Posted 11/15/2009 at 04:40:22pm

Seriously? Discussions often errupted into flame wars before the first web browser was ever invented. Have a look at old usenet logs if you doubt.

Granted, the spelling was a hell of a lot better and the name-calling was more creative.

Posted 11/14/2009 at 12:54:49pm

Seriously, I just don't get it. This game is pretty fun and a natural evolution of COD4. There seem to be some really vocal haters out there and I'm starting to think it's just bandwagon hopping.

The SP game is about as long as COD4, so no surprises there. Special Ops is fun in coop mode, although I wish they would have integrated voice chat into it. Hopefully they'll add that with a patch later on, but there's lots of ways to do voice chat anyway.

I guess what I'm saying is it's fine with me if you have a problem with the game, but calling people stupid because they like it is lame. I don't like WoW but I don't think millions of people are all stupid because they do.

Posted 10/28/2009 at 01:28:50pm

I'm a big fan of Xobni (inbox spelled backwards if you can't remember the funky word) and have been using it for a year or so now. I find that Google Desktop search and Xobni fill in each other's gaps nicely.

Posted 10/16/2009 at 05:15:43pm

<cite>"Any user that reads all those steps is probably going to freak out," Schiller stated. "If you have to go through all that, why not just buy a Mac?"</cite>

Because if you do buy a Mac to replace your XP machine, you would have to learn how to use an entirely new and unfamiliar OS, plus either buy new versions of all those applications for OSX or reinstall them on a virtualized XP system running under OSX.

Apple needs a better value proposition. Their surging popularity has forced Microsoft to step up their game, and I'd like them to keep it up. Competition is a good thing. I'd like to see Apple hit the cost arguments head-on.

Posted 10/14/2009 at 08:06:04pm

I've had a Popcorn Hour A-110 for almost a year and it appears comparable to the new WD unit, which is cheaper. I'm interested to know if anyone who has both would care to post how they compare?

I'm very happy with the Popcorn Hour but am thinking about getting a second media streamer. AppleTV has a terrific interface (high wife approval factor) but terrible format support (low husband approval factor).

Posted 09/07/2009 at 11:39:40pm

Seriously, this is only appealing if you've never used an eBook reader before. A few things to consider:

1) eInk is on every single decent eBook reader for a reason, and two of those reasons are eyestrain and glare. There is no backlight on eInk screens and they honestly look pretty much just like paper. Go check one out at a Sony store or something. If you've never seen one before you might just think the display is a mockup. It looks that good. Since there is no backlight, the brighter it is where you're reading, the better the screen looks. Color eInk is coming for those that like to read comic books, but this device won't have it at the price point named.

 2) The folding design sucks. It's fine with a paperback since it's light enough to be held in one hand anyway, but this probably won't be able to be comfortably held in only one hand. Try using it to read on a plane for four or five hours and see how much you like it then.

 3) Battery life. Another reason decent eBook readers use eInk screens is because they literally only consume power when a page is changed. Once the screen is displaying a page, no power is required to keep the text displayed. Powering a big, beautiful _backlit_ color display is expensive in terms of battery, and that means expensive in terms of weight. See point #2.

Posted 06/09/2009 at 11:23:21am

I'm really surprised by all the upgrade cost outrage. A two year refresh cycle for carrier-subsidised devices is standard. Why don't you try taking your one year old Blackberry Storm to Verizon when the Storm 2 comes out and see if they'll cut you a break on the upgrade cost? How about the resell cost of that previous generation Blackberry when the new one is out? Expecting something different just because the manufacturer in this case is Apple is naive.

This is really simple. Carriers have a two year refresh cycle. Apple has (so far) a one year refresh cycle. You will get a pricing break on the iPhone every other generation. Anyone surprised by this is just confused, at best.

About the device itself, the iPhone was absolutely revolutionary when it launched. Sure, there were touchscreen phones years before, but they were useless. Nothing like what Apple came up with. But time marches on and really the only thing the iPhone has going for it now is plentiful and easy 3rd-party application support. That's a huge advantage (Developers! Developers! Developers!) but subject to rapid erosion. For example, writing applications for the Pre is something even I can do. Using CSS/JavaScript is a genius move on Palm's part. It may be the only smart thing they've done this decade but they sure got it right. They want the developers because they want to erode Apple's advantage in the application space.

Apple needs to do better than this if they want to retain their market share. Hey, we all though the Motorola Razor was a revolutionary kick-ass phone at one time, too. Remember?

Posted 05/13/2009 at 09:40:53am

What kind of link are you creating?

I used a junction (/J) to relocate my entire C:\Users folder to a different drive for a long time now, works perfectly for me. Also use /J when I want to move a game to a different drive without reinstalling, also works great.

Posted 04/07/2009 at 03:41:57pm

"The <b> and <i> tags should never be used solely for the purpose of stylizing text and especially not for headers."

That's silly. The <b> and <i> tags don't functionally do anything _except_ stylize text and in every web browser on the planet can be used interchangibly with the much-longer-to-type-out "correct" tags. Arguing differently is just sophistry.

Look, CSS just isn't the answer to every web design problem. Different browsers behave very differently with the same markup. That means that the "correct" way to do things often results in unexpected behavior. It's ludicrous that a tutorial is needed to make a page that has a three column layout with CSS when the same thing is trivial to accomplish with tables.

Lastly, you should validate your own CSS before writing an article about what a wonderful panacea CSS is.

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=maximumpc.com&profile=css21&usermedium=all&warning=1&lang=en

Posted 03/09/2009 at 05:39:26pm

Goodby to the only retailer I've ever filed a BBB complaint against.