ENIGMA Forums

General fluff => Announcements => Topic started by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 07:27:24 AM

Title: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 07:27:24 AM
Boy metaphase is taking a long time (For those who are expecting it, hehe).

Anyway, another tidbit worth noting: "Local" typing, as in, "local struct a;" will be possible only if users ensure that said typing is done in the first event parsed. The create event is a safe bet.

Types are remarkable in that they cannot be assumed; that's why I needed a C parser in the first place.

So, I can do "local struct," which wasn't part of the original plan, but it's not going to be as convenient as "local int" or the like, simply because I can't treat something as a type before I know for sure that it is.



I've started documenting the systems that those implementing new libraries will need an understanding of. Aragon has been working on Wii things and has agreed to get started on some draw functions for ENIGMA. What's interesting is that he wanted to get started right away, so he checked out the SVN and started looking through it without docs. ;_;

What's even more interesting is that he commented on how well-organized it was, which is indeed what I was going for, but I didn't think anyone would just figure the whole thing out without bitching about documentation. Makes me wonder why I'm writing it sometimes.

Also, retep998 has volunteered to help with the collisions. I hope the undertaking will go a little more smoothly with more people on them than just me. He'll be starting that when R4 enters a stable test phase.



Ism and I talked for a bit, and now she is working on a set of classes in C and in Java that will allow the two to share resources. Getting a C DLL to call Java functions isn't going to happen, but I can probably communicate some simple instructions by returning an array of them.

Also, we used to use std-out to communicate from ENIGMA to LGM, such as info about what was taking place in the compiler. Well, now we can't, so hopefully we can create a reliable new mechanism for this. (It's a shame, too; she spent a fair deal of time threading that damn output window, and now it's useless...)

On the bright side, though we were originally afraid we'd have to add something to the path folder, we've found workarounds for that, too.



My current difficulty is figuring out a way to simplify installing a compiler for users. Problem is, Vista is incompatible with a release of MinGW for XP and the like, and I hate to think about Win7. The MinGW team has their own automated installer that downloads the correct version; maybe we can use that. The only problem that creates is locating the compiler after it installs it.... It doesn't add anything to the path variable, and the typical GM user doesn't even know what that means. ;_;

Suggestions/comments welcome. Criticism will be bashed thoroughly and considered later.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Fede-lasse on March 23, 2010, 07:39:40 AM
I've started documenting the systems that those implementing new libraries will need an understanding of. Aragon has been working on Wii things and has agreed to get started on some draw functions for ENIGMA. What's interesting is that he wanted to get started right away, so he checked out the SVN and started looking through it without docs. ;_;

What's even more interesting is that he commented on how well-organized it was, which is indeed what I was going for, but I didn't think anyone would just figure the whole thing out without bitching about documentation. Makes me wonder why I'm writing it sometimes.
I didn't know that he was this engaged in the project. Good to hear :D

My current difficulty is figuring out a way to simplify installing a compiler for users. Problem is, Vista is incompatible with a release of MinGW for XP and the like, and I hate to think about Win7. The MinGW team has their own automated installer that downloads the correct version; maybe we can use that. The only problem that creates is locating the compiler after it installs it.... It doesn't add anything to the path variable, and the typical GM user doesn't even know what that means. ;_;
Can't you email them and ask for the source or some other kind of help?

Suggestions/comments welcome.
I'll give them anytime.

Criticism will be bashed thoroughly and considered later.
*cough*Rusky*cough*
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 07:50:28 AM
> I didn't know that he was this engaged in the project. Good to hear
This was only a recent thing, after this was posted on the GMC: http://gmc.yoyogames.com/index.php?showtopic=468479

He didn't post it, but it was inspired by him. Try not to laugh at the GMC nubblets.
"Yes, it's legitimate. Zach (the developer), has been working on it for a few days now."
"been working on it for a few days now."
"a few days now."

Anyway, the truth behind it is, (and I feel confident posting it here since none of the GMC nubblets will find this post and have their hearts broken) he just wrote something that loads GM resources. He did the programming of his test game himself. Since converting GML to C++ is a decent undertaking, I figured he may as well team up with us rather than put in his own individual attempt at converting the code. I'd have done the same with G-Java, except I prefer C++. He doesn't have a choice in his language. XD

> Can't you email them and ask for the source or some other kind of help?
These people are GNUs. They believe in Google and Doxygen, not in helping people.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Fede-lasse on March 23, 2010, 08:43:04 AM
> I didn't know that he was this engaged in the project. Good to hear
This was only a recent thing, after this was posted on the GMC: http://gmc.yoyogames.com/index.php?showtopic=468479

He didn't post it, but it was inspired by him. Try not to laugh at the GMC nubblets.
"Yes, it's legitimate. Zach (the developer), has been working on it for a few days now."
"been working on it for a few days now."
"a few days now."
Well, I'd believe PwnageMage WhateverHesCalled in the first place, since he knows Aragon (Zach). But now that you tell me, a few days seems a bit exaggerated.

Anyway, the truth behind it is, (and I feel confident posting it here since none of the GMC nubblets will find this post and have their hearts broken) he just wrote something that loads GM resources. He did the programming of his test game himself. Since converting GML to C++ is a decent undertaking, I figured he may as well team up with us rather than put in his own individual attempt at converting the code. I'd have done the same with G-Java, except I prefer C++. He doesn't have a choice in his language. XD
Bahaha... *cries*

> Can't you email them and ask for the source or some other kind of help?
These people are GNUs. They believe in Google and Doxygen, not in helping people.
:froggonk:
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: retep998 on March 23, 2010, 09:06:20 AM
:suicide:

...

...

:dance:
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: IsmAvatar on March 23, 2010, 09:26:20 AM
Quote
(It's a shame, too; she spent a fair deal of time threading that damn output window, and now it's useless...)
It will still have to be threaded, so that waiting for the dll doesn't cause LGM to totally freeze, but at least I won't have to thread output retrieval. That's good, because I never really liked the bugger anyways. Also, now I won't have to figure out how to parse your output, because it will be stored in a more logical structure.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: retep998 on March 23, 2010, 09:27:32 AM
Quote
(It's a shame, too; she spent a fair deal of time threading that damn output window, and now it's useless...)
It will still have to be threaded, so that waiting for the dll doesn't cause LGM to totally freeze, but at least I won't have to thread output retrieval. That's good, because I never really liked the bugger anyways. Also, now I won't have to figure out how to parse your output, because it will be stored in a more logical structure.
See Josh?
Ism likes the new way, so quit complaining and work moar!
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 23, 2010, 12:04:34 PM
Heh, logical structure in Enigma.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: IsmAvatar on March 23, 2010, 12:15:45 PM
I never said the logical structure would be stored in Enigma. In fact, I was implying it would actually be in LGM.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: TGMG on March 23, 2010, 03:57:05 PM
Quote
Ism and I talked for a bit, and now she is working on a set of classes in C and in Java that will allow the two to share resources. Getting a C DLL to call Java functions isn't going to happen, but I can probably communicate some simple instructions by returning an array of them.
What was wrong with getting a C dll to call java functions? I found JNI quite pleasant to use for this. I would have through serializing a LGM java class then loading it again with the class called from c++ would be the best option. Then the c++ code can just call the functions,getters and setters for the java class. Plus Java4Cpp is a great tool for creating header and source functions for a java class. So that the code would be something like:
Quote
java::lang::Integer* i = new java::lang::Integer("10");
      printf("i=%i\n", i->intValue());
Direct access to the functions of the class.
I'm pretty tired tho so could be missing something glaringly obvious :-[

Plus I got my macbook so would love to start on mac port whenever your ready :) Wouldn't mind looking into adding gml functions aswell if that would be ok :)
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 04:09:08 PM
Quote
Heh, logical structure in Enigma.
:trollspray:

Quote
What was wrong with getting a C dll to call java functions? I found JNI quite pleasant to use for this.
I figured that I'd acknowledge that this sounded nice. I don't know much Java though, so all of this is news to me, really. Maybe that will help Ism? :P

Quote
Plus I got my macbook so would love to start on mac port whenever your ready :) Wouldn't mind looking into adding gml functions aswell if that would be ok :)
Sounds great. I'm probably not going to be happy with the documentation until I've got the entire system actually working like I say it should (meaning I want LGM-ENIGMA communication done first), but integrating it should be so simple that really you could just start by creating an empty window and GL context in a separate project, then copy over the code when you're done. There are a few function names the rest of the engine relies on; the beauty is that most of them are the GML ones, so as long as you have a header that defines those, it should integrate simply by copying over some files and possibly moving the important parts of main to an initialize function for which I have not yet settled on a name.

My current two systems, XLib and WinAPI, just leave a header to include. I haven't yet decided if that's an idea worth keeping, but will make that decision once it compiles for a system and I can start making sure my changes don't break anything.

As for input, I just keep an array of keys, but really it's up to you if you intend to implement keyboard_check and the like.

So yeah, if you like, just get a Mac copy of the OpenGL rotating-triangle example and do your best to get input functions working, and any window_ functions you can.

Thanks again.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: IsmAvatar on March 23, 2010, 04:22:23 PM
Quote
What was wrong with getting a C dll to call java functions? I found JNI quite pleasant to use for this.
First off, I tried using JNI just to get Java to call a C dll, but I couldn't for the life of me get it to work. I asked around for help, and got pointed to JNA. I tried it out and it worked wonderfully. However, I wasn't able to figure out how to get C to call any Java functions with it, so I assumed that was pretty much out of the question.

That said, what purpose would it serve if we did have a way for Enigma to call LGM's functions?
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 23, 2010, 05:02:00 PM
More flexibility? You could have it ask for specific things it needs, when it needs them, rather than just shoving it all at Enigma. You could have Enigma hand errors to LGM to show to the user.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 07:15:42 PM
This ^
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: RetroX on March 23, 2010, 08:56:25 PM
Vista isn't compatible with MinGW?  What?  It's compatible with 7.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 23, 2010, 09:31:51 PM
Code::Blocks warns Vista users to install their own copy of MinGW because the one that comes with the release breaks on Vista at times.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: retep998 on March 23, 2010, 09:55:41 PM
Vista isn't compatible with MinGW?  What?  It's compatible with 7.
7>XP>Vista
Vista sucks horribly. 7 fixed many of the issues of vista, so 7 runs more stuff better than vista.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: notachair on March 24, 2010, 01:05:34 AM
Vista isn't compatible with MinGW?  What?  It's compatible with 7.
7>XP>Vista
Vista sucks horribly. 7 fixed many of the issues of vista, so 7 runs more stuff better than vista.
Vista is fine stop being brainwashed by the media
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 24, 2010, 07:27:38 AM
Eh, XP never lost everything from a save form except the size. I can go to save things sometimes and get an empty window border. Have to restart to fix it sometimes, too. That's Vista.

Win7 I hate almost as bad. They fixed the window issues, and they even stole some really nice ideas from Linux. They also stole Mac's dock, which I HATE. Talk about unnavigable. And to make things worse, they have 10x the number of ../ loops as XP. If you click "My Documents," you're taken to a libraries folder that includes "My Documents." It's almost impossible to get to "~/Downloads" because it's not on the start menu, it can't be added to the start menu sidebar where it should have been from square one, and trying to move to ../ from their linked "My Documents" will loop "Libraries/Documents" "Libraries" "Libraries/Documents" "Libraries," just like when "My Documents/.." led to "Desktop" on XP.

I hate their new operating systems so much. Frankly, I kind of like Vista better than 7.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Game_boy on March 24, 2010, 02:31:19 PM
I prefer Vista to 7 too. 7, to me, was just Vista with the Mac dock and Libraries, both of which I don't like (same as Josh).

I have Ubuntu and would prefer to use it instead of Windows, if more programs worked with it (Wine or native, don't mind) and Youtube (Flash) performance wasn't abysmal (which HTML5 would fix had they decided not to make Firefox not work with it, by using h.264).
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: freezway on March 24, 2010, 04:38:26 PM
well flash should get somewhat better with 10.1. I too prefer ubuntu and find mac's dock horrible... well it looks cool, but for all other purposes, horrible. After using it, linux seems much more advanced. APT = amazing. my fav. microsloth swindows version is XP. Vista is too slow.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 24, 2010, 05:03:35 PM
I haven't used 7, but I like the concept of libraries. If they were implemented well I think they could be extremely useful. I would go so far as to suggest a completely tag-based FS, at least for user files. Most people don't care about or don't even understand hierarchies.

You can't blame the HTML 5 standard for Mozilla's choice. It's their choice not to support h.264, and their reasoning is hilarious. Their public reasoning is just over-idealistic and stupid, while any other possible reasons are political.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Game_boy on March 24, 2010, 05:12:33 PM
Rusky, you're wrong about h.264 and Mozilla. They can't get a license, because i) it would cost them several million dollars and ii) that only covers officially compiled versions. So if you wanted to build it yourself, or a Linux distro wanted to do it, or anyone wanted to fork it, it would not be covered. This does not mesh with open source development. Paying a fee for standards compatibility is not something I'd like to see. What if image tags required a $5M license to implement? Would images have been so successful and universal on the web?

Plus h.264 is only royalty-free for end-users on the internet until MPEG-LA say so. They could turn round and demand a fee as soon as the contract comes around for renewal. They'll wait until all internet video uses h.264 then they can legally charge what they like.

No, the web video used has got to be as freely licensed as possible, for practical reasons as well as ideological. Even if Theora can't do that, what about Google's VP3 (which they could open up) or the BBC's Dirac.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 24, 2010, 08:15:10 PM
Most video on the web is already encoded in H.264. H.264 is far superior to Theora anyway. Besides, a free format is no more a guarantee of free-ness than gif was- it's the same situation. The format is released for free, later someone tries to profit on some technology they claim it uses. It's pretty much impossible to design a codec without accidentally infringing someone's patent somewhere.

If you're not distributing the browser in a commercial context, you can use a free decoder like x264 and then there's no licensing problems for the browser. I'm not sure where Mozilla stands here, because I've heard both (they might be considered commercial because of Google sponsorship, in which case it falls under "political"- they claim to be all open and stuff, why not become non-commercial?) Then even if MPEG-LA tried to charge users or distributors, I doubt it would work. See what happened with gif- Unisys pretty much failed.

Basically, Mozilla should support H.264, at least where it's already on the computer, which is all Windows and Mac machines. They do the same thing with Flash, so they have no argument on ideological grounds. That way there is no possibility of license problems for them, and if we run into another gif-like situation, distributors will have a real reason to transcode all their video to something else. It's not the best situation, but the alternatives are no better. At least with MPEG-LA we know who might claim patent infringement.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: notachair on March 25, 2010, 12:57:01 AM
Eh, XP never lost everything from a save form except the size. I can go to save things sometimes and get an empty window border. Have to restart to fix it sometimes, too. That's Vista.

Win7 I hate almost as bad. They fixed the window issues, and they even stole some really nice ideas from Linux. They also stole Mac's dock, which I HATE. Talk about unnavigable. And to make things worse, they have 10x the number of ../ loops as XP. If you click "My Documents," you're taken to a libraries folder that includes "My Documents." It's almost impossible to get to "~/Downloads" because it's not on the start menu, it can't be added to the start menu sidebar where it should have been from square one, and trying to move to ../ from their linked "My Documents" will loop "Libraries/Documents" "Libraries" "Libraries/Documents" "Libraries," just like when "My Documents/.." led to "Desktop" on XP.

I hate their new operating systems so much. Frankly, I kind of like Vista better than 7.

Windows 7 didn't steal from Mac's dock, it's fundamentally different

And why would you hate a company's products for using things from something else, that's like hating HTC Sense, Android, Palm webOS, etc for implementing multitouch which Apple holds a patent on

Although I do agree that libraries is a pos
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 25, 2010, 05:12:52 AM
I don't hate them for taking the idea, I hate them for taking the idea badly.

I don't see how it's different; I've used both operating systems. Windows' is slightly more functional than Mac's, but it inherits everything I don't like about the dock, namely ambiguity: Did I mean to open the current FireFox, or launch a new instance?

Also, after extended use, I find the half-ass-stolen feature to maximize your window when dragged to a certain location on the screen REALLY annoying. GNOME's was nice because it allowed you to drag a maximized window out of the way, and only re-maximized it if you dragged it back before letting go. Now every time I need to look at a lower window, I have to be careful not to drag it to the top. It's an easy habit to get into, really, it's just that they're supposed to be catering to veterans as well.

Oh, and did I mention that as I said a few years ago (and was duly flamed by someone, probably Rusky), they have finally done away with "File | Edit | View | History" in all their programs. This is funny because I was reading about the same time I started bitching this HUGE writeup on how consistency is what makes Windows so friendly, and they devoted large chunks of that document to the very menu they have now hidden. That menu was the only reason I could put up with programs, and now I need alt- to get to it. <_<
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: retep998 on March 25, 2010, 10:12:34 AM
I assume I can do all this in Windows 7, too. Correct?

Are you sure that you can't re-enable that menu again?

Please say yes...

Yes.

You can re-enable it. There's a setting for it. Alt>View>Toolbars>Menu Bar

I think you can. I've never been too disturbed with that feature, but I'm certain I saw a setting for disabling those things.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Micah on March 25, 2010, 11:34:18 AM
I don't see how it's different; I've used both operating systems. Windows' is slightly more functional than Mac's, but it inherits everything I don't like about the dock, namely ambiguity: Did I mean to open the current FireFox, or launch a new instance?
First of all, I'm quite sure that you can disable that functionality in Windows 7.

Second of all, what you claim is an "ambiguity" is actually not ambiguous at all. Mac's windowing system is built on a different idea from Windows's and Linux's. Every application is pretty much a maximized MDI with a transparent background. You don't ever "launch a new instance". You start up the program or you make a new window. Whether you like this depends on taste, but I find it a lot nicer than Windows's and Linux's paradigm, and it's probably more user-friendly.

So it doesn't inherit ambiguity. It inherited a feature from Mac that was part of a coherent whole and shoved it onto a different paradigm, introducing that ambiguity. (Kind of like what you do when you try to combine GM and C++.)

Oh, and did I mention that as I said a few years ago (and was duly flamed by someone, probably Rusky), they have finally done away with "File | Edit | View | History" in all their programs. This is funny because I was reading about the same time I started bitching this HUGE writeup on how consistency is what makes Windows so friendly, and they devoted large chunks of that document to the very menu they have now hidden. That menu was the only reason I could put up with programs, and now I need alt- to get to it. <_<
I can't quite understand what you're saying with the extremely poorly written second half of that paragraph, but it sounds like you're saying that the ribbon interface makes things inconsistent. Actually, I would say that the ribbon interface makes things more consistent and easy to find than the old drop-down menu + toolbars paradigm, and trying to switch back to it is a silly idea.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Game_boy on March 25, 2010, 11:36:32 AM
@Rusky

So you mean display h.264 video in the browser with the existing codec on Win/Mac machines? I agree that would solve the licensing, but isn't the point of <video> to avoid relying on an external and proprietary plugin for media (as Flash is now)? If I understand you, you want to replace the Flash plugin with some kind of Windows Media plugin.

MPEG-LA's terms do not care whether Mozilla is commercial or not. They specify that royalties are payable for any project above a certain number of users, which Mozilla and probably a lot of semi-forks like Linux FF versions are definitely above. What's more, if the version of FF you use hasn't had the fee paid on it then end users are liable for all damages.

Even shipping free software with x264 is liable. Using the copy of x264 on the machine is not because MS and Apple have already paid up and included it in the cost of the OS, but I think that subverts the purpose of <video> per above.

I've seen arguments either way on the quality of h.264 v. Theora. h.264 is probably more practical for now, but Theora will improve which h.264's licensing never will.






Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: The 11th plague of Egypt on March 25, 2010, 11:45:11 AM
Wow. I didn't think Windows 7 was this bad.

I have Vista at home, and I've changed the theme to the efficient Windows 98 style, instead of the Windows Aero theme, to make everything go faster. I've disabled many, many visual effects. I run CCleaner, MyDefrag, Mz Ram Booster, Eusing Registry Cleaner, and I close all unnnecessary processes using batch at each startup. I have as few windows open as possible. I've removed the dock to the right, and the desktop background as well. I've done every single thing to make sure my computer runs Windows Vista as efficiently as possible, but I do have a screen resolution of 1440*900, which is the only exception.

I assume I can do all this in Windows 7, too. Correct?
Hum, no. You can't use the classic Start menu, for instance.
I had a 98ed vista too, and I liked it, but Win 7 is ok, you can distinguish an open program from its icon
because if you mouse over an opened program's icon, it will change color.

Just one thing, I miss the button to go to the parent directory!

BTW you can disable unused processes once and for all using the services.msc configuration tool.
However, the performance increase in modern pcs is minimum.
If you mean other programs running at startup, CCleaner has a tool to disable them.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 25, 2010, 09:39:11 PM
> Just one thing, I miss the button to go to the parent directory!
I kinda miss that too. But since they at least mimicked GNOME's beautiful button-based address bar, I won't complain about that.

> First of all, I'm quite sure that you can disable that functionality in Windows 7.
I'd hope so. Fortunately, it's my mother's computer, so I don't have to worry about that.

> Second of all, what you claim is an "ambiguity" is actually not ambiguous at all. Mac's windowing system...
Yes, yes. But on XP and Vista, I knew what I was getting intuitively when I clicked a button. On Mac and 7, I'm still not sure what I'll get when I click things. I despise having to go to File->New Window in things, though it is nice that Mac does simulate an MDI and bring -all- the Windows to front when you click the icon, instead of making you select one like 7. Also, alt-tab has been pain-in-the-assified on 7.

> So it doesn't inherit ambiguity. It inherited a feature from Mac that was part of a coherent whole and shoved it onto a different paradigm, introducing that ambiguity. (Kind of like what you do when you try to combine GM and C++.)

:troll:

> I can't quite understand what you're saying with the extremely poorly written ... I would say that the ribbon interface makes things more consistent and easy to find than the old drop-down menu + toolbars paradigm, and trying to switch back to it is a silly idea.
You just didn't stare at it long enough. Furthermore, if they actually had enough software that I was still forced to use in that shitty selection of theirs, it would seem more fitting for them all to have ribbons. My first thought when I saw Paint was that they were finally catching other programs up with Word. Problem is, 95% of the programs I use stick with the "File | Edit..." style menus. Not to mention that catching others up with Word isn't necessarily a good thing; Word often makes it fuck-impossible to find anything; I never had that problem before. At least Paint doesn't have enough features to really get lost in it. One nice thing about the ribbons was being easily extended as you work, so it doesn't have to show all that shit at once. Of course, try finding that shit if you need it when the program doesn't know you do...

Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: notachair on March 26, 2010, 01:06:14 AM
Quote
Just one thing, I miss the button to go to the parent directory!
backspace

also, hi josh:
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: retep998 on March 26, 2010, 08:05:37 AM
also, hi josh:
Yup, that's one of the very first things I did when I got my new comp.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 26, 2010, 09:17:32 AM
Ribbon in Word is actually much easier to find things with. An extremely common experience: "Oh, that's new! ... Wait, that was in 03?"

On h.264: There would be a proprietary plugin of sorts, but it would be much better than the old WM plugin. You can use an existing codec and keep the rest of the tag in the browser. Of course it would be a pain on Linux where you don't have the codec, but Linux is a very small percentage of end users and I think people that care enough to try Linux care enough to download a codec.

Theora may improve, but there's still the submarine patent problem, same as gif. It may even get worse as they improve it. With h.264, you know who owns the patents and they seem inclined to let people use the codec. Of course that's not an ideal situation, but it's better than Theora. The least Firefox can do is support h.264 externally for now so that <video> survives. As it is, they're completely splitting the market and basically killing the tag.

Hopefully if MPEG-LA starts charging distributors for h.264 there will be a better codec available. I believe that's the only way to get people to switch- have a better codec available and then make h.264 cost to distribute.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Josh @ Dreamland on March 26, 2010, 09:45:35 AM
> backspace
Functions like the "Back" button in Vista. Didn't try since.

>"Oh, that's new! ... Wait, that was in 03?"
It's been the opposite for me. I was very used to the old layout.
Title: Re: Another quickie
Post by: Rusky on March 26, 2010, 01:56:21 PM
I was used to the old layout, but it was harder to see the more advanced features. It took me forever to realize the difference between font and paragraph formatting, while in 07 they're separated for you. It would be nice if they wouldn't make contextual controls invisible, but otherwise it's very easy to find things.