oatmealsnap

Coupling the CSS and JS and HTML isn't a random design choice. It came out of some very useful styleguides for AngularJS (and other guides too, I'm sure). These guidelines suggest grouping the CSS and HTML and JS together when they are related. It makes a lot of sense in larger applications, but maybe not so much for server-rendered static pages.

There are global styles, and there are styles that are relevant only to a particular component. Hoist styles up to a global (or more general) layer whenever you can, but I really appreciate the fact that I know the important styles I need will be in the same file/folder.

I have a friend who got a really tiny (like, fits in your wallet tiny) cell phone from China. Worked fine when he put the SIM card in, and the audio quality was really solid.

No apps and features designed to suck your time up with. You still get notifications for the stuff you want, but there's no web browser, and far fewer distractions in general.

Although I don't know if it really fits the bill. You still need to pay for data access, it is far more expensive, and no private calls without some bluetooth headphones.

Yea, I can't believe this is the first time that I'm seeing this.

Mozilla made an extension specifically for Facebook.

Does vue-markdown not work with Nuxt?

I use marked.js on my own site. Works fine on NodeJS or in the browser.

I assumed they want to use two sensors as a means of reading depth for their special camera filters, and being able to make one a wide-angle and the other magnified is an added benefit.

It's neat to see all the creative takes on cameras, though. Google seems to have proven that you can get good results mimicking depth using one sensor, but I'm sure there are still benefits to be found with two.

Most people don't buy $800 phone, they pay $30+/mo for two years until it is paid off or they trade it in for something newer and continue paying $30+/mo.

$30/mo is comparable to $20/mo for most people, and they get the newest shiniest thing (and non-tech people don't know that Android phones don't get updates after the new model comes out).

I'm sure they outsource that.

Sidebar: Why are you looking at web technologies if you aren't expecting to make any updates for 20-30 years? Is the interest for speedier development?

What do you mean by "obviously AMD is not the same company as Intel"?

Agreement with who?

Same here. This does not match up with other similar surveys. Also, apparently my opinions line up with that of a 55yo programmer...I'm 28. They must have sampled an older crowd that all use Vim and happen to like JavaScript more than most.

Software is generally a lot more complex these days, and telemetry data is needed to stay competitive and keep improving.

Using Firefox as an example, look at how many improvements they have made over the last 5 years. I'm not here to argue whether we need these feature or if Firefox 2 was the last version of Firefox that we needed. Firefox (or Chrome, or whatever) wouldn't look as great as it does today without lots of data.

6 or 6s?

How is this a privacy invading update?

Mozilla owns Pocket, though. It's more of a bookmarking UI/service than a 3rd party add-on. Sort of like Safari's Reading List feature.

That's how I've always seen it anyway. I didn't know there was controversy around it, but I can understand how people would be sensitive to seeing another company's logo in the URL bar.

I have found it is really easy to create good fallbacks. If your content still makes sense when stacked vertically, you're good to go. (and it should make sense in this format, as screen-readers don't follow your grid)

This of it this way: If your mobile view is also your <IE11 view, you shouldn't have to do much overriding.

Nothing should be able to hack outside of of the lock screen. That should require some crazy special permissions.

What is the relevance of this post? Just a link to a Wikipedia article with no description?

This is just an announcement for the new version. "Release notes". Click the product page or homepage for info on the product.

https://www.literatureandlatte.com/scrivener/overview

Try clicking the link..

That's a great idea, along with a message explaining why.

I had major problems using LiveReload and BrowserSync during development (two tools that automatically refresh a local website when you make changes to your code). After a few saves, it was too slow to use. Chrome and Safari would refresh about twice as quickly, and remain fast.

57, once it got closer to Beta, was the first version I could develop with.

Even better than 57? I moved from Nightly to the Beta channel along with 57.

You can see here: http://html5test.com/results/desktop.html

FF57 gives me 483

Aside from community support, what is preventing Firefox's JS engine from being used to power a JS runtime?

I don't get that sense at all. Looks like a generic "techy" Wordpress theme.

Check out the Beta, or wait for Firefox Quantum to get released next week. It's FAST!

Headless Firefox is a thing, too.