Slashdot Mirror

What many of you don't realize is that diet soda is really, really bad for your teeth. The acid erodes your enamel.

Aha ok, well here's one item about it that implies that the change in UK journalism etc. is fairly recent so maybe we were mostly taught the old way as you say.

"Click to Play" It puts a little play button where the flashy is. If you don't want to view the flash, you don't clicky the play button.

Don't know where to get it off hand, quick google search yielded some kids blog which may or may not help.

Click to View

This may be a little off topic, but I thought it'd be a good time to ask: Can anyone recommend a good free/Free editor for HTML? I'm not looking for a WYSIWYG editor -- just something that allows me to hand-code more easily (with syntax highlighting and the like).

My current favorite is probably Crimson Editor. Its big features include syntax highlighting (of course), a tabbed interface, and change detection (it notifies the user if someone else has changed the file on-disk).

Any others I should look into? I've heard the suggestions for jEdit, but it doesn't seem to have a tabbed interface (at least not that I could manage to activate). HTML Kit is another one that always comes up, but I don't believe it has change-detection :-/.

I hope this is relevant to the current discussion.

Last year, I went to visit my grandmother and she shared with me many of the photographs that my grandfather took of my mom when she was growing up. My grandfather was a prosumer-level photographer, and pretty good at it. I really enjoyed the photographs, and I realized at that moment that I would like to be able to provide photographs like that for my grandchildren some day (I'm in my mid-20s at the moment).

I currently have a point-n-shoot camera, but it's so old and low-end that almost I'm embarrassed to use it. So, I plan on buying a digital camera within the next couple months (so far, so good). Digital cameras interest me as there's no cost to developing the "film", and the photographs can be easily distributed to friends and relative through my blog or even through e-mail.

However, my primary concern is in the longevity of the data. Sure, the bits themselves may last, but would CDRs be readable by computers 50 years from now? I mean, even disks from 20 years ago (such as an 8-inch floppy) may still have good data, but you'd have a hard time getting the data off it today (who has an 8-inch drive anymore?).

So, I see two options: I could either buy an analog camera in addition to the digital camera, or I could get prints made from my digital photographs. (Or, is there maybe a third option that I'm not seeing?)

Through some Google research, it looks like I can get digital prints made for about 30 to 40 cents each. And, that works out to about the same price-per-print as getting regular film developed. One downside to digital prints (from a longevity perspective), is that there's still no physical negative from which other prints could be made.

The other option, as I see it, would be to buy both a digital camera and an analog camera. The advantage, of course, is that I would have the negatives and physical prints from the analog camera (along with the convenience of a digital camera). However, by having two cameras, I'd have to either (1) take both cameras to an occasion or get-together or (2) take only one camera. Taking two seems a bit unwieldy, but taking only one would seem to defeat the purpose of having both (as I would get only digital or only analog photographs that way).

So, any ideas or suggestions? If I were to buy an analog camera (in addition to the digital), the Nikon N90 (or maybe F100, if I can find it used) looks like it would suit me well (that's the level of quality I'm aiming for). On the digital side, the one I've had my eye on is the Nikon Coolpix 5700. My guess is that its quality-level may not (?) match that of the aforementioned SLR, but digital SLRs are just too expensive for me at the moment (about $2000, and that's without a lens).

I'd be interested in hearing how other Slashdotters have coped with digital's "posterity problem". I'd also be interested as to what digicams may be equivalent to something like Nikon's N90 or F100 (I'm not as concerned with the megapixel or resolution comparison between digital and analog, but straight photographic accuracy and quality of the two).