Comments for Thunder\'s Blog

Comment on Thoughts on Fotofox by Dan

Dan — Sat, 17 Feb 2007 01:49:50 +0000

Oops :) You can get the Kodak-branded version here:

http://firefox.com/kodak/

Comment on Thoughts on Fotofox by Luis Villa

Luis Villa — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:50:38 +0000

Dude, no linky directly to the plugin? :)

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by Dan

Dan — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:53:30 +0000

Didier,

It was good! It was chocolate cake under the frosting.

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by John’s blog » Blog Archive » Firefox 2.0 release: Nice gesture by the IE team

Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:37:03 +0000

[...] I found out about this congratulations cake when I read a comment on a blog article about IE7 being released. The story is that when Firefox 2.0 was released the IE team sent the Firefox team a cake. More pictures of the cake can be seen on one of the Mozilla (Firefox) developers blog site. [...]

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by Didier from France

Didier from France — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 06:05:46 +0000

And they probably think developping Firefox 2.0 was a piece of cake… (Sorry, I couldn’t resist it) By the way, how did the cake taste like ?

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by Jorge

Jorge — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 21:40:06 +0000

So mean… funny, but too mean considering they were so nice to send the cake.

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by anon

anon — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 21:20:00 +0000

it would be lame to respond to their gesture of good will with mockery.

Comment on Poisoned? :-O by Edgar

Edgar — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:49:01 +0000

jajaja demasiado bueno :-D

Comment on Places Performance by Dan

Dan — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:38:51 +0000

Håkan,

I agree with you in general. That’s why our first task (for the places team) is to get the Firefox 2 UI to work on top of the places backend. Which doesn’t mean that we’ll be stuck there, we’d just prefer to use that as a starting point.

Vi,

Perhaps, but we’d need to know what the gains are for that, since it would require keeping around a bunch of extra code for dealing with both backend formats, and for converting between the two. There would also be a small performance hit at some point when the conversion kicks in.

This is why we need the performance data, so we can evaluate how much faster/slower each option is. My gut feeling right now (based on the tests I ran last week) is that we’ll be OK without resorting to using two formats based on history size.

Comment on Places Performance by Vi

Vi — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 20:27:58 +0000

Why not to use flat files up to a certain number (2 x statistical number where performance is the same, for example) of history and bookmark entires and switch to database after that. Some users often delete their history.