>Your browser doesn't seem to support HTML5 and WebGL. The best thing to do is upgrade to a modern browser that supports all the awesome things the web has to offer.
I am on the latest version of Opera which I guess is not a modern browser. Perhaps turning down the condescension a notch and changing that "Upgrade" message to "Best works in Chrome" will be a good move. You're a second class citizen on HN if you use anything but Chrome.
I don't read much/any condescension in that message. Fair enough if you enjoy to use Opera, but why not have Chrome installed on your machine too so you can spin it up and view content like this when needed?
You are right, we tried to take a jab at Internet Explorer but forgot about Opera along the way. It's our job to make our engine and demos work on all WebGL enabled browsers and respect all browser vendors who help pave the way for great web technologies like WebGL. We failed and make it sound like it the browsers fault. I will discuss the wording with the team. Thanks for the feedback !
Notice how Net Applications shows Chrome only at 16% while the others are close to 40%? Wonder why?
Net Applications attempts to measure what individual users are using, while Statcounter tries to measure how much of browsing is done though a particular browser. That is, if you browse 1000 webpages a day and use Chrome, and your girlfriend browses only 50 but uses Firefox, Statcounter counts you as 20 times more marketshare than your girlfriend! In this hypothetical scenario, Statcounter will give Firefox 5% of marketshare and Chrome 95%, even though half of people use Firefox.
This is like setting up a lookout on a road in a typical US city and concluding that the Ford Crown Victoria is the most popular car in America, based on the fact that you see it most since the taxicabs and police patrol cars drive back and forth all day(since you're not tracking the license plate) while the best selling cars like the Honda Civic/Accord, Toyota Camry/Corolla are not driven as much during a typical day. So, if you're writing a Chrome app, you're targeting only around 16% of people, not 40%.
Google bundles Chrome by default with Flash, Acrobat and Java updates which are installed on 98% of computers by paying a lot for it, Mozilla has nowhere near the huge ad revenues like Google does. Not to mention how Chrome is pushed on Google properties like Gmail and Youtube. I keep seeing a "Slow browser? Upgrade to Chrome." message on Gmail sometimes while using the latest version of Opera.
The biggest challenge Chrome apps will have is that they won't run on the hottest devices right now, the iPad and iPhones. Apple prohibits any sort of native API or dynamic code in iOS apps so Chrome apps will be confined to HTML5 and WebGL.
Net Applications count unique daily users, so if you surf all day you'll be counted as exactly the same as your friend who only surfs a little each day. However, you will both be counted 7 times more than someone who only surfs once a week.
So both give weight to more regular web surfers, it's just that Net Applications caps it at the level of daily use.
In addition to counting vistors rather than hits, Net Applications has a global number of 6.22% for Internet Explorer 6. No, that is not a typo, that is the number pulled today, because Net Applications performs geographic weighting of their data, and China has 24% usage. That inflates the global Internet Explorer numbers and is higher than IE7. Last time I looked at ie6countdown.com, the US and European numbers were 0.2%.
The medical applications of this will be wide, with a heart rate monitor, the wide angle and being able to detect old people falling etc. I hope they release the PC drivers and sell a standalone Kinect 2.0 as soon as this hits the market.
The raw power that you feel in your hand when using VIM is amazing, I never get that feeling with Emacs, but each to their own. Not needing to reach for the arrow keys, backspace etc. is neat too.
I think the raw _editing_ power of Vim is, as you say, probably unmatched in Emacs. Vim, however, cannot hold a candle to all the rest of Emacs and its elisp-y goodness. I'm a long-time Emacs user, and having recognized that Vim's modal editing and "language" are a better way of editing, opted for using Evil-mode, which gives you the best of both worlds. The transition was not without pain, but it was overall quick and worthy.
elisp is not such a great language, so the value of editing using a pile of it is mixed. It boils down to a matter of taste. If you like elisp, it's a big win and if you don't, it's a deal-breaker.
It is a great language when run inside Emacs for doing Emacs stuff. Elisp is orders of magnitude more powerful than Vimscript on Vim. Its easy to see by the best things each community has produced on their editors.
Disclaimer: I love all 3 editors for they all have great ideas.
in my experience using emacs reaching for the meta key is worse than reaching for the arrow keys. at least with arrow keys you don't need to morph your hand into pretzel.
I am on the latest version of Opera which I guess is not a modern browser. Perhaps turning down the condescension a notch and changing that "Upgrade" message to "Best works in Chrome" will be a good move. You're a second class citizen on HN if you use anything but Chrome.