Have to put in my host.

http://www.honestnetworks.com

HAY THNX GUYS!!!

Hey, today is one of the Programming Reg's birthday.

Unfortunately, iTunes won't do anything with unassociated filetypes. It's hard to use unpopular audio files like that since some of the big media players don't read them correctly.

I'd say there's nothing to help that...not to my knowledge anyway. I'd never even heard of ogg.

Hey Taylor, sorry to see nobody's taking this thread seriously. I respect you, and I thank you for all the help you gave me with ADM. The switch with axishost stopped all development on the site, unfortunately. I couldn't log into my account, I couldn't contact support without logging into an account, I couldn't have access to my domain name, and the payments that were supposed to be manual ended up being taken out automatically.

At 6/14/08 11:21 PM, Ciph3rzer0 wrote: goDaddy said that I had to wait till after it expired, but of course, as soon as it expired, someone snatched it up.

I hate that. It's one of the biggest ripoffs on GoDaddy for you to buy the "First Bid" or whatever they call it. Basically, GoDaddy will try to buy it for you right when it expires. But there's absolutely no guarantee, and it costs a ton of money.

At 6/12/08 05:04 AM, styi wrote: Squatting is taking trademarked names etc.
I don't.

Kinda getting close with the KHTV.info's and whatnot, I'd think.

At 6/7/08 08:18 PM, Anim8or666 wrote: Oh, so you want us all to say "GTFO, you fail!" to every noob and troll out there? What happened to manners?

Actually, in this specific case, this guy is the pure definition of a troll. I have no doubt in my mind that he knows what HTML is, and he's just posting to get attention. Just look at his post history.

All I usually need is time...but it never seems to be around :(

My apparatus usually includes...
1.) Good music. Generally a mix of classic/modern rock songs.
2.) IM. Gotta love procrastination by talking to friends.
3.) Laptop. I've tried coding at a desk, and it just doesn't work for me. I've got to move if I want to.

Um...seriously?

At 5/31/08 08:20 AM, smulse wrote: From last night, these girls (who I don't think picked the best song, but it was still great).

Reminded me of when Mcartney preformed at the Super Bowl.

Some of the stuff on the Britain version is pretty cool, but this guy is amazing.

Since you said you have a subdomain, I'm thinking you may not have one of those folders.

At 5/27/08 04:41 AM, yhar wrote: Yay for political correctness.

I totally agree with you there. That kind of stuff really makes me mad. For me, it's illegal immigrants that do that kind of stuff.

I thought you meant it in a different way. Luff you.

Hm. That wasn't racist at all.

At 5/25/08 11:17 PM, TheRyoku wrote: Then again, I am only like, 15. :)

I made that decision then, too...

At 5/25/08 12:58 PM, Anim8or666 wrote: You know... maybe you could go and get a better host, with PHP and mySQL... then you wouldn't have all these problems...

No. That's too easy.

At 5/24/08 05:36 AM, smulse wrote: Baileys anyone <3 ?

I've been told to try Baileys in a white mocha.

At 5/24/08 12:46 AM, Kuso416 wrote: and that's where i come in, crash the party and disagree with you. If you explain to someone the "massive benefits" of valid HTML, they will probably keep that in mind.

I just try to look at it from a non-developer standpoint. Simply...does it work. I don't care about whatever the "W3C" is, I don't want a weird image on my site saying it's valid, I don't want someone trying to explain to me all the ins and outs of "valid markup". I want it to work.

At 5/23/08 07:16 PM, Jon-86 wrote: Drink to get drunk. Tis a rule of thumb!

If you want to die :(

Vodka is good.

Especially when mixed with tequila, rum, gin, triple sec, sweet and sour, and coca cola. Anyone? Anyone?

At 5/23/08 11:18 AM, Seachmall wrote: If your using your site to promote your work it should be valid. Odds are if an employer has visited your site they have visited other sites which promote valid markup. I you can't replicate that promise you've lost a customer. Plain and simple.

See, on that point, I'd strongly disagree. If someone goes shopping on portfolios, some will have "Valid HTML" some won't. Just because they see it on one, doesn't neccesarily mean they'll look for it on the others. You have to understand that if someone's shopping for a web designer...they most likely have no idea what the hell they're doing or looking for. They want someone else to take care of it.

we see it as every new browser is released they are closer to conforming, in a few years all browsers my be 90%+ conformity, if that happens your site will break in all browser if its not up to standard. Its an insurance to minimise the amount of redesigns needed.

I'd love to see that. If all browsers started conforming more, it would be great. I write valid code myself, and I hate it when I have to use a tage that "isn't supported", such as embed...which doesn't have a feasible alternative. However, I've been hearing that kind of statistic for a few years now...Firefox 2 and IE7 were supposed to be the closest we've gotten, but I haven't noticed much change at all, except a few things from IE6-IE7.

I also hope everyone realizes that this is just a friendly debate to me...I don't mean to come off as an arrogant jackass or anything.

At 5/23/08 01:12 AM, polym wrote: it does matter.

You can try defending your views, but it doesn't change the fact that someone who's looking to hire a programmer won't check if the code is valid markup. That's what matters. I used to think it mattered, too.

At 5/22/08 11:28 PM, Rig wrote: Yeah man, I saw that on the news. Those things looked HUGE!

It's not rare to see storms that big, but when the entire CLOUD IS A TORNADO, it makes people shit their pants.

At 5/23/08 12:24 AM, polym wrote: if your code doesn't conform to web standards, then it will never display properly in all browsers, even if they don't necessarily follow standards themselves.

Even if your code does follow web standards, it won't display properly in all browsers. Sorry.

have you considered blind-people or people with slow connections (ie, the images take forever to load)? you just lost a visitor.

Sorry, I don't understand why slow connections would use screen readers.

if you can't be half-assed to validate your code, then that shows you're a lazy, and incompetent programmer. who would want to hire you?

No, it does not. You can be a very meticulous programmer that took the time to find out exactly what code it took to place the objects where he needed. Then come to find out, oh, it doesn't validate.

Then he comes to find out...it doesn't matter.

At 5/22/08 12:06 PM, Seachmall wrote: If someone offers to build a site for someone and can't write decent code on his own site he won't get much work.

If someone is hiring a web designer, decent code - to them - means something that works and looks nice. Or maybe just one of the two.

Having a valid site makes it more flexible and its alot less likely to break with the release of new browsers whom follow W3 validation.

That would be true, if it actually happened. Most of the time, if you want something to look the way you want it, you code it to look that way. If it's invalid...it still shows the way you want it to. No browser conforms to W3 validation, and most have tags that work in that specific browser.

It also makes it easier for screen readers to read the screen (although that depends on where the site breaks validation).

Screen readers reading through a web page is not a decent defense for requiring validation. Invalid code can be read through very easily, depending on what it is that is invalid. Also, writing code for screen readers...in my opinion...is like writing code for text-based browsers like Lynx. Sure, people use them, but not enough to care about.

That being said...the only part of my website left that I actually coded...here. If I can, I validate my code. However, certain things like an embed tag don't validate, no matter how hard you try. I've been able to use the object code for Firefox, but IE doesn't take it. Sure, I can do a work around in Javascript...and have in the past...but code validation for me is just personal preference.

Today, two huge weather cells rolled over Colorado, hitting major cities of Ft. Collins, Greeley, Longmont, and not the least of which - Windsor, who's touch down destroyed much of the town and killed at least one person.

A daycare in Windsor was hit, luckily the children were moved to a bank nearby and stayed in the vault for the duration of the storm. Many funnels touched down, at least one of which has been said to be larger than a football field in diameter. One even touched down a few miles from where I worked, and a funnel cloud started creeping up, making us shut down for a few minutes, before it blew away.

It's weird, because this area of Colorado doesn't experience tornadoes because the mountains disrupt the weather enough to keep the clouds from forming. But when we do get them...it's bad.

At 5/22/08 07:12 AM, adam2510 wrote: thanks for every1's help

You're....welcome?

At 5/22/08 04:17 PM, DannyIsOnFire wrote: It begins.

Bout time. And you spelled "you're" wrong.

Because everyone knows that a good website has to be valid.

Honestly, just looking over these SEVEN posts has frustrated me to no end.

Honestly, what do you hope to get our help from when you provide NO information about your code. Literally, it would be like me going to the doctor's office and saying, "Doctor, I'm sick. I need you to tell me how to get better." Then the doctor would say, "Well, what are your symptoms?" And I would say, "I'm sick. I think I have chicken pox, but I'm not sure."

Sorry for that long and drawn out response, but the main point is, if you want us to help you fix it, you've gotta give your code.