My double-secret inside source says we'll have to write our requests on a piece of paper, place it inside an envelope, then hold it up to our forehead while the computer guesses the content of the envelope calling on an exciting new advanced quantum entanglement fuzzy logic engine that runs on sweat beads.
According to Wikipedia, "Firefox for mobile 1.0 uses the same version of the Gecko layout engine as Firefox 3.6.” This seems similar to WebKit which means that Mozilla has finally made the Gecko engine and perhaps the associated JS engine efficient enough to run on a mobile device.
Mozilla has been working with Nokia for at least 1.5 years to port Firefox to Qt but I don’t understand why it’s taking so long or why Mozilla doesn’t have their mobile browser on every platform but the iPhone at this part. Can the app really take that long to build when you’ve got an engine that apparently requires no reduction to go mobile? I certainly don’t know, but it does seem like there is a huge chunk of the puzzle missing.
I don't follow Mozilla that closely but porting to QT would be a huge effort if I understand you correctly.
Not so much missing as not created yet. This creation is often reductive. Look at Safari on the Mac and iPhone for examples, both may be called Safari but the functionality difference is huge. The why is pretty simple, on the iPhone there is limited memory and no paging so there are minimal features to keep everything in RAM.
This actually highlights one big issue with the first Touch devices, which was far to little memory. Even today there is to little memory to run a web browser that is full featured. It should also be noted that iPhone software supplied by Apple needed a long period of debugging to minimize all of the memory management issues that existed. Considering this is a company with huge resources it should be obvious that Mozilla will have challenges shaving Firefox down to something usable.
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
I've always wondered why some are so quick to call other people cultists. It must give them some strange sort of comfort, but I've never understood what it could be.
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
My head's gonna explode if I sit here and try to make sense out of that.
BTW - The only Apple product I own is a 30gig iPod. Although I want one very badly, I don't have an iMac yet because spending the $$ on one is a big issue in my house right now. I want an iMac because I've never had a computer that operated at optimal efficiency. They've always been error prone, etc. Everyone I've ever talked to that owns a Mac is quick to point out how trouble free they are. The only exception is this one lady I know. However, she has no patience and believes she is a computer expert and expected her MBP to have a zero learning curve. Does this make me an Apple cultist?
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
Given Apple?s track record since Jobs has returned to the helm it?s not too hard to imagine that a tablet they?ve ben working on for presumably several years will be appealing.
Here is a pretty slick mockup of the Notion Ink tablet using Pixel Qi that should be shown at CES in a couple weeks. I have to wonder if Pixel Qi is what Apple will use. It seems like the best fit I?ve seen so far but usually we hear about a unknown beneficiary backing the company or simply Apple buying them out altogether.
I've always wondered why some are so quick to call other people cultists. It must give them some strange sort of comfort, but I've never understood what it could be.
How could you? - if you're a member of one???
Tom Cruise doen'st understand it either so you're not alone.
I don't follow Mozilla that closely but porting to QT would be a huge effort if I understand you correctly.
Not so much missing as not created yet. This creation is often reductive. Look at Safari on the Mac and iPhone for examples, both may be called Safari but the functionality difference is huge. The why is pretty simple, on the iPhone there is limited memory and no paging so there are minimal features to keep everything in RAM.
This actually highlights one big issue with the first Touch devices, which was far to little memory. Even today there is to little memory to run a web browser that is full featured. It should also be noted that iPhone software supplied by Apple needed a long period of debugging to minimize all of the memory management issues that existed. Considering this is a company with huge resources it should be obvious that Mozilla will have challenges shaving Firefox down to something usable.
Dave
I think Mozilla was still rewriting the Gecko engine to be more effective as a mobile browser. The way I read it, the exact Gecko Engine found in FF 3.6 is used in the mobile version, the differences being in the apps built around these engines.
Regardless, I want to see Mozilla gain some traction on the mobile space, specifically with an Android app where I think it can gain the most amount of ground quickly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Thats really nice the only thing it needs is an upgrade to wireless N.
802.11n would be nice, they might even have it installed by then. I expect the final device and specs to be somewhat different.
I’m looking forward to testing quite a few tablets this year at CES.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHateRegistering
Merry Christmas to 76% of you and Happy Hanukkah to 1.2% of you.
AppleInsider has readers all over the world so the demographics would be somewhat different. On top of that, going purely by religion doesn’t really cut as many atheists and agnostics celebrate religion-based holidays for social reasons.
Those demographics are idiotic and prove how cowardly Americans are of identifying themselves as Atheist/Agnostic.
None/ No religion, total: 15.0%
Agnostic+Atheist: 1.6%
I don't get it. If you're non-religious, you're either Atheist (believe there's no higher power) or you're Agnostic (believe in a higher power but don't identify with any specified religion). There's no "other". So I'm going to ignore that second statistic and call myself one of the 15% of Atheists (I am)/Agnostics (I am not) and say that I accept "Merry Christmas" just fine as a Season's Greeting.
Those demographics are idiotic and prove how cowardly Americans are of identifying themselves as Atheist/Agnostic.
None/ No religion, total: 15.0%
Agnostic+Atheist: 1.6%
I don't get it. If you're non-religious, you're either Atheist (believe there's no higher power) or you're Agnostic (believe in a higher power but don't identify with any specified religion). There's no "other". So I'm going to ignore that second statistic and call myself one of the 15% of Atheists (I am)/Agnostics (I am not) and say that I accept "Merry Christmas" just fine as a Season's Greeting.
Ignoring your ?cowardly Americans? comment, I disagree with your conclusion. Not having a religion does not mean one does not believe in a higher power, it can simply mean that one doesn?t accept a predefined system of faith. Perhaps they feel there is a god so they can?t be atheist or agnostic, but haven?t chosen a type of organized religion.
Agnostic is traditionally someone "who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.” Which is distinct from someone who may believe very strongly in a deity but hasn’t decided on an organized religion to follow or thinks that all the organized religions are incorrect.
Ignoring your “cowardly Americans” comment, I disagree with your conclusion.
I didn't use the phrase "cowardly Americans".
Quote:
Not having a religion does not mean one does not believe in a higher power, it can simply mean that one doesn’t accept a predefined system of faith. Perhaps they feel there is a god so they can’t be atheist or agnostic, but haven’t chosen a type of organized religion.
[edit]Apparently sol is right here.[/edit]
And with that in mind, I double the "cowardly" comment, but agree that the 15% conclusion would be wrong.
Maybe it's just that I grew up around educated people and went to a University outside of the Bible Belt, but I think there are much more than 1.6% of Americans who either deny/doubt the existence of God or admit that they don't know.
Comments
My double-secret inside source says we'll have to write our requests on a piece of paper, place it inside an envelope, then hold it up to our forehead while the computer guesses the content of the envelope calling on an exciting new advanced quantum entanglement fuzzy logic engine that runs on sweat beads.
For those of us old enough to remember...
So the anti-christ is happy with the new tablet
Why would you make a comment like that?
According to Wikipedia, "Firefox for mobile 1.0 uses the same version of the Gecko layout engine as Firefox 3.6.” This seems similar to WebKit which means that Mozilla has finally made the Gecko engine and perhaps the associated JS engine efficient enough to run on a mobile device.
Mozilla has been working with Nokia for at least 1.5 years to port Firefox to Qt but I don’t understand why it’s taking so long or why Mozilla doesn’t have their mobile browser on every platform but the iPhone at this part. Can the app really take that long to build when you’ve got an engine that apparently requires no reduction to go mobile? I certainly don’t know, but it does seem like there is a huge chunk of the puzzle missing.
I don't follow Mozilla that closely but porting to QT would be a huge effort if I understand you correctly.
Not so much missing as not created yet. This creation is often reductive. Look at Safari on the Mac and iPhone for examples, both may be called Safari but the functionality difference is huge. The why is pretty simple, on the iPhone there is limited memory and no paging so there are minimal features to keep everything in RAM.
This actually highlights one big issue with the first Touch devices, which was far to little memory. Even today there is to little memory to run a web browser that is full featured. It should also be noted that iPhone software supplied by Apple needed a long period of debugging to minimize all of the memory management issues that existed. Considering this is a company with huge resources it should be obvious that Mozilla will have challenges shaving Firefox down to something usable.
Dave
Why would you make a comment like that?
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
My head's gonna explode if I sit here and try to make sense out of that.
BTW - The only Apple product I own is a 30gig iPod. Although I want one very badly, I don't have an iMac yet because spending the $$ on one is a big issue in my house right now. I want an iMac because I've never had a computer that operated at optimal efficiency. They've always been error prone, etc. Everyone I've ever talked to that owns a Mac is quick to point out how trouble free they are. The only exception is this one lady I know. However, she has no patience and believes she is a computer expert and expected her MBP to have a zero learning curve. Does this make me an Apple cultist?
Because many of the members here act like they belong to a cult and since they don't believe in the MS God, they must believe the Steve is the anti christ.
Nice twisted logic.
You win the troll of the day award.
Nice twisted logic.
You win the troll of the day award.
thanks, I thought I was loosing it for a minute there.
When did this happen??
Probably after their fifth or sixth beer.
For those of us old enough to remember...
Answer: "Sis. Boom. Bah."
Question: "What sound does an exploding sheep make?"
Priceless.
Given Apple?s track record since Jobs has returned to the helm it?s not too hard to imagine that a tablet they?ve ben working on for presumably several years will be appealing.
Here is a pretty slick mockup of the Notion Ink tablet using Pixel Qi that should be shown at CES in a couple weeks. I have to wonder if Pixel Qi is what Apple will use. It seems like the best fit I?ve seen so far but usually we hear about a unknown beneficiary backing the company or simply Apple buying them out altogether.
Thats really nice the only thing it needs is an upgrade to wireless N.
Wait and see...
I assume Jobs was pleased with the hockey puck mouse at one time to...
and the toilet seat iBook Handbag......
I've always wondered why some are so quick to call other people cultists. It must give them some strange sort of comfort, but I've never understood what it could be.
How could you? - if you're a member of one???
Tom Cruise doen'st understand it either so you're not alone.
I don't follow Mozilla that closely but porting to QT would be a huge effort if I understand you correctly.
Not so much missing as not created yet. This creation is often reductive. Look at Safari on the Mac and iPhone for examples, both may be called Safari but the functionality difference is huge. The why is pretty simple, on the iPhone there is limited memory and no paging so there are minimal features to keep everything in RAM.
This actually highlights one big issue with the first Touch devices, which was far to little memory. Even today there is to little memory to run a web browser that is full featured. It should also be noted that iPhone software supplied by Apple needed a long period of debugging to minimize all of the memory management issues that existed. Considering this is a company with huge resources it should be obvious that Mozilla will have challenges shaving Firefox down to something usable.
Dave
I think Mozilla was still rewriting the Gecko engine to be more effective as a mobile browser. The way I read it, the exact Gecko Engine found in FF 3.6 is used in the mobile version, the differences being in the apps built around these engines.
Regardless, I want to see Mozilla gain some traction on the mobile space, specifically with an Android app where I think it can gain the most amount of ground quickly.
Thats really nice the only thing it needs is an upgrade to wireless N.
802.11n would be nice, they might even have it installed by then. I expect the final device and specs to be somewhat different.
I’m looking forward to testing quite a few tablets this year at CES.
Merry Christmas to 76% of you and Happy Hanukkah to 1.2% of you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...merican_adults
AppleInsider has readers all over the world so the demographics would be somewhat different. On top of that, going purely by religion doesn’t really cut as many atheists and agnostics celebrate religion-based holidays for social reasons.
Personally, I celebrate Festivus.
So the anti-christ is happy with the new tablet
I don't think Obama has commented one way or another.
Merry Christmas to 76% of you and Happy Hanukkah to 1.2% of you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...merican_adults
Those demographics are idiotic and prove how cowardly Americans are of identifying themselves as Atheist/Agnostic.
None/ No religion, total: 15.0%
Agnostic+Atheist: 1.6%
I don't get it. If you're non-religious, you're either Atheist (believe there's no higher power) or you're Agnostic (believe in a higher power but don't identify with any specified religion). There's no "other". So I'm going to ignore that second statistic and call myself one of the 15% of Atheists (I am)/Agnostics (I am not) and say that I accept "Merry Christmas" just fine as a Season's Greeting.
Those demographics are idiotic and prove how cowardly Americans are of identifying themselves as Atheist/Agnostic.
None/ No religion, total: 15.0%
Agnostic+Atheist: 1.6%
I don't get it. If you're non-religious, you're either Atheist (believe there's no higher power) or you're Agnostic (believe in a higher power but don't identify with any specified religion). There's no "other". So I'm going to ignore that second statistic and call myself one of the 15% of Atheists (I am)/Agnostics (I am not) and say that I accept "Merry Christmas" just fine as a Season's Greeting.
Ignoring your ?cowardly Americans? comment, I disagree with your conclusion. Not having a religion does not mean one does not believe in a higher power, it can simply mean that one doesn?t accept a predefined system of faith. Perhaps they feel there is a god so they can?t be atheist or agnostic, but haven?t chosen a type of organized religion.
Isn't that Agnostic?
Agnostic is traditionally someone "who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.” Which is distinct from someone who may believe very strongly in a deity but hasn’t decided on an organized religion to follow or thinks that all the organized religions are incorrect.
Ignoring your “cowardly Americans” comment, I disagree with your conclusion.
I didn't use the phrase "cowardly Americans".
Not having a religion does not mean one does not believe in a higher power, it can simply mean that one doesn’t accept a predefined system of faith. Perhaps they feel there is a god so they can’t be atheist or agnostic, but haven’t chosen a type of organized religion.
[edit]Apparently sol is right here.[/edit]
And with that in mind, I double the "cowardly" comment, but agree that the 15% conclusion would be wrong.
Maybe it's just that I grew up around educated people and went to a University outside of the Bible Belt, but I think there are much more than 1.6% of Americans who either deny/doubt the existence of God or admit that they don't know.