I wouldn't consider Hawaii and Iraq economic wars. They were both defense wars. The US military machine benefits from the strategic location of Hawaii and energy is seen as necessary for defense. Does military-industrial complex mean anything to you?
I can't speak to some of those above, but I bet at least a couple more were more strategically motivated than economically.
I can't speak for all web designers, but those that use pt measurements (rather than px) are doing their job just fine. If you can't read 10pt in your browser, it's your own/browser's fault. Use the browser to enlarge the text or set up your machine to display 10pt at a readable size if this is set incorrectly for some reason.
As for those who use px measurements, many are trying to fit text to the images on the page. If you have a problem with the font size then you probably have a problem with the image size. This becomes more exacerbated if the images are used to display text. Get a bigger monitor or turn down your resolution if you have problems. Or use the accessibility features of your browser/system to view text at a larger size.
It's not necessarily the web designer's fault if you have your machine set up in such a way that makes it so you cannot read the text.
If you are a Windows user, you may be happy to hear that Vista (the Aero compositing system specifically) will address this issue in many ways, virualizing the size of your screen so that things appear readable and similarly sized no matter your resolution. I've heard of some of the compositing systems coming into mainstream for Linux, but I have not heard whether this issue is addressed specifically.
I would rather think it has something to do with MS wanting the edit menu to contain options for editing the content you are working with. It's a usability thing. If you find it weird it's only because you have become accustom to Apple's way of doing things, not because MS decided to "think different".
In all my years running as non-admin, I've never really had a problem running an MS app as non-admin. The only issue I've ever had was the MSDN library would pop up a dialog as a non-admin, but this was a bug, not a design thing. There was a workaround that I applied and everything was peachy.
It is definitely the application developers' faults for not designing their software properly for a multi-user environment. This stuff is in MS's logo guidelines, too, so I'm not sure how companies could get away with this with boxed software (perhaps games have an exception and I would imagine virus scanners are exempt as they are system software).
Software d/led from the internet, of course, never gets MS certified to use the Windows logo, so you never know what you're going to get.
I have been running Windows as a non-admin since 2001. A few ideas, comments, suggestions:
1. There are many things that need to be run as administrator (app installs, etc.) but this can usually be accomplished by right clicking on executables and clicking Run as... for one time access.
2. Use the runas command from Start->Run. Basic usage is "runas/user:Administrator cmd.exe". It will then prompt for a password and you'll be set.
3. Get familiar with the command prompt. There are certain administrative dialogs that are nearly impossible to run as Admin while logged in as another user. For these tasks, you can do a runas to open the command prompt and do it from there.
4. Be aware of explorer problems. The main problem with running as non-admin is that you can not (easily) get explorer to run as an admin account. There is a workaround, though. Download MakeMeAdmin ( http://www.speakeasy.net/~aaronmar/NonAdmin/MakeMe Admin.zip ) and run that. The script prompts you for the admin password (if you have renamed your admin account as I have you can change that in the script easily) then for your own password. It then launches a command prompt that is actually running as your regular logged on account, but with admin privileges. This should let you work around any remaining issues you may have.
Hope this helps. It's really not as bad as it may sound.
Right-click -> Properties on Start menu and select classic view, might be a bit easier. I find it MUCH better, but that may only be because I'm used to Windows 2000. I can't find anything in XP.
Same experience here. My main annoyance is VS.NET, which brings itself forward when it gains focus. I have acquired a habit of moving the mouse to where an app window is going to pop up when I do compile-run so that VS doesn't get focus.
As for the context menu problem, it's an annoyance, but I've always been able to get them to work properly by never moving the mouse out of the context menu. With Combo dropdowns (depending on the app), after clicking the arrow, I have to move directly down to the drop down menu and cannot cross the main combo text area or it closes the dropdown.
I have sent in a bug report to MS for VS, hopefully it's something other people complain about and they'll fix it.
Apps are certainly handling messages in a non-standard manner, though it's up for grabs whether this could be called improper behavior or just design problems.
Don't know how this is that shocking, MS has been releasing shared source all over the place, including Allegiance, a multiplayer opline space real time strategy/shooter.
I do most of my application development in VB. While I have read about C/C++ and Assembly to a great extent, I find actually using them very distasteful (I've done a fair amount of C, but only a bit of assembly that I changed a bit here or there from examples). Like any high-level language, VB is not suited for doing complex computations on large amounts of data, most C++ code I see is spent simply reimplementing standard high-level language functionality. It's educational to understand the low-level stuff, but once you do, and you learn where high level languages suffer, the use of those languages greatly diminishes.
Back to the original post question, for me the main difference between C# and VB.NET is statement-continuation in VB "_" and statement termination in C# ";" and end statements in VB "End Function" as opposed to bracing code blocks in C# "{ }". In other words, they're trivial; there aren't any significant differences between learning one or the other unless you plan to work with unmanaged code as well, where C# will give you a better basis for using C++.NET.
I don't think any of the Microsoft.NET languages are well-suited to an educational environment (there are more special purpose languages for different concepts), but for learning coding on your own, they're both great.
I have actually heard Tolkien historians mention that could be the cause of some concern with editors (who may be tempted to correct the spelling) except that "you do not edit Tolkien".
I can only speak for myself, but I believe they may have drawn the wrong conclusions on their market research. I am American and I prefer the purchase model over the subscription model. And I despise the purchase-and-subscription model.
As far as the purchase over subscription, when I pay money for something I want it to be available to me at any later date. I do not always have time to get to something right away, and spending $15/month is annoying when I don't have any time to actually spend playing that month. I'd rather pay $70 and know that I can pick it up and play anytime I want.
And purchase-and-subscription? If a product requires a service, then the service should be included or the product is worthless. If a service requires a product (especially one which is almost free to copy and distribute) then the service fee should include the price of the product.
This is just the reason I don't buy into the MMOGs (I actually have a buddy who pays my subscription to WoW, but I bought the game). There may be others, but I do suspect their market research may not have been as accurate as they would like to think.
Actually, PathScale or Absoft are the way to go for Fortran. Yes, even on Intel chips. This is coming from someone who, until very recently, worked at a company that makes Fortran compilers.
I use personalized Google in Opera all the time. I am not sure what may be causing it, but perhaps you can try deleting any opera cookies you have (Ctrl+F12, Advanced, Cookies). Also, hit F12 and check to see if it says cookies are enabled there.
Do you search for spyware/adware? I use IE6 as my secondary browser (testing, certain sites with plugins that I don't want to bother installing on another browser, renting DRM movies, and more recently googlemaps). After months, it still runs faster than Firefox.
There's no conceivable reason my 2.6 GHz P4 HT w/ 512MB RAM should take over 2 seconds to start Firefox. That's just bad code, no matter how you slice it, at least as far as speed is concerned.
And before the expected replies of, "IE is part of Windows, so it has an advantage" start pouring in, please at least try to explain how Opera is faster than IE, even though IE is all "integrated" and cheats by "breaking TCP/IP".
In addition, due to additional features, I can see why some minor things may be slower. Opera 7 did a complete redesign, so the fact that it is slower than Opera 6 onmany things is undetstandable. But Opera 8 is already surpassing Opera 6 in a lot of the results, and it will probably only get better when the thing is actually releases.
Opera holds a slightly standards-elitist attitude compared to the other browsers out there. They don't worry quite so much about emulating IE's bugs as Firefox does.
So that might explain why it might be less "adverse-effects resistant", though I'm not sure how you gauged that. (Opera 7 certainly seems more accepting of HTML/CSS bugs than 6; I haven't really used 8 - I'll wait for the release).
Opera is bound by the same limitations that Firefox is and is faster than IE. So what's the latest excuse people are making up for Firefox now?
I can understand using it because it's Open Source or you like the interface, or whatever. But why do advocates feel the need to justify an open source project's problems with an unfair advantage to a closed-source one?
Until people accept that open source doesn't mean better, it never will be.
I could be wrong, but wasn't that originally for compiler optimization? The compiler would know ahead of time that it was comparing a single value multiple times and could compile accordingly. I think I heard this somewhere on the internet. And if it's on the internet, it must be true.
Opera seems to have no problem right-clicking or doing mouse gestures on this. And it is ECMA compliant. Maybe the book I was reading doesn't use the crippling?
I don't know about that. I'm sure you can find examples of Microsoft saying just about anything (true of most large companies), but Microsoft usually bashes the GPL not open source.
Not necessarily true. A significant (I'm sorry I can't be more specific in exactly what significant means) percentage of the money you spend goes to pay licensing fees to ROMS (the Russian RIAA). ROMS exists as an almost non-profit organization. Except for costs of doing business, all funds go to the copyright holder.
Pulling some numbers out of thin air that seem reasonable, if 25% of the money you pay goes to ROMS and 75% of ROMS revenue goes to copyright holder, the overall percentage is close to 20%. At about $1 per album (that's what it costs me), $0.20 should go to the copyright holder.
Compare to US store shopping where something like 1% of the cost of a CD goes to the artist. At $15 for a CD, that's $0.15 to the artist.
Not exact numbers of course, but it does show that you might be supporting the artist just as much by buying through allofmp3 as you would through Best Buy.
And as someone else pointed out, if you are worried about supporting artists, then buy merchendise like clothing or concert tickets. Artist profit margins are waaaaaay higher on this stuff.
Now the only caveat is that allofmp3 pays the copyright holder, which is the person who WROTE the song. The person who performs the song gets nothing. I personally don't have a problem with this since I don't know of any band I listen to that doesn't write their own stuff. And if you are only performing the song, you don't really deserve much anyway, as far as I am concerned.
Good site to hear well-thought out bitching about the government and the election. Includes a comprehensive aggregation of other political news as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't consider Hawaii and Iraq economic wars. They were both defense wars. The US military machine benefits from the strategic location of Hawaii and energy is seen as necessary for defense. Does military-industrial complex mean anything to you?
I can't speak to some of those above, but I bet at least a couple more were more strategically motivated than economically.
I can't speak for all web designers, but those that use pt measurements (rather than px) are doing their job just fine. If you can't read 10pt in your browser, it's your own/browser's fault. Use the browser to enlarge the text or set up your machine to display 10pt at a readable size if this is set incorrectly for some reason.
As for those who use px measurements, many are trying to fit text to the images on the page. If you have a problem with the font size then you probably have a problem with the image size. This becomes more exacerbated if the images are used to display text. Get a bigger monitor or turn down your resolution if you have problems. Or use the accessibility features of your browser/system to view text at a larger size.
It's not necessarily the web designer's fault if you have your machine set up in such a way that makes it so you cannot read the text.
If you are a Windows user, you may be happy to hear that Vista (the Aero compositing system specifically) will address this issue in many ways, virualizing the size of your screen so that things appear readable and similarly sized no matter your resolution. I've heard of some of the compositing systems coming into mainstream for Linux, but I have not heard whether this issue is addressed specifically.
I would rather think it has something to do with MS wanting the edit menu to contain options for editing the content you are working with. It's a usability thing. If you find it weird it's only because you have become accustom to Apple's way of doing things, not because MS decided to "think different".
You might be happy to find out that MS is bundling chess with Vista. 3d and 2d.
In all my years running as non-admin, I've never really had a problem running an MS app as non-admin. The only issue I've ever had was the MSDN library would pop up a dialog as a non-admin, but this was a bug, not a design thing. There was a workaround that I applied and everything was peachy.
It is definitely the application developers' faults for not designing their software properly for a multi-user environment. This stuff is in MS's logo guidelines, too, so I'm not sure how companies could get away with this with boxed software (perhaps games have an exception and I would imagine virus scanners are exempt as they are system software).
Software d/led from the internet, of course, never gets MS certified to use the Windows logo, so you never know what you're going to get.
Not sure of the winsudo thing. If it doesnt work out try MakeMeAdmin at http://www.speakeasy.net/~aaronmar/NonAdmin/MakeMe Admin.zip
I have been running Windows as a non-admin since 2001. A few ideas, comments, suggestions:
/user:Administrator cmd.exe". It will then prompt for a password and you'll be set.
e Admin.zip ) and run that. The script prompts you for the admin password (if you have renamed your admin account as I have you can change that in the script easily) then for your own password. It then launches a command prompt that is actually running as your regular logged on account, but with admin privileges. This should let you work around any remaining issues you may have.
1. There are many things that need to be run as administrator (app installs, etc.) but this can usually be accomplished by right clicking on executables and clicking Run as... for one time access.
2. Use the runas command from Start->Run. Basic usage is "runas
3. Get familiar with the command prompt. There are certain administrative dialogs that are nearly impossible to run as Admin while logged in as another user. For these tasks, you can do a runas to open the command prompt and do it from there.
4. Be aware of explorer problems. The main problem with running as non-admin is that you can not (easily) get explorer to run as an admin account. There is a workaround, though. Download MakeMeAdmin ( http://www.speakeasy.net/~aaronmar/NonAdmin/MakeM
Hope this helps. It's really not as bad as it may sound.
Have you tried classic view?
Right-click -> Properties on Start menu and select classic view, might be a bit easier. I find it MUCH better, but that may only be because I'm used to Windows 2000. I can't find anything in XP.
Same experience here. My main annoyance is VS.NET, which brings itself forward when it gains focus. I have acquired a habit of moving the mouse to where an app window is going to pop up when I do compile-run so that VS doesn't get focus.
As for the context menu problem, it's an annoyance, but I've always been able to get them to work properly by never moving the mouse out of the context menu. With Combo dropdowns (depending on the app), after clicking the arrow, I have to move directly down to the drop down menu and cannot cross the main combo text area or it closes the dropdown.
I have sent in a bug report to MS for VS, hopefully it's something other people complain about and they'll fix it.
Apps are certainly handling messages in a non-standard manner, though it's up for grabs whether this could be called improper behavior or just design problems.
Don't know how this is that shocking, MS has been releasing shared source all over the place, including Allegiance, a multiplayer opline space real time strategy/shooter.
I do most of my application development in VB. While I have read about C/C++ and Assembly to a great extent, I find actually using them very distasteful (I've done a fair amount of C, but only a bit of assembly that I changed a bit here or there from examples). Like any high-level language, VB is not suited for doing complex computations on large amounts of data, most C++ code I see is spent simply reimplementing standard high-level language functionality. It's educational to understand the low-level stuff, but once you do, and you learn where high level languages suffer, the use of those languages greatly diminishes.
.NET languages are well-suited to an educational environment (there are more special purpose languages for different concepts), but for learning coding on your own, they're both great.
Back to the original post question, for me the main difference between C# and VB.NET is statement-continuation in VB "_" and statement termination in C# ";" and end statements in VB "End Function" as opposed to bracing code blocks in C# "{ }". In other words, they're trivial; there aren't any significant differences between learning one or the other unless you plan to work with unmanaged code as well, where C# will give you a better basis for using C++.NET.
I don't think any of the Microsoft
Dwarves is Tolkien.
Dwarfs is English
I have actually heard Tolkien historians mention that could be the cause of some concern with editors (who may be tempted to correct the spelling) except that "you do not edit Tolkien".
I can only speak for myself, but I believe they may have drawn the wrong conclusions on their market research. I am American and I prefer the purchase model over the subscription model. And I despise the purchase-and-subscription model.
As far as the purchase over subscription, when I pay money for something I want it to be available to me at any later date. I do not always have time to get to something right away, and spending $15/month is annoying when I don't have any time to actually spend playing that month. I'd rather pay $70 and know that I can pick it up and play anytime I want.
And purchase-and-subscription? If a product requires a service, then the service should be included or the product is worthless. If a service requires a product (especially one which is almost free to copy and distribute) then the service fee should include the price of the product.
This is just the reason I don't buy into the MMOGs (I actually have a buddy who pays my subscription to WoW, but I bought the game). There may be others, but I do suspect their market research may not have been as accurate as they would like to think.
Actually, PathScale or Absoft are the way to go for Fortran. Yes, even on Intel chips. This is coming from someone who, until very recently, worked at a company that makes Fortran compilers.
I use personalized Google in Opera all the time. I am not sure what may be causing it, but perhaps you can try deleting any opera cookies you have (Ctrl+F12, Advanced, Cookies). Also, hit F12 and check to see if it says cookies are enabled there.
Just wanted to point out that you can do the same thing with IE, which defaults to 4 and Opera which defaults to 8.
Do you search for spyware/adware? I use IE6 as my secondary browser (testing, certain sites with plugins that I don't want to bother installing on another browser, renting DRM movies, and more recently googlemaps). After months, it still runs faster than Firefox.
There's no conceivable reason my 2.6 GHz P4 HT w/ 512MB RAM should take over 2 seconds to start Firefox. That's just bad code, no matter how you slice it, at least as far as speed is concerned.
And before the expected replies of, "IE is part of Windows, so it has an advantage" start pouring in, please at least try to explain how Opera is faster than IE, even though IE is all "integrated" and cheats by "breaking TCP/IP".
Opera 8 is still in beta.
In addition, due to additional features, I can see why some minor things may be slower. Opera 7 did a complete redesign, so the fact that it is slower than Opera 6 onmany things is undetstandable. But Opera 8 is already surpassing Opera 6 in a lot of the results, and it will probably only get better when the thing is actually releases.
Opera holds a slightly standards-elitist attitude compared to the other browsers out there. They don't worry quite so much about emulating IE's bugs as Firefox does.
So that might explain why it might be less "adverse-effects resistant", though I'm not sure how you gauged that. (Opera 7 certainly seems more accepting of HTML/CSS bugs than 6; I haven't really used 8 - I'll wait for the release).
Opera is bound by the same limitations that Firefox is and is faster than IE. So what's the latest excuse people are making up for Firefox now?
I can understand using it because it's Open Source or you like the interface, or whatever. But why do advocates feel the need to justify an open source project's problems with an unfair advantage to a closed-source one?
Until people accept that open source doesn't mean better, it never will be.
Not everyone. I use Opera. I select, right-click, click or even better double-click, click.
I need no extensions for something so trivial.
I could be wrong, but wasn't that originally for compiler optimization? The compiler would know ahead of time that it was comparing a single value multiple times and could compile accordingly. I think I heard this somewhere on the internet. And if it's on the internet, it must be true.
Opera seems to have no problem right-clicking or doing mouse gestures on this. And it is ECMA compliant. Maybe the book I was reading doesn't use the crippling?
I don't know about that. I'm sure you can find examples of Microsoft saying just about anything (true of most large companies), but Microsoft usually bashes the GPL not open source.
Not necessarily true. A significant (I'm sorry I can't be more specific in exactly what significant means) percentage of the money you spend goes to pay licensing fees to ROMS (the Russian RIAA). ROMS exists as an almost non-profit organization. Except for costs of doing business, all funds go to the copyright holder.
Pulling some numbers out of thin air that seem reasonable, if 25% of the money you pay goes to ROMS and 75% of ROMS revenue goes to copyright holder, the overall percentage is close to 20%. At about $1 per album (that's what it costs me), $0.20 should go to the copyright holder.
Compare to US store shopping where something like 1% of the cost of a CD goes to the artist. At $15 for a CD, that's $0.15 to the artist.
Not exact numbers of course, but it does show that you might be supporting the artist just as much by buying through allofmp3 as you would through Best Buy.
And as someone else pointed out, if you are worried about supporting artists, then buy merchendise like clothing or concert tickets. Artist profit margins are waaaaaay higher on this stuff.
Now the only caveat is that allofmp3 pays the copyright holder, which is the person who WROTE the song. The person who performs the song gets nothing. I personally don't have a problem with this since I don't know of any band I listen to that doesn't write their own stuff. And if you are only performing the song, you don't really deserve much anyway, as far as I am concerned.
http://poliwatch.org/
Good site to hear well-thought out bitching about the government and the election. Includes a comprehensive aggregation of other political news as well.