> One definition of "Common" means prevalent and it seems to
> me that this word was picked not to solve the above problem
> but to get around it by making Gruber look like a dick for
> objecting again to the same problem.
Or, alternatively, the largest sites that all use Markdown wanted to figure out how to build a Common Markdown format that they could all agree on (or Standardize on), since the original hadn't been touched in a decade.
Yes, the License does say that derivative works shouldn't use the Markdown name. And yes, I'll even agree that it's a somewhat classless move, assuming you ignore years of context. "Github Flavored Markdown" is a thing, has been for a very long time. Not a peep from Gruber about it. It is highly reasonable to expect that "Common Markdown" (or even "Standard Markdown") might not raise any hackles.
C'mon, you really think folks are sitting around, plotting the best way to steal John Gruber's one serious project?
but at the moment you start to derail real progress, the
moment you attack one of the best organizations who has
literally been busting its ass for the last decade to
change the world for no profit...Well, you declared war.
I'm not familiar with anyone that attacked Mozilla. The heaviest I saw were boycotts. That doesn't sound like "war" to me, that sounds like the right tack to take. Calling it "war" is overly-dramatic.
Don't tolerate this any more. Brendan Eich was just one
casualty. It's time to start sticking up for ourselves.
Let's start looking at reality. Brendon Eich had MANY opportunities to assure both his detractors and Mozilla's LGBTQ employees that he was dedicated to ensuring that Mozilla would remain inclusive regardless of sexual orientation. He pursued none of them.
Look, I can't speak to Eich's effectiveness as CEO, but it seems like handling a PR situation is part-and-parcel of being a CEO. Eich chose to resign.
We're not an equal society yet. We still have more changes
we need to make to secure the freedom and happiness of
everybody, especially groups that have been historically
Steps that include speaking out against and boycotting entities that put bigots in charge. (Bigot may be a strong word here, I don't know Eich personally, but he did donate to get Prop 8 passed, which certainly sounds like bigoted behavior.)
What else would you have the aggrieved parties do?
All the more reason to shut down the bullies that [...] produced nothing but useless bickering
I've said it before, but to make the Nexus Q awesome: give it Google Now, and have multiple users able to set up their own Google accounts on it.
I don't want an Android console, I don't need something else to stream content to my TV, but what I do want is a couple of glowing orbs in my house that will remind me over speakers that I have an appointment at 10am but heavy traffic means I should leave at 9:15am. Or, using built-in mics or connected Android devices, ask it Now-style questions and receive Star Trek style responses.
> When I buy a ThinkPad, I intend to keep it for 5 years.
> My friends with MacBooks all replace them every 2-3 years.
Yeah that's one of the reasons I don't know if I'm comfortable getting one of the new Macbooks. I mean the Retina Display w/ 16 GB of RAM is lustworthy, but the RAM is soldered into place (thus the need to max it out at 16GB at purchase-time), the battery's glued in place, and the SSD is apparently replaceable but completely nonstandard.
But I'm confused about what to replace it with, and concerned that I'll miss some of the better OS X stuff. Keynote is fantastic for presentations. Never having to worry about hardware compatibility is pretty convenient.
> These layers were built not just for differentiation but for
> base functionality/gloss that stock eclair/froyo/gingerbread lacked.
But then Android got awesome. 4.0 is good, and 4.1 is great. But manufacturers like Samsung and HTC continue to ship their phones with 4.0 upgrades that aren't upgrades! For example: my brother's Galaxy Note. He recently got the 4.0 upgrade from Samsung, which required him to download software (Kies) from Samsung and leash his phone to his laptop to upgrade. I have no idea why.
Then, we did the upgrade, but he's missing features: the 4.0 panoramic camera comes quickly to mind. The stock dialer and people apps, which are amazing, aren't there. The new in-call UI I believe also isn't there. Seriously, they're shipping 4.0 but holding some of the better UX upgrades back.
He even asked me what the hell was new about his phone. I said I didn't know. The menus look different, some of the UI controls are new, Face Unlock is a cool showoff feature, but besides that he's still running Samsung's diminished-experience crap.
I'm planning to stick CyanogenMod 10 on my Note, so I agree to a degree but I'll point out that I got the ICS update over-the-air despite hearing lots of complaints about needing to use keis (a uk vs us thing?)I also wonder if "normal" people really want the UI of their phone to change radically after an update. I get the feeling that is part of the reason that iPhone remains superficially similar over multiple upgrades.
> Apple targets people who want their computer to look pretty.
> Lenovo targets the people who want to get stuff done.
I'm no Apple fanboy, but this statement's ridiculous.
> Want to quickly scroll through a document? page up/page down/home/end buttons? Lenovo's got it.
Two-finger inertial scrolling on the amazing glass trackpad. Or, Command-arrow keys. Same effect. Not one-button, but it's not like the functionality isn't there.
> Want to change the volume easily and still have access to f1-f12? Lenovo's got dedicated buttons for it.
Macbooks have a "fn" key that can be held to modify the function key behaviors, and the unmodified behavior is a Mac OS X Preference option.
> Need more battery life? Buy a second battery and swap them when the first runs out.
> Need more ram? Just open it up and put it in. Same thing if you want a new HD/etc.
I feel the need to point out that these are completely valid arguments against the new Macbooks.
I have a Late 2008 Macbook Pro, the first unibody they made, and the only reason it still runs strong is because I've swapped the battery, RAM, and HDD (now an SSD). I love the new Retina Display Macbooks, but I don't know if I can put that kind of money down on a computer that isn't upgradeable. Not when it's my primary mode of earning a living.
I wasn't claiming a macbook can't scroll. I was just claiming that Lenovo has a lot of features that don't necessarily look pretty, but which make it easy to actually use the damn thing on an everyday basis.
Fewer buttons isn't necessarily better nor is it even simpler. The simplest thing in the world is a "do exactly what I want" button for every common value of "what I want". It's not pretty or as easy to market or as pretty, but it's highly usable.
(I'll skip the rant about my iPhone, and how it forces me to waste screen real estate on buttons that come built into Android.)
I agree, fewer buttons does not necessarily make a device simpler. There's a happy medium that I think Android hit with the four-button menu/home/back/search keys. Whenever I use an iPhone anymore I always cache-miss and try to find the hardware back button.
Not every screen needs a back button. You can't hide a hardware back button.
I'm with Apple on this one. The back-arrow button in the toolbar reminds me I'm in a hierarchal app, and the label reminds me what the prior screen was. It's just the opposite for me: every time I use an Android I hunt around the screen for the software back button.
As the hardware buttons are generally lit, you could de-emphasise it by removing the light. I had a Motorola java phone which did just this.
The failure of the Apple hierarchical model is it's app-centric, unlike Android which is activity-centric. In a perfect world we could have software back buttons which worked like Android, but I wouldn't trust developers to implement that consistently.
The only time I've ever used a function key (F1, F2) in a Mac application was in Photoshop. Most Mac applications use Cmd+? shortcuts. So in effect, the volume/brightness controls have their own dedicated keys.
Fair enough. Upon investigation, I've discovered there are a fair few OS X official system shortcuts which utilize function keys.
But I think you're an edge case. Apple targets hard the average consumer, and there are plenty (my parents) who don't understand an arbitrary mapping of a number to a function. The self-explanatory icons (the speaker with lots of sound vs no sound, the universal play triangle, etc.) are far more understandable. So why not save space?
Yes, I'm an edge case. I seek out a quality laptop that I can get work done on. That's what we are discussing, no?
As for "saving space", huh? A thinkpad is the same size as a macbook - both are as wide as their screen plus a little extra. The thinkpad is just covered with ugly buttons instead of pretty metallic empty space.
Yes, but you're far more proficient. Those who plug away happily at 30WPM will not share your definition of quality.
I'll take a beautiful product that sacrifices minor functionality (in my case) for aesthetics. My point is not that a MacBook is right for you, but that Apple seems to have rightly assumed that most people don't care about the function keys, and spared the ugly buttons.
In any case, you're probably saving a grand every time you buy a laptop, so maybe the joke's on us.
Though I'm not familiar with the Lenovo trackpads in particular beyond playing with them on display models, the trackpad on MacBooks is a huge differentiator over any of the ones I've had on PC laptops. It works so well you forget how well it's working until you start using a different computer with a trackpad that now feels completely broken.
It's honestly one of the reasons I'm still contemplating getting a new Mac when it's time to upgrade. I've never seen a PC laptop with both a comfortable, large, smooth trackpad and good drivers that provide the kind of scrolling you get with a Mac.
ORMs -- in my case ruby's ActiveRecord -- solve nearly every use-case I have. Find a record by its primary key; get a record and all of the associated records from another table; update a record with a bunch of data? Why should I write any of that SQL? It's a waste of time.
Is ActiveRecord running n+1 queries every time you call a method? You're doing it wrong. Ignorance of how an ORM works is not an indictment against ORMs.
Is ActiveRecord generating really bad SQL for the fifty-table report you want to generate? Fine, ditch it. Run your own custom-written SQL, or a stored procedure, or whatever. Just because an ORM can't write all the SQL you'll ever need does not mean that they're useless.