Appeal to linux, get tested early in development

I’ve been seeing a lot of OSS software lately that isn’t supporting linux, but could easily. Especially 64 bit users, which are growing in numbers thanks to ubuntu making 64 bit linux so damn easy.

Linux users are naturally early adopters (thus, they use linux). Limiting the support for this platform is a big mistake, because they are more likely to test the software early, and report bugs whenever there’s a problem.

Now, that doesn’t mean that this is always the case, I’ve met some pretty stupid linux users, but the majority is involved with open source in some way, even if it’s not programming.

What I’m trying to say is, I really want Gears to work on my main box, but it isn’t just limited to that. Firefox extensions really should support 64 bit, because by default 64 bit firefox is used in 64 bit Ubuntu, as with most other distros. Personally, I’m not going to start using 32 bit firefox just for Gears, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Anyways, that’s my rant. Now go fix the problem. Thanks.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Double Guitar Solo

Holy Jesus.

I think the most impressive part is where he plays two completely different parts on each side. (2:20)

This just amazes me.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Microsoft’s BlueTrack: A bunch of marketing bull

Ok, so Microsoft announced this amazing “dream mouse” that works on everything from carpet to granite. I think it’s a bunch of marketing bull, and I’ll show you why.

I’m going to be comparing the BlueTrack to my Razer Diamondback. Below is a comparison of the two mice.
Note: I don’t actually own a BlueTrack. The data below is based on what I’ve read. The data from the Diamondback is my own findings.

Price Colors Wireless Surfaces
Wood Granite Carpet Glossy Plastic Glass* Mirror
Razer Diamondback 3G $36-$52 Green, Red, Blue No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Microsoft BlueTrack $80-$100 Blue Yes Yes Yes Yes Dunno No No

* Not frosted

The only real thing BlueTrack has that my Diamondback isn’t wireless. It’s not too big of a disadvantage, because wireless is worse for gaming, and you need to buy batteries for the mouse if it’s wireless.

I also measured both mice. Microsoft claims that their big BlueTrack mouse is about 3.1″x4.5″. The Diamondback is about 2.5″x4.75″. They’re both about the same size. The Mini-BlueTrack is around 2.7″x3.8″, so it’s about an inch shorter then the Diamondback. Quite frankly, I’d rather bring the slightly bigger mouse, and not risk getting carpal tunnel.

I wish I could have found the DPI and frame capture rate, but I couldn’t find anything for the BlueTrack. The Diamondback has 1800 DPI, and can capture 6400 frames per second.

So, there you have it. My Diamondback (which is cheaper, older, and uses infared) matches the performance of a new mouse that Microsoft made. Cool.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

How Chrome will improve other browsers

After reading Alex’s post, I’ve thought about what chrome should be, and what tech editors don’t seem to get.

I think the point of Chrome is to really get some ideas rolling for the major browser vendors. Specifically, threads. Threads are great, and I really do think browsers should start using them. I’ve been wanting this for a very long time. Chrome will (hopefully) start getting the browser vendors motivated to try them out. But, when you use threads excessively, it adds un-needed overhead (which is exactly what Chrome is doing). The way they sandbox plugins using them is a good plus, because it takes the blame off the browser when a plugin crashes. Pages, however, should definitely let the browser take the blame. I feel that it makes fixing renderer and js engine bugs less important when you use threads, since their consequence isn’t as great. On top of that, using a thread for every page is just wasteful of resources. Think of what would happen if several popups opened up (all having some sort of “shoot the monkey” flash game). Yikes.

So, how would things work in a perfect world? Browsers could get the renderer, and the js engine on separate threads (either both on the same thread, or each having their own). This way, the browser will work well on a multi-core system, but it doesn’t become a “thread whore”. When you think about it, the user only uses one RIA at a time, and most RIAs don’t use the CPU when they’re not being interacted with (and if they do, they should really use worker pools). Epiphany, Gnome’s web browser, implements this behavior, and it works very nicely. All while avoiding the need to spawn a bazillion threads while doing so.

So, Not only is the press making crazy stories (as you can see from Alex’s blog), but Chrome isn’t what they’re making it out to be. It’s not “Google is taking over the earth”, it’s more like “Google is trying to bring their ideas to the table”. And quite frankly, I can’t wait to start seeing the browsers follow Google’s path, and implement threads (sparingly, of course).

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

My thoughts on Google Chrome (Part 2)

Ok, so I tried out Chrome. It’s pretty damn fast. If it’s that fast on linux, I’m going to be very happy. I also like how the UI is very condensed. It has some quirks with javascript stuff though.

I also saw something weird involving dijit.Menu, I think those are artifacts of iframes being shown.

Anyways, it’s nice. The dom could be a bit faster, but it’s not bad.

I wonder if they’ll use the native UI toolkits for OSX and Linux.

Anyways, I still don’t see the point.

Update: I’m kinda agreeing with this post as well…

Update #2: interesting… there’s some weird stuff going on in their ToS

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Text-based battle engine in python

I wrote a simple battle engine in python while I was teaching a friend about the aspects of OOP. Somebody may find it useful, so I’m just throwing up the package. It’s licensed under the AFL. Enjoy.

Download

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

My thoughts on Google Chrome

So, for those that don’t already know, Google’s working on a new browser called chrome. To be honest, I don’t see the point. Each tab having it’s own process is unnecessary, if anything the renderer should have a seperate thread. Firefox already has ubiquity, which is in-the-works. Firefox 4 will have a javascript VM. I can see the point in sandboxing each plugin, but that’s the only good point I see. Why is google making their own browser, when they could just as easily pay some firefox devs to get what’s already planned done faster?

Update: John Resig posted his reaction

Update #2: And so has Alex Russel.

Even after reading the two responses, I still don’t seem to get it. The cartoon I read talks about how the architecture is superior, but Alex’s post is talking about how chrome is getting back to the content part of the web. Maybe I’m missing something here.

Update #3: I’ve read the post on the google blog now. I’m still confused, but it seems that it’s trying to provide a clean un-cluttered browser. I don’t think we need that, if anything I think the browser should become smarter, and do things involving microformats. Eh, I’ll wait until tomorrow until I make my final decision on weather or not it’s necessary.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment