Ah ... so Apple plans to kill Flash with HTML5

[AwayEam]

I'm not defending IE6, just saying that the png thing isn't a show-stopper in most cases. I'm sure there are times when is a real limitation and we shouldn't have to do this crap anyway, but here we are...

 

HEY BRO

 

You're right, but as you've probably guessed, PNG alpha channels aren't the only reason I hate IE6. While we're on the topic, I love how Google Maps automatically applies the DXImageTransform hack to PNGs, but Microsoft's annoyingly-named Bing Maps doesn't

 

"Bing Maps"... I guess "Virtual Earth" didn't sound embarrassing enough at meetings with management :mad:

 

I'm a huge fan of the .NET Framework (after 2.0 at least) but everything else Microsoft has done recently has been totally disappointing. I can't tell you how frustrating it was when I had to switch from SQL Server 2005 to the much crashier PostgreSQL just because SQL Server didn't seem to like our data anymore.

 

Agree about the new features. I think there are, and will be, plenty of developer reactions along the lines of "Yay, we can now do exactly the same things we could do before. Why did we do this again?". I'm not quite sure who thought this collaborative approach would work in the first place. I doubt Apple, Microsoft, Google, Sun etc would agree on what day of the week it is (as in - they would actively choose to disagree), let alone future standards for the web. Proprietry platforms aren't great and all but at least a company can get something out the gate, usable and supported, in a reasonable timeframe.

 

Totally agree with this.

 

It's much easier to make a widely-used proprietary technology an open standard than it is to get a new open standard adopted by widely-used proprietary platforms.

 

Not to mention that new open standards are always subject to a certain level of interpretation by the companies that adopt them (like SQL).

[eventArgs]

 

I'm a huge fan of the .NET Framework (after 2.0 at least) but everything else Microsoft has done recently has been totally disappointing. I can't tell you how frustrating it was when I had to switch from SQL Server 2005 to the much crashier PostgreSQL just because SQL Server didn't seem to like our data anymore.

 

Yeah I like .Net. Although I'd like it considerably less if I couldn't use SQL Server databases...

[blue2blue]

I don't think this is a tech-only problem. Journalists report to an audience of outsiders (ie mainstream news readers) from outside the industry. The reader feels informed and neither the reader nor the journalist have to think too hard. Everybody is comfortably ignorant. Being in the industry (tech or other) means you have to look harder for meaningful insight.

Yeah... but I can't get my clients to read The Register.

 

It's a joke.

[AwayEam]

My disdain for the lack of technical grasp, dearth of logic, and the desperate crowd-think mentality in the tech press zone is based on two and a half decades of reading these bozos. Still, I can't stop. Just often enough... I actually get some meaningful news, a strategic view of various business entities' machinations, and with painful infrequency, some real insight into a tech issue or two. But most of them are vapid, sycophantic tech-wannabes, terrified of being left behind by reporting of the latest trend.

 

HEY BRO2BRO

 

Two and a half decades?! You've got some intestinal fortitude. Those rags are nothing but regurgitated press releases.

 

I read a couple blogs to keep up with things, but even that can be a little too much -- especially when the goofball in that first link starts writing like he knows the first thing about cryptography. Talk about the blind leading the blind...

 

The only tech "literature" I actually enjoyed was the BileBlog, and it's dead

[offramp]

 

Well, it is an attractive manner of presenting photos. I just don't have the time or inclination to try and figure out another alternative, especially right now, so I'm using the Flash I was given by Patrick/AudioIcon, and am going to divvy it up into smaller galleries so it loads faster. At this point, I really don't have much other choice.

 

 

Every time I start to think about doing mine as a Flash site, I think about the Greek chorus out here that make that idea sound about as appealing as a three-day-old taco. Then, I also think 'why do I need Flash? For what? Is there something I need to accomplish with it that I can't do any other way?' Then I get all confused. Then I make myself a sandwich.

 

For now, I use a nifty online service that has you upload your Photoshop files, where they slice and dice and make thousands and thousands of Julienne fries and send your files back as a webpage. I'm not real thrilled with the way it loads, but otherwise it gave me sighs of relief when I tried it.

[Cry Logic]

 

"....But an advantage of Flash over something like Shadowbox is that, with Flash, you can prevent people from easily rt-click copying/downloading your image. (They can still do a screen capture, of course...."

 

 

The Snipping Tool that comes with Win 7 has made it ridiculously easy to grab images from the screen.

So all the old methods like using Flash, preventing right click with JavaScript,

or covering the image with a transparent gif (spaceball.gif on Flickr) are useless now.

[AwayEam]

 

The Snipping Tool that comes with Win 7 has made it ridiculously easy to grab images from the screen. So all the old methods like using Flash, preventing right click with JavaScript, or covering the image with a transparent gif (spaceball.gif on Flickr) are useless now.

 

 

HEY BRO

 

As opposed to their utility before when you had to hit print-screen. Or pull the image out of the browser cache. Or disable javascript. Or use Firebug to pull the image out of the page DOM. Even Flash files can be decompiled.

 

Those methods have always failed and always will fail for the same reason DRM will: If you display digital content on hardware controlled by the user, that user will be able to make a copy of the content.

[gdoubleyou]

My wife used to work for Adobe, but was pushed out in the last Aldus ( Pagemaker, Freehand) Purge.

 

I don't do much web development nowadays, so any solution that would keep my money out of Adobe's pockets would be preferred.

 

[Jeff da Weasel]

On a number of sites, I use the popular javascript-driven Shadowbox lightbox utility.

 

Wanna hear a bummer story? I had an entire site go tits-up due to a Shadowbox implementation that was unsuccessfully trying to get along with a Flash-based slideshow on the same page. I ended up having to write a much less elegant-looking Javascript void script for some pop-ups that were required. It was only a problem with IE (both 6 and 7)... Firefox, Safari, and Chrome were fine with it. Of course, I kind of have to make sure my {censored} works with IE.

 

Hadn't had any trouble with Shadowbox before, to the point where I couldn't assume it was the culprit and had to troubleshoot the whole thing, removing one component at a time. Yanked Shadowbox, and everything was fine again. Those are the times where I'd like to switch careers over to ditch digging or something else where you always know the likely results of your actions.

 

Anyway, carry on...

[Cry Logic]

 

HEY BRO As opposed to their utility before when you had to hit print-screen. Or pull the image out of the browser cache. Or disable javascript. Or use Firebug to pull the image out of the page DOM. Even Flash files can be decompiled. Those methods have always failed and always will fail for the same reason DRM will: If you display digital content on hardware controlled by the user, that user will be able to make a copy of the content.

 

 

Yeah .. I guess my point with the Snipping Tool is

now it's easy for anybody to grab any part of the screen.

You don't have to do those things you mention above which

are a bit too geeky for the average person.

[rasputin1963]

I just hate the whole suite of ADOBE sub-progs that are installed when all you want is PHOTOSHOP or ILLUSTRATOR. BRIDGE, AIR, and god-knows-what-else.

 

That whole sub-suite of {censored} positively COMMANDEERS your whole computer, choking it, and each new release (CS2, CS3, CS4) installs yet more subsidiary programs.

 

Supposedly the peripheral proggies are made to streamline the whole workflow experience... But I don't know any Web person who uses all that extra stuff.... more trouble than it's worth.

[eventArgs]

 

I just hate the whole suite of ADOBE sub-progs that are installed when all you want is PHOTOSHOP or ILLUSTRATOR. BRIDGE, AIR , and god-knows-what-else. That whole sub-suite of {censored} positively COMMANDEERS your whole computer, choking it, and each new release (CS2, CS3, CS4) installs yet more subsidiary programs. Supposedly the peripheral proggies are made to streamline the whole workflow experience... But I don't know any Web person who uses all that extra stuff.... more trouble than it's worth.

 

Yeah I use Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, InDesign, Flash and none of the other junk that's installed.

 

CS4 Design Premium has 7 apps according to the box but there are 17 Adobe apps in my Start menu.