Baniboy

If you're using it for web-development, there is nothing to worry about. You can get IE on linux (not from microsoft site but... you get the idea. Google is your friend. I'm not very familiar with WYSIWYG editors on linux but there are some. If you're just going to use it to preview your pages, then why not just install a normal code editor like bluefish and just save and refresh the page in a browser, that's what I do, has worked for me. I'm not very experienced user when it comes to photoshop, but from the 30 day trial of it which I used like 9 days, it seems to me GIMP can do almost everything PS can, but maybe it takes a little longer. I'm obviously talking about the things you might have to do with it regarding web-dev.(not the fancy things that you don't ever need like a 3D shapes with an image wrapped around them, besides, I remember making orbs in GIMP like that, so yeah, pretty much everything). To me it seems that you have small problems, many people have driver problems and stuff like that. Here are some html editors you might want to try out(I don't know if you get these from repositories with your distribution, but you can always compile from source): Another option is to use WINE to run dreamweaver on Linux, which I don't recommend because you might not get it to work with WINE and waste your money.

If you want to upload it to be visible by everyone, then use the folder called "public_html".

Well that's your point of view, instead, look at it from the readers view. A reader that doesn't click on any ads anyways, like me, just gets annoyed by ads. I think most of the people clicking on ads aren't the type of people bothered by them that much, that they make the effort to block them.(Like install a new browser and install plug-ins)

So, that's it? No more suggestions? Like which banner looks better?I'm going to start doing some other stuff on it like content management, but any ideas on how to improve the look are welcome during that time. I'll also upload the final look for everyone to see when everything is done.

Why don't you just use adblock plus? Just right-click on the ad and block. Don't you have a pop-up blocker? Maybe you could link me somewhere so I can see what you're talking about.Try adblock plus element hiding helper.

I have a facebook account and I'm active there. I play mafia wars and farmville. My mafia is way too small and my farm is full of strawberries (literally) :PAnyway, they are nice to play once in a while...

Nope, I don't photoshop my designs, I just code it out. It's the form of XHTML and CSS now. Think I'm going add some javascript later. Thanks for replying

Wow, thanks! I have to admit tho, the finding of those colors was an accident, I don't think I'm capable of doing that with other colors, gotta try some time tho. Well, the dummy text's purpose is to just inform that "content here" or something like that. Thanks for replying This is my third website. But I didn't make the template myself for the other two, I used WordPress and it's themes(I did modify the code and graphics tho). This is the 4th template I've done if I remember correctly. The graphics load is now around 56 kB Thanks for the advice. I'll make sure I have enough whitespace between my content. I made two headers, don't know if they are "aquatic", but hey, I tried I want to know which one looks better, one has drop shadow and the other one doesn't(dial-up alert): Tell me what you think... They are both partially transparent.

Thanks. I made the fonts smaller. I have five background gradients, and then the gradients in the logo. I'm using gradients in the design to make it blend together or at least try to. Maybe the distraction is because of the dummy text, since there is no actual content. I made a darker background gradient. I also tried it out without a gradient but it came out to be kinda boring. I want a simple look, not a boring one. I've made all my graphics with GIMP. () Thanks for replying. I made a new logo, the last one had horrible font(I don't know if this is good, you tell me!). I don't really want a super-complicated logo with all the fancy things, but a simple one. I made a footer. It's the reversed of the navigation bar. They kinda create an area for the content together and the white font looks nice on them(tell me if I'm wrong). I'm going to use this template for my website which will contain tutorials about web-development, educative science articles and I also plan to publish my projects and share source with my visitors. Like make templates and share them for free on my website.

Yes I tried to edit it last night but it wasn't approved yet so I couldn't edit and add it to the post. Anyway, the screenshot is added now.

Hi trappers! I've made a template for my website (which I'm planning to launch before Christmas if possible).So what do you think about it? Is it too blue? Is it nice? it's not done yet, I'll have to decide font color and some other adjustments to be done. In the meantime, any suggestions? What I could've done better? and yes I like blue color. Which font color fits the best, the one in the right column or the one used in the left column?Does the navigation bar look smooth like I intended?If you don't like it, tell me why? I personally like it, I can imagine what it looks like when done... I think the layout itself is pretty much done. The navbar will have drop-down menus. And I'll add stuff to the sidebar. I have an idea of what I'll do with it. I thought it would be nice if there is a small "about" thingy in there, which is visible when clicked on a link, and can be vanished by clicking the same link. I'm gonna do that with javascript, not very good at it tho, at all... Don't worry, I'm not gonna spam with my "help me with javascript"-topics, this time I'm gonna learn! The sidebar is also going to contain random things... I don't know yet. I'm keeping all my navigation in the vertical navigation barAre the background images ok? the sidebar background might need some adjustments but I think the page's background is nice, don't you?I'm using arial fonts, then comes helvetica and serif. I don't like serif tho, and I don't know if linux distros offer arial fonts installed by default.Oh and what about the logo, is it OK? I didn't want to make complicated logo. I'm keeping my graphics at minimum. The size of my template's graphics combined is around 62kB for now, I consider making my banner smaller, but first I'll try doing some png optimization(thanks tf for the links you gave me in the other topic:))Anyway, tell me what you think!

Are you going to play those DVDs on a DVD-player? If not, then just make a data-DVD. Just burn the matroska files on the DVD without converting or anything. If you want to play those files in a dvd player, you'll have convert your mkv files to .vob format. Just convert and burn. So will these mkv files fit in 3 DVDs? I don't know, just convert and take a look at the file size. If your DVD-player supports .avi format (Check which compression, mpeg-4 or mpeg-2..) then just convert to avi and burn. It might also be a good idea to get a DVD-player that supports USB mass storage devices if you are sick of carrying DVDs around.

Thanks for the replies and optimization links.@Ray: 400KB in 10 seconds with dial-up? How did you calculate that one? 56kbits is 7kB/s and 400 divided by 7 is 50. It would take 50 seconds.I've decided to make a site with the graphics load of around 100 kB or less if possible. First I was going with a design with rounded corners and stuff, but tf poin about what the site is for woke me up, I don't need a fancy looking site. I'll just spice things up with a few gradients and I'm done.Thanks all.Could anyone who owns their own site here post their size of their graphics load in a standard page(just interested)

This one is gonna be a quickie, I'm not gonna write a lot. Oops, yea I was kinda sleepy when I wrote that, so...I see you have been so busy using styling in your text that you've forgotten my other statement. Anyway, you do realize that you can't see "the four corners of the earth" from the top of a mountain, don't you? Let's go back to your links then:It says that "It is indeed extraordinary to have someone who has died in public at an execution to appear to many people afterwards." Yet you say that you agree that eyewitnesses don't count as empirical evidence(and some other things like why you believe in god and stuff like that). Yes it might be extraordinary, but isn't count as evidence, got it? So you didn't present evidence to "defend your faith", but you linked me to a site that puts eyewitness accounts under the category of evidence. I did not throw away your site because I didn't like it, but because it's academic understanding of evidence isn't correct. So stop blaming me for throwing away a site because I don't like it. Also, the writer seems make difference between homosexuality and lesbianism? He might mean "acting lesbian" without being homosexual but who knows. Instead of debating on about the reliability of the site, let's get back on the topic, please. Dude, where's your sense of humor? @tf: Heh, I was sleepy Despite the fact that the article wasn't written in a way it could've been, if you don't know anything about the shape of the earth and read the bible, you WILL conclude that it is flat. This has already been proved(the middle-ages?). Now that we know better, you find another meaning for the words and just walk around the argument. So, the words "The earth" have many meanings... Wouldn't it be just "earth", if they were talking about a piece of land and "the earth" when they're talking about the whole thing? So what of 4 units he saw from the top? 4 remote areas? So "He saw the four remote areas of the world". Could you provide me an example of these four remote areas? Could you at least provide me an example where the word "corner" is used to mean "remote area" in the bible? I think Kansuke's explanation for four corners was a better one. There is no need to offend me, even if I didn't "get passed the history class". Like I don't offend you because of your understanding of time.So you think that turning WATER into WINE is a sign(remember: "signs make use of our understanding of physics, which give the impression of a miracle.") So all the stuff Jesus was doing were just some cheap magic tricks? And sorry for saying "the only evidence for it is in the bible", I forgot that bible doesn't count as empirical evidence for a second. So, is it safe to say that killing people because they don't believe in god is god's favorite hobby? Either way, murderous or just killing for fun, I wouldn't like to follow such god, but hey, that's only me. As for taking out of context, I remember finding a verse in the bible some time ago. It was something like "And for those who don't accept me as their king, bring them in front of me and slaughter them." If such thing as god exists, I think I wouldn't be so comfortable with his way of dealing with problems. Hmm-... I meant more like science and church. Church collides with science all the time when they try to defend their bronze-age mythologies, like the creation. While the scripture might read in many ways and walk around the argument by doing that. Churches are stubborn in their beliefs...

You can always WINE everything! And for those who say that you can't WINE everything, just watch me... So if media player classic is your favorite and vlc is causing problems, just WINE it!

Wow, somebody has dug a deep hole for this thread and buried it there because I didn't find it until now! :lol:I play my drums, my piano, and I go jogging 3 times a week. Other than that, I'm on my computer playing, coding or hanging out at Xisto

Party 24/7!!! :lol:No, really. Well, you could do some exercises like jogging, or you could build some muscles. 10 days isn't such a long time but it's a good time to start. I started jogging on summer and now I'm addicted to, I think I'll continue running even on winter.Hang out with your friends, learn something useful (like more php functions, a new programming language like c++ or assembly). Or you can just chill out for 10 days... have sleepovers and stuff like that. Try out how long you can go without sleeping... All kinda fun things

When are the graphics of the template too heavy? Like when it gets out of hand? 100kB? 150kB? more? How some people get so smooth jpg files with massive dimensions and small file size? How long dial-up people are willing to wait for my site load?Sooo... I was designing a template (960px wide design) for my site and when I was designing a banner. After I designed the background the banner text is going on, I saved and checked the file size hoping it'll be small, cause I used .jpg. But no, 960x200px image has a file size of 360 kB! I tried png(with maximum compression) and I got a file size of 150 kB. I also tried using more compressed jpegs, but the quality was horrible.I'm suffering from this thing, and I find that a wordpress theme(named "Eos") has a jpg background image sized 5000x300px(sliced image) and it's file size is only 66 kB with good quality! How the hell is that possible? Can I do that?

Redirecting isn't SEO friendly. This has nothing to do with the domain you have your site on, but the other ones that redirect to it. They won't probably get indexed. And I remember reading at google's site that redirections have some bad effect on something, it had something to do with the bots crawling down your site...

1. Since you were kind enough to notify me about abiogenesis "stuff" and asking me if I realize what I'm saying, could you also be kind enough to point out where I said that it wasn't dust? Well, now I'm gonna say it, NO IT WASN'T DUST. If you consider montmorillonite, perfect temperature, free nucleotides and many more materials mixed up dust, then you have no scientific credibility. And no, abiogenesis isn't from dust to man. If you read some books, you may realize that the process to get from a chemical mix into a cell is abiogenesis. Getting from living cells into other multi-celled living organisms and evolving into new species, is evolution. 2. Yes, magic is one of my favorite words because it describes creation fantasies so ironically, yet so accurately. 3. And your point is? Because we can't test this with an underwater volcano and we create multiple possible conditions for life to occur, it can't happen? montmorillonite can't possibly be anywhere near a volcano? Could you give me some proof? If I burn a wooden stick in lab condition, I can't prove it can happen without help? You've watched way too much mythbusters, since they change their testing conditions if nothing happens. Real science isn't like that, you test, test and test and gather results for 3 years. Then you publish your report, it's peer-reviewed and then if other scientists can duplicate your results, it's accepted as a theory. A theory also has to fit in with the other theories. Everything doesn't have to happen in nature and be observable there to be accepted as a theory, for example quantum theory. So get over it and stop arguing on something that has already been proved. RNA chains can form by themselves, and that's it. 1. Where I said that it isn't? Matter is compressed energy. Matter is formed energy, energy isn't matter. So I was right.2. I should agree?! I've been saying that all the time, because we don't have any evidence from the time before(obviously because it didn't exist..), we CAN'T KNOW. And now you're telling me I should agree? 1. You fail to see what differs a fact, a theory and what is the scientific method used for.2. No, science tells us the exact opposite. It tells us that energy exists forever. 3. Show me the evidence that metaphysical realm exists, only conscious things can cause things and that desire is needed. Or at least justify it by logic of some kind. You should agree that we have no evidence of anything "metaphysical", do we? How do you know metaphysical things last forever? You said it like it was an obvious thing. Like you've been on a lunch date with metaphysical beings and asked them if they last forever or not. So you've DECIDED that god must exist(without any empirical evidence, as usual). Now when you don't find god in the physical world, you make up something you call "metaphysical" and place your god in there. And your god is 100% protected against all evidence, logic and everything. Why? Because we can't observe the metaphysical world(because it doesn't exist, perhaps?), therefore we can't disprove god. 1. Well I don't know how people are being taught physics at school there but I assume you never studied about the big bang? If space exists, time does too, and if time exists(forever)... *Houston, we have a problem...* 2. I'm not saying science is a rules over religion, I'm saying religion isn't ruler over anything, because at least all religions I know can't match up with science. And by matching up with science I mean the info is incorrect, and the content is full of fantasy worlds and beings. That's what I'm saying You rationalized again. Because there is no evidence of god and GOD MUST EXIST, it must in somewhere else, but we obviously have no evidence of that somewhere else.

I suggest you get familiar with ABIOGENESIS. It doesn't have as much evidence as evolution because it's not as easy to prove/disprove or even test properly. Few success', on the other hand, speak for themselvesActually you don't need any magic to but up an RNA chain. It has been done artificially and without any supernatural being put there. As for the lipid, RNA chains attract certain materials around themselves. This forms a lipid. When the percentage of something(for example, sugar) with small molecule size is more on the other side of the cell, the lipid lets stuff go through to make it even. There you have it, a primitive cell. And no it doesn't mean there was only one live cell, why not many in different locations? As for the Big Bang(I hate this name, as it wasn't an explosion). It was energy at first, not mass of land or matter. And it didn't explode, big bang is a horrible name for space-time expansion. We don't know what caused it or does it even need a cause or if there was anything before it. If we don't know it and it needs a cause, that doesn't prove anything. It means it needs a cause. When you don't know anything about the universe before it(or that if there even was a universe). It doesn't mean a supernatural being made it happen. That would be assuming things without evidence. We don't know if you even need a supernatural being to create the universe, we have no idea. Of course it's a possibility, but it's as likely as any other one. It's like "because I don't know who made my dishwasher, I'm gonna assume it's made by Siemens, even tho there is not evidence else than a siemens instruction manual. And let's not even talk about how the dishwasher differs from the one in the picture on the manual's cover" If everything needs a cause, so does the one that caused it's existence. I'm sorry to bring this up, but yeah... Many religious people walk around this by saying that god(s) exist outside our universe. This is just a rationalization. I can say my lil' bro created the universe and you can't deny that. Hah! So, something either exists or it doesn't, if it needs a cause, then everything does. You can't say this needs a cause but this doesn't. You also mentioned that somebody put the mass "there". No. Because there was no space&time&energy, it's safe to assume that there wasn't a specific location where the big bang took place, since space and time came after it. If you are having a hard time understanding that, then that just shows how little we can know from something that doesn't include space or time. There are also some problems with time if everything is eternal. This argument was written my KansukeKojima in another thread where we debated if universe needs a cause or not. I left that topic and continued with another one because I don't know much about space-time, yet to debate of anything existing outside their influence. Because bible or any other "holy book" doesn't match up with modern science, it's safe to assume that we shouldn't bet all our money on one option. Let's convert to all the religions at the same time! + Scientific method and logical thinking. It's optimization, guys! PS. If you can ever see the entire earth from a top of a mountain, I swear I'll convert to christianity! Keep an open mind, and you'll confuse yourself all the time and debate with yourself to death! I think this is why people choose religion, because it's so simple. You just believe in it and that's it. If you want to keep an open mind, on the other hand...

My desktop system monitor is based on conky, I use screenlets program on my ubuntu laptop and the sysmonitor is one of it's "widgets". Yea it's nice, but I didn't find any real use for it. Sometimes I check the RAM usage or something like that. Displaying weather can be useful, but it comes by default in gnome panel, so yea...

That's nice, you took the picture?Kinda looks like the looks I was trying to achieve with my desktop. I don't like panels on top of the screen, that messes me up (Well, I guess I haven't yet got over the windows syndrome ). Besides, I like to have space in my screen, I don't like to read stuff in the bottom, so I always scroll up. Sites that have boxes that have their own scrollers and the content is placed in them have always irritated me(the thing is even worse, when the content box is near the bottom). There is also not enough space since I have many toolbars on top of my browser. So I just like my panels to be visible when I like and disappear when I don't have a use for them.And it seems like I'm like you, I always leave all my junk on the desktop hehe except when I took the screenshot

You should try the other file managing thingy, I haven't used cpanel for some time so I don't remember the name. I think it's next to the file manager image/link in the cpanel home. I also remember there was somekind of thing popping up whenever I clicked the normal file manager logo in home. It asked me where I wanted to browse and to show hidden files or not(not so sure about this, you should check it out).