Because of that, Opera has two features you could find useful:
Mask as: as most sites don't work because of improperly and outdated sniffing code, you can make Opera pretend to be IE or Fx, this setting can be global, or can be per domain.
Opera Sync: The upcoming Opera 9.5 has syncing between accounts too.
As you see, Opera deserves its good reputation because they are updating the browser all the time adressing all kind of issues.
(And I'm glad you posted real issues, not the same old 'extensions, extensions, extensions!')
Wrong. Eating more calories than you burn makes you gain weight. But if you exercise properly you can gain muscle weight. And if you do the wrong diet you can lose more muscle than fat tissue, weighting less but actually being more obese.
Are you one of those who believe that BMI is a valid measure of obesity?
If your weight goes up or down depends strictly on eating more or less calories than you use. At least you understood that part.
But you are wrong because weight and fat are not the same thing.
You can gain weight changing for example the amount of muscle in your body. High glycemic carbohydrates make you gain more weight in fat that other kinds of calories. High glycemic carbohydrates give you more fat weight. Calories from tuna will make you gain more muscle weight.
For example: you can gain a lot of weight eating a lot of calories from fat and proteins, doing weightlifting, and almost none of that weight will be fat.
In other words: Eating more or less calories that you use will make you gain or lose weight. Depending on the type of calories you eat, with some influence from other factors like excercise or simply genetics will decide the kind of weight you will gain (or lose).
You can even lose more muscle than fat, if you do the wrong diet, and then when you add weight it will be even more fat and less muscle than before.
And this is the reason the BMI is a totally wrong measure of obesity for strong people.
Mmmm well not really. My sister is a doctor. She says that all medicines have nocive effects. When choosing medicines, doctors try to balance not what is good for you, but what is less dangerous.
If you can find a way to not to need a medicine, like a change of diet and exercising, by all means, do it.
That said, sometimes your body is so fucked up that your only alternative to live some years more is to take a medicine. We all die after all.
I can say that I have heard more positive things about Vista during launch than I heard about XP during its launch. The architecture change is bigger and better than in 2K->XP. In this regard MS should not be worried...
What's different is what MS has at stake. They _need_ Vista to succeed much more than they needed XP to succeed. And the market perception about MS has changed too. In XP times MS was an OK company. Now they are simply EVIL. Using XP instead of Vista is the only way people has to hurt MS.
Another difference is the huge amount of time it passed since the last release. MS made lots of companies to subscribe to any SO updates that would have happened in the last 6 years.
Then they released nothing during that years. They got the money and provided nothing in exchange of that money. That's a (very valid) reason for a lot of companies to dismiss Vista, as in 'this is payback time'.
So the initial opinion of Vista is in fact better than the initial public opinion of XP. But, public opinion of XP changed slowly but surely towards positive, specially with service pack 2. All its problems were technical and nothing else. Vista has already fixed most of the technical problems and public opinion is still bad. I see no signs of the public opinion of Vista getting better.
Seems like people finally understood that DRM sucks and should be repeled with full force.
All others are optional and for example I like SQL Server very much. SQL Server is taking away marketshare from Oracle, got OLAP long before O, and has a lot of good features people actually use. And no one forced me to choose it.
But I would hate to buy a laptop with Vista, and MS is trying to force me do exactly that in one year when I plan to buy it.
I want to have choice about it. I'm not in the USA. Six months ago it was all Vista. I hope it will change.
I don't want to be forced to buy Vista if I want XP. That's why people in the media are looking at Vista. That's why I tell everyone NOT TO USE Vista.
Now we need a study to test if the materials used in the implant or the RF originating so close of the cells is the responsible for the cancer.
Any volunteers? I for one will say not.
Remember the recent study that linked brain cancer with cell phones, after ten years of use of the device, precisely in the side of the brain that is closer to the phone in use. No implant material in that case.
Sure there are lots of radiation going around our bodies. But the signal strengths are very dissimilar, because of the distances involved with the emitters. When one of these emitters is in our skin or inside us, that distance becomes zero or almost zero. Only one cancer cell is needed to start the disease.
Radiohead motives for this don't matter. To every transaction two actors are needed.
Radiohead is not the only one who are doing something here. The people downloading the album are a big part too. A bigger part I say.
Let the market speak. If they get 10 times as much as they get with traditional CDs, next time it will be very different, and the other artists will get the idea too.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough. U_U
I would like for them to add session syncronization too.
But I'm testing Opera 9.5 Beta and I have 42 tabs open.
Checking RAM usage, it's using 237MB right now, as reported by Process Explorer.
Because of that, Opera has two features you could find useful:
As you see, Opera deserves its good reputation because they are updating the browser all the time adressing all kind of issues.
(And I'm glad you posted real issues, not the same old 'extensions, extensions, extensions!')
I hope you are not one of those who says that the BMI is a valid measure of obesity. It's totally wrong if you're a weightlifter.
Wrong. Eating more calories than you burn makes you gain weight. But if you exercise properly you can gain muscle weight. And if you do the wrong diet you can lose more muscle than fat tissue, weighting less but actually being more obese.
Are you one of those who believe that BMI is a valid measure of obesity?
If your weight goes up or down depends strictly on eating more or less calories than you use. At least you understood that part.
But you are wrong because weight and fat are not the same thing.
You can gain weight changing for example the amount of muscle in your body. High glycemic carbohydrates make you gain more weight in fat that other kinds of calories. High glycemic carbohydrates give you more fat weight. Calories from tuna will make you gain more muscle weight.
For example: you can gain a lot of weight eating a lot of calories from fat and proteins, doing weightlifting, and almost none of that weight will be fat.
In other words: Eating more or less calories that you use will make you gain or lose weight. Depending on the type of calories you eat, with some influence from other factors like excercise or simply genetics will decide the kind of weight you will gain (or lose).
You can even lose more muscle than fat, if you do the wrong diet, and then when you add weight it will be even more fat and less muscle than before.
And this is the reason the BMI is a totally wrong measure of obesity for strong people.
Mmmm well not really. My sister is a doctor. She says that all medicines have nocive effects. When choosing medicines, doctors try to balance not what is good for you, but what is less dangerous.
If you can find a way to not to need a medicine, like a change of diet and exercising, by all means, do it.
That said, sometimes your body is so fucked up that your only alternative to live some years more is to take a medicine. We all die after all.
Well said!
I wish more people would take medicines the way you do. Less power to the drug corporations.
What about Colombia? Ugly Betty was written here.
Opera is faster and more secure. Opera 9.5 is even faster, making Safari bite the dust. It also uses less memory.
It also can block ads (although not with a blacklist as FF, but you can block whole domains).
To me the lesser minds are the ones that can't respect other people choices.
I can say that I have heard more positive things about Vista during launch than I heard about XP during its launch. The architecture change is bigger and better than in 2K->XP. In this regard MS should not be worried...
What's different is what MS has at stake. They _need_ Vista to succeed much more than they needed XP to succeed. And the market perception about MS has changed too. In XP times MS was an OK company. Now they are simply EVIL. Using XP instead of Vista is the only way people has to hurt MS.
Another difference is the huge amount of time it passed since the last release. MS made lots of companies to subscribe to any SO updates that would have happened in the last 6 years.
Then they released nothing during that years. They got the money and provided nothing in exchange of that money. That's a (very valid) reason for a lot of companies to dismiss Vista, as in 'this is payback time'.
So the initial opinion of Vista is in fact better than the initial public opinion of XP. But, public opinion of XP changed slowly but surely towards positive, specially with service pack 2. All its problems were technical and nothing else. Vista has already fixed most of the technical problems and public opinion is still bad. I see no signs of the public opinion of Vista getting better.
Seems like people finally understood that DRM sucks and should be repeled with full force.
Vista is Windows 6, they just forgot to update cmd.
That can't beat stage6.divx.com way of doing it.
Just double click on the video, and you have fullscreen AND hardware-accelerated video.
No cpu-hogging, full-of-artifacts, crappy flash video.
I have touched live wire at 120V. It felt very shaky.
I know of someone who have touched live wire at 240V. He was badly burned and had to go to the hospital. Nothing of that sort happened to me.
If I had touched both live and ground, one in each hand, it could have been lethal, going through my heart.
However, I touched a live 120V wire and nothing happened to me. So I agree with the GP and disagree with you.
It is the only MS product you are FORCED to buy.
All others are optional and for example I like SQL Server very much. SQL Server is taking away marketshare from Oracle, got OLAP long before O, and has a lot of good features people actually use. And no one forced me to choose it.
But I would hate to buy a laptop with Vista, and MS is trying to force me do exactly that in one year when I plan to buy it.
I want to have choice about it. I'm not in the USA. Six months ago it was all Vista. I hope it will change.
I don't want to be forced to buy Vista if I want XP. That's why people in the media are looking at Vista. That's why I tell everyone NOT TO USE Vista.
Now we need a study to test if the materials used in the implant or the RF originating so close of the cells is the responsible for the cancer.
Any volunteers? I for one will say not.
Remember the recent study that linked brain cancer with cell phones, after ten years of use of the device, precisely in the side of the brain that is closer to the phone in use. No implant material in that case.
Would you volunteer?
What about this:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/09/rfid-implants-linked-to-cancer-in-lab-tests/
and this:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2848
Sure there are lots of radiation going around our bodies. But the signal strengths are very dissimilar, because of the distances involved with the emitters. When one of these emitters is in our skin or inside us, that distance becomes zero or almost zero. Only one cancer cell is needed to start the disease.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/09/rfid-implants-linked-to-cancer-in-lab-tests/
There, for you.
Well most nerds are creeps, weirdos, who want a perfect body, want a perfect soul.
:)
I see they are the perfect market for this
Radiohead motives for this don't matter. To every transaction two actors are needed.
Radiohead is not the only one who are doing something here. The people downloading the album are a big part too. A bigger part I say.
Let the market speak. If they get 10 times as much as they get with traditional CDs, next time it will be very different, and the other artists will get the idea too.
I will not buy the physical CD.
I remember a study that linked implanted chips with cancer.
Surely, in this case they are only in the clothes, but still too close to the body.
And what about all the X/raying people in airports and other places?
Will you trade your health for (a little) security?
That's incredible value for your money!!!!11
Except in Nebraska.
And the USA has the iPhone.
That device has the most advanced technology ever devised:
A personal portable Reality Distortion Field (tm)
It's like you can carry a part of The Steve aura with yourself!
Try to beat that Asians!
Young people learn at amazing rates. Some people keep learning stuff much longer but are a very tiny minority.
Actually, the day I bought the video card, installing it was all bliss and joy. I couldn't have been happier.