Why would you be generating a "Word file" if the intent is not to have Word do the work at some point?
Maybe, just maybe the point was for ajaxWrite to be a web-based word processor that offered MS Word Doc compatibility as a feature. If you can believe that (apparently, that's a big "if"), then it seems conceivable that this app could someday have a user that doesn't have access to Word, but still wants to create a document with DOC compatibility.
Or does staring at the DOC file in a hex editor seem more plausible?
Feeding HTML4/CSS1 to Word/Excel is by far the most superior way that I've found to create simple "DOC" or "XLS" files from a web application. Let MS do the work so you don't have to.
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't the whole point of ajaxWrite to allow users to create Word docs without having MS Word installed on their system? Your solution requires Word to do the work. If you've already got Word installed, why not just use Word?
Medicine is failed in the US because of government's reach into it -- 40 years ago medicine was much more readily available to the poor and the minority. Today it is destroyed because of trying to fix a problem that never existed.
I think this is an overly simplistic statement. The fact of the matter is, medical technology today just isn't comparable to what was available 40 years ago. It certainly isn't getting cheaper, but why is that? Your post implies (perhaps not intentionally) that it has primarily to do with government involvment. I would think that very significant factor (if not the most significant factor) is the expense of higher tech equipment. MRIs require very expensive equipment. The same is true of any surgery involving lasers. Also, doctors go to greater lengths to help patients because more options are available. Just look at cancer. The point at which doctors give up on treating a patient nowadays is much further along than it was 40 years ago.
Although your question was most likely rhetorical, I'll respond nonetheless. We Americans feel that most if not all problems can be solved by throwing computers at them. You see, kids suddenly become smarter when a computer is in the classroom. Similarly, crappy teachers become excellent teachers when a computer is in the room. It's also important to understand that effects are compounded by adding more computers.
Applying what we've learned thus far...
Vote counting going to slow? Turbo charge it by adding a computer!
Thanks for the advice. For the record I did buy her a laptop and it is nicer than mine. However, that isn't the issue. She objects to me taking any laptop with me to the crapper as a matter of principal, I suppose. So I just grab a book or magazine and go about my business. Marriage is all about compromise, right?
I disagree. I think the term "rental" very accurately describes these services. An apartment is an excellent example--if you stop paying the rental fee, you are no longer able to continue to use the apartment. The same is true of Napster. If you cease to pay your monthly fee, you no longer have access.
With a subscription to a magazine or cheese of the month or whatever I get to keep and continue to use that which I've paid for after my subscription expires. This is not the case with Napster. Or is my understanding of the Napster service wrong?
Those are all good reasons. I certainly don't want to be tethered to a computer just to read a book. The wife already gets upset if I take the laptop to the crapper. I suppose if there were a reader with exceedingly high resolution, long battery life and the cost was negligible I might be tempted. However, this magic device doesn't exist.
I also like to let people borrow my books. I don't see this being that easy with ebooks in our DRM'ed world
All in all, ebooks strike me as being like tablet PCs--kinda neat, but they don't really offer a benefit that makes their drawbacks worth it.
I absolutely agree. This was just the first time I encountered these services being semi-accurately described in the media. In the public's mind it seems that the meaning of "subscription" with regard to digital media is shifting toward the traditional definition of "renting". I was just glad to see someone NOT call the other services subscriptions.
Did anyone else watching the video notice that he referred to Rhapsody and Napster as song rental services and not subscription services?
Re:Private enviro-bacterial research organization?
on
Bacteria Eat Styrofoam
·
· Score: 1
I think we're in agreement. When you see a company do something like give to charity, they aren't doing it to be nice. They're doing it for good PR and possibly tax benefits. It may also have a bearing on employee morale. My point being that this is intended to have a positive impact on the bottom line.
Profit is not bad, it means a gain instead of a loss.
I absolutely agree.
There is no good or evil in the free market. I think that's what scares a lot of people.
I don't believe in public property, but I do believe that there is enough desire amongst members of a community to endow a trust to own land that is available to the public.
The idea of a community trust owning land for public use is interesting. But how does that really differ from the government owning the land? At some level, that's what government is right? Individuals pooling resources to do things like provide for the common defense, maintain public lands, etc. To me it seems like a community trust and a government are points on the same continuum. Could you explain the difference?
Not to create a straw man, but I have done the research, and the worst polluter in all of history has been the U.S. government. I'm not sure the worst polluter in history is really the best organization to regulate the pollution of private citizens.
It certainly isn't analogous to having a known child molester watching your kids, but I understand your point. I took a look at the PERC site and it's definitely something I'll be looking into.
In the end, pollution can ONLY be controlled through voluntary desire.
I certainly don't agree with that statement, but maybe I'm misinterpreting it.
If people really want to end pollution, they need to be informed by others in who is the worst polluters, and we need to boycott those companies.
Where do we get information about who are the worst polluters? Do companies report their own pollution or are they monitored by some other party? How would this work?
Re:Private enviro-bacterial research organization?
on
Bacteria Eat Styrofoam
·
· Score: 1
Sure, the average socialist will say that corporations just want to pollute the world so they can make a buck, but that's not the case: corporations want to provide the best price to their consumers, which is why pollution has tended to be so obvious.(emphasis added)
Corporations want to maximize profit. Period. Full stop. That's it. Of course, limiting pollution may be in line with that goal, but it might not be. Any action that a corporation takes to limit pollution is connected to an effort to maximize profit.
Right off the bat, I'd like to say that I don't share the beliefs you have expressed in this thread. I'm aquainted with a number of people that share your beliefs, but do so for knee-jerk, tinfoil hat, militia sort of reasons. However, your points seem well thought out.
So I was hoping you could explain some things that others haven't. Do you believe in public property? What about government regulation for companies/corporations with regard to polution?
You're right, and I can admit it. It's been a while since I read the Zeldman book. I mentally grouped his book with what I used to see on ALA. And that was folks jumping through hoops to follow the web standards to no real benefit other than standards compliance. This wasn't, of course, the case every time, but it happened plenty. And at the time I was totally on board. Is it OK to use a <dl> to mark up a form? Does a form really count as tabular data? Do the benefits of FIR (standards compliance!) outweigh accessibily concerns?
That sort of thing is somewhat ridiculous. I'm feeling much better now. And I stand corrected.
Zeldman and the ALA people seem to spend a lot of time making workarounds for specific versions of IE, thereby elimating the main benefit of CSS.
That is frequently the case. A lot of people lose sight of the purpose of standards--to make things easier. And with that in mind, "Designing with Web Standards" is a great book if you can tune out the standards for standards' sake zealotry. For practical standards compliance I really recommend "Web Standards Solutions" by Dan Cederholm.
But, hey, I'm a neurotic geek, coming up with new things to worry about is practically a hobby.
Oh lordy. I know where you're coming from.
More curiously, I've occasionally found myself almost using a French word in English conversation at work -- and I'm a native speaker of English. So I've even felt this sort of language-drift pressure _away_ from my native language.
My wife is a bilingual (German/English) and I'm a native English speaker that can speak German. We occasionally drift in and out of each language depending on what we're talking about and where we are. I, too, have tossed in a German word or two at work. People look at me funny, but they usually know what happened. What's really unfortunate is when I translate a German idiom that just doesn't sound right in English. For example, there is a German expression for "going to great lengths to be accommodating" or "being excessively accommodating". So to say I'm not going to bend over backwards to help someone, I would say "I'm not going to tear my ass open to help him." Needless to say, this is greeted with curiousity by my coworkers.
The one principle we decided on very early was -- Complete Sentences Only! Either a full sentence in English, or a full sentence in French, or in Bulgarian -- no mixing languages. This way, we prevent corrupting the kids' grammar, let alone our own. I've heard stories that Turkish children growing up in Germany who end up speaking and hearing a mishmash of the two languages end up being fluent in neither -- and could be said to have no native language of their own.
First of all, I think it's awesome that you're taking such care to ensure that your children grow up to be multi-lingual. So often parents that speak a minority language don't pass that language on to their children. About not mixing languages...
I think you're being overly cautious. The situation with the Turkish in Germany is markedly different from your own. The Turkish children in Germany constitute a speech community of their own. The Turkish/Gerrman mishmash has become a language in its own right. Your children will not have a speech community to reinforce and support this mixture. You clearly won't being doing your kids a disservice, but I wouldn't get too stressed about it.
"Waffen" means "weaponry". You may be thinking of "Luftwaffe" which is the German term for "Air Force" although it transliterates as something more like "air weapon".
Database Abstraction:
For the most part, I think you're right on about database abstraction. The vast majority or apps will never change databases. However, I think a great deal of the appeal of most DB abstraction packages is the functions. Most packages allow you to get just a single value without having to do a lot of the crap that you would normally have to do. For example, something like this:
$myVar = $db->get_var('SELECT foo FROM bar WHERE baz='123');
Or you can get results returned as an associative array, or whatever. It can save you from a lot of repeated tedium. That might not be reason enough for you to use it, but just so you're aware. Also, I'm not sure what 'mysql_result_id' is. I assume you meant 'mysql_insert_id' and if so, I've used a few different database abstraction packages and every one of them gave me ready access to that value.
Templates:
Like anything, templates can be done wrong. Really wrong. And I've seen some really bad templating. But when done right, templating can make your life so much easier. The point of templating is to make maintenance easier. But it can also make development easier. Categorically rejecting templates is like categorically rejecting user defined functions, IMO.
Although the parent may not have been 100% factually correct, it certainly wasn't bogus advice. You are correct about VISA check cards and the like. HOWEVER, while you're waiting for the chargeback to happen, YOUR funds are tied up and not the bank's.
I hate the fact that so many Americans live beyond their means. I hate that debt is pretty much a necessity in the USA. Nonetheless, a credit card is a good idea. You can still live debt free and it doesn't have to cost you a thing. Personally, I use a Discover card for pretty much any transaction I can. I pay it off every month and once a year Discover credits my account with a few hundred dollars for my trouble.
Besides, you never know when life will throw you a curveball. A little financial flexibility can come in handy.
It's certainly true that relative to the rest of the world most Americans prefer weaker coffee. The same could be said of American Liberalism:)
Anyway, my understanding is that the term "Americano" came about during WWII when American soldiers were in Italy. The Americans would add hot water to the Italian coffee/espresso/whatever to suit their tastes.
I've been using it exclusively for well over a year now. I keep a dual boot in case I ever need to do something in Windows, which is a rarity these days.
So which is it: do you use Linux exclusively or do you use Windows rarely? One or the other, please.
"Exclusively" != "generally" or "usually". Exclusively means "to the exclusion of all others", among other definitions.
Not flaming - just pointing out a common linguistic issue. People tend to show up on/. and proclaim "I use Linux exclusively!" and then add parenthetically "(except when I need Windows)".
Uh, if you limit responses to those that use Linux and only Linux to the exclusion of all others, you will get very few responses, indeed. Most computing environments aren't homogonous ( I know, I know, except for your home LAN).
Looking at the title of the post I would think the question being asked is "Why do people switch to Linux?" I don't think that a person's response is invalid if they occassionally boot into Windows.
No, you weren't flaming. You were just being a pedantic ass.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you be generating a "Word file" if the intent is not to have Word do the work at some point?
Maybe, just maybe the point was for ajaxWrite to be a web-based word processor that offered MS Word Doc compatibility as a feature. If you can believe that (apparently, that's a big "if"), then it seems conceivable that this app could someday have a user that doesn't have access to Word, but still wants to create a document with DOC compatibility.
Or does staring at the DOC file in a hex editor seem more plausible?
Feeding HTML4/CSS1 to Word/Excel is by far the most superior way that I've found to create simple "DOC" or "XLS" files from a web application. Let MS do the work so you don't have to.
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't the whole point of ajaxWrite to allow users to create Word docs without having MS Word installed on their system? Your solution requires Word to do the work. If you've already got Word installed, why not just use Word?
Medicine is failed in the US because of government's reach into it -- 40 years ago medicine was much more readily available to the poor and the minority. Today it is destroyed because of trying to fix a problem that never existed.
I think this is an overly simplistic statement. The fact of the matter is, medical technology today just isn't comparable to what was available 40 years ago. It certainly isn't getting cheaper, but why is that? Your post implies (perhaps not intentionally) that it has primarily to do with government involvment. I would think that very significant factor (if not the most significant factor) is the expense of higher tech equipment. MRIs require very expensive equipment. The same is true of any surgery involving lasers. Also, doctors go to greater lengths to help patients because more options are available. Just look at cancer. The point at which doctors give up on treating a patient nowadays is much further along than it was 40 years ago.
Although your question was most likely rhetorical, I'll respond nonetheless. We Americans feel that most if not all problems can be solved by throwing computers at them. You see, kids suddenly become smarter when a computer is in the classroom. Similarly, crappy teachers become excellent teachers when a computer is in the room. It's also important to understand that effects are compounded by adding more computers.
Applying what we've learned thus far...
Vote counting going to slow? Turbo charge it by adding a computer!
Thanks for the advice. For the record I did buy her a laptop and it is nicer than mine. However, that isn't the issue. She objects to me taking any laptop with me to the crapper as a matter of principal, I suppose. So I just grab a book or magazine and go about my business. Marriage is all about compromise, right?
I disagree. I think the term "rental" very accurately describes these services. An apartment is an excellent example--if you stop paying the rental fee, you are no longer able to continue to use the apartment. The same is true of Napster. If you cease to pay your monthly fee, you no longer have access.
With a subscription to a magazine or cheese of the month or whatever I get to keep and continue to use that which I've paid for after my subscription expires. This is not the case with Napster. Or is my understanding of the Napster service wrong?
Those are all good reasons. I certainly don't want to be tethered to a computer just to read a book. The wife already gets upset if I take the laptop to the crapper. I suppose if there were a reader with exceedingly high resolution, long battery life and the cost was negligible I might be tempted. However, this magic device doesn't exist.
I also like to let people borrow my books. I don't see this being that easy with ebooks in our DRM'ed world
All in all, ebooks strike me as being like tablet PCs--kinda neat, but they don't really offer a benefit that makes their drawbacks worth it.
I absolutely agree. This was just the first time I encountered these services being semi-accurately described in the media. In the public's mind it seems that the meaning of "subscription" with regard to digital media is shifting toward the traditional definition of "renting". I was just glad to see someone NOT call the other services subscriptions.
Did anyone else watching the video notice that he referred to Rhapsody and Napster as song rental services and not subscription services?
I think we're in agreement. When you see a company do something like give to charity, they aren't doing it to be nice. They're doing it for good PR and possibly tax benefits. It may also have a bearing on employee morale. My point being that this is intended to have a positive impact on the bottom line.
Profit is not bad, it means a gain instead of a loss.
I absolutely agree.
There is no good or evil in the free market. I think that's what scares a lot of people.
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
I don't believe in public property, but I do believe that there is enough desire amongst members of a community to endow a trust to own land that is available to the public.
The idea of a community trust owning land for public use is interesting. But how does that really differ from the government owning the land? At some level, that's what government is right? Individuals pooling resources to do things like provide for the common defense, maintain public lands, etc. To me it seems like a community trust and a government are points on the same continuum. Could you explain the difference?
Not to create a straw man, but I have done the research, and the worst polluter in all of history has been the U.S. government. I'm not sure the worst polluter in history is really the best organization to regulate the pollution of private citizens.
It certainly isn't analogous to having a known child molester watching your kids, but I understand your point. I took a look at the PERC site and it's definitely something I'll be looking into.
In the end, pollution can ONLY be controlled through voluntary desire.
I certainly don't agree with that statement, but maybe I'm misinterpreting it.
If people really want to end pollution, they need to be informed by others in who is the worst polluters, and we need to boycott those companies.
Where do we get information about who are the worst polluters? Do companies report their own pollution or are they monitored by some other party? How would this work?
Sure, the average socialist will say that corporations just want to pollute the world so they can make a buck, but that's not the case: corporations want to provide the best price to their consumers, which is why pollution has tended to be so obvious.(emphasis added)
Corporations want to maximize profit. Period. Full stop. That's it. Of course, limiting pollution may be in line with that goal, but it might not be. Any action that a corporation takes to limit pollution is connected to an effort to maximize profit.
Right off the bat, I'd like to say that I don't share the beliefs you have expressed in this thread. I'm aquainted with a number of people that share your beliefs, but do so for knee-jerk, tinfoil hat, militia sort of reasons. However, your points seem well thought out.
So I was hoping you could explain some things that others haven't. Do you believe in public property? What about government regulation for companies/corporations with regard to polution?
My Finnish is no doubt worse than yours. However, that doesn't matter in the slightest as IKEA is Swedish, not Finnish.
You're right, and I can admit it. It's been a while since I read the Zeldman book. I mentally grouped his book with what I used to see on ALA. And that was folks jumping through hoops to follow the web standards to no real benefit other than standards compliance. This wasn't, of course, the case every time, but it happened plenty. And at the time I was totally on board. Is it OK to use a <dl> to mark up a form? Does a form really count as tabular data? Do the benefits of FIR (standards compliance!) outweigh accessibily concerns?
That sort of thing is somewhat ridiculous. I'm feeling much better now. And I stand corrected.
That is frequently the case. A lot of people lose sight of the purpose of standards--to make things easier. And with that in mind, "Designing with Web Standards" is a great book if you can tune out the standards for standards' sake zealotry. For practical standards compliance I really recommend "Web Standards Solutions" by Dan Cederholm.
Oh lordy. I know where you're coming from.
More curiously, I've occasionally found myself almost using a French word in English conversation at work -- and I'm a native speaker of English. So I've even felt this sort of language-drift pressure _away_ from my native language.My wife is a bilingual (German/English) and I'm a native English speaker that can speak German. We occasionally drift in and out of each language depending on what we're talking about and where we are. I, too, have tossed in a German word or two at work. People look at me funny, but they usually know what happened. What's really unfortunate is when I translate a German idiom that just doesn't sound right in English. For example, there is a German expression for "going to great lengths to be accommodating" or "being excessively accommodating". So to say I'm not going to bend over backwards to help someone, I would say "I'm not going to tear my ass open to help him." Needless to say, this is greeted with curiousity by my coworkers.
First of all, I think it's awesome that you're taking such care to ensure that your children grow up to be multi-lingual. So often parents that speak a minority language don't pass that language on to their children. About not mixing languages...
I think you're being overly cautious. The situation with the Turkish in Germany is markedly different from your own. The Turkish children in Germany constitute a speech community of their own. The Turkish/Gerrman mishmash has become a language in its own right. Your children will not have a speech community to reinforce and support this mixture. You clearly won't being doing your kids a disservice, but I wouldn't get too stressed about it.
"Waffen" means "weaponry". You may be thinking of "Luftwaffe" which is the German term for "Air Force" although it transliterates as something more like "air weapon".
Database Abstraction:
For the most part, I think you're right on about database abstraction. The vast majority or apps will never change databases. However, I think a great deal of the appeal of most DB abstraction packages is the functions. Most packages allow you to get just a single value without having to do a lot of the crap that you would normally have to do. For example, something like this:
Or you can get results returned as an associative array, or whatever. It can save you from a lot of repeated tedium. That might not be reason enough for you to use it, but just so you're aware. Also, I'm not sure what 'mysql_result_id' is. I assume you meant 'mysql_insert_id' and if so, I've used a few different database abstraction packages and every one of them gave me ready access to that value.
Templates:
Like anything, templates can be done wrong. Really wrong. And I've seen some really bad templating. But when done right, templating can make your life so much easier. The point of templating is to make maintenance easier. But it can also make development easier. Categorically rejecting templates is like categorically rejecting user defined functions, IMO.
Although the parent may not have been 100% factually correct, it certainly wasn't bogus advice. You are correct about VISA check cards and the like. HOWEVER, while you're waiting for the chargeback to happen, YOUR funds are tied up and not the bank's.
I hate the fact that so many Americans live beyond their means. I hate that debt is pretty much a necessity in the USA. Nonetheless, a credit card is a good idea. You can still live debt free and it doesn't have to cost you a thing. Personally, I use a Discover card for pretty much any transaction I can. I pay it off every month and once a year Discover credits my account with a few hundred dollars for my trouble.
Besides, you never know when life will throw you a curveball. A little financial flexibility can come in handy.
It's certainly true that relative to the rest of the world most Americans prefer weaker coffee. The same could be said of American Liberalism :)
Anyway, my understanding is that the term "Americano" came about during WWII when American soldiers were in Italy. The Americans would add hot water to the Italian coffee/espresso/whatever to suit their tastes.
Thankfully it hasn't been on Slashdot yet, I'd know as that usually tears my bandwidth a new one.
Poor bastard
I think he was referring to the iTunes Music Store. And to the best of my knowledge the iTMS only offers 128Kbps AAC files.
So which is it: do you use Linux exclusively or do you use Windows rarely? One or the other, please.
"Exclusively" != "generally" or "usually". Exclusively means "to the exclusion of all others", among other definitions.
Not flaming - just pointing out a common linguistic issue. People tend to show up on /. and proclaim "I use Linux exclusively!" and then add parenthetically "(except when I need Windows)".
Uh, if you limit responses to those that use Linux and only Linux to the exclusion of all others, you will get very few responses, indeed. Most computing environments aren't homogonous ( I know, I know, except for your home LAN).
Looking at the title of the post I would think the question being asked is "Why do people switch to Linux?" I don't think that a person's response is invalid if they occassionally boot into Windows.
No, you weren't flaming. You were just being a pedantic ass.