Skip to main content

Home/ Open Web/ Group items tagged responsive web design

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Gary Edwards

The top 20 HTML5 sites of 2012 | Feature | .net magazine - 0 views

www.netmagazine.com/...top-20-html5-sites-2012

HTML5 Oli-Studhlme NetMagazine

shared by Gary Edwards on 19 Dec 12 - No Cached
  • Gary Edwards on 19 Dec 12
     
    Excellent review of great HTML5 Web Sites.  Includes quick reviews of tools and developer services for HTML5, CSS3, Canvas/SVG, and JavaScript.  (No JSON :()  Includes sites offering tutorials and demonstrations of how advanced, even spectacular, HTML5 builds.  This is clearly the kind of resource anyone involved with advancing HTML5 would like to return to and reference as the Web pushes forward.  Good Stuff Oli!!!! "2012 in review: HTML5 Doctor Oli Studholme nominates the websites that made best use of HTML5 this year, including a range of useful developer tools and online resources Another year has flown by, bringing the requisite slew of major changes. HTML5 is on track to be a recommendation in 2014, with W3C appointing four new editors to manage the W3C's HTML5 spec and putting the HTML5 spec on GitHub; and WHATWG focusing on the HTML Living Standard. Responsive design and Twitter Bootstrap went mainstream, IE10 was released (along with seven versions of Chrome and Firefox), and browser support continues to improve. It's impossible to pick only 20 ground-breaking sites from the thousands that did truly advance our collective game, but here's my attempt. For convenience, I've grouped them according to the way in which they use HTML5."
Gary Edwards

35 top free WordPress themes for designers | Web design | Creative Bloq - 0 views

www.creativebloq.com/...free-wordpress-themes-712429

responsive wordpress-themes

shared by Gary Edwards on 27 May 13 - No Cached
  • Gary Edwards on 27 May 13
     
    "Free themes are a great way to get a blog or website off the ground. You might want to start writing about a topic but don't want to invest the money in a custom site design on top of hosting and a domain. And once your site is up and running, there's nothing to stop you dissecting them, building on top of them and learning from them. In this article we've selected some of the very best WordPress themes for you to use in your projects. Each is not only free to use and open to the public but also offers something special and unique. For all our WordPress articles, click here"
Paul Merrell

Working to Fulfill our Legal Obligations in Europe for Windows 7 - Microsoft On The Issues - 0 views

microsoftontheissues.com/...s-in-europe-for-windows-7.aspx

Microsoft antitrust MSIE Windows7 EU

shared by Paul Merrell on 12 Jun 09 - Cached
  • Earlier today CNET reported that Microsoft had sent a memo to computer manufacturers and retailers about our plans for Windows 7 in Europe.  We’re getting quite a few calls on this, so we thought it would be helpful to explain our plans.
  • In January the European Commission provided its preliminary view that Microsoft’s “bundling” of Internet Explorer in Windows violated European competition law.
  • Windows 7 will be offered in Europe in all of the versions that will be available here in the United States, both 32- and 64-bit, with an “E” at the end of the product name (for instance, Windows 7 Home Premium E).  The E versions of Windows 7 will ship at the same time as Windows 7 ships in the rest of the world, and they will be available in 23 European languages. What does this mean for European consumers?  The E versions of Windows 7 will include all the features and functionality of Windows 7 in the rest of the world, other than browsing with Internet Explorer.  Computer manufacturers will be able to add any browser they want to their Windows 7 machines, including Internet Explorer, so European consumers who purchase new PCs will be able to access the Internet without any problem.  Consumers will also be able to add any Web browser to their PCs, to supplement or replace the browsers preinstalled by their computer manufacturer.  Most importantly, the E versions of Windows 7 will continue to provide all of the underlying platform functionality of the operating system—applications designed for Windows will run just as well on an E version as on other versions of Windows 7. 
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Our decision to only offer IE separately from Windows 7 in Europe cannot, of course, preclude the possibility of alternative approaches emerging through Commission processes.  Other alternatives have been raised in the Commission proceedings, including possible inclusion in Windows 7 of alternative browsers or a “ballot screen” that would prompt users to choose from a specific set of Web browsers.  Important details of these approaches would need to be worked out in coordination with the Commission, since they would have a significant impact on computer manufacturers and Web browser vendors, whose interests may differ.   Given the complexity and competing interests, we don’t believe it would be best for us to adopt such an approach unilaterally. 
  • In January 2009 the Commission sent Microsoft a “Statement of Objections.” In it the Commission advised Microsoft of its preliminary view that the inclusion of Web browsing software in Windows violates European competition law. The Commission said in this document that it intends to impose a fine for this. The Commission also said that, with hindsight, the remedy adopted in its 2004 decision was not effective because there was very limited consumer demand for the versions of Windows without media player. We were, of course, disappointed to learn that the approach we took in September 2008 would not adequately address the Commission’s concerns. Microsoft filed its response to the Commission’s Statement of Objections in April. We believe we made a strong showing that including Internet Explorer in Windows is lawful so that no remedy is needed. We hope that the Commission will ultimately agree with us. In the meantime, we have to move forward with final planning for the release of Windows 7, so we’ve decided that instead of including Internet Explorer in Windows 7 in Europe, we will offer it separately. As noted, we will continue to discuss browser issues and other matters with the Commission.
  • Paul Merrell on 12 Jun 09
     
    Note the emphasis that this is a unilateral move by Microsoft and a different remedy may still be forthcoming from DG Competition. In particular, not only the remedy as to bundling may be different, but other related issues remain, such as Opera's complaint that Microsoft had been undermining Open Web standards with inadequate support.
Gary Edwards

CPU Wars - Intel to Play Fab for an ARM Chipmaker: Understanding What the Altera Deal M... - 0 views

www.dailytech.com/...article33659.htm

OpenWeb WinTel Intel-ARM x86-ARM CPU-GPU

shared by Gary Edwards on 04 Nov 13 - No Cached
  • Intel wants x86 to conquer all computing spaces -- including mobile -- and is trying to leverage its process lead to make that happen.  However, it's been slowed by a lack of inclusion of 4G cellular modems on-die and difficulties adapting to the mobile market's low component prices.  ARM, meanwhile, wants a piece of the PC and server markets, but has received a lukewarm response from consumers due to software compatibility concerns. The disappointing sales of (x86) tablet products using Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows 8 and the flop of Windows RT (ARM) product in general somewhat unexpectedly had the net result of being a driver to maintain the status quo, allowing neither company to gain much ground.  For Intel, its partnership with Microsoft (the historic "Wintel" combo) has damaged its mobile efforts, as Windows 8 flopped in the tablet market.  Likewise ARM's efforts to score PC market share were stifled by the flop of Windows RT, which led to OEMs killing off ARM-based laptops and convertibles.
  • Both companies seem to have learned their lesson and are migrating away from Windows towards other platforms -- in ARM's case Chromebooks, and in Intel's case Android tablets/smartphones. But suffice it to say, ARM Holdings and Intel are still very much bitter enemies from a sales perspective.
  • III. Profit vs. Risk -- Understanding the Modern CPU Food Chain
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • Whether it's tablets or PCs, the processor is still one of the most expensive components onboard.  Aside from the discrete GPU -- if a device has one -- the CPU has the greatest earning potential for a large company like Intel because the CPU is the most complex component. Other components like the power supply or memory tend to either be lower margin or have more competitors.  The display, memory, and storage components are all sensitive to process, but see profit split between different parties (e.g. the company who makes the DRAM chips and the company who sells the stick of DRAM) and are primarily dependent on process technology. CPUs and GPUs remain the toughest product to make, as it's not enough to simply have the best process, you must also have the best architecture and the best optimization of that architecture for the space you're competing in. There's essentially five points of potential profit on the processor food chain: [CPU] Fabrication [CPU] Architecture design [CPU] Optimization OEM OS platform Of these, the fabrication/OS point is the most profitable (but is dependent on the number of OEM adopters).  The second most profitable niche is optimization (which again is dependent on OEM adopter market share), followed by OEM markups.  In terms of expense, fabrication and operating system designs requires the greatest capital investment and the highest risk.
  • In terms of difficulty/risk, the fabrication and operating system are the most difficult/risky points.  Hence in terms of combined risk, cost, and profitability the ranking of which points are "best" is arguably: Optimization Architecture design OS platfrom OEM Fabrication ...with the fabrication point being last largely because it's so high risk. In other words, the last thing Intel wants is to settle into a niche of playing fabs for everybody else's product, as that's an unsound approach.  If you can't keep up in terms of chip design, you typically spin off your fabs and opt for a different architecture direction -- just look at Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s (AMD) spinoff of GlobalFoundries and upcoming ARM product to see that.
  • IV. Top Firms' Role on That Food Chain
  • Apple has seen unbelievable profits due to this fundamental premise.  It controls the two most desirable points on the food chain -- OS and optimization -- while sharing some profit with its architecture designer (ARM Holdings) and a bit with the fabricator (Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930)).  By choosing to play operating system maker, too, it adds to its profits, but also its risk.  Note that nearly every other first-party exclusive smartphone platform has failed or is about to fail (i.e. BlackBerry, Ltd. (TSE:BB) and the now-dead Palm).
  • Intel controls points 1, 2, and 5, currently, on the food chain.  Compared to Apple, Intel's points of control offer less risk, but also slightly less profitability. Its architecture control may be at risk, but even so, it's currently the top in its most risky/expensive point of control (fabrication), where as Apple's most risky/expensive point of control (OS development) is much less of a clear leader (as Android has surpassed Apple in market share).  Hence Apple might be a better short-term investment, but Intel certainly appears a better long-term investment.
  • Samsung is another top company in terms of market dominance and profit.  It occupies points 1, 3, 4, and 5 -- sometimes.  Sometimes Samsung's devices use third-party optimization firms like Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) and NVIDIA Corp. (NVDA), which hurts profitability by removing one of the most profitable roles.  But Samsung makes up for this by being one of the largest and most successful third party manufacturers.
  • Microsoft enjoys a lot of profit due to its OS dominance, as does Google Inc. (GOOG); but both companies are limited in controlling only one point which they monetize in different ways (Microsoft by direct sales; Google by giving away OS product for free in return for web services market share and by proxy search advertising revenue).
  • Qualcomm and NVIDIA are also quite profitable operating solely as optimizers, as is ARM Holdings who serves as architecture maker to Qualcomm, NVIDIA, Apple, and Samsung.
  • V. Four Scenarios in the x86 vs. ARM Competition
  • Scenario one is that x86 proves dominant in the mobile space, assuming a comparable process.
  • A second scenario is that x86 and ARM are roughly tied, assuming a comparable process.
  • A third scenario is that x86 is inferior to ARM at a comparable process, but comparable or superior to ARM when the x86 chip is built using a superior process.  From the benchmarks I've seen to date, I personally believe this is most likely.
  • A fourth scenario is that x86 is so drastically inferior to ARM architecturally that a process lead by Intel can't make up for it.
  • This is perhaps the most interesting scenario, in the sense of thinking of how Intel would react, if not overly likely.  If Intel were faced with this scenario, I believe Intel would simply bite the bullet and start making ARM chips, leveraging its process lead to become the dominant ARM chipmaker.  To make up for the revenue it lost, paying licensing fees to ARM Holdings, it could focus its efforts in the OS space (it's Tizen Linux OS project with Samsung hints at that).  Or it could look to make up for lost revenue by expanding its production of other basic process-sensitive components (e.g. DRAM).  I think this would be Intel's best and most likely option in this scenario.
  • VI. Why Intel is Unlikely to Play Fab For ARM Chipmakers (Even if ARM is Better)
  • From Intel's point of view, there is an entrenched, but declining market for x86 chips because of Windows, and Intel will continue to support Atom chips (which will be required to run Windows 8 tablets), but growth on desktops will come from 64 bit desktop/server class non-Windows ARM devices - Chromebooks, Android laptops, possibly Apple's desktop products as well given they are going 64 bit ARM for their future iPhones. Even Windows has been trying to transition (unsuccessfully) to ARM. Again, the Windows server market is tied to x86, but Linux and FreeBSD servers will run on ARM as well, and ARM will take a chunk out of the server market when a decent 64bit ARM server chip is available as a result.
  • Gary Edwards on 04 Nov 13
     
    Excellent article explaining the CPU war for the future of computing, as Intel and ARM square off.  Intel's x86 architecture dominates the era of client/server computing, with their famed WinTel alliance monopolizing desktop, notebook and server implementations.  But Microsoft was a no show with the merging mobile computing market, and now ARM is in position transition from their mobile dominance to challenge the desktop -notebook - server markets.   WinTel lost their shot at the mobile computing market, and now their legacy platforms are in play.  Good article!!! Well worth the read time  ................
cmsMinds - Web Design & Development

HTML5 vs Flash - 0 views

www.cmsminds.com/html5-vs-flash

Web design service USA web design company usa html vs flash responsive web design

shared by cmsMinds - Web Design & Development on 08 Mar 17 - No Cached
  • cmsMinds - Web Design & Development on 08 Mar 17
     
    HTML5 and Flash are two technologies that are getting measured constantly.HTML5 vs Flash is like comparing oranges and apples.
timothypeverhart

Google Chrome for PC Latest Version - 0 views

image

Google Chrome

started by timothypeverhart on 24 Jul 23 no follow-up yet
1 - 6 of 6
Showing 20▼ items per page