Well she is clearly one of the biggest threats to this world. I think she's got off light. She should have had to pay infinity billion dollars and spend the rest of her life in Guantanamo Bay.
Most consumer anti virus software sucks. It's bloated and interferes with your computer usage. On my Windows machine I use Kaspersky which performs better but it was a bit of a pain to install and required that I remove Spy-bot which is a load of rubbish.
PS. given that, I totally agree with you that people should be encouraged to create web pages, and all that "only people who have a master degree in CS should touch the web" nonsense should go away.
You certainly don't need a degree to be a web developer but you shouldn't be lazy and you should do things properly.
It helps readability and it would probably help browser performance if they just displayed a broke page rather than wasting resources fixing people's bad code.
Notice how it's not qualified in any way. "Thetoadwarrior" literally thinks that you should
be forced to entirely understand XHTML before you should be "allowed" (by whom?) to create a
webpage. He's being a total asshat, so please don't attempt to defend him.
Well creating a web page is different from creating content. If you want to voice your opinion but
be bothered properly format the code then use facebook or some other blog software.
Except that's wrong, because XHTML existing doesn't make HTML4 go away. Browsers will have to
render HTML4 until the end of time, if only for backwards compatibility purposes-- given
that, bad web developers used to HTML4's quirks and idiocies will simply continue to code in
HTML4 and ignore XHTML altogether.
And... gasp... after years of XHTML, that's exactly what's happened. The existence of HTML4
hasn't helped this site improve any, and
it's one of the most popular e-commerce sites on the web.
What I don't get is why so many people who were behind XHTML believed that it would make
HTML4 go away. Either they didn't bother thinking about the situation for more than 10
seconds, or they are entirely clueless about human psychology.
HTML hasn't gone away yet but it will. Who's using HTML 2.0?
If you shop at JC Penny,that's not going to help people's image of you.;)
Just because some people do things wrong doesn't mean they should be allowed to. HTML/XHTML are still
languages. We wouldn't accept any old English gibberish within a professional environment so why should
we accept gibberish HTML?
JC Penny has no reason to be writing such bad code. Even if they are using a CMS there is no excuse.
They have a broken form tag, two opening and closing body tags and that's just two big ones I've noticed
a very quick glance. Those aren't mistakes from automation, they're just bad mistakes that should not be
made and developers shouldn't have to waste their time accounting for web developer incompetence. The
only correct outcome that people should get from viewing that page is that it breaks and doesn't display.
Then the web developers fix it. If they can't fix those problems they don't deserve their jobs.
I'm not surprised they use ASP. They clearly aren't the best coders by a long shot so it's only natural they
pick a shit language like ASP.
It's no wonder companies want to outsource work to other countries. If the locals won't code it right
then who cares if anyone does a bodge job. So you might as well get it done cheap. People need to show
that they're worth that extra bit of cash by doing a proper job.
IFRAMEs make entire industries that could not have existed before possible. One of the huge
errors of XHTML Strict was not including IFRAMEs, which breaks an enormous range of
analytics and ad-serving tag packages. IMO, the W3C is entirely run by people who have
absolutely *no* idea how to actually write or maintain a website. (At least
commercially.)
I-Frames work in XHTML transitional. No one said you must use XHTML strict at all times nor did anyone say
they would never be replaced.
1) HTML was designed to be extensible. In a sane world, people wouldn't care if IE added a
MARQUEE tag because browsers that didn't support it would simply ignore it. Even ActiveX was
an extension allowed by the very design of HTML. (Now, it turns out that in retrospect, that
making HTML extensible was a bad idea, but you can't fault browser makers for using the
capabilities given to them.) In short, Netscape and Microsoft aren't satan because someone
told them HTML was extensible and they extended it.
It probably means you get no rights to it use it in any way you choose and that they won't support it for when some noob wants help turn enemies into penis shaped creatures and wants someone to tell him what to copy & paste and how to get it to run on his emulator.
Despite all these lawsuits their business practices are the same and they're still a monopoly. The only real problem they've got out of the lawsuits was paying their lawyers.
In fact it makes MORE sense, who on earth *installs* a program through the windows program manager?
It's the easiest place to go to add Windows Components. It's like a very very primitive package manager for Windows software. So, unless that's been moved out on Vista, "Uninstall programs" would be incorrect even if most people don't use it.
Face it, most people leave all that rubbish that OEMs install onto their machine. That doesn't make it sensible.
And a firewall stops stupid co-workers from importing viruses from their home computer via USB and external hard drives? Where can I buy this magical firewall?
If you're running windows then there is a fair chance that you don't realise you've been infected. Especially if you're not running software to check for it.
Re:Hooray fileinfo is standard!
on
PHP 5.3 Released
·
· Score: 1, Troll
I use php and do enjoy it but it is ugly. There is no consistency within the function naming, using -> over . Or any other single symbol is dumb and __construct() but why two underscores? It's unnessary.
I loved my tape collection but it could be completely hit or miss as to how long they'd last because your tape could get eaten, you ideally, had to keep cleaning the player, and, while this is true of electronics in general, tapes laying around in the car was not a good idea at all.
I personally think CDs had better cover art and you were much more likely to get more stuff to read in the CD over than the tape cover. The paper was generally better quality and it didn't fall apart after years of use (assuming you actually looked at it), the lack of decent cover art has more to do with the transition to downloadable music rather than CDs.
Saddam was much better because he didn't cause as much destruction and was a piece of cake to take out.
The same goes for Google. Yahoo and Alta Vista both dominated search, at one point, and I'm sure there was a time when people didn't think anyone would something other than Yahoo but luckily you can't be tied into use a certain website especially when it's not connected to software within your computer.
That's something that should be included but it should be easily replaced.
What you you have done if you had to use Win 3.11 to get onto the internet? I mean having to take the install disk from your ISP and installing Trumpet Winsock and a browser to get online. I mean wow, it was like so hard to stick the disk in and click a few buttons.
But yes, if it was easily replaceable who is say there wouldn't be more innovation? Hell we'd still be using IE6 as was MS's intention if it wasn't for competition.
How about the disk defragging segment?
Again, you'll probably find this is much easier to remove than IE because, even though there are better disk defragging programs out there, MS is not interested in dominating that area.
MS has stepped hurt a lot of companies by including the browser, WMP, a zip utility and now they want to include anti-virus software. Hell, why bother buying software from anyone but microsoft?
It's not even so much about them including software but my right to remove it. Most of their software you can remove. In fact you can rip out chunks of networking, which is actually quite important through the "add/remove windows components" but they won't let you get rid of the browser and why not? Why is it such a big deal that people get to remove the browser which won't break the computer but MS will let me remove other things that will break it?
It's because they know there is a good chance the browser will effectively become the OS and they're not going to lose their monopoly that easily.
It depends entirely on what you do with your computer. As stated, MSN uses IE to view hotmail and here are some other things that ignore your preference and use IE instead.
Gmail had no effect on my search experience. I can not uninstall IE. If I use MSN Messanger, it decides to open my hotmail in IE despite the fact my default browser has been Firefox for years and every other company's software adheres to my decision.
So yes, actually there are some things that force me to use IE. Thankfully, being in the EU, if I become stupid and get a PC with Windows 7 on it, it won't have IE8.
Facebook and everyone's "friends" do nothing but pass around a bunch of bullshit, half truths quizzes to determine who your sexual partner should be. Both models should exist but one is good for learning (Google) and the other is good for a laugh (Facebook).
With the amount of people that use computers in public, having a easily viewable password is just dumb. If you can't manage to remember what you've typed then slow down and think about your actions.
You mean like the Xbox 360 with it's over priced wireless adapter and custom and highly over priced hard drives?
While a 360 isn't required for a PC and, in fact, has little to do with a PC (other than MS would love for it to replace the PC) it just goes to show, if given a chance, MS will gouge the customer on hardware as well as software.
I had neighbour that had solar panels back since at least the late 80's and he had them up until the turn of the century (I moved, he may still have the originals) and aside from washing them, I don't think I've ever seen him do anything to them. I can only imagine the technology has gotten better and no doubt take up much less room than his did.
Slashdot Mirror
Well she is clearly one of the biggest threats to this world. I think she's got off light. She should have had to pay infinity billion dollars and spend the rest of her life in Guantanamo Bay.
Most consumer anti virus software sucks. It's bloated and interferes with your computer usage. On my Windows machine I use Kaspersky which performs better but it was a bit of a pain to install and required that I remove Spy-bot which is a load of rubbish.
PS. given that, I totally agree with you that people should be encouraged to create web pages, and all that "only people who have a master degree in CS should touch the web" nonsense should go away.
You certainly don't need a degree to be a web developer but you shouldn't be lazy and you should do things properly.
It helps readability and it would probably help browser performance if they just displayed a broke page rather than wasting resources fixing people's bad code.
Notice how it's not qualified in any way. "Thetoadwarrior" literally thinks that you should be forced to entirely understand XHTML before you should be "allowed" (by whom?) to create a webpage. He's being a total asshat, so please don't attempt to defend him.
Well creating a web page is different from creating content. If you want to voice your opinion but be bothered properly format the code then use facebook or some other blog software.
Except that's wrong, because XHTML existing doesn't make HTML4 go away. Browsers will have to render HTML4 until the end of time, if only for backwards compatibility purposes-- given that, bad web developers used to HTML4's quirks and idiocies will simply continue to code in HTML4 and ignore XHTML altogether.
And... gasp... after years of XHTML, that's exactly what's happened. The existence of HTML4 hasn't helped this site improve any, and it's one of the most popular e-commerce sites on the web.
What I don't get is why so many people who were behind XHTML believed that it would make HTML4 go away. Either they didn't bother thinking about the situation for more than 10 seconds, or they are entirely clueless about human psychology.
HTML hasn't gone away yet but it will. Who's using HTML 2.0?
If you shop at JC Penny,that's not going to help people's image of you. ;)
Just because some people do things wrong doesn't mean they should be allowed to. HTML/XHTML are still languages. We wouldn't accept any old English gibberish within a professional environment so why should we accept gibberish HTML?
JC Penny has no reason to be writing such bad code. Even if they are using a CMS there is no excuse. They have a broken form tag, two opening and closing body tags and that's just two big ones I've noticed a very quick glance. Those aren't mistakes from automation, they're just bad mistakes that should not be made and developers shouldn't have to waste their time accounting for web developer incompetence. The only correct outcome that people should get from viewing that page is that it breaks and doesn't display. Then the web developers fix it. If they can't fix those problems they don't deserve their jobs.
I'm not surprised they use ASP. They clearly aren't the best coders by a long shot so it's only natural they pick a shit language like ASP.
It's no wonder companies want to outsource work to other countries. If the locals won't code it right then who cares if anyone does a bodge job. So you might as well get it done cheap. People need to show that they're worth that extra bit of cash by doing a proper job.
IFRAMEs make entire industries that could not have existed before possible. One of the huge errors of XHTML Strict was not including IFRAMEs, which breaks an enormous range of analytics and ad-serving tag packages. IMO, the W3C is entirely run by people who have absolutely *no* idea how to actually write or maintain a website. (At least commercially.)
I-Frames work in XHTML transitional. No one said you must use XHTML strict at all times nor did anyone say they would never be replaced.
1) HTML was designed to be extensible. In a sane world, people wouldn't care if IE added a MARQUEE tag because browsers that didn't support it would simply ignore it. Even ActiveX was an extension allowed by the very design of HTML. (Now, it turns out that in retrospect, that making HTML extensible was a bad idea, but you can't fault browser makers for using the capabilities given to them.) In short, Netscape and Microsoft aren't satan because someone told them HTML was extensible and they extended it.
2
The wii has keyboard support so you could, as a dev, make a game that uses a keyboard.
There are two broken links. It can be easier to just browse the directory and grab the files. http://www.programmerfish.com/Attari7800/
It probably means you get no rights to it use it in any way you choose and that they won't support it for when some noob wants help turn enemies into penis shaped creatures and wants someone to tell him what to copy & paste and how to get it to run on his emulator.
Anyone too lazy to code nice neat xhtml shouldn't be allowed to create web pages.
Despite all these lawsuits their business practices are the same and they're still a monopoly. The only real problem they've got out of the lawsuits was paying their lawyers.
In fact it makes MORE sense, who on earth *installs* a program through the windows program manager?
It's the easiest place to go to add Windows Components. It's like a very very primitive package manager for Windows software. So, unless that's been moved out on Vista, "Uninstall programs" would be incorrect even if most people don't use it.
Face it, most people leave all that rubbish that OEMs install onto their machine. That doesn't make it sensible.
And a firewall stops stupid co-workers from importing viruses from their home computer via USB and external hard drives? Where can I buy this magical firewall?
If you're running windows then there is a fair chance that you don't realise you've been infected. Especially if you're not running software to check for it.
I use php and do enjoy it but it is ugly. There is no consistency within the function naming, using -> over . Or any other single symbol is dumb and __construct() but why two underscores? It's unnessary.
As long as this isn't something that can easily be compromised then I think this is an excellent way of handling the problem.
I loved my tape collection but it could be completely hit or miss as to how long they'd last because your tape could get eaten, you ideally, had to keep cleaning the player, and, while this is true of electronics in general, tapes laying around in the car was not a good idea at all.
I personally think CDs had better cover art and you were much more likely to get more stuff to read in the CD over than the tape cover. The paper was generally better quality and it didn't fall apart after years of use (assuming you actually looked at it), the lack of decent cover art has more to do with the transition to downloadable music rather than CDs.
Saddam was much better because he didn't cause as much destruction and was a piece of cake to take out.
The same goes for Google. Yahoo and Alta Vista both dominated search, at one point, and I'm sure there was a time when people didn't think anyone would something other than Yahoo but luckily you can't be tied into use a certain website especially when it's not connected to software within your computer.
How about the Notepad Text Editor segment?
It's much easier to replace than IE.
How about the TCP/IP stack segment?
That's something that should be included but it should be easily replaced.
What you you have done if you had to use Win 3.11 to get onto the internet? I mean having to take the install disk from your ISP and installing Trumpet Winsock and a browser to get online. I mean wow, it was like so hard to stick the disk in and click a few buttons.
But yes, if it was easily replaceable who is say there wouldn't be more innovation? Hell we'd still be using IE6 as was MS's intention if it wasn't for competition.
How about the disk defragging segment?
Again, you'll probably find this is much easier to remove than IE because, even though there are better disk defragging programs out there, MS is not interested in dominating that area.
MS has stepped hurt a lot of companies by including the browser, WMP, a zip utility and now they want to include anti-virus software. Hell, why bother buying software from anyone but microsoft?
It's not even so much about them including software but my right to remove it. Most of their software you can remove. In fact you can rip out chunks of networking, which is actually quite important through the "add/remove windows components" but they won't let you get rid of the browser and why not? Why is it such a big deal that people get to remove the browser which won't break the computer but MS will let me remove other things that will break it?
It's because they know there is a good chance the browser will effectively become the OS and they're not going to lose their monopoly that easily.
It depends entirely on what you do with your computer. As stated, MSN uses IE to view hotmail and here are some other things that ignore your preference and use IE instead.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/810565
Gmail had no effect on my search experience. I can not uninstall IE. If I use MSN Messanger, it decides to open my hotmail in IE despite the fact my default browser has been Firefox for years and every other company's software adheres to my decision.
So yes, actually there are some things that force me to use IE. Thankfully, being in the EU, if I become stupid and get a PC with Windows 7 on it, it won't have IE8.
It's better than having a software monopolist tying their awful search engine into all their products and becoming number one.
Facebook and everyone's "friends" do nothing but pass around a bunch of bullshit, half truths quizzes to determine who your sexual partner should be. Both models should exist but one is good for learning (Google) and the other is good for a laugh (Facebook).
With the amount of people that use computers in public, having a easily viewable password is just dumb. If you can't manage to remember what you've typed then slow down and think about your actions.
You mean like the Xbox 360 with it's over priced wireless adapter and custom and highly over priced hard drives?
While a 360 isn't required for a PC and, in fact, has little to do with a PC (other than MS would love for it to replace the PC) it just goes to show, if given a chance, MS will gouge the customer on hardware as well as software.
They probably will be. Some companies have been doing for decades already and they're only getting more popular.
I had neighbour that had solar panels back since at least the late 80's and he had them up until the turn of the century (I moved, he may still have the originals) and aside from washing them, I don't think I've ever seen him do anything to them. I can only imagine the technology has gotten better and no doubt take up much less room than his did.