Brilliant idea.SlackmasterK said:A thought occurred to me while watching EvNet Part 2...
Have you guys put any plans into some sort of live chat room? Possibly live video while the videos are being recorded (If they stay within one office, like this one)... That way if a question comes up as a result of another answer (if you have time), you can answer it.
Plus live streams with chat have become wildly popular.
Well, how can you use it if Internet Explorer does not support it? It's still got like 70% or something of the market. Some websites do anyway: Google Maps renders as SVG on browsers that support it, and Wikipedia uses SVG extensively. SVG allows for crossplatform and crossbrowser vector images and animations, which can be embedded directly in HTML and be a native part of the website.littleguru said:Bass said:*snip*
Data URIs lets you embed images directly into the HTML or CSS of the site. I think it's pretty useful. IE8 will support it, fortunately.
I supsect Microsoft is a bit hesitant on implementing some of the W3C standards which directly compete with some of their initiatives. W3C SVG and HTML5 is a way to do a lot of the "use cases" for Silverlight or Flash, without the need for Silverlight or Flash.
Yeah they tried that, but I think that controversial change was reverted on the same day. Webkit is the only engine that passes Acid3 currently, but Opera is really close. Of Opera/Presto, Safari/Webkit, Firefox/Gecko, and Internet Explorer/Trident, Internet Explorer is furthest away from passing Acid3.littleguru said:mVPstar said:*snip*
Interesting. This looks like how certain graphic card vendors trim their drivers for benchmarks. It's really hard to believe in these kind of tests and benchmarks after all.
And yeah Internet Explorer has no SVG support, and I'm pretty it'll need it (and supporting stuff like SVG animations) to pass Acid3. SVG is a W3C standard, but not everything Acid3 tests is (as matthews said), and even Acid2 tests some stuff like Data URIs which aren't a accepted standard, but can be pretty useful in practice.
Hey, you really sure you want a doctor that's "for-profit" man? Doctors don't make money when people are healthy.phreaks said:jamie said:*snip*
I hate to rain on this liberal love fest of utopian fantasies, but the fact is that people want to be economically successful, and the best and brightest will always trend towards that ideal.
The field is level, if I can become succesful than anyone can. If some jackovasaur doesn't want to work or apply him/herself, too bad suffer. I am sick of taking away from my own family to pay for your sorry azz.
You want to provide healthcare for those that can't afford it, then fine; legalize marijuana and pay for it that way. But don't for one second force your sub-standard (to my level of living) health-care on me. I pay my $800 per month premium, I shouldn't be forced to either pay yours too or to lower my level of health care.
Biden really ruined a lot of his Internet cred, unfortunately.jamie said:Bass said:*snip*
..he has based his whole campaign on being internet savvy as well...
thought programmers would like that?
(yes...biden has a bad internet voting history) ..but he doesnt
(except for flip flop on isp accountability)
I like Obama. He's not perfect, but he is eloquent, well respected around the World, and compassionate. I think that's what the country needs right now.jamie said:brian.shapiro said:*snip*
what i wouldnt give to have him running here (instead of ratatoullie - i mean stephan dion)
* i meant reply to root
We don't need another ignorant Republican to trash the economy and crap on the Constitution. If McCain wins I'm not sure if America will ever recover.