lhunath

Any company in Google's position would change like this, they've proven that they won't let themselves be seduced too much towards the commercial side like MSN or Yahoo. Therefore, I think we owe Google alot of gratitude. They remain an increadible quality even though they're so big.Google will soon become the major competator of MSN & Yahoo, meaning, Google will have to fight them. And that's where Google will need to be more careful of itself. It's true that all big companies need competators, if not, they fall for the weak side, money. Just like Microsoft and Yahoo have.I hope Google'll become dominant, so that they can give some serious punches to the web community, and the reason why I hope that, -me being against any dominant company- is that google seems to be decent. And I have the feeling that only though a dominating factor like google, the web world can change. Google will force MSN & Yahoo to become decent, or disappear. And when they do, Google will fade again. Marketting, is a game.

.... *irritated yawn*

You don't loose any quality whatsoever, and if you think that you do, then you just didn't have a clue of what you were doing, and it's because of your ignorance.If you know what Linux is about, how it works, and you then go back to windows, then you start noticing how slow, unstable, buggy, uncontrollable, static, ugly, etc it is. Linux lets your pc do what it's able to do, but you need the brains to know what you're up to. Not everything's automatic and lead by retarded wizards.Qwijibow 1 - 0 Gates, Bill

Nice colours, but do convert your image to a Jpeg, it's far too big for slow connections like this

Delete all the files in it.Delete the folder.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sacred ?

http://php.net/manual/en/ref.mysql.php + http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/ + Brains + Concentration + Experimentation

er..? Downloads..? *sighs hopelessly*just upload something to your website, and link to it, click the link.. and you'll download it.By the way, I think it would be better for you to get hosting at Xisto, and not here. This place is for people who have more of a clue..

palestranger, the "dark" side, has nothing to do with the fact that it's dark there, or the sun. As you probably know, it's not full moon all the time, when it eclipses, it gets lighter on the other side of the moon, the side which we can't see.The name "dark side of the moon" is born because it's a side we never get to "see". It's more of a metaphoric name.marijnnn, they can see the other side, they see it under a diffrent angle alright, but the angle isn't that large that they can see the other side.. Thats mathematically impossible, except if the moon were inbetween Europe & America, which, it is not. ;P (there's sea there.... ;/)

There is only One good PHP tutorial, and it's exactly where you'd Least expect it........... right on PHP.Net :| Start right here: Chapter 10. Basic syntax Or go here if you want to choose a language, other than english.

Don't think that's going to be possible, Bigyan. It's near to impossible for a spider/bot to determine the context of text properly, and since that problem, it would thus cause alot of accurate results to be left out, or incorrect results to still be in there (misinterpretation by the bot).Future talk, for the years when computers walk amoung us.

PNG is definately superior to GIF. And it uses a comparable algorythm, in that way that they both work with colour palettes, meaning, you have a limited amount of colours you can use, and the more you use, the bigger the file gets (which is not the case with JPEGs). PNGs support the transparency GIF supports, and even supports translucency (alpha channels, pixels that aren't either transparent or not, like GIF, but pixels that can be a little bit translucent and u can see the background through).The only disadvantage is that it isn't as well supported as GIF. If you want to use web graphics, it's still best to use GIF, that way, at least you know that almost anybody will be able to see the image. Some old browsers don't show PNGs, and even IE 6.0 doesn't even support the translucency yet.. ¬_¬

Who cares? Is there anybody who actually uses MSN Search? Everybody knows Google is far more superiour. MSN Search pollutes the web, they use far too agressive ways of spreading it around, like including it in their MSN Messenger, making things install the MSN Search Bar by default; making it search with it when you type something in the IE Address Bar, and it's absolutely unaffordable to have a search engine like that, and put Ads on it the way they do. Esp the popups etc. MSN is the purest evil ever to be spawned by a big company, like Microsoft.

JPEG uses a diffrent compression algorythm. It has nothing to do with the PNG one. PNG works in chunks and based on palettes. It's in no way a cross between GIF & JPEG. And it would be a silly idea to convert highcolour JPEG Images to PNG.. as I said in the post right above you.

Well, there should be a standardised language designed and documented in such a way that it can almost not be extended further, that it provides in all basic needs, so that it needn't be extended further. The DOM structure should be rebuilt as well, true, learning from the mistakes that were revealed with this. But most importantly, two major things :Faulty webpages shouldn't render. At all.Browsers should stick to the standards.If you create a language that provides in most basic DOM access needs, and all browsers use those standards, (even should they extend it further), then users using those standards alone will have webpages that Work. Nowadays, things aren't as easy as that.And those two statements I stated, are universal. Not just concearning clientside scripting, but also concearning CSS, HTML, SGML, etc.. If only W3C had the authority to penalise all browsers that didn't support the standards correctly.

Very true, you shouldn't have prejudgements like this, it's what identifies you as a total idiot. Prejudgement is the cause of almost all the bad out there, so just wait and see, and after it's released, praise if they're worth it.

What exactly do you mean with this thread?

First of all, incompatibilities. Few browsers support the large gamma of functions JavaScript offers. And you have specific browsers that decided to make specific JavaScript functionalities which only work on their browsers, like Microsoft IE & Netscape. Thus, people working with those browsers, and using them as only testing browser will generate JavaScript which is ****ed in other browsers, completely screwing the primairy objective of a Web Application / Site, which is compatibility. They argue that IE is used by many people. This arguement only proves how lame and shortminded they are. Secondly, JavaScript parsers are a pain in the backside, especially the Internet Explorer one. Code goes wrong when there is no reason for it to go wrong, because, for example, a div in the body didn't load in time, and the script can't find it. Many browsers don't even have JavaScript parsers, which causes them to be unable to browse a specific site that depends on it. JavaScript is insecure. It allows far too much datagathering, and allows for people to abuse holes in software. Holes are unpreventable, but JavaScript is a gate to take hackers there. Any clientsided script is a victim of this, unless if there are extensive restrictions. Java does a very good job, they should learn from it. Most of all, the users which incorperate it. They are stupid and retarded. They don't realise that their code is evil, and they can't be bothered to learn JavaScript decently. Browsers should give parsing errors and not display the website should there be problems with the code, just like a Java compiler won't allow a program with screwed syntax to be run.

Alternative covers alot, you have Radiohead, Mew, Neurosis, Shape of Despair, ....

Opera can do that.

Yes, you're quite right. You should at least write in detail what you're to expect when you click the link.

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition

It has good ways of implementation and good concepts are possible with it, but the language itself is just a screwup. They should make a new client side language like it, and do it right this time.

Best: Healing brush.Worst: Wait times.

Lol... forgotten the laws of nature?A star radiates energy in the form of waves. Visible light, but also many other frequencies. When those energies leave the star, it looses fuel. And it can't live forever when it's leaking energy like this.