dorward

Not a lot for you. I probably only watch a movie every couple of months.

Firefox/iOS embeds UIWebView (or uses some other mechanism to get Mobile Webkit). Apple still won't let Mozilla use their own engine.

It's the "on time" bit that is important.

I've spent whole weekends waiting in at home for a delivery from Amazon Logistics only to get emails at 7pm each evening telling me they tried to deliver and failed.

Pubs tend to be owned by the breweries. I suspect there would be problems if Sky wanted (for example) Greene King to start advertising Fuller's in their pubs.

… among readers of W3Schools. Which is a pretty niche market.

It is a feature in HTML 5 that has been defined for a while but which Firefox hasn't implemented yet.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=825294

Was the previous beta only available to people with Apple developer accounts?

I love region limited distribution so much.

sigh.

I had moaning about how backwards IE11 was earlier this week, but last week I was moaning about Safari and the week before it was Firefox.

We've reached the point where I'm spending about equal time dealing with bugs in different browsers instead of IE being the source of 95% of all pain.

This is a good thing, but I sometimes miss being able to just hate on Microsoft :)

You are not alone. The UK government is doing something similar.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/07/uk-governm...

Browsers have already started to remove/limit code execution capability from the address bar.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=656433

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=82181

Last time a recruiter cold-called me at the office I asked them if they really thought it was appropriate to 'phone my client in an effort to recruit me … and then hung up on them.

That article says the problem is with the way SSL is set up on the host in the example, not with scheme relative URIs.

Their PHP+MySQL tutorial has an SQL injection vulnerability in every example that takes user input. It never mentions SQL injection as a possible problem and it never covers any of the techniques needed to defend against it.

In my book, that's unforgivable and they won't get any slack from me until they fix it.

Plenty of people have made the connection. I've frequently seen people refer to it as "W3C Schools" and complain to the W3C Validator's mailing list about the Validator rejecting code from "your site http://w3schools.com.

Authors get compensated when I borrow books from my local library.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Lending_Right

> Whenever they realize they don't understand something.

Which is quite likely to be when their customers' data gets leaked or altered. That's a really bad time to discover a hole in your understanding.

How are people supposed to know that they need to go and find a separate security tutorial (and not a W3Schools one, they don't have one)?

Following that tutorial introduces massive security holes into a site. Those security problems need to be discussed. At the very least they need a warning saying "Don't do this until you understand the security issues discussed in THIS OTHER GUIDE".