The funniest thing about the whole situation is that if Microsoft just shut up and added ODF support to Office, they could turn around and say, "Buy your Office 2008 licenses! It's got ODF support, you NEED ODF support!".
It's certainly not everyone who can't afford Microsoft's tools.
I have a whole suite of Microsoft tools provided by my employer, and I can't stand them. ASP.NET and IIS (which can you develop with gratis if you run Windows) are just backwards ways to do things. Visual Studio is OK, but it doesn't do anything I need that I can't get from Eclipse or some other free IDE. VSS is an offense against logic, as if were made to counter the effectiveness and usability of SVN.
Basically, Microsoft's tools suck if you've ever used anything else.
That would be offensive and totally unacceptable to any client that used internet explorer, which is almost all of them.
You can show more professionalism and make more money by building standards compliant pages whose scripts test for capability and fail elegantly, and use conditional comments to load css and scripts for IE. Thus delivering a standards-compliant xhtml document to everyone, and css and javascript hacks only to the people suffering from IE usage.
It's largely a clarification and expansion of the 2nd edition rules, which were very good. I still have several books for both editions. Where 2nd edition rules are vague or incoherent, 3rd is pretty polished. It follows the history of the 2nd edition rules, and takes some of the content of various sourcebooks, with some brand new stuff and adds it all to the core book.
It's also compatible with 2nd edition material, which is awesome, but the comparable third edition sourcebooks are almost always better if you can find them.
It's not that bad. Once you understand the basics of the various IE flaws, working around them becomes instinct.
For example with the double wide margin/padding bug, I always set anything that's floated to display: inline. I don't even think about it anymore. And with the occasional use of conditional comments you can deal with any potential CSS conflicts pretty easily.
The GP is right, it's really not that hard to develop for.
BTW: I'm not defending the idea of actually *USING* IE. It's by far the worst "modern" browser by any metric except market penetration.
The "story" is a link to a forum thread where, at this time, *TWO* people have experienced this issue.
I've been running 10.4.11 since it came out, and my Mac is running fine. I've had no problems with my bootcamp partition at all. I have several coworkers here who also have had no problems installing 10.4.11 on their machines with bootcamp partitions.
It depends on what you're searching for and how you're typing it. I type searches in the firefox address bar (same thing) all the time, and it almost always gives me what I want.
For example, let's say I want a quick overview of giraffes for some reason. I can type "wikipedia giraffe" and I get this page.
Sometimes I think the enlightened consumer needs to think about the competetion aspect of the market. Given two options of equal or comparable value, give extra consideration to the little guy...you may benefit from the competetion later.
I think I'd benefit more from buying the superior product. If Intel manages to drive AMD out of business they'd be in for some trouble. First of all, they'd be under increased scrutiny from various governments for having a monopoly on the desktop processor market (not a big deal in the US, but Europe is too big a market to ignore). Secondly, if the quality of their products and their research went south, someone else would come in to pick up the slack. Lots of people make processors, even you only hear about Intel and AMD right now. We might even get to see some superior architectures gain ground. It would be a great opportunity for someone to gain a big chunk of the market with a superior CPU that could translate x86 instructions on the fly. Or the desktop/traditional-laptop market could simply fall apart as people begin to use leaner, faster mobile devices.
Disclaimer: It's late. I'm tired. Please forgive me if the preceding post makes no sense.
What they really need to do is create some sort of VR goggles for all of these kids that put glowing exclamation points above the heads of their parents, bosses and teachers. They'd be the most productive people on the planet.
It wouldn't cost too much, either. Some electronics and a pair of giant, gaudy shoulder pads for each kid. Well worth it.
A plug-in hybrid can run for short (long enough for the average commute) distances entirely on electricity. It costs very little (compared to gasoline) to plug the car in over night and recharge its batteries.
If we rely on nuclear power, which produces cheap energy and no greenhouse gases, we could cheaply fuel a large chunk of our transportation sector without the need for oil. Reduced demand for oil means reduced prices for oil, hence those who make their money selling oil would have good reason to suppress nuclear power.
I'm not saying I believe there's really a massive conspiracy, but it's not that hard to see the connection between plug-in hybrids and nuclear energy in the context of the GP's post.
Yeah, that's a pretty dumb thing to say, but maybe instead of being insulting and posting anonymously, you could actually contribute to the discussion and talk about WHY that's a dumb thing to say. Just a suggestion.
For the record, it's a dumb thing to say because scarcity exists, whether one likes it or not. We do not live in some Star Trek communist paradise where technology can create physical necessities out of nothing. Capitalism, as a system, naturally allows people to exploit existing scarcity to their advantage. When you possess something that is valuable to others, you can trade it for things which you find valuable. Logically, if supplies of commodity X are more limited, than those who want or need commodity X will be willing to exchange more for it. It has nothing to do with any paranoid concept of inappropriate "obedience".
I might even suggest raising the price of each issue for the sole purpose of reducing the number of ads. Perhaps it may make sense to go to a bi-monthly schedule. It means a longer wait, but it translates into more time to produce a quality issue.
That's the approach taken by some of the design magazines I subscribe and I always feel like each issue is worth the subscription. They're worth holding on to. Unlike most gaming magazines I see which are obnoxious crap barely worth picking up off the newsstand.
It's not really a fair comparison though. Good design never goes out of style. Gaming news is stale the next day.
I imagine part of it is that most people don't have half a gig of ram for each copy of Photoshop they want to run. Photoshop is a huge app, and it has an insatiable lust for system resources.
Let's look at 9/11 as a great example of this. We all know what happened. We have evidence to piece together the events of that day down to the minute. We all saw those airplanes hit the buildings on TV. There was an exhaustive investigation conducted concluding in a detailed report. It only emboldened the tin-foil hat brigade.
Any evidence contradicting their insane, stupid beliefs will be written off by conspiracy folks as lies and illuminati propaganda. Debating them is an exercise in futility.
Slashdot Mirror
The funniest thing about the whole situation is that if Microsoft just shut up and added ODF support to Office, they could turn around and say, "Buy your Office 2008 licenses! It's got ODF support, you NEED ODF support!".
It's certainly not everyone who can't afford Microsoft's tools.
I have a whole suite of Microsoft tools provided by my employer, and I can't stand them. ASP.NET and IIS (which can you develop with gratis if you run Windows) are just backwards ways to do things. Visual Studio is OK, but it doesn't do anything I need that I can't get from Eclipse or some other free IDE. VSS is an offense against logic, as if were made to counter the effectiveness and usability of SVN.
Basically, Microsoft's tools suck if you've ever used anything else.
That would be offensive and totally unacceptable to any client that used internet explorer, which is almost all of them.
You can show more professionalism and make more money by building standards compliant pages whose scripts test for capability and fail elegantly, and use conditional comments to load css and scripts for IE. Thus delivering a standards-compliant xhtml document to everyone, and css and javascript hacks only to the people suffering from IE usage.
You should try to find a copy of 3rd edition.
It's largely a clarification and expansion of the 2nd edition rules, which were very good. I still have several books for both editions. Where 2nd edition rules are vague or incoherent, 3rd is pretty polished. It follows the history of the 2nd edition rules, and takes some of the content of various sourcebooks, with some brand new stuff and adds it all to the core book.
It's also compatible with 2nd edition material, which is awesome, but the comparable third edition sourcebooks are almost always better if you can find them.
It's not that bad. Once you understand the basics of the various IE flaws, working around them becomes instinct.
For example with the double wide margin/padding bug, I always set anything that's floated to display: inline. I don't even think about it anymore. And with the occasional use of conditional comments you can deal with any potential CSS conflicts pretty easily.
The GP is right, it's really not that hard to develop for.
BTW: I'm not defending the idea of actually *USING* IE. It's by far the worst "modern" browser by any metric except market penetration.
I think this might all be a little overblown.
The "story" is a link to a forum thread where, at this time, *TWO* people have experienced this issue.
I've been running 10.4.11 since it came out, and my Mac is running fine. I've had no problems with my bootcamp partition at all. I have several coworkers here who also have had no problems installing 10.4.11 on their machines with bootcamp partitions.
It depends on what you're searching for and how you're typing it. I type searches in the firefox address bar (same thing) all the time, and it almost always gives me what I want.
For example, let's say I want a quick overview of giraffes for some reason. I can type "wikipedia giraffe" and I get this page.
I find it quite useful.
I've found them to be worse on the Mac, actually.
Not trying to start a flame war, I use both on a daily basis.
My work machine is brand new Macbook Pro. It's got an nvidia card in it. Like all Macbook Pros do. So does the Mac Pro.
I think I'd benefit more from buying the superior product. If Intel manages to drive AMD out of business they'd be in for some trouble. First of all, they'd be under increased scrutiny from various governments for having a monopoly on the desktop processor market (not a big deal in the US, but Europe is too big a market to ignore). Secondly, if the quality of their products and their research went south, someone else would come in to pick up the slack. Lots of people make processors, even you only hear about Intel and AMD right now. We might even get to see some superior architectures gain ground. It would be a great opportunity for someone to gain a big chunk of the market with a superior CPU that could translate x86 instructions on the fly. Or the desktop/traditional-laptop market could simply fall apart as people begin to use leaner, faster mobile devices.
Disclaimer: It's late. I'm tired. Please forgive me if the preceding post makes no sense.
What they really need to do is create some sort of VR goggles for all of these kids that put glowing exclamation points above the heads of their parents, bosses and teachers. They'd be the most productive people on the planet.
It wouldn't cost too much, either. Some electronics and a pair of giant, gaudy shoulder pads for each kid. Well worth it.
When you do that on Vista, it looks like total utter crap - which is not fine.
I was under the impression from various screenshots that vista also looked like win2k when you turned off the eye candy.
In what way is it worse?
It could be an adventure, it could be a sim, it could be a management game, it could be a shooter, it could be a stategy game.
What makes this game a Wii game?
What makes any of those genres of games a bad fit for the Wii? There are fun examples of all of those types of games on the Wii.I'll give it a go.
A plug-in hybrid can run for short (long enough for the average commute) distances entirely on electricity. It costs very little (compared to gasoline) to plug the car in over night and recharge its batteries.
If we rely on nuclear power, which produces cheap energy and no greenhouse gases, we could cheaply fuel a large chunk of our transportation sector without the need for oil. Reduced demand for oil means reduced prices for oil, hence those who make their money selling oil would have good reason to suppress nuclear power.
I'm not saying I believe there's really a massive conspiracy, but it's not that hard to see the connection between plug-in hybrids and nuclear energy in the context of the GP's post.
Yeah, that's a pretty dumb thing to say, but maybe instead of being insulting and posting anonymously, you could actually contribute to the discussion and talk about WHY that's a dumb thing to say. Just a suggestion.
For the record, it's a dumb thing to say because scarcity exists, whether one likes it or not. We do not live in some Star Trek communist paradise where technology can create physical necessities out of nothing. Capitalism, as a system, naturally allows people to exploit existing scarcity to their advantage. When you possess something that is valuable to others, you can trade it for things which you find valuable. Logically, if supplies of commodity X are more limited, than those who want or need commodity X will be willing to exchange more for it. It has nothing to do with any paranoid concept of inappropriate "obedience".
Bravo. I wish there was a "+1 Didn't use a car analogy" mod.
That's the approach taken by some of the design magazines I subscribe and I always feel like each issue is worth the subscription. They're worth holding on to. Unlike most gaming magazines I see which are obnoxious crap barely worth picking up off the newsstand.
It's not really a fair comparison though. Good design never goes out of style. Gaming news is stale the next day.
There's a version here in the US called "Fahrenheit" as well, I believe it's the unrated version.
You're not that guy who told to me, "I won't farm if you don't farm.", are you? =)
I imagine part of it is that most people don't have half a gig of ram for each copy of Photoshop they want to run. Photoshop is a huge app, and it has an insatiable lust for system resources.
No, a quick dismissal is entirely appropriate.
Let's look at 9/11 as a great example of this. We all know what happened. We have evidence to piece together the events of that day down to the minute. We all saw those airplanes hit the buildings on TV. There was an exhaustive investigation conducted concluding in a detailed report. It only emboldened the tin-foil hat brigade.
Any evidence contradicting their insane, stupid beliefs will be written off by conspiracy folks as lies and illuminati propaganda. Debating them is an exercise in futility.
Mr. Sohn released a detailed plan requiring a drastic reduction in the temperature of hell, and the opening of a large school for pig aviators.
Don't forget knowingly revealing the identity of a covert intelligence officer, which could easily be considered treason.
Elections are one of the few times I'm happy to live in Wisconsin. Russ Feingold might well be last patriot left in government.
No, but removing the right of habeas corpus is.
So is knowingly revealing the identity of a covert intelligence officer.
So is spying on US citizens without a warrant.
So is torture.
So is holding US citizens indefinitely without trial.
Need I go on?