Hands down, Dreamweaver - 4 was real good, MX in some respects is better. It beats the pants off of Golive, which is really meant as the "designer's" web development tool (when the designer doesn't have access to a professional developer, for some reason or another).
DW MX will produce code using CSS and the like (even XHTML if you so desire) that will validate to the W3C validator, for the most part.
Absolutely agreed. Also - calling the folks involved in the HTML development "web designers" is absolutely incorrect. In all but the absolute smallest web boutiques, the designer is the creative talent that develops the look, feel and flow of the site. Colors, shapes, copy location, copy size, etc.
Folks in charge of HTML are the developers or "production monkeys." Typically, good designers have a decent bit of knowledge when it comes to what is and isn't possible in HTML, but are not involved after they hand off the Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand or Fireworks files to the developers to slice 'n dice into images & html using their tools. Those tools being Fireworks and Imageready, primarily.
As a developer, I'll typically do production work in Dreamweaver 4 or Dreamweaver MX after slicing and dicing in Imageready (we have an Adobe workflow). As a rule, DW produces very compatible HTML unless you coerce it not to. DW MX (and to some extent DW4) is aware of Mozilla's DOM and writes JavaScript that is cross-browser compatible. Typically, when producing sites in DW4/MX, I only ever have problems with NS4, Mozilla and *most* versions of IE on both the Mac and the PC render the pages acceptably, possibly needing a bit of tweaking here and there. NS4, on the other hand, is (as it always has been) a pain in the a** to code for.
DW MX can even create its HTML to be XHTML compatible now, which is a nice feature (but one I haven't really used so far). People using Frontpage will necessarily produce MS-centric web pages and companies that rely on Frontpage for web production are not what I would call professionals. I don't mean to offend, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere. Frontpage is fine for personal stuff if you have that bent, but if you're promoting yourself as a professional web developer to a client, you should be using industry leading tools such as Dreamweaver or Adobe GoLive! (though most developers worth their HTML-salt will prefer DW over Golive! without exception).
Now, on a related note - as a developer, I can tell the Slashdot community that I have fielded a fair number of requests from clients to "ignore" browser-compatibility testing and to "simply" ensure that the site looks fine on IE, that's all they care about. Most of the time I can convince the clients to allow us to produce the best possible site out there, but the fact of the matter is, it costs money to do cross-browser, cross-platform testing. I typically test sites on IE5,5.5,6 for PC, IE5,5.1.x,5.2.x on Mac, NS4 on PC/Mac/*nix, Mozilla on whatever system I happen to be on (I've yet to find a rendering fault that is platform specific) and NS6.2.x,7 on Mac/PC. Ignoring the amount of maintenance that goes into keeping systems around that allow me to test all those browsers (even through the use of VMware) and the sheer time of loading key elements of the site on all those browsers, the time spent fixing rendering errors for NS4 alone is not inconsequential. Any HTML changes to fix one browser then need to be previewed on all others to determine if any regression has occurred... in many respects, this testing is equivalent to software QA/QC. I've even written an article comparing the two, since I have a software engineering background (checkout interactive8.webprojkt.com - it should be in the archives).
This post ended up being a lot longer than I intended... my apologies.
Precisely. Focus on increasing the data density - speed can be increased in a variety of ways, the most popular being RAID striping. Use RAID0 (either via software or via hardware, many motherboards now offer IDE hardware RAID w/ support for RAID0,1,0+1). Get a couple 7,200 RPM drives setup on independent ATA66 channels w/ RAID0 and you'll see a marked speed improvement over a single drive running at 10,000 RPM. RAID0 also doesn't cost you disk-space as RAID1 or RAID5 does, it also doesn't provide any data safety, merely speed. But then - you didn't have any data safety with just one 10,000RPM drive either, eh?
This approach is getting more and more popular with Firewire drives, too, which is why I mention it here. Firewire is capable of 400Mbps or roughly 50MB/s, but no drive is capable of filling this bandwidth, never mind the Firewire chipset and the slow-downs it can cause. Putting multiple drives on a Firewire bus, however, will get you to those maxed out bus speeds.
Just a thought... I haven't heard of a law saying that it is illegal to uncap a cable modem. Its certainly against the cable modem provider's policy (obviously), but this doesn't entitle the cable company to get the FBI involved, does it?!? This seems like a gross miscarriage of justice. I don't condone uncapping cable modems (as that would screw up the bandwidth of those that don't uncap, such as myself), but in the same sense, there's a big difference between disconnecting someone's service/banning them from your network (as we've seen reported on slashdot before) and RAIDING a person's house!
The thing about this that really stinks is that the Bush administration basically has carte blanche to lock up anyone they want, as an "enemy combatant." Who's to say they won't do this to particularly vocal political dissidents, such as antiwar or environmental activists, or militias?
Exactly. I'm so glad that this has occured to someone else. Our media, apparently, has not quite caught on to it. Or, they haven't caught on to the game the Bush administration is playing: someone comes across something that the Bush administration is doing that isn't entirely "above the table"; the media starts reporting on it; the Bush administration releases new information on the "War on Terror"; the media forgets about what the Bush administration was doing and concentrates on this "new threat."
There are religions that are not monotheistic. The judge stated that "under God" implies a judeo-Christian monotheism that is inappropriate.
As for atheists not being offended, I doubt it. Many atheists do not acknowledge a higher being (as you stated) and so being forced to recite an incantation that acknowledges a higher being ("one Nation, under God") goes against that in a rather severe way.
Baseline is pretty simple, really: the gov't. should govern, it should not dictate morals, spirituality, or anything of that type. It should govern in such a way that WE (the citizens) are able to practice our spiritual beliefs, where they do not conflict with the greater good (human sacrifice, etc.)
Recent "moral" policies that have come up (e.g. married mothers on welfare should receive more $$ than single mothers) are dangerous to say the least. Such is also the case with this. The framers of our constitution did a number of things that hind-sight has shown to be not entirely perfect, however, decreeing that there shall be an absolute separation of church and state was not one of those areas.
The US citizen from Louisiana is still locked up in a military prison and is being denied an attorney, much less a trial! (And that news is from today, 6/26/02.
This happens not *only* because of the floating-point precision. MySQL, for instance, when rounding a decimal field (which, according to the documentation, isn't stored as a float), will round 82.845 down, unfortunately. Makes it difficult to use MySQL's numerical functions for $$ transactions.
Glad someone else noticed this... it should be old news: software exists to use an iPod with Windows. End of story. XPlay costs money, Ephpod is free. I'm sort of surprised that the pay software is getting more press on/. than the free one.
Actually, the more money is counterfeit, the more of the taxpayer's money is wasted, not only in tracking down and busting counterfeiting rings, but also in the general devaluation of our money that occurs when counterfeit money enters into circulation. I'm not sure who pays when the counterfeit money is taken out of circulation (and the criminal isn't caught), but someone does and my bet is on the taxpayer. Just a guess, though.
The US does not have "a" culture, it has many and most are quite interesting, actually. Fortunately, each sub-culture isn't permitted to design its own currency, though I imagine that would be interesting.
I challenge you to walk into a boston pub and tell all the Irish-*Americans* there that they have no culture. Yes, its from Ireland, but they are also Americans and as such, that is our culture as well. The argument goes for many of the immigrants that have chosen to call the US home.
Just a note - for the most part, I agree with you, but I don't think that the Fed really cares about the beefiness of the money, they care more that the Secret Service keeps busting counterfeit rings... $47.5 billion in counterfeit money is quite a lot, eh?
Re:Lots of twisty turny bills all the same
on
Greenbacks No More
·
· Score: 1
Having lived in Germany for a year and visited it many times prior to that and thereafter, I must say that I never once was able to determine how much money I had by the SIZE of it in my pocket. I do recall being annoyed because the more money I had, the less likely it would be that I could fit it in my wallet w/o carrying around one of those huge waiter billfolds.
Even so, I'm so glad Germany won this morning... Einfach toll!
Absolutely. First you'll need the ink that is detectable by UV light, you'll need something that can ultra-finely print for the text that goes around the image (most printers don't have that kind of resolution), then there's the strip through the bill (w/o which the bill is useless - if you want to try, just take it out and take it to a bank), the watermarked image you can see if you hold it up to the light (just like all european currency), then there's something special about the weaving on some portions of the pictures that's apparently very difficult to duplicate, the paper has strands of different materials infused in it (so it doesn't look like homogenous paper), even matching the (one) color of green on the bills is apparently very difficult.
Plenty of security protections there... what did you think, that the worlds most used currency *wouldn't* have some top-of-the-line security protections?
Once new bills are introduced, old bills are slowly taken out of circulation. Also, since it only comes through every 10-12 yrs, you have 10-12 yrs to figure out what the current ones look like before new ones hit the streets. I think that's plenty of time to be able to distinguish counterfeits. In any case, $45+ billion wasn't used in counterfeit money in 2001 by purchasing gum at the gas station... so their mainly doing this for banks who need to keep their employees informed of what's going on.
Re:Especially true for Adobe products
on
Version Fatigue
·
· Score: 1
... allowing users to change things would be too confusing. Of course, when _they_ change the tool pallet to include infrequently used tools and randomly reassign keys to different functions it's not confusing at all...
Re:Yes, I agree! Photoshop is the worst offender.
on
Version Fatigue
·
· Score: 1
Compatibility between file formats for Adobe should be improved as well... I constantly hear about text not being editable if you go from this version to that version, yada, yada, yada... with as many different versions with different capabilities are out there, it gets to be a bit much to figure out which version is "safe" to save as... such is life, I guess.
I'd imagine the website since this is the driving force behind selling the services/products. If the website suffers, so does Google's image and that makes it infinitely more difficult to sell search appliances/services.
You're aware that sites submitted to dmoz are subsequently fed to Google, right? Just checking, not trolling or anything... some people don't know just how many services pool info from dmoz (google isn't the only one).
Slashdot Mirror
Hands down, Dreamweaver - 4 was real good, MX in some respects is better. It beats the pants off of Golive, which is really meant as the "designer's" web development tool (when the designer doesn't have access to a professional developer, for some reason or another).
DW MX will produce code using CSS and the like (even XHTML if you so desire) that will validate to the W3C validator, for the most part.
Cheers!
Absolutely agreed. Also - calling the folks involved in the HTML development "web designers" is absolutely incorrect. In all but the absolute smallest web boutiques, the designer is the creative talent that develops the look, feel and flow of the site. Colors, shapes, copy location, copy size, etc.
... in many respects, this testing is equivalent to software QA/QC. I've even written an article comparing the two, since I have a software engineering background (checkout interactive8.webprojkt.com - it should be in the archives).
... my apologies.
Folks in charge of HTML are the developers or "production monkeys." Typically, good designers have a decent bit of knowledge when it comes to what is and isn't possible in HTML, but are not involved after they hand off the Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand or Fireworks files to the developers to slice 'n dice into images & html using their tools. Those tools being Fireworks and Imageready, primarily.
As a developer, I'll typically do production work in Dreamweaver 4 or Dreamweaver MX after slicing and dicing in Imageready (we have an Adobe workflow). As a rule, DW produces very compatible HTML unless you coerce it not to. DW MX (and to some extent DW4) is aware of Mozilla's DOM and writes JavaScript that is cross-browser compatible. Typically, when producing sites in DW4/MX, I only ever have problems with NS4, Mozilla and *most* versions of IE on both the Mac and the PC render the pages acceptably, possibly needing a bit of tweaking here and there. NS4, on the other hand, is (as it always has been) a pain in the a** to code for.
DW MX can even create its HTML to be XHTML compatible now, which is a nice feature (but one I haven't really used so far). People using Frontpage will necessarily produce MS-centric web pages and companies that rely on Frontpage for web production are not what I would call professionals. I don't mean to offend, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere. Frontpage is fine for personal stuff if you have that bent, but if you're promoting yourself as a professional web developer to a client, you should be using industry leading tools such as Dreamweaver or Adobe GoLive! (though most developers worth their HTML-salt will prefer DW over Golive! without exception).
Now, on a related note - as a developer, I can tell the Slashdot community that I have fielded a fair number of requests from clients to "ignore" browser-compatibility testing and to "simply" ensure that the site looks fine on IE, that's all they care about. Most of the time I can convince the clients to allow us to produce the best possible site out there, but the fact of the matter is, it costs money to do cross-browser, cross-platform testing. I typically test sites on IE5,5.5,6 for PC, IE5,5.1.x,5.2.x on Mac, NS4 on PC/Mac/*nix, Mozilla on whatever system I happen to be on (I've yet to find a rendering fault that is platform specific) and NS6.2.x,7 on Mac/PC. Ignoring the amount of maintenance that goes into keeping systems around that allow me to test all those browsers (even through the use of VMware) and the sheer time of loading key elements of the site on all those browsers, the time spent fixing rendering errors for NS4 alone is not inconsequential. Any HTML changes to fix one browser then need to be previewed on all others to determine if any regression has occurred
This post ended up being a lot longer than I intended
Cheers.
Precisely. Focus on increasing the data density - speed can be increased in a variety of ways, the most popular being RAID striping. Use RAID0 (either via software or via hardware, many motherboards now offer IDE hardware RAID w/ support for RAID0,1,0+1). Get a couple 7,200 RPM drives setup on independent ATA66 channels w/ RAID0 and you'll see a marked speed improvement over a single drive running at 10,000 RPM. RAID0 also doesn't cost you disk-space as RAID1 or RAID5 does, it also doesn't provide any data safety, merely speed. But then - you didn't have any data safety with just one 10,000RPM drive either, eh?
This approach is getting more and more popular with Firewire drives, too, which is why I mention it here. Firewire is capable of 400Mbps or roughly 50MB/s, but no drive is capable of filling this bandwidth, never mind the Firewire chipset and the slow-downs it can cause. Putting multiple drives on a Firewire bus, however, will get you to those maxed out bus speeds.
Cheers.
Hadn't seen this compared to phreaking anywhere else. That kinda makes sense now. *ouch* ... bandwidth uncappers beware, I guess.
OK, theft of service may be illegal, but enough so to get the FBI involved? That seems to be a stretch ...
Just a thought ... I haven't heard of a law saying that it is illegal to uncap a cable modem. Its certainly against the cable modem provider's policy (obviously), but this doesn't entitle the cable company to get the FBI involved, does it?!? This seems like a gross miscarriage of justice. I don't condone uncapping cable modems (as that would screw up the bandwidth of those that don't uncap, such as myself), but in the same sense, there's a big difference between disconnecting someone's service/banning them from your network (as we've seen reported on slashdot before) and RAIDING a person's house!
What's going on here?
Exactly. I'm so glad that this has occured to someone else. Our media, apparently, has not quite caught on to it. Or, they haven't caught on to the game the Bush administration is playing: someone comes across something that the Bush administration is doing that isn't entirely "above the table"; the media starts reporting on it; the Bush administration releases new information on the "War on Terror"; the media forgets about what the Bush administration was doing and concentrates on this "new threat."
Result? Bush's approval rating is SKY HIGH.
There are religions that are not monotheistic. The judge stated that "under God" implies a judeo-Christian monotheism that is inappropriate.
:)
As for atheists not being offended, I doubt it. Many atheists do not acknowledge a higher being (as you stated) and so being forced to recite an incantation that acknowledges a higher being ("one Nation, under God") goes against that in a rather severe way.
Baseline is pretty simple, really: the gov't. should govern, it should not dictate morals, spirituality, or anything of that type. It should govern in such a way that WE (the citizens) are able to practice our spiritual beliefs, where they do not conflict with the greater good (human sacrifice, etc.)
Recent "moral" policies that have come up (e.g. married mothers on welfare should receive more $$ than single mothers) are dangerous to say the least. Such is also the case with this. The framers of our constitution did a number of things that hind-sight has shown to be not entirely perfect, however, decreeing that there shall be an absolute separation of church and state was not one of those areas.
Just my $0.02, really
Not according to this:
http://www.sunspot.net/news/nationworld/bal-lawyer -attacks26.story?coll=bal%2Dhome%2Dheadlines
The US citizen from Louisiana is still locked up in a military prison and is being denied an attorney, much less a trial! (And that news is from today, 6/26/02.
This happens not *only* because of the floating-point precision. MySQL, for instance, when rounding a decimal field (which, according to the documentation, isn't stored as a float), will round 82.845 down, unfortunately. Makes it difficult to use MySQL's numerical functions for $$ transactions.
Reading a book or the PHP manual on PHP functions would have helped you out here, me thinks :) PHP defaults to "by-value" function arguments. See here:
s .p hp
http://www.php.net/manual/en/functions.argument
Cheers!
Very true, I stand corrected :)
Glad someone else noticed this ... it should be old news: software exists to use an iPod with Windows. End of story. XPlay costs money, Ephpod is free. I'm sort of surprised that the pay software is getting more press on /. than the free one.
Actually, the more money is counterfeit, the more of the taxpayer's money is wasted, not only in tracking down and busting counterfeiting rings, but also in the general devaluation of our money that occurs when counterfeit money enters into circulation. I'm not sure who pays when the counterfeit money is taken out of circulation (and the criminal isn't caught), but someone does and my bet is on the taxpayer. Just a guess, though.
The US does not have "a" culture, it has many and most are quite interesting, actually. Fortunately, each sub-culture isn't permitted to design its own currency, though I imagine that would be interesting.
I challenge you to walk into a boston pub and tell all the Irish-*Americans* there that they have no culture. Yes, its from Ireland, but they are also Americans and as such, that is our culture as well. The argument goes for many of the immigrants that have chosen to call the US home.
Just a note - for the most part, I agree with you, but I don't think that the Fed really cares about the beefiness of the money, they care more that the Secret Service keeps busting counterfeit rings ... $47.5 billion in counterfeit money is quite a lot, eh?
Having lived in Germany for a year and visited it many times prior to that and thereafter, I must say that I never once was able to determine how much money I had by the SIZE of it in my pocket. I do recall being annoyed because the more money I had, the less likely it would be that I could fit it in my wallet w/o carrying around one of those huge waiter billfolds.
... Einfach toll!
Even so, I'm so glad Germany won this morning
Absolutely. First you'll need the ink that is detectable by UV light, you'll need something that can ultra-finely print for the text that goes around the image (most printers don't have that kind of resolution), then there's the strip through the bill (w/o which the bill is useless - if you want to try, just take it out and take it to a bank), the watermarked image you can see if you hold it up to the light (just like all european currency), then there's something special about the weaving on some portions of the pictures that's apparently very difficult to duplicate, the paper has strands of different materials infused in it (so it doesn't look like homogenous paper), even matching the (one) color of green on the bills is apparently very difficult.
... what did you think, that the worlds most used currency *wouldn't* have some top-of-the-line security protections?
Plenty of security protections there
Once new bills are introduced, old bills are slowly taken out of circulation. Also, since it only comes through every 10-12 yrs, you have 10-12 yrs to figure out what the current ones look like before new ones hit the streets. I think that's plenty of time to be able to distinguish counterfeits. In any case, $45+ billion wasn't used in counterfeit money in 2001 by purchasing gum at the gas station ... so their mainly doing this for banks who need to keep their employees informed of what's going on.
Amen.
OK, I understand your question better now ... :)
Compatibility between file formats for Adobe should be improved as well ... I constantly hear about text not being editable if you go from this version to that version, yada, yada, yada ... with as many different versions with different capabilities are out there, it gets to be a bit much to figure out which version is "safe" to save as ... such is life, I guess.
I'd imagine the website since this is the driving force behind selling the services/products. If the website suffers, so does Google's image and that makes it infinitely more difficult to sell search appliances/services.
Don't ya think?
Hand optimized assembly .. mmm.
You're aware that sites submitted to dmoz are subsequently fed to Google, right? Just checking, not trolling or anything ... some people don't know just how many services pool info from dmoz (google isn't the only one).