World: r3wp

Did anyone see the Cinema 2.0 stuff from ATI? That's pretty amazing. 
It's basically voxel graphics with raytracing. It looks almost as 
good as prerendered graphics, but it's fully realtime.

Article posted to ML by Carley Simon. I can see many of Carl's visions 
there. Might be good overal target for R3.


 - http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/future_of_the_desktop.php
 - discusses Web3.0

ECMAScript disharmony = http://ncannasse.free.fr/?p=82

http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2008/08/ru-roh-adobe-screwed-by-ecmascript.html

If you look at the postings by the actual people involved in the 
discussion, you will realize that there is no disharmony now, and 
Adobe is not screwed - they were involved in this decision and agreed 
to it.

Ah, flame/ad bait journalism

Agreed to decision, that MS is not following their proposed standard:) 
I don't mind much.. I'm quite like Nicolas, I can use Rebol to create 
the Adobe's VM bytecode:)

I just can see another room of hell in possible incompatibilities 
between IE and other browsers in near future.

I'm so tempted to just ignore IE as a developer. My latest site fails 
only in IE. If they don't want to play ball in standardization, then 
screw them. I'm just wondering if it would be so bad if all developers 
just ignored IE.

Progressive Enhancement.  Web Sites don't need to fail...

It's much easier to ignore IE when you don't have to support it.

http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

Good stuff, thanks

Doesn't seem to have been posted yet, and it's an important article:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10002150-92.html

my lcd screen for my computer is dead only after 1 year of use. Syntoma 
when i turn it on the power led indication flash during 5 to 10 minutes 
before the screen lights and became stable. this pumping effect seems 
to be current in the new generation of LCD screen and seems to be 
related to the defective of chimicals condensator next to the alimentation 
block .... having to spend 130 euros  in a new screen only becaue 
two condensators of 0.60 euro are deficient that really piss me off

most brand name LCD screens come with 3 year warranties.

Even then, we have consumer protection here ... so even if it dies 
after the warranty period, it can be argued that to die after 1 years 
use indicates that it was not for fit for the purpose for which it 
was sold.

unfortunatly that a no brand "you are just fucked up" lcd screen 
...

well dead for dead i can affort a trip to my favorite electronics 
shop and by some condensator and remplace them

if it works I will earn 130  euros  ^^

Auction sites often have cheap LCD screens

Dell dumps their excess stock on auction sites here.

I will replace the  condensators and if it works  good for me if 
it doesn't well it doesn't ...

condensors

condom soars ?

muaaaaawhaaaaaaaahahahaha

how many babies do you have?

none ...

that's a pity those condensors .... the whole screen is new and working 
well apart the pump efect on starting

once the condensors are charged if I turn on/off the screen it worst 
without problem

shadwolf, is "Syntoma" the brand of the LCD monitor ?

Having to wait 5 - 10 minutes before seeing a picture would be a 
waste of time.
Are you sure you cannot get your supplier to replace it ?

If you can fix it, that is good, but you have not earned any money. 
You will have lost both money and time.

That's what happens with no-name stuff

I used to have a computer store and I quickly noticed that many products 
just look like the products they're supposed to be, but really aren't

Case in point: it may look like a display, but if it doesn't display 
a picture, it really isn't

The most interesting example were the floppy disks that were sold 
everywhere at the end of the era of floppy disks. People didn't want 
to spend anything on them any more, so you could store files on them 
and quite consistently, a month later they would be gone

It was actually quite hard to find good ones. People get what they 
deserve

I think some of my original Amiga floppies still work, but the last 
PC floppies I bought were utter crap.

Kaj, "People get what they deserve" - that seems a rather odd conclusion 
to me.

.   anton no Syntoma = symptom

tomorow i'mgoing to disassembly the monitor and replace the condensors 
near the transformer

Anton, why odd? If people want the cheapest, they get what looks 
cheapest at that moment. It may just not be cheapest in the long 
run

If you consider quality in the long run, you usually get quality 
in the long run

hum but the problem is productivity and rentability are against quality...

now in day the pity is that they sell you crap for price of gold 
...

if most of the lcd monitors crafters offer a 3 year waranty that's 
because they are aware their monitor will fail from lacks of fiability 
in their components. Doing fast and lot of monney implicates they 
have to cut cost on every thing...

so instead of putting in the lcd monitors chimical  condensors of 
25 V 1000 µF they put 16 V 1000 µF instead of redunding them they 
just put the just the simple amount of condensors. Instead of putting 
quality condensors wich cost 0.60 cts they put low quality condensors 
at 0.20 cts ... then because you have no redundency on the power 
supply  you don't have backup in the main power supply  and if one 
of the condensors is dead you just have to throw it to junk ....

Kaj, I would agree that the tendency to buy the cheaper of otherwise 
identical-looking items is something that tends to drive the market 
quality downwards, but I don't agree that that is what "people" deserve.

I could imagine the situation this way; on introduction to the market, 
floppy disk manufacturers were fewer, and prices were higher, so 
the competition was about quality. Later, more manufacturers entered 
the market and caused a price war. Consumers became confused and 
couldn't distinguish brands by quality, so they chose the cheaper 
"alternatives". I could say, then, that the manufacturers which chose 
to lower the quality of their products in order to undercut their 
competition were slowly degrading the public's idea of the quality 
of a floppy disk. Essentially lying, by taking advantage of trust 
in all the confusion.

[Disclaimer: The above is just an alternative explanation. I haven't 
studied the actual history of floppy disks at all, and I never ran 
a computer store.]

I think many manufacturers choose to lower the quality of their products, 
because they learn how to produce an almost identical product at 
a lower cost. Philips VCRs went from being innovative and high quality 
in the 80s and early 90s and slowly became of poorer and poorer quality 
over the years until they became as unreliable as the cheapest crap 
you could find. But I bet it would cost about 1/10 to produce that 
crap VCR than the old high quality one. Finetuning a production line 
down to the last dime is a science in itself and you can bet they 
take advantage of it.