Beatport

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Craig Shore, Sep 3, 2008.

  1. Craig Shore

    Craig Shore Guest

    Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    a track and it's playing almost instantly.

    If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    quite a few tracks.

    www.beatport.com

    Anyone got any other examples of well programmed www sites?
     
    Craig Shore, Sep 3, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Craig Shore

    Dave Taylor Guest

    Craig Shore <> wrote in
    news::

    > Anyone got any other examples of well programmed www sites?


    http://www.grc.com
    Once you get past the splash, it is quick. If it is not, tell steve! He
    will listen to constructive criticism.
    The new BETA DNS tester is here:
    "

    Gang...

    What I have online now seems quite unimpressive given what was
    necessary to create this next approach for comprehensive DNS
    nameserver statistics gathering. But I am confident that the
    analysis presentation I have in mind for the next round of
    development will make up for its current lack of pizzazz. <g>

    The questions are:

    o Does the new system work for everyone?
    o Does it gather lots of raw data?
    o Does it find multiple nameservers?
    o Is it robust and reliable?

    Let's find out.

    I have no doubt that you guys will let me know! :)

    https://www.grc.com/dns

    --
    Ciao, Dave
     
    Dave Taylor, Sep 3, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    Craig Shore wrote:
    > Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    > this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    > ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    > the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    > And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    > a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >
    > If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    > quite a few tracks.
    >
    > www.beatport.com
    >

    It doesn't work without Flash Player.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 3, 2008
    #3
  4. In article <48bf0455$>, Enkidu <> wrote:
    >Craig Shore wrote:
    >> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    >> this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    >> ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    >> the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    >> And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    >> a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >>
    >> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    >> quite a few tracks.
    >>
    >> www.beatport.com
    >>

    >It doesn't work without Flash Player.


    So it's broken then. :)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Sep 4, 2008
    #4
  5. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:48bf0455$...
    > Craig Shore wrote:
    >> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    >> this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    >> ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    >> the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    >> And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    >> a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >>
    >> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    >> quite a few tracks.
    >>
    >> www.beatport.com
    >>

    > It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >


    So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and it will
    greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and many others
    (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband connection).
     
    impossible, Sep 4, 2008
    #5
  6. Craig Shore

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:40:37 +1200, Enkidu <>
    wrote:

    >Craig Shore wrote:
    >> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    >> this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    >> ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    >> the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    >> And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    >> a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >>
    >> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    >> quite a few tracks.
    >>
    >> www.beatport.com
    >>

    >It doesn't work without Flash Player.


    True, and you need javascript as well. It's not a static page, I
    doubt they would have been able to acheive what they have without
    flash.
     
    Craig Shore, Sep 4, 2008
    #6
  7. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    > news:48bf0455$...
    >> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>> instantly.
    >>>
    >>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>
    >>> www.beatport.com
    >>>

    >> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>

    >
    > So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    > it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    > many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    > connection).
    >

    There is still no 64 bit flash player.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 4, 2008
    #7
  8. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    Craig Shore wrote:
    > On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:40:37 +1200, Enkidu <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    >>> this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    >>> ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    >>> the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    >>> And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    >>> a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >>>
    >>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    >>> quite a few tracks.
    >>>
    >>> www.beatport.com
    >>>

    >> It doesn't work without Flash Player.

    >
    > True, and you need javascript as well. It's not a static page, I
    > doubt they would have been able to achieve what they have without
    > flash.
    >

    I fired up the old 32 Windows to have a look. It's not that great.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 4, 2008
    #8
  9. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Craig Shore" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:40:37 +1200, Enkidu <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Craig Shore wrote:
    >>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone into
    >>> this www site. If only all web sites had this level of functionality,
    >>> ease of use, and speed. It's all the little things like for example
    >>> the mouse over scrolling of track names that don't fit in the box
    >>> And the speed of it feels like you're using a local app! You click on
    >>> a track and it's playing almost instantly.
    >>>
    >>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be buying
    >>> quite a few tracks.
    >>>
    >>> www.beatport.com
    >>>

    >>It doesn't work without Flash Player.

    >
    > True, and you need javascript as well. It's not a static page, I
    > doubt they would have been able to acheive what they have without
    > flash.
    >
    >


    It's **not** a static page, no. That would be the last thing this kind of
    site needs! So what's wrong with using javascrip, Flash, or any other tools
    that can generate dynamic content? Static pages can be useful in some
    applications, but they are becoming more and more obsolete.
     
    impossible, Sep 4, 2008
    #9
  10. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:48bf9e4c$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >> news:48bf0455$...
    >>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>> instantly.
    >>>>
    >>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>
    >>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>
    >>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>

    >>
    >> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >> connection).
    >>

    > There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >


    Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running on a
    64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day and age.
     
    impossible, Sep 4, 2008
    #10
  11. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    impossible wrote:
    >
    > "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    > news:48bf9e4c$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>
    >>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>> connection).
    >>>

    >> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>

    >
    > Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running on a
    > 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day and age.
    >

    Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS? It's your sort
    of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit architecture. There
    were no such attitude and no such dragging of heels by developers when
    16-bit became 32-bit.

    How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 5, 2008
    #11
  12. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:48c0e554$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >>
    >> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>> connection).
    >>>>
    >>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running on a
    >> 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day and age.
    > >

    > Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?


    Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?

    > It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    > architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of heels by
    > developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >
    > How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?
    >


    Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet demonstrated
    the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in a browser, for
    heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the slow train to
    64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by tangible improvements
    in performance in mainstream applications. So far, at least, 64-bit has
    functioned mostly as a niche brand that appeals only to technos who delight
    in theorisng about improvements they can never quantify.
     
    impossible, Sep 5, 2008
    #12
  13. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    > news:48c0e554$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>> connection).
    >>>>>
    >>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running
    >>> on a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day
    >>> and age.
    >> >

    >> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?

    >
    > Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >
    >> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of
    >> heels by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>
    >> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?

    >
    > Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    > demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in a
    > browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    > slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    > tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So
    > far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that
    > appeals only to technos who delight in theorising about improvements they
    > can never quantify.
    >

    Bollocks. The improvements are there. It's the same argument that the
    developers use. Of course there's no improvement if they don't write the
    apps to take advantage of them. The improvements for rendering things
    like shockwave should be impressive.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 5, 2008
    #13
  14. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >> news:48c0e554$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>>> connection).
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running on
    >>>> a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day and
    >>>> age.
    >>> >
    >>> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?

    >>
    >> Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >>
    >>> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >>> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of heels
    >>> by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>>
    >>> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?

    >>
    >> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in a
    >> browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    >> slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    >> tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So far,
    >> at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that appeals only
    >> to technos who delight in theorising about improvements they can never
    >> quantify.
    > >

    > Bollocks. The improvements are there.


    Care to cite any benchmarked examples?

    > It's the same argument that the developers use. Of course there's no
    > improvement if they don't write the apps to take advantage of them. The
    > improvements for rendering things like shockwave should be impressive.
    >


    If there were any serious demand for 64-bit apps, developers would be
    tripping over themselves to get those out. As I said, "64-bit" is a niche
    brand that primarily appeals to technos who delight in theorising about
    improvements they can't ever seem to quantify. I was hoping you'd prove me
    wrong, but -- sadly -- no.
     
    impossible, Sep 5, 2008
    #14
  15. Craig Shore

    Enkidu Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:48c0e554$...
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>>>> connection).
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running
    >>>>> on a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this
    >>>>> day and age.
    >>>> >
    >>>> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?
    >>>
    >>> Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >>>
    >>>> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >>>> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of
    >>>> heels by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>>>
    >>>> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?
    >>>
    >>> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >>> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all
    >>> in a browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That
    >>> explains the slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was
    >>> driven by tangible improvements in performance in mainstream
    >>> applications. So far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a
    >>> niche brand that appeals only to technos who delight in theorising
    >>> about improvements they can never quantify.
    >> >

    >> Bollocks. The improvements are there.

    >
    > Care to cite any benchmarked examples?
    >

    It's difficult to compare apples with apples. We use exclusively 64 bit
    hardware and it is, of course, faster than the hardware that it
    replaces, but the hardware is not comparable.
    >
    >> It's the same argument that the developers use. Of course there's no
    >> improvement if they don't write the apps to take advantage of them.
    >> The improvements for rendering things like shockwave should be
    >> impressive.

    >
    > If there were any serious demand for 64-bit apps, developers would be
    > tripping over themselves to get those out. As I said, "64-bit" is a
    > niche brand that primarily appeals to technos who delight in theorising
    > about improvements they can't ever seem to quantify. I was hoping you'd
    > prove me wrong, but -- sadly -- no.
    >

    You put the cart before the horse. The developers should be attempting
    to get the best out of 64-bit. There will be no 'demand' until the apps
    are there, obviously.

    No, I lay this at the feet of the developers who can't be bothered even
    to compile their products will a 64 bit compiler. It's trivial, in spite
    of the developers whining about it.

    It's like going to the supermarket and finding that there is no product
    X on the shelves. You ask the manager and he says that there's no demand
    for it. *Of course* there's no demand if it isn't *available*.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    "I LOVE IT!!" - my biggest fan and follower, on a newsgroup, somewhere.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 6, 2008
    #15
  16. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:48c0e554$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>>>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>>>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>>>>> connection).
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running
    >>>>>> on a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day
    >>>>>> and age.
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?
    >>>>
    >>>> Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >>>>
    >>>>> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >>>>> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of
    >>>>> heels by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?
    >>>>
    >>>> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >>>> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in
    >>>> a browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    >>>> slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    >>>> tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So
    >>>> far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that
    >>>> appeals only to technos who delight in theorising about improvements
    >>>> they can never quantify.
    >>> >
    >>> Bollocks. The improvements are there.

    >>
    >> Care to cite any benchmarked examples?
    > >

    > It's difficult to compare apples with apples. We use exclusively 64 bit
    > hardware and it is, of course, faster than the hardware that it replaces,
    > but the hardware is not comparable.
    > >


    Yes, of course, all the new cpus are 64-bit -- but that's not the crucial
    bit of the architecture that makes them faster. Thing is, you assume that
    64-bit software will perform better than 32-bit. My question is, Why? Have
    you actually seen any evidence to suggest that's true? Surely there are
    developers who have tried this on -- but if they can't market the end
    product as any real imporvement, who's going to pay for the exercise?

    >>> It's the same argument that the developers use. Of course there's no
    >>> improvement if they don't write the apps to take advantage of them. The
    >>> improvements for rendering things like shockwave should be impressive.

    >>
    >> If there were any serious demand for 64-bit apps, developers would be
    >> tripping over themselves to get those out. As I said, "64-bit" is a niche
    >> brand that primarily appeals to technos who delight in theorising about
    >> improvements they can't ever seem to quantify. I was hoping you'd prove
    >> me wrong, but -- sadly -- no.
    >>

    > You put the cart before the horse. The developers should be attempting to
    > get the best out of 64-bit. There will be no 'demand' until the apps are
    > there, obviously.
    >


    I'm not sure what sort of conspiracy you're imagining here. If commercial
    developers thought they could recover the extraordinary cost of developing
    64-bit apps, they would have had them on the market when the first Athlon
    64's were delivered. Fact is, users expereince no performance penalty
    whatsoever when running 32-bit apps on 64-bit hardware. So your objection to
    running a 32-bit version of Firefox, IE, or whatever (and so then enjoying
    the benefit of a free Flash Player plugin) makes no sense.

    > No, I lay this at the feet of the developers who can't be bothered even to
    > compile their products will a 64 bit compiler. It's trivial, in spite of
    > the developers whining about it.
    >


    Trivial? Not at all.

    > It's like going to the supermarket and finding that there is no product X
    > on the shelves. You ask the manager and he says that there's no demand for
    > it. *Of course* there's no demand if it isn't *available*.
    >


    If cost is not an obstacle to you, I'm sure the super market manager will be
    happy to oblige your every request. Otherwise, you might have to wait a bit
    for **market demand** to catch up with your passion for cumquats, say, and
    so encourage producers to grow more. Then you should have no trouble finding
    them at a reasonable price.
     
    impossible, Sep 6, 2008
    #16
  17. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Mark Robinson" <2tod.net> wrote in message
    news:2tod.net...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in a
    >> browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    >> slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    >> tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So far,
    >> at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that appeals only
    >> to technos who delight in theorisng about improvements they can never
    >> quantify.

    >
    > Piffle.
    >
    > CPU intensive 32bit tasks run on this system under a 64bit OS in 75% of
    > the time that they take under a 32bit OS.
    >
    > Recompiling the apps as 64bit gives a further reduction of 60%.


    Right. Soon as you post the details of your benchmark, I'll have a look.
     
    impossible, Sep 6, 2008
    #17
  18. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "Mark Robinson" <2tod.net> wrote in message
    news:2tod.net...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Mark Robinson" <2tod.net> wrote in message
    >> news:2tod.net...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >>>> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in
    >>>> a browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    >>>> slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    >>>> tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So
    >>>> far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that
    >>>> appeals only to technos who delight in theorisng about improvements
    >>>> they can never quantify.
    >>>
    >>> Piffle.
    >>>
    >>> CPU intensive 32bit tasks run on this system under a 64bit OS in 75% of
    >>> the time that they take under a 32bit OS.
    >>>
    >>> Recompiling the apps as 64bit gives a further reduction of 60%.

    >>
    >> Right. Soon as you post the details of your benchmark, I'll have a look.

    >
    > I just did.
    >
    > Remain ignorant, it's more fun for the rest of us.


    Anyone can make up numbers. Just makes you look foolish.
     
    impossible, Sep 6, 2008
    #18
  19. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "oneofus" <> wrote in message news:48c1f314$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:48c0e554$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake, and
    >>>>>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site and
    >>>>>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>>>>> connection).
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running
    >>>>>> on a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this day
    >>>>>> and age.
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?
    >>>>
    >>>> Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >>>>
    >>>>> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >>>>> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of
    >>>>> heels by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?
    >>>>
    >>>> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >>>> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all in
    >>>> a browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That explains the
    >>>> slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was driven by
    >>>> tangible improvements in performance in mainstream applications. So
    >>>> far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a niche brand that
    >>>> appeals only to technos who delight in theorising about improvements
    >>>> they can never quantify.
    >>> >
    >>> Bollocks. The improvements are there.

    >>
    >> Care to cite any benchmarked examples?
    >>
    >>> It's the same argument that the developers use. Of course there's no
    >>> improvement if they don't write the apps to take advantage of them. The
    >>> improvements for rendering things like shockwave should be impressive.
    >>>

    >>
    >> If there were any serious demand for 64-bit apps, developers would be
    >> tripping over themselves to get those out. As I said, "64-bit" is a niche
    >> brand that primarily appeals to technos who delight in theorising about
    >> improvements they can't ever seem to quantify. I was hoping you'd prove
    >> me wrong, but -- sadly -- no.
    >>

    >
    > Probably not much improvement for the computers mostly used as typewriters
    > and data entry workstations, but it makes a difference where software dsp
    > is concerned, and if you want to address lots of ram, but as Cliff says
    > the market is a bit sluggish coming up with components and plugins.
    >
    > http://knowledgebase.steinberg.de/274_1.html


    There's not much demand yet for 64-bit, it's as simple as that.
     
    impossible, Sep 6, 2008
    #19
  20. Craig Shore

    impossible Guest

    "oneofus" <> wrote in message news:48c26620$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "oneofus" <> wrote in message news:48c1f314$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:48c0e554$...
    >>>>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:48bf9e4c$...
    >>>>>>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>> news:48bf0455$...
    >>>>>>>>>>> Craig Shore wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>> Can't help but be impressed with the programming that has gone
    >>>>>>>>>>>> into this www site. If only all web sites had this level of
    >>>>>>>>>>>> functionality, ease of use, and speed. It's all the little
    >>>>>>>>>>>> things like for example the mouse over scrolling of track names
    >>>>>>>>>>>> that don't fit in the box And the speed of it feels like you're
    >>>>>>>>>>>> using a local app! You click on a track and it's playing almost
    >>>>>>>>>>>> instantly.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a mainstream music www site like it I think i'd be
    >>>>>>>>>>>> buying quite a few tracks.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>> www.beatport.com
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> It doesn't work without Flash Player.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> So install Flash Player. It's a free plugin, for heaven's sake,
    >>>>>>>>>> and
    >>>>>>>>>> it will greatly improrve your browsing experience on this site
    >>>>>>>>>> and
    >>>>>>>>>> many others (assuming, of course, that you have a true broadband
    >>>>>>>>>> connection).
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> There is still no 64 bit flash player.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Who cares? You can run run Flash Player in a 32-bit browser running
    >>>>>>>> on a 64-bit operating system. No excuse for not doing so in this
    >>>>>>>> day and age.
    >>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>> Why would I want to install a 32-bit app on my 64-bit OS?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Because then you could browse something besides static web pages?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It's your sort of attitude that is holding back the move to 64-bit
    >>>>>>> architecture. There were no such attitude and no such dragging of
    >>>>>>> heels by developers when 16-bit became 32-bit.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> How long has 64-bit been around? *Three years*?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Apart from some highly specialised applications , no on has yet
    >>>>>> demonstrated the value of 64-bit software over 32-bit. Least of all
    >>>>>> in a browser, for heaven's sake -- Who are you kidding?! That
    >>>>>> explains the slow train to 64-bit. The move from 16-bit to 32-bit was
    >>>>>> driven by tangible improvements in performance in mainstream
    >>>>>> applications. So far, at least, 64-bit has functioned mostly as a
    >>>>>> niche brand that appeals only to technos who delight in theorising
    >>>>>> about improvements they can never quantify.
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> Bollocks. The improvements are there.
    >>>>
    >>>> Care to cite any benchmarked examples?
    >>>>
    >>>>> It's the same argument that the developers use. Of course there's no
    >>>>> improvement if they don't write the apps to take advantage of them.
    >>>>> The improvements for rendering things like shockwave should be
    >>>>> impressive.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> If there were any serious demand for 64-bit apps, developers would be
    >>>> tripping over themselves to get those out. As I said, "64-bit" is a
    >>>> niche brand that primarily appeals to technos who delight in theorising
    >>>> about improvements they can't ever seem to quantify. I was hoping you'd
    >>>> prove me wrong, but -- sadly -- no.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Probably not much improvement for the computers mostly used as
    >>> typewriters and data entry workstations, but it makes a difference where
    >>> software dsp is concerned, and if you want to address lots of ram, but
    >>> as Cliff says the market is a bit sluggish coming up with components and
    >>> plugins.
    >>>
    >>> http://knowledgebase.steinberg.de/274_1.html

    >>
    >> There's not much demand yet for 64-bit, it's as simple as that.

    >
    > Yeah, who would want better performance ?


    As I said, apart from some highly specialised applications, there's no
    evidence that the current generation of 64-bit software improves
    performance. As a result, market demand is nil right now. Money talks, and
    few people seems anxious to part with it on a whim.
     
    impossible, Sep 6, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page