I Hate Firefox
-
@boomzilla said:
I don't really disagree with anything you've said here, but look out, because there are some serious adblockerists on this forum.
Yeah, I've seen it. Really morbs? Wishing nut cancer on someone?
So my position for now that will satisfy no one: I can see morbs' position about taking content without paying for it by not downloading the ads. That makes sense. But if I download the ad, I'm free to decide whether I want to actually render it on screen or not. If it's a pay-per-click ad, I'm not going to click it anyway, so the advertiser loses nothing. If it's a pay-per-download ad, then I've downloaded it (I received the ad in my newspaper, or my mailbox, whatever) and I choose not to view it. I haven't harmed the content provider -- they delivered it -- and I chose to send it straight to the shredder. Perfect parallel to the physical world. If anyone disagrees with these views, piss off.
-
I think what Morbius is getting at is that you need to view his/her content exactly as s/he created it. That means that you need to do the following:
- Make sure you are using the exact same browser, with all the same plugins
- Use the same OS, with all the same fonts
- Use the exact same computer setup, right from the keyboard and mouse, to the case and monitor (you have to see it exactly as Morbuis sees it after all)
- Get corrective eye surgery to match your eyesight so his/hers exactly. Tough luck if you lose a bit of vision
- Ensure you have exactly the same mobility functions as him/her (if you don't know how to do this you must be an asshole)
- Make sure your mental disability level is the same, so if s/he has dyslexia then you need to have the same amount too, etc
Of course, we don't all live in Morbius' world, and a good thing too, so we all experience things in different ways. Some people are more distracted by ads than others, some people use browsers that can't get those adverts (try getting Flash ads to work on a Braille browser, I dare you) and some people use browsers that intentionally block those ads. I'm glad we don't live in Morbius' world, where we all have to do everything exactly the same.As far as I'm concerned, if anyone doesn't like it that someone uses an ad blocker, if they're really bothered, then they can find a way to stop that person from viewing the content. And good luck finding a way that doesn't piss off the people who weren't using ad blockers. Until then, Morbius and his/her ilk can piss off and stop whining, we aren't all the same.
-
@dhromed said:
@TimeBandit said:
slashdot
What's that?
Please send back your Geek card since your subscription just been revoked :p
http://slashdot.org
-
@TimeBandit said:
@dhromed said:
@TimeBandit said:
slashdot
What's that?
Please send back your Geek card since your subscription just been revoked :p
http://slashdot.org
Please make a package containing your "I Haven't Been Trolled" card, and your "I Get Every Joke I See" membership. Also, send me $20 and a cooked turkey.
-
@TimeBandit said:
@dhromed said:
@TimeBandit said:
Please send back your Geek card since your subscription just been revoked :pslashdot
What's that?
TimeBandit
Not Ranked
Joined on 2006/11/15
Posts 6While you may have joined just over 5 years ago, you clearly haven't been reading the forums that frequently.
-
@TimeBandit said:
@dhromed said:
@TimeBandit said:
slashdot
What's that?
Please send back your Geek card since your subscription just been revoked :p
While I do have a vague idea of what slashdot.org is I have never visited it and nothing said in this forum (which I totally trust because you guys would never lead somebody astray) has provided a reason for me to read it. If you really think thats geekness is measured by that site then you really belong in slashdot, not here.
-
@PJH said:
@morbiuswilters said:
For me, that is. I mean, I guess Firefox is supposed to have some sort of isolation for plugins but I've never seen Flash die and Firefox continue working. I don't even know what that would look like--I know in Chrome you get the "dead puzzle piece" placeholders.
I've had Flash die fairly regularly without taking Firefox down with it - thing is if it crashes in one tab, it crashes in all tabs.
You get a similar screen to Chrome:
That is a sad Lego, not a sad puzzle piece.
-
@serguey123 said:
@TimeBandit said:
@dhromed said:
@TimeBandit said:
slashdot
What's that?
Please send back your Geek card since your subscription just been revoked :p
While I do have a vague idea of what slashdot.org is I have never visited it and nothing said in this forum (which I totally trust because you guys would never lead somebody astray) has provided a reason for me to read it. If you really think thats geekness is measured by that site then you really belong in slashdot, not here.
Slashdot is a depressing hellhole where every member is stupid and every opinion retarded. So like this site without me. :D
-
-
@serguey123 said:
@morbiuswilters said:
like this site without me
Where do I sign for this slashdot site?
Ingrate.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
That is a sad Lego, not a sad puzzle piece.
Hence my use of the phrase 'a similar' instead of 'the same' in the sentence
@PJH said:You get a similar screen to Chrome:
Phrase highlighted for those that missed it the first time. HTH, HAND.
-
@PJH said:
@morbiuswilters said:
That is a sad Lego, not a sad puzzle piece.
Hence my use of the phrase 'a similar' instead of 'the same' in the sentence
@PJH said:You get a similar screen to Chrome:
Phrase highlighted for those that missed it the first time. HTH, HAND.I didn't mean to imply you'd said otherwise. Scarlet said Firefox gave the same thing as Chrome. I missed dhromed's explanation that followed.
-
@mrsparkyman said:
@nonpartisan said:
@Shagen said:
Heathen.@nonpartisan said:
@dhromed said:
Let's push this thread to 4 pages, alright?
It's been a month since the last religion debate . . .
(Before anyone responds: kidding!!)
Everybody knows that the best browser is Emacs.
I use Firefox and IE cuz I have to at work. Personal browsing I use wget.
Blasphemer.
The only right way is to curl everything and grep it later.
I presume by "everything" you mean just the internet. Do you have the curl part set up as a cron job, or do you do it manually when you feel like it? I reckon you are really on to something here. You could use Ubuntu One to store curl's output, and that way you could grep from anywhere!
-
@Shagen said:
@mrsparkyman said:
@nonpartisan said:
@Shagen said:
@nonpartisan said:
@dhromed said:
Let's push this thread to 4 pages, alright?
It's been a month since the last religion debate . . .
(Before anyone responds: kidding!!)
Everybody knows that the best browser is Emacs.
Heathen.
I use Firefox and IE cuz I have to at work. Personal browsing I use wget.Blasphemer.
The only right way is to curl everything and grep it later.
I presume by "everything" you mean just the internet. Do you have the curl part set up as a cron job, or do you do it manually when you feel like it? I reckon you are really on to something here. You could use Ubuntu One to store curl's output, and that way you could grep from anywhere!
You grepplers and your Perfect-perfects the only way is to video your desktop then option tt at prompt#1 enter enter xz at prompt #2. Will join your video. Random playback of video snips to read your forums press zkk to scroll who wouldn't want this? Forget cruel Jobs and his ubuntu OnePad won't run this tool they need to get A PC plenty in a landslide. This is the only tool. You will ever need. It keeps getting on betterer and betterer no tool can touch this my swimpies leave em in the dust for sure yessir.
-
-
-
@Cassidy said:
You grepplers and your Perfect-perfects the only way is to video your desktop then option tt at prompt#1 enter enter xz at prompt #2. Will join your video. Random playback of video snips to read your forums press zkk to scroll who wouldn't want this? Forget cruel Jobs and his ubuntu OnePad won't run this tool they need to get A PC plenty in a landslide. This is the only tool. You will ever need. It keeps getting on betterer and betterer no tool can touch this my swimpies leave em in the dust for sure yessir.
Oh fuck that shit. Keep it up and I'll be wishing nut cancer on you.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@Severity One said:
AdBlock Plus.
Asshole.
@morbiuswilters said:
@Severity One said:
Colourful tabs
I don't even..
@morbiuswilters said:
@Severity One said:
IE tab
@morbiuswilters said:
@Severity One said:
Source viewer tab, View source chart, and other stuff to dive deep into web pages
Chrome has better developer tools than Firefox, I would say.
I agree wholeheartedly, and there's a Firebug port which adds some missing features.
NEXT!
-
@dhromed said:
@morbiuswilters said:
I missed dhromed
dawwww :3
Simply poor aiming, dear chap.
@dhromed said:
For a moment, I thought you actually were... shudder
No, no, no.. he's still stuck over yonderthread, espousing the virtues of a VB5-built file indexing utility that randomly does-- oh, what the hell, you know what he's like.
@dtech said:
IE Tab
Is there a point to this? I thought it was just IE's rendering engine in a FF tab (so doesn't work on systems without IE installed).
-
@Cassidy said:
@dtech said:
IE Tab
Is there a point to this? I thought it was just IE's rendering engine in a FF tab (so doesn't work on systems without IE installed).
You're right, it embeds ie just like (or at least in a similar manner) explorer used to.
Not doing so would mean they have to practically duplicate ie and who knows what unknown quirks there are in there that you don't and will never see whilst sites still rely on them without knowing that they do, or other quirks that are a result of another one and won't work without the parent one.
That would be more trouble than it's worth, so i think it's a sensible choice.
-
@roelforg said:
@Cassidy said:
@dtech said:
IE Tab
Is there a point to this? I thought it was just IE's rendering engine in a FF tab (so doesn't work on systems without IE installed).
You're right, it embeds ie just like (or at least in a similar manner) explorer used to.
Not doing so would mean they have to practically duplicate ie and who knows what unknown quirks there are in there that you don't and will never see whilst sites still rely on them without knowing that they do, or other quirks that are a result of another one and won't work without the parent one.
That would be more trouble than it's worth, so i think it's a sensible choice.I don't understand why you'd ever want to embed IE in Firefox. You have IE already. What's wrong with just launching IE? It seems like the silliest extension anyone could think of.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
I don't understand why you'd ever want to embed IE in Firefox. You have IE already. What's wrong with just launching IE? It seems like the silliest extension anyone could think of.
It made more sense in the IE6 days, when IE didn't have tabs. At this point, I suppose you can avoid having multiple windows open to be able to use FF and IE at the same time.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
I don't understand why you'd ever want to embed IE in Firefox. You have IE already. What's wrong with just launching IE? It seems like the silliest extension anyone could think of.
Because IE is bloatware, obv.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
I don't understand why you'd ever want to embed IE in Firefox.
I think the reasoning was to be able to use sites that have things like ActiveX within Firefox without having to open a separate instance of IE.
-
@PJH said:
@morbiuswilters said:
I don't understand why you'd ever want to embed IE in Firefox.
I think the reasoning was to be able to use sites that have things like ActiveX within Firefox without having to open a separate instance of IE.Yeah, but it's just running IE inside of Firefox? Is window management such an obscure process that people have to write extensions to avoid having another window open?
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Yeah, but it's just running IE inside of Firefox? Is window management such an obscure process that people have to write extensions to avoid having another window open?
Yep, but at least you didn't have to look at IE's ugly mug. Also, again, it could reduce status bar clutter. Even if you only used IE tabs, you could get tabbed browsing and soothe your OCD regarding the amount of crap in the task bar at the same time.
Also, IIRC, you could right click on a link in FF and select Open in IE Tab (or whatever). ISTR a similar addon that would open a link in "normal" IE. That was definitely useful when I had to go somewhere that was IE only...especially certain intranet pages..
-
@boomzilla said:
Also, IIRC, you could right click on a link in FF and select Open in IE Tab (or whatever). ISTR a similar addon that would open a link in "normal" IE. That was definitely useful when I had to go somewhere that was IE only...especially certain intranet pages..
Our DNS/DHCP interface has a server-side bug that prevents it from being useful in Firefox. (It worked up to about 3.6.15 or so, then some time after that certain key pages just started coming back empty; I presume it's looking at the User-Agent, but I don't know for sure.) Chrome just flat out doesn't render it right at all. IE is the only usable browser right now. There's a bug filed with the company, but so far no love. Which means I have to go through Citrix to do DNS and DHCP functions via IE, as I don't have it running in Wine under Linux.
-
@nonpartisan said:
Our DNS/DHCP interface has a server-side bug that prevents it from being useful in Firefox. (It worked up to about 3.6.15 or so, then some time after that certain key pages just started coming back empty; I presume it's looking at the User-Agent, but I don't know for sure.) Chrome just flat out doesn't render it right at all. IE is the only usable browser right now. There's a bug filed with the company, but so far no love. Which means I have to go through Citrix to do DNS and DHCP functions via IE, as I don't have it running in Wine under Linux.
http://www.tatanka.com.br/ It's not ideal for prolonged use (tends to leak memory) but is fine for in-and-out jobs.
-
I understand the extreme love for Google Chrome right now, especially considering it's my browser of choice..
Here's something it seems like no one knows though..
If you're only running Google Chrome, then it works great.
The better computer you have, the better Google Chrome works.The longer you have Google Chrome open regardless of how many tabs, the worse your computer becomes.
If you leave google chrome open for too long, especially with other programs open as well, your computer constantly becomes more and more bogged down until you close it.
This, is a REAL memory leak..
Google Chrome has the worst memory leak I've ever seen, it's just very well masked.
It's also something that I don't think they can fix unless they rewrite the ENTIRE program..If you don't run into problems with this you're not leaving chrome open very long, you have one hell of a computer, or you're doing nothing other than browsing the internet.
It's possible to self-fix this, it's just annoying.
You have two main options:- Restart the browser every 10-15 minutes to release the memory.
- Clear your browser history every 5 minutes (I'd love some way for this to happen automatically every 5 minutes...)
or - Run in Incognito 24/7..........................
Google Chrome when opened long enough can eat so much memory you will crash your PC.
Depending on your PC and how many tabs you have open this will certainly take a long time, however that's when it reaches rock bottom.I love google chrome, I hate this problem.
-
@mdg said:
You have two main options:
- Restart the browser every 10-15 minutes to release the memory.
- Clear your browser history every 5 minutes (I'd love some way for this to happen automatically every 5 minutes...)
or - Run in Incognito 24/7
That's three main options. Also, I don't believe you; every 10-15 minutes? Chrome is not memory efficient but it doesn't have to be restarted every 10-15 minutes unless there is something seriously wrong with your computer. I frequently leave it up for weeks on end with dozens of tabs and it does not need restarting. My machine is pretty good but I've only got 8GB of memory. My current instance of Chrome has 32 tabs open and has been running for 2 days straight and is consuming 2GB of memory.
Coincidentally, Firefox just crashed again. I wasn't even actively using it, just had a single tab open to Gmail. After restarting it with that single tab it's already using 200MB of memory. 200MB for a single tab.. I know memory is cheap but that's not even trying.
-
That's true that is 3 O:
I'm not exactly asking to be believed, I'm explaining to you a problem with Chrome that many people don't know..
Of course there are also a lot of people that do know about Chrome's memory leak..
I only mean to get the point across that Chrome is far from perfect, but it's also the browser I use. I see a lot of bashing on Firefox for it's memory leak issues so I just try to inform those people that it's not just Firefox. If anyone thinks Chrome doesn't have big memory leak problems over time they're wrong..
Rather than explain it, I would just advise you to look into it yourself..
-
@mdg said:
I'm not exactly asking to be believed, I'm explaining to you a problem with Chrome that many people don't know..
Maybe they don't know about it because it doesn't affect most people. I'm not saying Chrome doesn't have some memory leaks but: 1) they aren't prohibitive for me (and I haven't heard many others complain of it, either); 2) it certainly doesn't require a restart every 10-15 minutes, that's just nuts. Something is clearly very, very wrong with your setup if you have to restart every 10-15 minutes.
-
I don't restart every 10-15 minutes, I bite the bullet because I don't want to.
That is just one solution to it.
A good test for me is a lot of streams buffer slower than sh^t in chrome.
I just DL'd firefox after not using it for a year or so to take a look, and streaming the same address happens near instantly.
It's not my setup, but that doesn't mean everyone runs into problems with it.
I would just suggest looking into this to curb disappointment when/if you find out Chrome isn't a savior.
I've been using it for a couple of years, it is of course still the best browser like I've said..
The problems get annoying sometimes though, when I first began using it I either didn't notice these things, or I was so used to a bad browser I got over them..
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@mdg said:
I'm not exactly asking to be believed, I'm explaining to you a problem with Chrome that many people don't know..
Maybe they don't know about it because it doesn't affect most people. I'm not saying Chrome doesn't have some memory leaks but: 1) they aren't prohibitive for me (and I haven't heard many others complain of it, either); 2) it certainly doesn't require a restart every 10-15 minutes, that's just nuts. Something is clearly very, very wrong with your setup if you have to restart every 10-15 minutes.
My problem isn't nearly this bad. However, I've been using Chrome (or Chromium, whatever) under Linux, and I noticed a couple of months back that if I just leave it sitting there for a while ("a while" is undefined, but I'd guess >= 10 minutes just sitting idle), all the tabs will end up saying "He's dead, Jim. [Chrome|Chromium] either ran out of memory or the process for the web page was terminated for some reason." I'm not even doing anything heavy with it. It certainly doesn't dog my system down; I close it, restart it, and it's back like nothing happened. I think I've even tried just navigating to another page and it's back. The worst I did was apply regular patches during that time, so I don't know what's causing it. If I just sit there and keep using it, it works like there's no problem. I haven't bothered to try to hunt this down; since the fix is just restarting it, I don't much care. I pondered if the Flash plugin was causing it, but it has happened when I've had nothing open that does Flash. I don't think I even have any other plugins for it.
I just find it bizarre that every tab ends up saying "He's dead, Jim." If it were one Web page causing the problem, I'd expect that tab to blink out but not the rest.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Coincidentally, Firefox just crashed again. I wasn't even actively using it, just had a single tab open to Gmail. After restarting it with that single tab it's already using 200MB of memory. 200MB for a single tab.. I know memory is cheap but that's not even trying.
FWIW, gmail (as much as I like it) is a bloated motherfucker. If you have a spike in memory-- gmail. If you disk is thrashing-- gmail.
If your firefox is crashing-- probably gmail. Especially if you have any dev tools running at the same time. For some reason, gmail+firebug = fucked by a horned owl. You can somehow disabled Firebug on gmail, but I've never been able to figure out exactly how. (Again, love firebug, but fuck their docs).
-
@mdg said:
I don't restart every 10-15 minutes, I bite the bullet because I don't want to.
That is just one solution to it.
A good test for me is a lot of streams buffer slower than sh^t in chrome.
I just DL'd firefox after not using it for a year or so to take a look, and streaming the same address happens near instantly.
It's not my setup, but that doesn't mean everyone runs into problems with it.
I would just suggest looking into this to curb disappointment when/if you find out Chrome isn't a savior.
I've been using it for a couple of years, it is of course still the best browser like I've said..
The problems get annoying sometimes though, when I first began using it I either didn't notice these things, or I was so used to a bad browser I got over them..I've been using Chrome as my primary browser for at least a year and I use it very heavily. I have never seen anything like you are describing. I've already said repeatedly that its stability and memory footprint beat Firefox (for me). I'm not sure how many more times I have to say it--I just haven't seen the problems you have and I doubt they are all that widespread. The fact that Chrome has a problem streaming but Firefox doesn't does not necessarily mean something isn't seriously wrong with your system. You may not restart every 10-15 minutes but you seem to think you should, which is just crazy bad. If Chrome behaved as poorly as you say it does, I would never say it was the best browser like you have. Your posts seriously confuse me.
-
@nonpartisan said:
However, I've been using Chrome (or Chromium, whatever)...
Which is it? Chrome is the official Google binary. Chromium is the Open Sores project you have to compile yourself. Same codebase but there is a difference. I don't know what might be causing your problem, but if you are running Chromium it's possible something got messed up in the compilation or linking. Stability is a very relative term on Linux, though; my build might be stable whereas yours is buggy and there are dozens of reasons why that might be. Also, I don't pretend to be much of an expert on Chrome. I've only run it heavily for 1 year and then only on 1 computer running Linux. It's entirely possible the problems other people are reporting are because the Linux binaries I have are rock-solid and the Windows binaries are buggy, but that seems unlikely to me; the opposite of what I'd expect.
-
@Lorne Kates said:
FWIW, gmail (as much as I like it) is a bloated motherfucker. If you have a spike in memory-- gmail. If you disk is thrashing-- gmail.
Disk? Damn, I've rarely seen a web site capable of making a disk thrash (and my laptop has an SSD which can easily do 500 Mbytes /sec on random reads and writes). Still, bloated or not Gmail is far more crashy and memory-hungry in Firefox than Chrome (I have my personal Gmail always open in Chrome, business email always open in Firefox and that's about all I have in Firefox).
@Lorne Kates said:
If your firefox is crashing-- probably gmail. Especially if you have any dev tools running at the same time. For some reason, gmail+firebug = fucked by a horned owl. You can somehow disabled Firebug on gmail, but I've never been able to figure out exactly how. (Again, love firebug, but fuck their docs).
I don't keep Firebug enabled. I only have, like, 1 or 2 small extensions and no plugins running in Firefox, because crashy.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
It's entirely possible the problems other people are reporting are because the Linux binaries I have are rock-solid and the Windows binaries are buggy, but that seems unlikely to me; the opposite of what I'd expect.
Yeah, my experience with chrome has been pretty good. I started using it...uh...a couple of years ago, I think, primarily on Linux, and it was somewhat crashy (though I think that back then they were only releasing the Linux version as beta). Some web sites still don't quite work, but I haven't noticed super memory bloating.
I run it on a 64-bit Linux machine with 8GB, a couple of 32-bit Linux machines with 4GB and a Windows machine with 2GB. Two of those are used entirely by children, so the browser is all flash games and youtube. Especially on the Windows machine, chrome sits open all the time pointed at youtube.
It's pretty much always open on the 8GB Linux machine, too. Aside from restarts, it's almost always open with a couple of tabs, one of which is always gmail. I do have to restart it occasionally when a right click menu gets dismissed but leaves a ghost on the screen. It just sits there on top of everything else until I close chrome. I'd guess this happens once a week or so.
It looks like I opened the current instance of chrome three days ago, and it appears to be using between 500MB and 600MB among all of its processes, and my system overall is using 2.9 GiB of 7.8 GiB, so there are no memory leaks in chrome big enough to cause a problem for me over 3 days.
-
@boomzilla said:
I do have to restart it occasionally when a right click menu gets dismissed but leaves a ghost on the screen. It just sits there on top of everything else until I close chrome
I've seen this with Opera on Linux, as well as a couple of other programs (the bundled image and video viewer with Mint 9) so I assume it's actually a window manager bug.
-
My post shouldn't confuse you unless you're under the impression that 'best' means completely perfect in every way.
If you are under that impression then I'll correct it. When I use the term best I am indicating that Google Chrome does what it was designed to do better than all other browsers, it has problems that extend far beyond my system. Google Chrome is a very nice browser with a lot of functionality that nothing else comes close to. It's problems annoy me, I put up with them because the pros outweigh the cons. Do not confuse the problems I'm having as problems with my setup without looking into it. Do not assume that because everyone you know runs Google Chrome fine the browser is fine. There is no reason not to look into what I'm describing, if you don't want to then I don't understand why you're blaming my computer with such a small idea of how Chrome really runs for the majority.
Streaming is absolutely NOT a problem with my computer, if you didn't know this then go look into it. Regardless of whether or not you have problems with streaming, there are a very high number of others that have problems streaming things in chrome specifically. I know you aren't dismissing what I'm saying, but you're belittling it based on your experience which may not be the experience of the majority.
-
@mdg said:
My post shouldn't confuse you unless you're under the impression that 'best' means completely perfect in every way.
You know what definitely isn't "best?" A wall of freaking text. Let me introduce you to the <p> tag. But maybe you like typing for your own edification, and don't mind others skipping it. That's not to say that you don't have interesting things to say. It's just that with so much text crammed all in there, it's more difficult to read than it would be if you broke it up a little bit. One giant paragraph isn't as bad as a massive run on sentence, but it still kinda gives the reader the feeling that it's all said in one breathless go. It also makes it all feel just smashed together and undisciplined, though maybe that's just me. Either way, using a nice paragraph structure could make your writing much more effective by breaking things down. I find that when I do so, I can say things much more succinctly than I already have. Of course, it's also a good idea to preview your posts and read through them just to look for mistakes or things that you've forgotten. I'm sure I let a lot of mistakes get through, but I try to correct at least bad spelling an grammar.
-
@boomzilla said:
@mdg said:
My post shouldn't confuse you unless you're under the impression that 'best' means completely perfect in every way.
You know what definitely isn't "best?" A wall of freaking text. Let me introduce you to the <p> tag. But maybe you like typing for your own edification, and don't mind others skipping it. That's not to say that you don't have interesting things to say. It's just that with so much text crammed all in there, it's more difficult to read than it would be if you broke it up a little bit. One giant paragraph isn't as bad as a massive run on sentence, but it still kinda gives the reader the feeling that it's all said in one breathless go. It also makes it all feel just smashed together and undisciplined, though maybe that's just me. Either way, using a nice paragraph structure could make your writing much more effective by breaking things down. I find that when I do so, I can say things much more succinctly than I already have. Of course, it's also a good idea to preview your posts and read through them just to look for mistakes or things that you've forgotten. I'm sure I let a lot of mistakes get through, but I try to correct at least bad spelling an grammar.
1. You didn't use the p-tag yourself either.
2. Some computer's of mine do and other don't show the rich* editor, sometimes i forget that it didn't show and don't insert br-tags or p-tags.
* Wherether that is a right name for it is questionable as it breaks most bb-code.
-
@roelforg said:
1. You didn't use the p-tag yourself either
Your powers of observation are simply amazing.
@roelforg said:
2. Some computer's of mine do and other don't show the rich* editor, sometimes i forget that it didn't show and don't insert br-tags or p-tags.
This means that you don't preview your posts, in which you admit that you are a horrible person. Presumably, previewing takes too much time away from drowning sacks of puppies.
-
@roelforg said:
1. You didn't use the p-tag yourself either.
That was deliberate. The point being to show you what others have to put up with. Which worked, since you picked up on it.2. Some computer's of mine do and other don't show the rich* editor, sometimes i forget that it didn't show and don't insert br-tags or p-tags.
So stop being lazy and use preview like the rest of us who only use the plain text editor and want to know how others will see our posts. Forums aren't a write-only medium.
-
Is it me or mdg post looks autogenerated?
-
@serguey123 said:
Is it me or mdg post looks autogenerated?
We got pitched by a company whose product can take "raw" data and generate articles from it that look like they were written by a (bored, not particularly talented) human. It's already being used by newspapers to write those boring sports columns that are just rehashes of a game. They were trying to pitch us to use it for web analytics.
It works, but the problem is it takes ages to train-- so they were trying to convince us that paying for their product, even though you have to babysit it for years, is more economical than just hiring a low-end employees to do the work manually. Which is also assuming that any of our clients actually want paragraph-formatted reports as opposed to chart-formatted reports. Hint: none do.
I could see it maybe being used for something like Google Analytics, maybe. Where one training can handle thousands of customers. But for us it was useless.
I was impressed at how well it could write, once it was trained.
-
@blakeyrat said:
I was impressed at how well it could write, once it was trained.
You do realize you will now be accused of being a write-bot, especially in light of the fact that someone managed to template your rants?
There will be jokes. None of them will be funny. But you allowed them to happen.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@serguey123 said:
We got pitched by a company whose product can take "raw" data and generate articles from it that look like they were written by a (bored, not particularly talented) human. It's already being used by newspapers to write those boring sports columns that are just rehashes of a game. They were trying to pitch us to use it for web analytics.Is it me or mdg post looks autogenerated?
It works, but the problem is it takes ages to train-- so they were trying to convince us that paying for their product, even though you have to babysit it for years, is more economical than just hiring a low-end employees to do the work manually. Which is also assuming that any of our clients actually want paragraph-formatted reports as opposed to chart-formatted reports. Hint: none do.
I could see it maybe being used for something like Google Analytics, maybe. Where one training can handle thousands of customers. But for us it was useless.
I was impressed at how well it could write, once it was trained.
So you are saying that mdg posts are too dumb to be autogenerated? or that he is a bot-in-training that has notyet earned its internet wings?
Maybe he is one of those spam writers, the style is similar
-
@PJH said:
So stop being lazy and use preview like the rest of us who only use the plain text editor and want to know how others will see our posts. Forums aren't a write-only medium.
I never preview, but then again I know basic HTML so I can tell what my post is going to look like.
