can also add the plug in. I block all flash and explicit enable it on site where you want the content. That combined with the Yes Script javascript blocker[^] which disables auto page refreshes that some sites like drudge and cbs local like to employ to boost hit numbers at your expense.
That poses a new paradigm to advertisers that use annoying gimmicks to get your attention, not sure what they will do to overcome. But I have found inline ads to be less invasive and even informational as long as they don't do flash.
modified 6-Sep-14 16:32pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you.
The Drudge Report has been irritating me lately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very nice
According to my calculations, I should be able to retire about 5 years after I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Alviani wrote: According to my calculations, I should be able to retire about 5 years after I die.
Make sure you take into account the cost of your funeral and estate taxes.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Projects built internally and used for few years with my last employer were replaced by some vendor tool, and I didn't want to be in the shoes to 'config' 'support' and 'wait for another patch', so I joined a different firm, but after few months i was told that the project we've been working on is going to be replaced by some vendor tool...again!
Is this the trend? do you feel there are less home grown applications that could stick long enough and beat the 'vendor tool'??
|
|
|
|
|
It's certainly a trend - we're an expensive resource and re-using programming talent across multiple clients has some economic advantages.
However, custom applications are more targeted on individual needs, so they're not going to go away!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
The trend is to try to use the cheapest 3rd party software available, even if it doesn't match the requirements. Then complain loudly and blame your IT department which, since it was 3rd party software, can't do a damn thing about it.
The next step would be to try even cheaper 3rd party software.
|
|
|
|
|
So as developers who want to do development, what do we do? join the 'vendor' company? 
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. Maybe a startup that's making something new.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - join the vendor company.
How many hardware engineers does a typical company employ?
Not many - they buy from vendors. Similarly should be the case for software.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10815848 wrote: So as developers who want to do development, what do we do? join the 'vendor' company?
That won't do any good, because most vendor software now is just a bunch of cobbled-together frameworks.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It has been my experience that there ends up being insufficient time and hours to maintain home-grown apps. Usually, homegrown apps suck, whether we want to admit it or not and are in constant need of maintenance or fixing.
By having that functionality taken care of by a third party vendor, you can focus on the apps that bring money into your business.
We still have some utility apps, that their are no vendors for but that could change too.
|
|
|
|
|
The last company I worked in had a dedicated dev team to create and maintain their applications, which were written from scratch and went through a number of rewrites and releases and so on as normal, and did exactly what the company needed, and was a large part of what made the company number one in the country in its field. New features were delivered quickly, bugs were fixed very quickly, anything was possible if the business or their users could justify it. The devs were close to the business and its users, and understood them both.
The company I now work for also has a dedicated dev team to create and maintain applications. One monster that I worked on was written by a third party who then stopped maintaining and supporting it so we bought the source code and modified it ourselves over a number of years. It was a nightmare, but the bits we created ourselves worked extremely well and all the positives from above applied too.
A few years ago this was replaced with an application from a third party vendor. It has been a huge pain (still not over yet) trying to bend it to fit the business, changes are expensive, take many months, and have to be tempered with the core functionality, much of which is a poor fit. Bug fixes take even longer as they have to go off to the original software house and go into normal release cycles. Customisations have been biting us in the ass ever since go live, and are getting worse, part of the problem is that we have a faceless blob of resource to work on these things for us who neither know, nor understand the business we are in.
Generally speaking we try to use the systems we write in house that are around the new vendor supplied monster to fudge any problems before we resort to the vendor.
Of course many of the issues were caused by the business trying to choose the cheap option, although a cheap option that has probably already cost around the same as employing a hundred devs for a year.
And I'm not going to get onto the application that was purchased on the back of a bet made in a golf course clubhouse.
Everything written in house works, and it works as the business needs, it is responsive, and takes into account how our users work. Far, far more effort is put into just keeping the vendor bought systems up and available.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: It has been my experience that there ends up being insufficient time and hours to maintain home-grown apps. Usually, homegrown apps suck, whether we want to admit it or not and are in constant need of maintenance or fixing.
Aren't you basically buying a home grown app, somebody elses albeit. The only difference is that you are at their mercy if something needs fixed or it doesn't quite fir your needs.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft Visual Studio is a home-grown app. The piece of crap file parser I wrote last month is a home-grown app. Which one do you think is going to get more attention and love. Probably the one that brings in the money versus the one that just makes my life a little easier.
Semantics. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
