You should be careful about melatonin. See how far down you can take your dosage before it becomes ineffective; you might be surprised. I have a friend who gets to sleep on something like 500 micrograms.
Unfortunately, I have housemates who would slaughter me in my sleep if I tried that.
I like clock radios, somewhat loud, out of reach, and tuned to a really annoying station. This morning I heard "Judges decided to allow Terri --" and was across the room and out of bed before the sentence was up.
Insightful? These people set up a service and declined to know even the basics about it and it's somehow the company's fault that they couldn't use features they hadn't signed up for?
No, I am agreeing with you but saying that simple and clean doesn't mean that it won't break in IE. IE is so wrong and broken that even simple and clean designs break horribly all over the place.
And IE being stupid or not, the examples you gave are not using the tools we have well. Those are bad websites if they are coded entirely in DW using tables or entirely in CSS.
Can I get a link to your magical website? Because max-width simply DOES NOT WORK in IE. Hovers on things that aren't links simply DO NOT WORK in IE. I would love to see an example of ones that do work.
It's not that the way they are implemented is off. It's that they aren't implemented.
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. When you show them what it looks like in IE without the hacks, they assume that it's your fault, that you are crap at coding, and that you are wasting your time and their money by not coding for IE in the same amount of time as other things.
PHBs will never understand. Some bosses do, like mine for example, but many, many don't.
It's not even a matter of huge pages, it's knowing that you are capable of doing Cool Design Trick Y that will make your site easier to navigate or understand and then finding out that IE simply doesn't support it at all.
And if you have only had problems with position: fixed you must not ever work with floats, margins, max-width, hovers on things that aren't links, etc.etc. the list goes on and on.
Get one really huge business to do this, and to knock on MS' door and say why they are doing it, and let's see what happens.
So far it's just been small time web devs complaining; what happens when someone who spends millions a year on hundreds of web devs refuses to continue to waste their employees' time and their money making them code to a shitty, poorly implemented, BROKEN browser?
Insightful? Do you think the iPods would have become popular if they weren't really easy to use and had a great interface?
Jesus. Not everybody is a slave to fashion. I hate when people say that they're bought because they're cool. They BECAME cool because they work better than anything else out there for the majority of people's use.
I didn't call Macs outrageously expensive, I said that the style argument should be brought up when others do. Which happens quite often around here.
Someone has to pay the designers who created those computers, who made them look better than all the others. Consumers do when they pay more for a Mac. That is my entire point.
Why don't you go find a real troll and bother them?
I don't have one. I'm saying that people here and elsewhere complain a lot about how expensive Macs are but nobody seems to take into account that there were some pretty high up designers that made all this pretty machinery and someone has to pay THEM for their work.
I never said that *I* think Macs are too expensive. I think you get exactly what you pay for - a superior machine both in design and execution.
You know, there are those of us who are past the legal drinking age who are no longer pimple-faced teens and who are actually (wait for this) productive members of society who were not old enough to watch the first ones in the theater.
I believe I was born when the third one came out, but I'll be darned if I can recall being 8 months old.
I wouldn't present that much information over on the side either way. Why do you feel you have to have every single movie listed there on the side? Why not just have the alphabet linked in the headers and the footers which takes you to a page of links of movies that start with that letter? People can navigate themselves and might choose to open the actual spoilers in a new tab or window if they don't want to lose the list of movies.
That's what I would do, anyway. I'll be sending you a bill for consulting services for my time. What's your address? (Tongue firmly in cheek)
Slashdot Mirror
You should be careful about melatonin. See how far down you can take your dosage before it becomes ineffective; you might be surprised. I have a friend who gets to sleep on something like 500 micrograms.
Unfortunately, I have housemates who would slaughter me in my sleep if I tried that.
I like clock radios, somewhat loud, out of reach, and tuned to a really annoying station. This morning I heard "Judges decided to allow Terri --" and was across the room and out of bed before the sentence was up.
(I like to avoid that particular news story.)
My commute to work right now -is- uphill both ways. I told my father about it, and he asked how that was possible.
Uh. I have to go up a hill to get there, and then back down the other side?
My kids are never going to believe me.
Wait, so I can't advertise something as being a "great benefit" when it's actually a completely included free option or I'll get sued?
What the fuck?
Insightful? These people set up a service and declined to know even the basics about it and it's somehow the company's fault that they couldn't use features they hadn't signed up for?
Ignorant.
When you practice your fire drill do you stand at the top of the stairs and describe how you would walk down them and out the emergency route?
No, you actually do it.
I think the original phrase is "I could care less about X", and it is meant to be sarcastic.
That used to bug me to death, too, and then I learned it was intended to be sarcastic, even if it doesn't always read that way.
Ah, but if you go through Napster you know you're getting what you requested, and the quality is all the same.
No, I am agreeing with you but saying that simple and clean doesn't mean that it won't break in IE. IE is so wrong and broken that even simple and clean designs break horribly all over the place.
And IE being stupid or not, the examples you gave are not using the tools we have well. Those are bad websites if they are coded entirely in DW using tables or entirely in CSS.
Can I get a link to your magical website? Because max-width simply DOES NOT WORK in IE. Hovers on things that aren't links simply DO NOT WORK in IE. I would love to see an example of ones that do work.
It's not that the way they are implemented is off. It's that they aren't implemented.
Why would we want websites to look like simple pages of white backgrounds and black text when we have all these amazing tools?
Simple and clean does NOT mean that they won't break in IE. It is really, really messed up.
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. When you show them what it looks like in IE without the hacks, they assume that it's your fault, that you are crap at coding, and that you are wasting your time and their money by not coding for IE in the same amount of time as other things.
PHBs will never understand. Some bosses do, like mine for example, but many, many don't.
It's not even a matter of huge pages, it's knowing that you are capable of doing Cool Design Trick Y that will make your site easier to navigate or understand and then finding out that IE simply doesn't support it at all.
And if you have only had problems with position: fixed you must not ever work with floats, margins, max-width, hovers on things that aren't links, etc.etc. the list goes on and on.
YOU are lucky. Most of us are not.
Get one really huge business to do this, and to knock on MS' door and say why they are doing it, and let's see what happens.
So far it's just been small time web devs complaining; what happens when someone who spends millions a year on hundreds of web devs refuses to continue to waste their employees' time and their money making them code to a shitty, poorly implemented, BROKEN browser?
I'd like to find out.
I wonder - what about people using .mac accounts on iChat? Do they have to click through AOL agreements to get to that point?
(I know that isn't an option for everyone, but it is something to consider.)
Just for the record, because you didn't include it on your list of accepted file formats, AAC files don't have to include DRM.
Insightful? Do you think the iPods would have become popular if they weren't really easy to use and had a great interface?
Jesus. Not everybody is a slave to fashion. I hate when people say that they're bought because they're cool. They BECAME cool because they work better than anything else out there for the majority of people's use.
*cough*
Not a dude.
You're right, I was trying to make the argument as simplistic as possible by saying that it was to pay the designers.
Obviously I failed.
You must be functionally retarded.
"When someone else says that Macs are outrageously expensive, please, tell them about the design and how that is one reason for the cost."
IS NOT THE SAME AS
"I think that Macs are outrageously expensive."
Learn to read.
Maybe you should learn to read what I am saying.
I didn't call Macs outrageously expensive, I said that the style argument should be brought up when others do. Which happens quite often around here.
Someone has to pay the designers who created those computers, who made them look better than all the others. Consumers do when they pay more for a Mac. That is my entire point.
Why don't you go find a real troll and bother them?
I don't have one. I'm saying that people here and elsewhere complain a lot about how expensive Macs are but nobody seems to take into account that there were some pretty high up designers that made all this pretty machinery and someone has to pay THEM for their work.
I never said that *I* think Macs are too expensive. I think you get exactly what you pay for - a superior machine both in design and execution.
Mention that the next time someone talks about how outrageously expensive Macs are. Design costs money. Designers cost money.
You know, there are those of us who are past the legal drinking age who are no longer pimple-faced teens and who are actually (wait for this) productive members of society who were not old enough to watch the first ones in the theater.
I believe I was born when the third one came out, but I'll be darned if I can recall being 8 months old.
SSIs? I dunno, man.
I wouldn't present that much information over on the side either way. Why do you feel you have to have every single movie listed there on the side? Why not just have the alphabet linked in the headers and the footers which takes you to a page of links of movies that start with that letter? People can navigate themselves and might choose to open the actual spoilers in a new tab or window if they don't want to lose the list of movies.
That's what I would do, anyway. I'll be sending you a bill for consulting services for my time. What's your address? (Tongue firmly in cheek)