Coffeehouse Thread

18 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Thanks Slashdot !

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    lenn

    Its been fun having so many people around here from Slashdot.  Certainly some interesting and fun coversations are emerging from a little diversity in this community. 

    Thanks for coming by ... keep asking, keep thinking, keep challenging.

    Curious as to what Slashdotter's have to say about Channel 9, have a peek.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Oh no! Microsoft knows about /. the OpenSource community must have a leak.. who knows what else this guy could be leaking to Microsoft, maybe even source-code :o 

  • User profile image
    vanlandw

    i read the story on news.com.  pretty much every news site did a short blurb about channel 9

  • User profile image
    submariner

    I heard about it on FlyeTalk's United forum, of all places... for obvious reasons

  • User profile image
    Pseudo

    Does anyone else find it funny that this site apparently crashes the FireFox browser?  I think that reflects the questionable quality of FireFox more than bad HTML.

    Although I do think it would be nice if the site formatted correctly (or at least readibly) for people not using IE.

  • User profile image
    lars

    I would have been more upset if this site crashed MSIE.

    Besides that, I agree. But the fact that many sites are optimized to look its best in MSIE really shouldn't be a surprise by now. And I try to stay clear of feeding the avalanche of trolls on the subject.

    I found my way here trough slashdot as well.
     

  • User profile image
    codemonkey

    It doesn't crash FireFox, it just doesn't render properly. But you're right, a browser shouldn't crash just from looking at a site.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    FireFox is a beta... pre-version 1.0

  • User profile image
    Michael Elsdoerfer

    FireFox is a beta... pre-version 1.0

    Yeah, that's very clever. Just keep your version number below 1.0 and no one can ever complain about bugs. Well - someone who has to sell a product can't do that.

    And yes, I use Firefox (except for Channel 9 actually).

  • User profile image
    Manip

    People can and will complain regardless. Keeping it below 1.0 is a clear indication that you might have problems..


    PS. Could the programmers consider adding fixed table sizes to the pages so people's profiles can't cause the rest of the page to get condensed.

  • User profile image
    Michael Elsdoerfer

    People can and will complain regardless. Keeping it below 1.0 is a clear indication that you might have problems..

    Since no software is bug free, there might always be problems. A version number below 1.0 is a indication that you might have problems, but a version number equal or greater than 1.0 is not a guarantee that there won't be any.

    However, me point was the following: If I'm *now* comparing two products, because I want to decide which one to use, I will not give the pre-1.0 products any bonus points just because it's pre-1.0.

  • User profile image
    nemisys



    Can't wait!

  • User profile image
    ghos

    I use firefox regularly and have not had it crash on any site, including this one.  In fact I just did a comparison between firefox and IE and the display is nearly identical.  Things are slightly more evenly lined up with IE, but otherwise very much the same.
    The only thing that bothers me is websites that end up wider than my browser window and I get those bottom scroll bars.  This isn't limited to firefox, happens with IE also.  It used to be that my size of window was actually bigger than most websites were wide, how it seems more are designing them wider. 
    Oh well a minor point.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    My biggest problem with firefox on windows is its loading time.. with IE it takes about as long to open 'my computer' as it does to start browsing, firefox takes quiet a while to start.

  • User profile image
    Cronan

    Doesn't crash it - I'm replying using FireFox ...

  • User profile image
    ElNinoo

    I am also riding on a FireFox.

  • User profile image
    UdoSchroeter

    Just keep your version number below 1.0 and no one can ever complain about bugs. 

    What a load of crap. People DO complain about software regardless of the version number, and rightly so (well not always). And versions below 1.0 DO in fact indicate the "product" is not finished, but some projects release it for public use anyway - which is great because the version number indicates beta status. And that in turn indicates that complaining about bugs is in fact very much welcomed by the developers!

    Well - someone who has to sell a product can't do that.

    Oh come on, if you're really working in the software industry (I don't know) you too have shipped something that wasn't complete because time ran out. It happens all the time, we've done that too. Rhetorically you're right, of course, because no sane software company would ever actually ship something labelled below 1.0 - but that's just a marketing issue.

  • User profile image
    Michael Elsdoerfer

    UdoSchroeter wrote:

    What a load of crap.


    I would appreciate it if you were a bit more polite.

    UdoSchroeter wrote:

    People DO complain about software regardless of the version number, and rightly so (well not always). And versions below 1.0 DO in fact indicate the "product" is not finished, but some projects release it for public use anyway - which is great because the version number indicates beta status. And that in turn indicates that complaining about bugs is in fact very much welcomed by the developers!


    I acutally agree with all of that. Still, the point I was trying to make (see also my second response to manip):
    If I have to decide - *now* - which product I want to use, I will not give one of them any extra points, just because it is still beta (except, of course, if later switching would mean additional cost, that would be an additional factor).
    So, if a product is constantly crashing, of course you can say, see, it's still 0.0.0.1 or something, but I will use an alternative that works.

    UdoSchroeter wrote:

    Oh come on, if you're really working in the software industry (I don't know) you too have shipped something that wasn't complete because time ran out.


    I'm not, but I surely have used such software.

    UdoSchroeter wrote:

    Rhetorically you're right, of course, because no sane software company would ever actually ship something labelled below 1.0 - but that's just a marketing issue.


    Yes, it's a marketing issue, that's what I meant. So, instead of just looking at the version number, better try a program yourself.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.