If you browse a lot of text on the Web--and who doesn't, given one's typical commuting habits and/or easy access to 3G USB dongles--then you probably find yourself scrolling over huge pages of copy without any real way to make notes on what it is that you're reading. This might not be the biggest deal for the casual surfer, but there's always a time when it would be nice to just have some way to mark an especially pertinent passage for use later.
You can save pages via bookmarks, but you can't really do much with the information contained within these pages unless you copy and paste it over to your word processing app of choice and go to town. A Firefox add-on looks to change this up a bit, and it delivers a very simple feature that's surprisingly omitted from, well, every browser there is.
Make... Chrome... faster? It's not quite a match under this browser's butt, but the helpful extension Fastest Chrome builds in a number of great tweaks for speeding up a number of common functions during your browsing experience. This won't help you render pages quicker per se, but you will find yourself with a host of new features for taking some of the routine out of common browser tasks. And that, in itself, will reduce your total browsing time--which is kind of like making Chrome faster, isn't it?
Why do open-source programs win awards? Or, rather, what is it about open-source that makes us so prone to dishing out accolades--as if the very nature of a program being open-source somehow makes it indistinguishable from any other common application you can use.
And, for that matter, why do we keep giving the same programs the same awards?
I'm talking, of course, about Infoworld's recently announced "Best of Open Software Awards 2009." As a frequent downloader, user, and recommender of open-source software, I just don't get it. And neither do my colleagues, who have already weighed in on the strange circumstances surrounding some of Infoworld's picks for best business process management tool, amongst others.
But this isn't some Grandpa Simpson-like complaining about who should have won this, and why Pidgin didn't win that. No, the fault is not the presence of the awards banquet; it's the menu. Awards that focus on the open-source world invariably highlight the wrong aspects of the movement at the expense of areas that should rightfully be noted. While I can't speak to many of Infoworld's enterprise-themed selections--in fact, that's all the site elects to highlight--I think there's something to be said for calling out important software triumphs in the open-source world. We, in the media, are just prone to pointing the spotlight the wrong way.