Any idea if this exists for Firefox? I've been looking for it for a while. It's the major feature I miss from Chrome. I've had enough of Ctrl-C, Ctrl-T, Ctrl-V.
Highlight any text and right-click. The third option down will offer to search Google using the selected text (though it probably uses your default search engine, rather than hardcoding Google).
You can also highlight any URL (it doesn't need to be a link, just look like a URL) and tell Firefox to load it by either right-clicking or by dragging it to the tab bar. Try it out on any of the following:
It's awesome, I'm writing this comment from it right now in my bed. I particularly like the new input method in 4.2 where you don't need to actually press the keys, you just need to let your fingers slide over the keys and it guesses the word you meant to type. As you see, it's pretty accurate too. I hope this before a standard for tablets, is life- changing. I don't any bad things to say about the tablet either.
I think the AJAX thing is just because 7 to 10 years ago, AJAX was not called AJAX (the term was coined in 2005).
As for Javascript, it is by far the easiest to implement online, so it's good for a prototype. I don't think it's supposed to remain that way, as subscribers are allowed to choose their favorite dev area.
Popularity means good software? Windows must be the best OS by very far then!
Regarding mobile OS, we all know this now depends on the number of "apps" available. Many may have made a superior OS, but adoption has been too low because of the lack of apps.
>Popularity means good software? Windows must be the best OS by very far then!
Yes, windows too, has had historically delivered the things its users cared about.
"Good software" is not some mystical status of code perfection, it's doing the things its users want it to do. So, yes, popularity equals good software.
Software, as any engineering effort, is measured by its utility and use. It's not like art where popular is not necessarily good. Unless you are some kind of dreadful "code poet", whose programs nobody uses.
But notice how I didn't just say that Apple's software is good because it's popular. For example, I challenged anyone to mention a "substantially better mobile OS than iOS".
>Regarding mobile OS, we all know this now depends on the number of "apps" available.
No, even without apps, the basic OS is just as important. iPhone, at it's introduction, had by far the best OS of every other smartphone out there, even without third party apps at all.
>Many may have made a superior OS, but adoption has been too low because of the lack of apps.
Really? Disregarding apps at all from the comparison, do you care to mention one "superior mobile OS", let alone "many"?
No, it doesn't. I think what you really meant popularity of a mobile OS depends on the number of apps available. In reality, a good OS really depends on the quality of its API. Code you can rely on to build great apps.
And, what do you mean by many have made superior OS? You meant Blackberry OS 10? Nah, it's vaporware. Or what you really meant WebOS? Nah, it's fartware. Nokiat attempts with weird funny names? Windows Mobile 8? Have you heard of DLL hell or whatever flavor of bad API Redmond throws out the windows these days?
We really have two mobile OS, Android and iOS. They both have good APIs, and also some dirty little bugs inherent of any new code base. And we have to deal with it.
Not really the same. You can take a dozen jerrycan of gas that will last you for a long time, and that does for the same price as the gas you'll buy at the station, which is precisely what people did before you could find gas stations every few miles.
Not so for electricity: charging and taking 10 batteries with you on a trip is much more of a hassle and quite expensive. Fuel is really the deal-breaker for the buyers who won't go with an electric car until "fuel" is available everywhere. The other points are moot until this issue is solved.
I believe these problems are already somewhat solved. The Chevy volt uses a hybrid system. Runs off electricity exclusively, with a small gas powered engine to charge the battery pack when need be. The backup engine can perform at its most efficient rate of rotation, and electric motors are so much more efficient than their combustion engine counterparts. As a Mech eng, I would be willing to bet that burning gas in a modern power-plant would be more efficient than using the fuel in a car. So much of the energy is lost in the form of heat, that lost heat could be harnessed. These problems are already addressed; it’s about what you require out of your car that should determine what type of car you need. I don't travel outside of the city. If I do I use public transit (GO tansit, live in Canada). The future will require trade-offs, there is no way that the status quo is sustainable
My guess is that the Volt is a stopgap, whereas Telsa are skating ahead of that puck. The Volt works for now for most people for most of their trips, which is awesome. However, you are still dealing with a whole host of moving parts and my guess is maintenance costs will be higher than either a pure EV or pure gas powered.
Given the rate Tesla are going, I think the plug-in hybrid (or indeed any hybrid) is going to look fairly quaint in 5-10 years.
I visited some of the article from his homepage. This guy is an all-around genius! He writes every page on his website in this manner, on so many different fields. Bookmarked.
