bjrn

I have no idea if Portugal has strange release dates compared to the rest of the world, but as far as I know the PC version of GTA:SA is coming out the 7th of June. As far as requirements go, the minimus should be this: And the recommended should be: For more info about the game (and the PC release), go to here.

No, I don't love or hate SpongeBob.

Yeah, the W3C are working hard on writing XHTML specs, but there is also the WHATWG, which is working on "HTML5", or Web Applications 1.0 as it's currently called (note that they call it HTML5 in the DOCTYPE). Check out the WHATWG website, or read a bit of what Anne van Kesteren has written about it (Anne has a neat blog about markup related things). I think the W3C will continue working on XHTML, but there seems to be a demand from both web developers and browser manufacturers for a new (backwards compatible) HTML.

I just read that you can't download GWA anymore. Google's site says But the question is of course if that is the real reason or if they've shut it down in order to fix the security issues.

So many to chose from, so I'll just add on to those that have already been posted: For FTP things I like Filezilla I use PasswordSafe to store my passwords. For older computers Firefox is way too big & heavy, so there you can (if you don't want to use IE), use K-Meleon, or the IE wrapper app called Maxthon. I use AVG anti-virus, which is free, and so are the updates. And I use a free version of Tiny Personal Firewall as my firewall. Also, there are loads of neat little apps on TinyApps.

I don't really know anything about rewriting, but to me this looks like anyone using the Google Accelerator would just get a "blocked" message, is that what this does? I guess it would be handy if you're afraid cookies with sensitive data are being spread to others through the GA thing (I heard that could happen), but are there any other benefits to blocking GA users?

And what would those things be exactly? All XHTML forces you to do is mark up your document correctly - every opening tag must have a closing tag and tags/elements that became deprecated in HTML 4.0 cannot be used. The only other thing is that some tags have /> at the end of them which is not going to affect older browsers.Okay, perhaps not loads of things, but how many old browsers do you think understand XML? Things like:<script type="text/javascript"><![CDATA[ ...script commands...]]></script>Or how about the very simple <br /> tag, which if your older browser is parsing things correctly (which it may or may not do) should make this <p> Hello <br /> World </p>look like this Hello> World I'm not sure what you're basing this assumption on so am viewing it with some at the moment, but I do know that IE is losing market share hand over fist to Mozilla, so if you wanna continue living in the past and coding your pages as HTML 4.0, go right ahead.I don't know which assumption you are referring to, but at the moment IE has a market share of about 90%. The other assumption, that IE doesn't understand XHTML, is a fact. IE doesn't understand XHTML, it does parse it as tag soup, and it will totally break down if you send XHTML with the correct MIME type (application/xhtml+xml) instead of text/html. I'm not saying XHTML is evil. And I'm not sure how much you really should take old browsers into account, IE6, possibly 5.5, is about as old as I usually bother with. XHTML can be terribly handy if you want to embed things like SVG or MathML into your documents (or perhaps plan on doing so in the future), but if you are mainly serving "normal" content to an IE audience you might ask yourself if it's worth switching. You say that making HTML4 pages is "living in the past", to which I'd reply that I wouldn't be so sure that HTML4 will be replaced by XHTML, in fact chances that a new HTML version will emerge are far from small. Go make XHTML pages, I do that too, as long as you realize that the only benefits you are making is when you are serving it to browsers that understand it, and with the correct MIME type. And that XHTML may not be the next widely used HTML version.

Try this: #memoryticker{ width: 448px; }html>body #memoryticker{ width: 450px; } Since IE doesn't recognise many CSS selectors you can make hacks like that. IE doesn't understand html>body, so it just ignores the style rule. But Firefox understands it, and in CSS the last rule is the one that counts, Firefox just ignores the first rule.

Actually, if you want older browsers to understand your site, you should definitely stick to HTML and not use XHTML. If you want to make sure everything works I'd probably go for HTML 4.01 transitional. XHTML forces you to do loads of things older browsers wouldn't understand. Seriously, IE, the most used browser right now doesn't understand XHTML, it just handles it like tag soup (this means IE just says "wow, this looks a bit like HTML, I'll see what happens if I render it like bad html").

It should use a bit more bandwidth because it sends more requests, but it's definitely not like clicking "go" several times. Clicking "go" gets the whole page, the pipelining thing uses lots of connections to get small pieces of the page in paralell. This tweak can cause errors, and if it doesn't work for you, then it isn't your fault. There are servers who won't accept you opening loads of connections, either to keep down their bandwidth usage, or protect themselves against DoS attacks. You see, using the pipelinging tweak isn't very nice to the sites you are visiting, your hogging connections and using extra bandwith. Feel free to use it, but think about whether or not you really need to save that fraction of a second while visiting sites... You might want to skip the pipelining tweak and just do the initialpaint delay tweak, which makes your browser display data as it is received. About the nglayout.initialpaint.delay tweak, if you have a slow computer, don't use it, the tweak can increse the CPU usage quite a bit, which is something really not worth sacrificing if you have a slower computer. Especially with Firefox, which isn't exactly slow-computer friendly.

In case anyone wants some further reading about XHTML, I suggest reading Ian Hickson's interesting piece called Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful, in which he talks about the importance of sending XHTML as application/xhtml+xml to get any advantage over "normal" HTML. It's well worth the read if you are using, or considering using XHTML instead of HTML.

Very good post Whyme. I'll just write my thoughts on a thing you quoted. I'm not sure I agree with those things. Having a XHTML page (if you want to make it valid) will force you to write well-formed markup, but browsers will not warn for well-formed but incorrect XHTML. There are certain tags that aren't allowed to be nested within each other, or have to be nested in something else (like the <input> tag, which has to be inside a <div> or similar). Such things will not be warned about, because you can write well-formed XML without necessarily having valid XHTML. And that browsers giving warnings would be a good thing is something I am not certain of at all. Make an XHTML 1.1 (or 1.0) page, which is invalid XML, and send it as application/xhtml+xml and view it with Mozilla/Firefox. You'll get a big ugly syntax error message. Do you really want your visitors to see that?

I think that if you have a JavaScript question, you put it in the Java and JavaScript forum, if you have ASP or VB, then put it in the VB forum. ASP in itself is so tiny, so very, very tiny. Really, almost everything you write when you are writing server-side ASP pages will be VBScript, so I think your ASP questions should go very well in the VB forum.

10? More like one hundred I like Firefox, and it is without a doubt better than IE in most situations. The problem is that IE, just the basic thing, is so old, so very very old. I find that if you use an IE wrapper, like Maxthon, which gives you ad & pop-up blocking, tabs, mouse gestures etc, IE becomes a lot better. Still, there are a lot of security holes in IE, which is a bit annoying, and a definite lack of support for even quite basic (X)HTML and CSS stuff. I'm hoping IE7 will bring IE up to speed again, that would be nice.

Yeah, what Mugglenet does is use PHP so they don't have to make index1.html->css1.css, index2.html->css2.css and so on, but instead change the HTML imporsting the stylesheet to get the chosen stylesheet. I've done the same on my site mainly to see what would be a good way to make it. And I thought it was pretty fun to do. Besides it teaches you that using CSS for positioning instead of tables is very handy (since you can change the whole look of the site with one stylesheet, instead of having to change the HTML itself).

If I were you I'd add some debug messages (just print to the screen) to see where it hangs. Are you sure you are allowed to create new files on the server with your script?

If you stick to open source apps, you should be faily safe from spy- and adware. If they put spyware (or adware) in an open source app, people would notice, because people read the code.So, stay away from Kazaa and exeem and anything else close-sourced. That should get you a good bit on the way.But then you can of course be vulnerable to p2p worms and so on. Oh it never ends!

I've done some Prolog. While it was a nice learning experience, I didn't really like the language. Perhaps I just tried to do things in strange ways but I remember having problems with the implementation I used, which had strange bugs (like the built-in concat function not working).But right now I'm working with a PhD student on a multi-agent system, and while the bulk of the system will be "normal" OO, we're considering using something which lets us write "what" instead of "how" for the agents themselves.

Yep, beeseven's and mike's querys should work, it only becomes tricky if the field is some sort of text, in which case you'd be forced to pull all data, convert the text to numbers, subtract one, and then store it (which would autoconvert it back to text).

I know that in some database systems upper/lowercase is important (like Oracle), but I don't think uppercase/lowercase is important in MySQL. However, I would think that there is a big difference between "ID INT UNSIGNED" and "ID_INT_UNSIGNED", the second one would just be one huge field name, and probably give off a syntax error because you didn't specify a type. So, upper/lowercase probably doesn't matter (in MySQL), but don't exchange underscores for spaces. And Hi. Welcome to Xisto.

Yeah, that was what I said. The display:list-item is only available to lists, not other elements. And <ol> and <ul>, in combination with <li> are the only types of lists...

Just follow the link I posted. The first thing you'll see if the four first tools they've released. Then, when you're done with that, read the FAQ.

I think everyone who has GMail has about 50 invites about now. Check the Xisto GMail invite exchange thread: http://forums.xisto.com/topic/1557-gmail-invite-exchange-the-only-thread-valid/ Getting a GMail account is really not hard at all.

Yeah. And then Luxembourg will form a SUPERUNION with Andorra, Monaco, Lichtenstein and San Marino! It's so obvious now, I don't understand why I didn't see it before! Anyway, I think both India and China have good chances of becoming powerful eventually. Both are big countries with lots of people in it, and both are getting more and more economic power.

I think he means the PHP package. The answer is yes. It's preinstalled and all accounts have PEAR. I know this for sure because I use PEAR's DB functions.