DarkPhoenix

Honestly, posting your Product Key, especially that specific one, is a bad idea.

(Why do I like people that are against me? Most likely cause I love debate, and it takes a person opposing my views to get a debate going... in other words, you're cool neosapience.. yah, and you too mutahir.. but don't go thinking this is propaganda for making you like me more. *hehe*) Yeah, I know they are protocols... I just blurted out with the first things I could come up with. It could've been a formal letter standard for all that matters. TCP most likely became dominant because most people chose to use it.. I know of the IPX and what was it.. NetBIOS standards that are choices in old DOS games for muliplayer... I think NetBIOS still lives though (not my game really.. isn't that what the file sharing in LANs are based on?). And HTTP had competition too, by stuff like Gopher and CompuServe... but HTTP was by far the most useful one.. and so it won. At least that's what I think happened. That's what I've read. I feared it might be interpreted that way cause I used police and criminals as examples.. It was, once again, the first thing I came up with.. my point was, if we leave examples out, that everybody else try their best to follow the web standards. (which makes the web, as the W3C calls it, interoperable) So why can't just Microsoft do the same? That's the real question. It wouldn't be hard for them, and the W3C standards are very carefully thought out, by many people, and when correctly implemented, and correctly used (by authors), you can make wonderful designs, neat effects and so forth with it. And it will work with all browsers that follow their standards. That's the idea of a standard... that everyone, no matter which browser, OS or even which disabilities they have, should be able to enjoy the internet and the web equally. Yeah, I know.. unlike me with IE. After all though, I am biased. You seem more neutral. I don't want to be though.. I dislike IE. Mostly because it proves that as long as enough people use something, no matter how bad it is, it's the most accepted practice. True... though I thought they had their own IE team... really, I read today that Bill Gates has more money than Norway spends in a whole year... ... so he could've afforded it. Actually, I still haven't seen a page that looks bad in Mozilla.. although I usually surf around CSS and XHTML resources, where people usually do correct coding... but I also visit bad pages... where this mode called Quirks mode kicks in, and sorta repairs the errors with the site as best it can.

No offense, but I don't understand what you're trying to say... It may be that my English sucks, like IE.. *hehe* (I'll just skip the part about Linux and UNIX and security and stuff, it's not like it's not interesting, but it's irrelevant and off-topic) Very good.. try to view the link I posted in the previous post of mine too.. it'll show you even more examples of IE being thoroughly out of date. Ok.. thanks for sharing your views and opinions... although I agree with basically none and disagree with basically all, but that's the lovely thing about debate.

Every single site eh? It does? Try to view my under construction design and tell me that this site looks correct in IE. I don't really have more to say about that. If you'd be comfortable using IE with my site (which validates perfectly as correct XHTML and CSS, and thus is correctly written, and shows up correctly in a DECENT browser) then you're just weird. The main intent of this example is to show you just that IE does not show every single site correctly. And as time passes, more and more sites will start to look like mine in IE.

No problem... don't worry about it. It may be written.. and it may be true.. but I won't believe it until I get it from a reliable source... unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I'm a misanthrope and a pessimistic soul. I believe nothing until proof is shown. I really wonder why this relates to the topic of this post... but anyway, no they wouldn't, and I claim that if people actually were given the choice when they bought PCs, a lot less MS Windows would be sold and a lot more of the others would be provided, not only cause they are free while Windows costs, but because Linux for instance is known to be more stable, secure, etc. And I don't think it would be so hard to use if more people used it, since then more people would update it, fix it, etc. And concerning Mozilla.. once installed, it's just as easy to use as IE. And for a techie, like myself, easier to use, with mouse gestures and other neat plugins installed. If they are so good, why are they so mean? Why don't they let others take part? If Microsoft were the best, they'd win anyway. Instead they have to use dirty tricks and plagiarism to win. Actually, I think they've given up IE. It seems like it. The only thing they fix are security holes, and only cause it makes them look bad if they don't. I'll forgive IE the day it is up to date, and lets everyone see my sites as they are meant to look.. until then, I'll say it sucks. And being good at it. Oh, and yeah.. I do think I'm a little moody today. I still stand by what I said though.

Basically, yes. It's just like any other standards organization. Unless people follow their recommendations (yes, it's only recommendations) there will be misunderstandings. Just imagine what the web would be like if the TCP/IP standard was incorrectly implemented.. or the HTTP protocol? That's an interesting way of looking at it. But I'd say no. It's the other way around. Would you say that if 90% of the population was being thieves, that the police are wrong? Microsoft has, since the standards of the web was set, worked against it, while all other groups crave to do so. After figuring out that people would like standards to be implemented, they appear to try and adjust, and even claim that their browser is compliant. Gah. Like I said, CSS2 has been around since 1998, but Microsoft hasn't implemented it yet. If they just had done it, the web could've looked a lot nicer now. CSS2 has a lot of nice features, but many (and I must say weak) web authors don't do it cause they know that IE users can't see it. Oh yeah, that is surely so sad. No and no. And I never said any browser did. But compare IE with the ones that update, and you'll see that IE is still in the dark ages when it comes to it. I hope they'll get rid of that horrible ActiveX, but I have strong doubts about it. As for the security flaws, sure, it's bad, but it's not really why I dislike IE. After all, I always place myself behind a firewall and with an up-to-date virus scanner. I also have a feeling that this so-called update is Longhorn's IE7.. and why should people have to pay for a browser? Better in what way? The core is still the same. It's just an IE shell. I assume it will still fail to show decently configured XHTML+CSS2 pages, like the ordinary IE. I might have a look at it if you can tell me why it is better... although FYI, I've never tried FireFox, so I can't really compare. How do you know? You aren't coincidentially in the Mozilla team, but going against your own and talk bad about it? I think they still would have. You know what? Netscape has mistakes, Opera too, and so does all other browsers. They most likely compare with each other to see what they manage to do right and what they do wrong, and then fix up. But IE does not fix up.

Hey dude.. please see the rules.. no double posting.

For photographs, use JPEG. For anything else, use PNG. See here for an interesting article: Gradient Effect

I remember that used to happen when I used StyleXP to set themes on my PC. Whenever it restarted, the theme was reset to the classic (the one you apparently use) and the task bar was reset to one row. I know it's horribly annoying, and myself, I use three rows. After a reinstall, I stopped using StyleXP and just used a modified ux_theme.dll (or whatever it was called) and set the themes using .theme files and .msstyle files. I don't know if you use StyleXP or not, so it might not be the problem, but it could be.. as I've had the same problem when using it.

Hi mutahir. Thanks for answering my post. I don't really like saying IE sucks. I'd rather just show it, so people can make that decision for themselves. That is rather hard though. When people look at a website with IE and it looks bad, what do people say? (I hope I don't offend anyone; by "people" I mean the general (severely ignorant) public) They just say "Oh, this page looks like crap. It can only be because the web author doesn't know what s/he's doing. Microsoft is übercompetent, and never makes a mistake, and so I cannot imagine that it's the browsers fault." Ok, so that's a little exaggerated... but in short, it explains why IE still has the major market. Please notice that Internet Explorer hasn't had a real update for over 3 years, whereas most other browsers update frequently. I'd say there's something there. My Operating System? Windows XP. I'm not saying Microsoft sucks, if that's what you're saying? OK, so I do think so.. but unfortunately, unlike on the Internet, where switching to a non-Microsoft web browser won't keep you off the net... in the very best cases, it'll make your net experience a better one, an OS, if you use something else besides Windows, you'll miss out a lot of good stuff. Especially commercial games. HTML and CSS is cross platform. Win32 exectutables aren't. True, there are emulators.. but it's just not the same thing. Yeah, nothing is perfect. Including Mozilla. I'll give you that. Though I believe Mozilla is the best. I wish to have the right to say and feel that way. Sure, you may disagree with me, but I'm still entitled to believe and say so. Yeah, I agree with you about Windows XP. After having used Windows since version 3.1 (except for NT and 2000), Windows XP was a true pleasure to have. Windows 95 was buggy, Win98 was nice though... and WinME was buggy again... and then came WinXP along. It gave me the stability I was always looking for in other Windows versions. However, this was not really about XP... I was talking about browsers, IE in particular, and as I mentioned earlier, Microsoft doesn't seem to care about it. CSS2 has been a W3C recommendation since May 1998, and yet Microsoft hasn't implemented it (fully and properly). Does that prove somehing, or what? I don't know what you intented with this comment, but I find it somewhat offensive. I never claimed to be a genious. And I doubt you seriously think I am. (Yeah, yeah, I know sarcasm when I see it) What exactly was my approach? I'm just saying that... ok, take it like this... If you had an apparatus that was not functioning properly (in this case IE), and someone offered you something that is remarkably better (Mozilla, Opera, etc.) for free... what would be your arguments for not accepting the latter? Why would you hold on to the malfunctioning apparatus? I don't understand fully what you mean from "I would say everyone is good..." and out, but I didn't take it personally. I wanted a discussion over this, and to be honest, I was slightly disappointed when nobody answered me.. I wish to thank you for taking the time to, it was interesting to read what you had to say, as it got me thinking (thus having more to say). Like I said in my introduction post: Which I guess this answer is a proof of..

Don't flame me for this, that would be against forum rules section 7.b. Instead hear me out. If anyone of you have been "following" me since I joined, you've probably noticed my discontent for Internet Explorer and my love for web standards. For instance I only program in XHTML 1.1 and CSS2. Out of boredom, I made a search on Google, and started looking through the articles. After a while, I came across the ultimate page to show why IE sucks. The wonderfulness of this page is that it doesn't say that IE sucks. It just shows you why IE sucks. It also proves why Mozilla rules. Mmhm.. why Mozilla rules. Before I saw that page, I was an Opera fan. But even Opera has errors in it, that makes this page show up wrong. Mozilla on the other hand makes it look just perfect. And that is not because the page has been made just for Mozilla. It's because Mozilla is the only browser that interprets the CSS as it is meant to be interpreted. The page is called Newt Edge, and has a lot of demonstrations of the wonderfulness of good CSS. For those of you who swear to use Internet Explorer, you will se a rather boring page. That is because IE is incapable of doing anything right. So, for you guys, I've made a screenshot (~80 KiB), so you can see what the page really should look like. Most of the other pages on the site will look rather bad for you too, but I won't bother to get you a screenshot for each one of them. As a final note, please check out my google search. Read the first ten or so articles and be sure to also follow their links at least one step further... oh what the heck, I'll direct you to the decent articles. Hixie's Natural Log: Spring 2004 Travelog: Part 2 (Backwards Compatibility) Sore Eyes: IE sucks Warning! Your Browser Has A Problem Smoke screens ala Scoble | mentalized eclecticism > It's not my fault IE sucks. Get a real browser Note that these articles don't necessarily reflect my opinion, although I can almost guarantee that they speak the truth most of the time. Take their word for it. IE sucks. And if anyone of you try to tell me that it's weird to be against Microsoft products on a Microsoft forum, I'll just say: "Well, I might be against a Microsoft product, but it's a Microsoft forum and I'm talking about Microsoft, so per definition, I'm doing what's the forum's intent."

Hehe, that was cool. It's not like I care that much if people get it or not.. I'm quite open minded, I'll just let people do whatever they want as long as it won't harm me or people I care about. And plastic surgery ain't too bad.. what could it hurt me? As for the idea, it can go bad.. some examples are Michael Jackson and Cher... Michael Jackson just looks bad... Cher, although rather good looking, looks so unatural... But anyway, I guess it could help some people with their self-image to get plastic surgery. And if that'll give them a better life, then why not?

Not to mention that the <font> tag is by definition not HTML at all. Anyway, I use Dreamweaver, though I work basically only in source-code mode, so I could might as well be using Notepad... it's just that Dreamweaver has some nice features, like source-code coloring and the like. And.. for the love of all that is nice... please refrain from using FrontPage at any cost. It's the sewage of WYSIWYG applications.

Okay. I'll try again. I don't have one. Can I have one?

@hotmale: Oh yes, now we're talking. This looks very nice. Way to go! I just have one wish... the two side-menus only look nice in IE... how about making them look nice for everyone, hm?

Hiya, Anni. My ex-girlfriend is Finnish. That's about as close as I get to the Finnish culture... I also have a "Teach yourself Finnish" book, since I was going to learn it. Until my girl and I split up, and I don't really see a need to learn the language anymore. I know a couple of Dutch people... not like they are my best friends, but well enough that I talk with most of them at least once a week over MSN Messenger. Yup, this is my greeting to you. *hehe* Hope you'll have a nice time around here.

This is usually the server's fault. The server is supposed to supply a correct MIME type for all files it sends out. If this is not sent, most browsers will not know what kind of filetype it is. IE goes against standards, and tries to recognize file types by extension instead. IE is always the sinner. *cough* You know why? The author of the web page has most likely done something wrong. IE accepts a lot of errors silently.. sadly. Since most people use IE to see their pages when they code, many pages end up looking bad in other browsers. Since many sites are made by real n00bs, this occurs quite often. I've even seen professional companies use horrible HTML-code and CSS. Some don't even use CSS at all. Yuck. Try to make a decent-looking page in IE with proper HTML (well, actually, preferably XHTML 1.0 Strict or XHTML 1.1) and CSS, and it'll fail. IE has a lot of CSS bugs. The most annoying one being "margins: auto;", which is intended to center stuff.. if you place a <div> tag in the <body> tag and set "margins:auto;", it's supposed to center. And does so in most browsers.. but not IE. I could mention many more IE faults, but I think it'll only bore people. Just google for it if you wonder. I use Opera myself, 7.50, and have used Opera since version 5. It r00lz. I also use Mozilla and unfortunately IE when making web pages (although I hate IE, most others use it, so I gotta make my site IE compatible unless I don't feel like it) and IE for doing windows updates) And then there's ActiveX. The worst invention since IE. Craptacular. Works only in IE, and is a highly potential security risk. I'll rather be safe (with a non-IE browser) than sorry. OK, so you can turn it off, but what does that help when most users don't know what it is, and leaves it on by default?

You know, once I get excess money, this is what I'll do, by priority, 1 being most important, and 5 being least 1) Get a very decent CPU fan (ordered one already, a Thermaltake Volcano 11+. (meant for a lot more than 2200+'es, which I have) 2) Get S-ATA drives and controllers or at least get rounded IDE-cables, so the the usually flat-cables don't supress the air flow. 3) Get fans pulling air in in the front, and get fans pulling air out in the back. 4) Get a new cabinet, one that is made for providing a better air flow. 5) Replace the whole fan-crap with a water-cooling system, for both a quiter and (I believe) cooler system. Cooler as in heat, not as in awesomeness. Although it is cool having a water-cooled system.

I really should resist my urge to do this, but I'm so seriously devoted to it, that I want everybody else to be too.... 1) Get your page validated... It really appears much cooler then, and will look better in all browsers. 2) Don't use tables for layout. Use <div> tags accompanied with CSS. I see you use CSS already, which is cool, but don't use tables. Tables are for presenting tabular data, such as budgets and other things that require two-dimensional representation, like price charts. 3) Your code has some real issues. I could find several unclosed tags, a head tag somewhere in the middle of the document... and many of your img-tags have two alt="" values. And javascripts seemed to be placed randomly around inside the code. Enough with the complaining... here's for the praise: The site looks very good alltogether. Nice colors, excellent choice of font, (Tahoma, one of my two most favorite fonts ) nice logo(s) and the content looks very professional. If you'd just do what my three complaint-points suggest, this page would be very very good.

Actually, I have to keep my cabinet cover off, else it reaches 65-75°C... which is way above my accepted limit... so there's no need to talk about airflow in my case, since there is none... lol

I would suggest removing the .\ part, although I'm not sure it'll work.. but I think you're not supposed to have it there.

In Windows XP at least, you have the following variables: %Userprofile% = "X:\Documents And Settings\Username".. if you have windows installed on C and the user name is Cow, then it'll return "C:\Documents And Settings\Cow" %Username%="Username".. would just return "Cow" (I think this is the one you want) These assume you have WinXP though.. I don't use other systems, so I can't help you otherwise.

I don't think it has been suggested yet, so here's my suggestion as to how to remove viruses.. first, do like what has been told earlier, disable system restore (for the duration of this process anyway) and restart the computer in safe mode and then run the virus scan there. That's what I always do, and it usually kills everything, cause nothing gets loaded there but critical windows files, so unless the virus has had a chance at those (something which should not really be a possibility with WFP) it should get removed. Try it anyway, works for me.

It's an AMD... and I sorta have decided to buy a new one anyway... yesterday I unscrewed my fan from the heat sink... and there was a ton of dust in there.. so I removed that, and screwed the fan back on... and now it runs at about 45-46°C...still, I'd like a new one. Maybe I'll even go for water-cooling, just for the coolness of it.

Heck no... I'd never buy software from someone who would demand my personal information... and require me to be online to register? That's silly as well. Then at least allow phone-verification, like you can do with XP, in case you don't have the net where you need it. And online purchase as well? How about if a young kid would want to buy it? Kids can't buy stuff online, afaik... just giving examples... could be that a kid would not want to or need to use the program, but say one did... I believe in the method of trust... honest people will be honest, and most people who use pirated version of a software wouldn't have gotten it if it hadn't been available as a pirate edition.. this especially applies to poor people in poor countries. At least not do like microsoft did with XP and only allow x number of registrations, and by all means, don't attach a registration to hardware.. having to re-register just cause you install a new HDD or a new 3D-card ain't that much fun.. especially if you only have x registrations to do in the first place.