windows key + many letters (yes OS X's use of the apple key makes more sense most of the time) the run box the fact that every explorer window and open/save dialog box has an actual PATH that I can edit. (I fucking hate Finder!)
I'm actually looking forward to the new address bar in Vista's Explorer (even though they copied some of its abilities from some 3rd party mac apps)
even though I've used windows for the majority of 9 years I never quite developed any muscle memory of the minimize/maximize/close buttons and never stopped relying on the x and square and other thingy icon in the buttons.
When I'm in windows I only touch my mouse to use photoshop or maya, and before firefox's find-while-typing - to sometimes click a link in IE on pages that took too long to tab to the link I wanted.
Honestly the keyboard navigation built into every nook and crannie of windows is my favorite think about it.
alt, alt+space bar, ctrl+ESC, tab, the arrow keys, pressing whichever letter is underlined in a menu item, or alt+the underlined letter..... it doesnt get any better than this!;)
And there's the OPTION to always show the underlined letters in the menu without having to hold alt first.
Heck, even when I'm in photoshop, illustrator or maya I still use the keyboard extensively to access repetitive menu items.
I read somewhere that OS X has something similar but I've never figured out how to activate it or the key combinations to use it.
I use XP all night and OS X all day. I DESPERATELY wish there were and OPTION to always have the x - + displayed. Nobody has to win or loose in the decision whether or not to show them all the time!
JUST GIVE USERS THE O P T I O N !!!!!!
With enough OPTIONS a user can configure the os to be as minimal or cluttered as they desire.
I couldn't give a shit about the defaults so long as it is quick and easy to change the OPTIONS that I want to change and that there enough OPTIONS to satisfy me.
The vast majority of sites were built without a doctype or using a doctype that does not activate Standards mode. For them to fully implement CSS properly will NOT BREAK these millions of old pages that are displayed in QUIRKS MODE. It's that simple.
You might be a developer but your knowledge of web development is lacking.
ALL of what I do is professional web development. And I agree with everything you said.
Example for the grandparent post.
I have many times taken a layout from photoshop comp to fully coded html+css page in under an hour. Then another 10 minutes and I've got every page on a 18+ page website ready and awaiting content from the client.
THEN I spend the next 1-4 or more hours trying to get rid of weird extra spacing all over the place (especially navigation areas made of styled lists) without resorting to IE specific hacks or stylesheets (because you never know whats gonna get f-ed up in the next IE version).
Now let's Imagine I charge $50 an hour. After the charge for designing the look of the site the costs would be
$40 - taking the layout from static image to actual html page
$70 - to drop in 18 pages of content (if its supplied in sensibly typed text files and is mostly simple paragraphs and bulleted lists)
anywhere from $50 - $400+ - for the time spent mucking about with IE trying to get the layout to look correct.
Another possible $50 - $150 because sometimes you just HAVE TO rewrite the javascript from scratch in a completely different manner to get it to work in IE at all or to detect where was the bug that was crashing IE.
Firefox needs a super shiney interface as one of the OPTIONS when installing.
They also need to hype the development of the interface during its design stages. Hire some well known gui-skinner or somebody from apple to design it.
In the last couple months, every site I've styled an unordered list into a navigation for has looked totally off in IE. Sometimes the problem can be fixed by compacting all of the markup into a single ungodly line but most of the time there's no hope.
I have. Many do it by accident and don't realize it. Of course this means their developers don't know enough about website development to bother even testing in other browsers. But that's the case with a lot of so called website developers. So, even if every developer using standards today were to boycot IE, it wouldn't make a very noticeable difference.
that reminds me, a good many years back I came across a website that had a set of pages setup for validating varous aspects of css and html and forms. It was a few dozen pages long. Firefox 0.9-something passed nearly everything and IE6 failed many of the css related tests. Anyone have a clue what site I'm talking about?
Yip, if MS took the bull by the horns, fixed all their rendering bugs, and fully implemented css2 properly and gave us at least 50% of css3, all web developers everywhere would love it and put pressure on firefox/safari etc to play catchup.
can u give more details on what goes into creating the foundation of one of those homes?
like how deep/tall is the foundation made before the house is built on it?
fyi, the foundation on my aparment building starts about 1 foot under the lawn and ends about 2 1/2 feet above ground... at least thats how it seems to me, i might be wrong
Well, where I'm from, we have enough sense not to build on sand. It's that simple. The only people in the last 5 years in Nassau to build on sand are some really really really expensive beach front homes the had foundation problems less than a year after they were built. Just don't build on sand. It's dumb. If you've ever gone to church or knew one Christian growing up you MUST have heard of some sort of parable or old saying about not building your house on sand.
If a 2x4 can go through a cinderblock, imagine what it'll do to a toothpick house. The Bahamas has been hit at least to some degree by almost every hurricane there ever was, including the most destructive ones. I've never heard of or seen a picture of any major damage to a cinder block built house other than roof damage and cracked windows.
Can you describe what goes into the foundation of homes in your area?
Every hurricane or every news report about tornado alley showing the damaged homes looks like this. This looks like a pile of toothpicks! You really spend thousands of dollars to build and live in these wooden things?
I'm from the Bahamas. Although I'm the least patriotic person I know, I have to admit that our buildings hold up pretty damned good under hurricanes. A hell of a lot better that the photos we see coming out of florida. We build everything with CINDER BLOCKS reinforced with steel rods. They work, trust me.
I tried googling for some photos to illustrate but none of them show enough steel rods to be accurate.
And what is with you people and sheetrock walls? I've heard crooks in ft. lauderdale getting in through people's walls. Try breaking through cinder blocks. Actually I remember something from a guiness book of world records where a karate teacher and his young students totally demolished an entire home by just karate chopping everything. If a dozen 14yr olds can destroy a house built out of the same material as so many american homes, what the hell did you think a hurrican (or tornado) would do!?!
on 5 occasions in the last 3 years I've tried multiple versions of linux (ubuntu, knoppix, mandrake, red hat, probably others I don't really remember at the moment) on my system and 3 others I have access to.
No linux distro has ever worked 'completely' with any of them. the problems are always either with the sound card, video card, network card, usb ports, not finding all the hard-drives, not finding the cd drive after booting.
I impatiently await the day when linux works out of the box on these systems just as well as Windows. But that day just keeps not coming. I really really hate windows. Really! But I still can't make the linux switch because I don't have the time to learn whatever mystical chants are required to make any of them JUST WORK.
"I just don't find it "abusive" for MS to include their browser with their own O/S any more than I find it "abusive" for Apple to include Safari."
For the millionth time...everyone... The abusive business practices carried out by microsoft that turned out to be illegal are impossible to sum up as 'bundled the browser with the OS'. Bundling IE is irrelevant. Their crime was 'convincing'/forcing OEMs to NOT install any other browser on the systems before they left the factory. There's really nothing wrong with anyone bundling anything with anything else, which is why I think their media player problem in europe is a croc of crap.
What's illegal is threatening to double the price of windows for the pc manufacturers who wanted to put both netscape and IE on the systems they sold.
For a more in depth understanding, read the full report by Judge Penfield Jackson [http://www.albion.com/microsoft/]
The majority of the browsing public don't care about standards...
but, the people paying for the websites that the browsing public will visit are interested in saving money. Developers who stick to the standards can build a layout that works perfectly in everything except IE in a matter of minutes, then they spend hours and hours (of billable time) sometimes days getting it to work in IE, and that's just css I'm talking about, javascript is even more of a hassle sometimes.
The browsing public wants 'cool sites' with frequently updated content. Sticking to the standards makes both of those goals much easier, faster, cheaper, better...until it comes time to hack the crap out of it so IE users can get the same experience.
well, good for you. Could you please put up a guide or something for the rest of us, because I can't get ANY VIDEO of any kind except flash to play in the firefox/win. And I'm not alone, between the release of version 7.something and now I've gotten nearly 30 people to switch to firefox and none of us can get windows media to play and most can't get anything else to play, even quicktime seems to only work 45% of the time.
"Microsoft should face a class-action lawsuit for negligence in their product design resulting in expensive and time-consuming repairs to computers on a regular basis."
YES, MY GOODNESS YES. WE SHOUL SUE THEM. Like collectively, everyone who could prove they owned any version of windows from 95 and up and has a receipt/invoice for computer repair of damage caused by anything that exploited flaws in IE, should get 88% off Vista.
IE's page display only 'appears' to be better because MS spent more effort improving IE's ability to guess at what the crap code in a crap website is 'supposed' to do, instead of spending the time to implement the standards.
The point of the standards is to get the developers to learn their trade properly and build sites properly and not rely on the browsers guesswork.
After firefox's standards support was pretty good, then they went back and improved the shitty code guesswork. I guess you gave up before they got to that part. you should try it again.
BTW, html and css should be f-ing simple to you top-notch genius programmer types with your complicated C++ and java stuff that I'll never be smart enough to comprehend. No excuse for you not to be able to get your layouts to work. It's not hard. You're smart.
what the fu...!!!!!!
Screw you.
You Bastard!
The vast majority of web developers are not working on huge enterprise applications and so for us, IE6, firefox, netscape, safari and others can do everything that is needed. And with adequate css support I can get a site up and running PERFECTLY in all those browsers except IE! To get even the layout to work in IE will take an extra 20 minutes to 2 days. Don't knock Firefox until you try taking a layout from photoshop to finished page in firefox in under 15 minutes!!! Impossible in IE unless its friggine exported slices and tabled to hell.
A majority of users don't even know that they're using IE. Or windows. Or that the 'thingie' the mouse movies is called the pointer/cursor. Or that the way files are stored on their computer is based on a simple to comprehend concept of folders within folder and that there are places beyond the desktop.
Don't forget the so-called 'confession tape' where a man who really looks nothing like Bin-Laden, wearing jewelery that Binladen has never and never would wear 'confesses' to masterminding 9/11.
video footage 'released' by Bin Laden is few a far between yet they 'found' this video taped confession out of the blue.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html
then later, Osama actually states to reporters that he had nothing to do with it. He's still evil scum. But he's not 'as' guilty of 9/11 as the US gov would have it's sheep believe.
And what the phuck is up with Sadam being captured and Iraq on the news EVERY hour of every day, meanwhile I havent heard squat about afganistan in months and nobody even mentions whether or not they're still trying to capture Osama, you know, the guy accused of destroying the towers. I know Sadam is a bad guy but what has he done to the US in the last 10 years that even comes close to 9/11.
If I were president I'd close the borders, recall every american soldier and employee based in countries we're not on good terms with and then wait for the enemy to come to us.
Half the terrorists only want the US off of their soil anyway. Once we leave they'll leave us alone. And dozens of countries will realize how dependant they were on US presence there and will beg and plead for their return and will do anything to make it happen, even finally providing useful info on terrorists in their country.
--Compusa, Fry's Electronics, Microcenter don't have these in my country
With windows I know what to do.
With linux I have no idea. I only know about the package management tools and they download stuff from the internet and install it automatically. Is it possible to just have it download the files and I can then burn them to cd and install them on the offline system easily? how easily. "How?" period!
with windows I can download the vital updates as executables, take them to the other system and double click.
Forget updates for now. I'm more intersted in finding a distro that will 'just work' with my sound and video card!
Slashdot Mirror
...almost forgot
windows key + many letters (yes OS X's use of the apple key makes more sense most of the time)
the run box
the fact that every explorer window and open/save dialog box has an actual PATH that I can edit.
(I fucking hate Finder!)
I'm actually looking forward to the new address bar in Vista's Explorer (even though they copied some of its abilities from some 3rd party mac apps)
even though I've used windows for the majority of 9 years I never quite developed any muscle memory of the minimize/maximize/close buttons and never stopped relying on the x and square and other thingy icon in the buttons.
;)
When I'm in windows I only touch my mouse to use photoshop or maya, and before firefox's find-while-typing - to sometimes click a link in IE on pages that took too long to tab to the link I wanted.
Honestly the keyboard navigation built into every nook and crannie of windows is my favorite think about it.
alt, alt+space bar, ctrl+ESC, tab, the arrow keys, pressing whichever letter is underlined in a menu item, or alt+the underlined letter..... it doesnt get any better than this!
And there's the OPTION to always show the underlined letters in the menu without having to hold alt first.
Heck, even when I'm in photoshop, illustrator or maya I still use the keyboard extensively to access repetitive menu items.
I read somewhere that OS X has something similar but I've never figured out how to activate it or the key combinations to use it.
I use XP all night and OS X all day.
I DESPERATELY wish there were and OPTION to always have the x - + displayed.
Nobody has to win or loose in the decision whether or not to show them all the time!
JUST GIVE USERS THE O P T I O N !!!!!!
With enough OPTIONS a user can configure the os to be as minimal or cluttered as they desire.
I couldn't give a shit about the defaults so long as it is quick and easy to change the OPTIONS that I want to change and that there enough OPTIONS to satisfy me.
FOR THE 10 BILLIONTH TIME
DOCTYPE Switch!
The vast majority of sites were built without a doctype or using a doctype that does not activate Standards mode. For them to fully implement CSS properly will NOT BREAK these millions of old pages that are displayed in QUIRKS MODE. It's that simple.
You might be a developer but your knowledge of web development is lacking.
ALL of what I do is professional web development. And I agree with everything you said. Example for the grandparent post. I have many times taken a layout from photoshop comp to fully coded html+css page in under an hour. Then another 10 minutes and I've got every page on a 18+ page website ready and awaiting content from the client. THEN I spend the next 1-4 or more hours trying to get rid of weird extra spacing all over the place (especially navigation areas made of styled lists) without resorting to IE specific hacks or stylesheets (because you never know whats gonna get f-ed up in the next IE version). Now let's Imagine I charge $50 an hour. After the charge for designing the look of the site the costs would be $40 - taking the layout from static image to actual html page $70 - to drop in 18 pages of content (if its supplied in sensibly typed text files and is mostly simple paragraphs and bulleted lists) anywhere from $50 - $400+ - for the time spent mucking about with IE trying to get the layout to look correct. Another possible $50 - $150 because sometimes you just HAVE TO rewrite the javascript from scratch in a completely different manner to get it to work in IE at all or to detect where was the bug that was crashing IE.
Firefox needs a super shiney interface as one of the OPTIONS when installing. They also need to hype the development of the interface during its design stages. Hire some well known gui-skinner or somebody from apple to design it.
Don't have to do anything deliberately!
In the last couple months, every site I've styled an unordered list into a navigation for has looked totally off in IE. Sometimes the problem can be fixed by compacting all of the markup into a single ungodly line but most of the time there's no hope.
I have. Many do it by accident and don't realize it. Of course this means their developers don't know enough about website development to bother even testing in other browsers. But that's the case with a lot of so called website developers. So, even if every developer using standards today were to boycot IE, it wouldn't make a very noticeable difference.
that reminds me, a good many years back I came across a website that had a set of pages setup for validating varous aspects of css and html and forms. It was a few dozen pages long. Firefox 0.9-something passed nearly everything and IE6 failed many of the css related tests. Anyone have a clue what site I'm talking about?
Yip, if MS took the bull by the horns, fixed all their rendering bugs, and fully implemented css2 properly and gave us at least 50% of css3, all web developers everywhere would love it and put pressure on firefox/safari etc to play catchup.
can u give more details on what goes into creating the foundation of one of those homes? like how deep/tall is the foundation made before the house is built on it? fyi, the foundation on my aparment building starts about 1 foot under the lawn and ends about 2 1/2 feet above ground... at least thats how it seems to me, i might be wrong
Well, where I'm from, we have enough sense not to build on sand. It's that simple. The only people in the last 5 years in Nassau to build on sand are some really really really expensive beach front homes the had foundation problems less than a year after they were built. Just don't build on sand. It's dumb. If you've ever gone to church or knew one Christian growing up you MUST have heard of some sort of parable or old saying about not building your house on sand.
If a 2x4 can go through a cinderblock, imagine what it'll do to a toothpick house.
The Bahamas has been hit at least to some degree by almost every hurricane there ever was, including the most destructive ones. I've never heard of or seen a picture of any major damage to a cinder block built house other than roof damage and cracked windows.
Can you describe what goes into the foundation of homes in your area?
I really have to ask. You North Americans, why the hell do you build your homes out of toothpicks?
g /_41805420_001842788_house_getty300.jpg
r y/full/Post-Tension-Rebar-Closeup.jpg ...reinforcing cinder blocks...r 15.jpg
e %20construction%20for%20web-716493.jpg
Look at the photo from the article:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41805000/jp
Every hurricane or every news report about tornado alley showing the damaged homes looks like this. This looks like a pile of toothpicks! You really spend thousands of dollars to build and live in these wooden things?
I'm from the Bahamas. Although I'm the least patriotic person I know, I have to admit that our buildings hold up pretty damned good under hurricanes. A hell of a lot better that the photos we see coming out of florida. We build everything with CINDER BLOCKS reinforced with steel rods. They work, trust me.
I tried googling for some photos to illustrate but none of them show enough steel rods to be accurate.
And what is with you people and sheetrock walls? I've heard crooks in ft. lauderdale getting in through people's walls. Try breaking through cinder blocks. Actually I remember something from a guiness book of world records where a karate teacher and his young students totally demolished an entire home by just karate chopping everything. If a dozen 14yr olds can destroy a house built out of the same material as so many american homes, what the hell did you think a hurrican (or tornado) would do!?!
steel rebar...
http://www.caed.calpoly.edu/polycanyon/ncbs_galle
http://www.proptek.com/dbfiles/products/17/carrie
and held together with cement.
versus 2x4's, nails, and sheetrock!
I for one could not get a good nights sleep knowing my home is held up by this crap.
http://www.yournextbroker.com/uploaded_images/Hom
on 5 occasions in the last 3 years I've tried multiple versions of linux (ubuntu, knoppix, mandrake, red hat, probably others I don't really remember at the moment) on my system and 3 others I have access to.
No linux distro has ever worked 'completely' with any of them.
the problems are always either with the sound card, video card, network card, usb ports, not finding all the hard-drives, not finding the cd drive after booting.
I impatiently await the day when linux works out of the box on these systems just as well as Windows. But that day just keeps not coming. I really really hate windows. Really! But I still can't make the linux switch because I don't have the time to learn whatever mystical chants are required to make any of them JUST WORK.
"I just don't find it "abusive" for MS to include their browser with their own O/S any more than I find it "abusive" for Apple to include Safari."
For the millionth time...everyone...
The abusive business practices carried out by microsoft that turned out to be illegal are impossible to sum up as 'bundled the browser with the OS'. Bundling IE is irrelevant.
Their crime was 'convincing'/forcing OEMs to NOT install any other browser on the systems before they left the factory. There's really nothing wrong with anyone bundling anything with anything else, which is why I think their media player problem in europe is a croc of crap.
What's illegal is threatening to double the price of windows for the pc manufacturers who wanted to put both netscape and IE on the systems they sold.
For a more in depth understanding, read the full report by Judge Penfield Jackson [http://www.albion.com/microsoft/]
The majority of the browsing public don't care about standards...
but, the people paying for the websites that the browsing public will visit are interested in saving money.
Developers who stick to the standards can build a layout that works perfectly in everything except IE in a matter of minutes, then they spend hours and hours (of billable time) sometimes days getting it to work in IE, and that's just css I'm talking about, javascript is even more of a hassle sometimes.
The browsing public wants 'cool sites' with frequently updated content. Sticking to the standards makes both of those goals much easier, faster, cheaper, better...until it comes time to hack the crap out of it so IE users can get the same experience.
well, good for you.
Could you please put up a guide or something for the rest of us, because I can't get ANY VIDEO of any kind except flash to play in the firefox/win. And I'm not alone, between the release of version 7.something and now I've gotten nearly 30 people to switch to firefox and none of us can get windows media to play and most can't get anything else to play, even quicktime seems to only work 45% of the time.
--while firefox (and others) will have to stay innovative to maintain or grow.-- u say that like its a bad thing
"Microsoft should face a class-action lawsuit for negligence in their product design resulting in expensive and time-consuming repairs to computers on a regular basis."
YES, MY GOODNESS YES.
WE SHOUL SUE THEM. Like collectively, everyone who could prove they owned any version of windows from 95 and up and has a receipt/invoice for computer repair of damage caused by anything that exploited flaws in IE, should get 88% off Vista.
IE's page display only 'appears' to be better because MS spent more effort improving IE's ability to guess at what the crap code in a crap website is 'supposed' to do, instead of spending the time to implement the standards.
The point of the standards is to get the developers to learn their trade properly and build sites properly and not rely on the browsers guesswork.
After firefox's standards support was pretty good, then they went back and improved the shitty code guesswork. I guess you gave up before they got to that part. you should try it again.
BTW, html and css should be f-ing simple to you top-notch genius programmer types with your complicated C++ and java stuff that I'll never be smart enough to comprehend. No excuse for you not to be able to get your layouts to work. It's not hard. You're smart.
what the fu...!!!!!! Screw you. You Bastard! The vast majority of web developers are not working on huge enterprise applications and so for us, IE6, firefox, netscape, safari and others can do everything that is needed. And with adequate css support I can get a site up and running PERFECTLY in all those browsers except IE! To get even the layout to work in IE will take an extra 20 minutes to 2 days. Don't knock Firefox until you try taking a layout from photoshop to finished page in firefox in under 15 minutes!!! Impossible in IE unless its friggine exported slices and tabled to hell.
A majority of users don't even know that they're using IE. Or windows. Or that the 'thingie' the mouse movies is called the pointer/cursor. Or that the way files are stored on their computer is based on a simple to comprehend concept of folders within folder and that there are places beyond the desktop.
Don't forget the so-called 'confession tape' where a man who really looks nothing like Bin-Laden, wearing jewelery that Binladen has never and never would wear 'confesses' to masterminding 9/11. video footage 'released' by Bin Laden is few a far between yet they 'found' this video taped confession out of the blue. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html then later, Osama actually states to reporters that he had nothing to do with it. He's still evil scum. But he's not 'as' guilty of 9/11 as the US gov would have it's sheep believe. And what the phuck is up with Sadam being captured and Iraq on the news EVERY hour of every day, meanwhile I havent heard squat about afganistan in months and nobody even mentions whether or not they're still trying to capture Osama, you know, the guy accused of destroying the towers. I know Sadam is a bad guy but what has he done to the US in the last 10 years that even comes close to 9/11. If I were president I'd close the borders, recall every american soldier and employee based in countries we're not on good terms with and then wait for the enemy to come to us. Half the terrorists only want the US off of their soil anyway. Once we leave they'll leave us alone. And dozens of countries will realize how dependant they were on US presence there and will beg and plead for their return and will do anything to make it happen, even finally providing useful info on terrorists in their country.
--Compusa, Fry's Electronics, Microcenter
don't have these in my country
With windows I know what to do.
With linux I have no idea.
I only know about the package management tools and they download stuff from the internet and install it automatically. Is it possible to just have it download the files and I can then burn them to cd and install them on the offline system easily? how easily.
"How?" period!
with windows I can download the vital updates as executables, take them to the other system and double click.
Forget updates for now. I'm more intersted in finding a distro that will 'just work' with my sound and video card!
what about if you don't have an internet connection?
then how do yo install stuff?