Yeah but those companies, Coca Cola etc, can only pay as long as Twitter have the user-base. And if the adverts cause users to go visit the site less, then their revenue stream from advertising would shrink.
Would they put averts in the Developer-API responses too? One one hand it's free to use, on the other hand it's being paid for by advertising. What company wants to be a slave to advertising companies? That sounds like a difficult situation to be in.
It's amazing to have watched Twitter grow in the last four years. Now people even tweet from space. I think with regards to the architecture, it's not an old problem, and there are existing solutions from much larger entities. If they had the money, they could invest in an architecture worthy of a communications system that is so ubiquitous that it is being used to ignite social revolutions, manage humanitarian crises and talk to people buzzing around the themosphere in a tin can.
It's time for some real upgrades. And they do have a user base to support that. I would most definitely pay for better Twitter services if they were available. I think the question is, how do you not neglect the people are unable to pay for these services? How do you make it a fair service?
Agreed. Mozilla are also doing their part with FireFox, they have something called "35 Days" coming up to co-inside with the public release of 3.5, which is packed with juicy HTML5 goodness.
I think Microsoft are badly hurting from the their lack of web-focus (or at least web-productivity) over past years (around v6), but I don't think they are maimed. When you actually meet some of these guys at conferences etc: they seem to be very intelligent individuals, who have their finger on the pulse, yet remain very guarded.
Their guardedness is understandable from a corporate perspective, but it also carries personal weight when you hear a room full of people bad-mouthing IE with some of their developers standing at the back of the room. I have to say I am sympathetic to their position and believe in their ability, even though I am very much NOT an IE developer or enthusiast.
Yeah they do a lot of stuff. I think the reason people feel they don't is that their coming and goings are largely enveloped behind the green paper curtain. They do put things out there more than people give them credit for, but we are often not aware of them because of a natural schism between the consensus of a world-view and the forays of a dominant corporate machine. Regardless... the two organisms are really different faces of the same entity and should be treated as such if we are to experience the maximum reward from it's cumulative knowledge, which after-all is the primary purpose of the Internet in the first place.
I Disagree. I just got back from the Microsoft offices at Boston, and my personal hunch is that Silverlight is being primed for slick one-web device integration. While that may be possible to achieve with numerous languages, the people who seem to be really leading the way are in fact Microsoft:which makes me wonder: was the idea of having "a computer in every home" more a vision of the computer on the Star Ship Enterprise than the idea that everyone would have their own terminal? Judging by Bill Gate's abode, I would think the latter.
I'm not ruling out the possibility of Flash and Silverlight dying to HTML5, I'm just saying that it is unlikely to happen in the near future (even in HTML5) a) because of the people behind them and modern projects they are rolling out and b) because it takes a long time to change from one standard to another unless there is some kind of unforeseen tear in the fabric of hyper-space.
When all is said and done, it always seems come to down to the preference of the developer, which will always remain a diversity.
Well someone requested it as a demo because they are creating an interactive canvas program in which the text being displayed will change every time the script is run. Obviously that makes using images impossible. With regards to using images for the glyphs, it's slower and requires more KBs across the board.
When you talk about shifting the rights problem one step further away, I wonder what exactly you mean? Surely the issue is the same regardless of the application layer in which the font's path data is being presented? The only issue being of course that the font's path data is publicly available. Am I missing something?
It was not intended to be a solution to text on the canvas for anyone but people using the Processing.js language. There are already great tools for TTF rendering for websites like Cufon.
Well it really is designed as a low-barrier language. It doesn't have all the shortcuts you'd see in a low-level language. Even though you can use JavaScript in Processing.js, I usually try to make sure my examples run in the Native Java application also, which requires greater verbosity of course.
It was not meant to behave like text as such. It was a quick before-breakfast response to someone's "how-to" request. Processing.js is a visualization language, not a replacement for browser technology, apologies to those who were expecting some kind of all-singing miracle-link.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/the-old-github-fon...
https://github.com/rreusser/the-old-github-font