TangentIdea

The video that I made of the "line people" waiting for the midnight showing of EpIII just made its way to slashdot... Let's see if TCH can keep up! http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/2...tid=133&tid=101 They can handle it, right?

Yeah, that was plan B. I thought it might be easier for content maintenance to keep them in the database. That way, when I delete a record, it deletes the whole thing... but doing it with files should work fine. I'm just lazy.

Aaak. Okay, any ideas for workarounds?

Yes, I know that the PHP max_upload_size is 2M by default. I was trying to change that. I don't know for certain that it's from mySQL; it's just a hunch, from what I know from mysql.com and php.net.

Yeah, I've tested it with smaller files and it works fine.

Okay, now I'm feeling really stupid. I've been stumped on this for weeks, and I'm just now figuring it all out... sigh. Okay, I decided to get rid of the MAX_FILE_SIZE field. Not needed. So, I come across another error: >Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' From what I understood from PHP.net, this is a message generated by MySQL. Now what? How do I change this without having admin access?

Okay, update: I discovered that ha, yes, I can set that in .htaccess, and apparently I can't within a script. Duh. Okay. Got that working. Now, it says that my problem's with the MAX_FILE_SIZE in the HTML code. Here's what I have: ><input type="hidden" name="MAX_FILE_SIZE" value="20M"><input type="file" name="media" id="media"> Hmm... what's wrong?

Okay, I'm having a major headache over this. I'm trying to insert MP3 files into a mySQL database, but I keep coming across an error of one kind or another. First it was a timeout, now it's filesize. I managed to use the ini_set command to successfully reset the max_execution_time var, but it's not working on the upload_max_filesize one. Here's the code... >$setmaxexectimeresult = ini_set(max_execution_time,600); $uploadsizeresult = ini_set(upload_max_filesize,20240); //20 megabytes and then later on... >echo "[" . $setmaxexectimeresult . "] [" . $uploadsizeresult . "]"; ...which returns... ><!--set result: [30] []--> What's the deal? In the second pair of brackets, it should have a "2M" or something like that, to show that it was successfully reset. Aaand, it doesn't. I'm probably just missing something stupid -- any idea what?

Okay, I'm trying to do this, and it's not working. Whenver I put that line in my .htaccess file, the whole file won't work. I'm assuming I just missed something and I'm doing it wrong. What am I possibly missing? Here's the content of my .htaccess file: -Ryan

I think the whole tracking scenario is inevitable. People will fuss about it for a while, but then they'll get used to it... and life moves on. On the end-times point: If it's not time, then God's not gonna let it happen. If it's time, it's gonna happen and there's nothing we can do about it.

If you're not looking for something with a whole lot of features, try a Kodak. I have a Kodak 6200 -- got it for $100. The pictures can get a little grainy in low light, but I like that it is point and shoot idiot-proof. I can give it to someone to take pictures for me, and I don't have to worry about them not taking right, or something. -Ryan

Even the low-end mac laptops are pretty nice. Most of them come with built-in 802.11b or g wireless, and all have 10/100BT ethernet. Of course, if you're doing a lot of graphics work, a mac would be a pretty obvious choice... Photoshop is practically built around the mac, and a mac is built for graphics and video. However, if most of your existing software is PC-only, that'd be a problem. Virtual PC is just not fast enough to make it worthwhile. But I use a Mac for everything -- it's so stable and easy to use that I don't ever have to worry about it. My parents' eMac, which is running OS 10.2, goes for weeks without having to be restarted. No joke. -Ryan

Yeah, monsoon is what I'm using now. Could TCH install a couple of those "slimmer" skins on our server? -Ryan

One of the things that's always irritated me about Cpanel is its unnecessary use of images and HTML code. It's a total waste of bandwith. Can I make a slimmer template to use with cpanel, perferably something text-based? It would be a huge help to me and my clients (most of which are on dialup). Is that possible? -Ryan

Great, thanks. I really don't think that it's a problem, but I want to keep his info handy should he become a real problem. Like I said, I suspect it's just some idiot trying to be funny. -Ryan

Is there any way to have FormMail trace IPs of users using FormMail to submit messages, and then attach the trace to the email? I've gotten a threatening emails that I *suspect* are just some idiot playing a prank. However, I'd like to be able to get a trace, so I can figure out their ISP is to report them if necessary. Of course, I have FormMail include their IP address, but by the time I look at it, they've disconnected. Any ideas? -Ryan

Could you post info on how that works once you find out? -Ryan

There's an excellent book on the subject on webwriting that I highly recommend, Writing for the Web (I read the Geek's edition). You can get it on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=glance&s=books Composing for the internet is a much different process and has a much different goal than, say, writing for a book. You have as concise as possible, and do everything in your power to hold the user's attention, and that book explains much of that. -Ryan

Keep in mind, though, that "poor design" is often in the eyes of the beholder. Nielson's useit.com might be great for a screen reader for the visually impaired but for me trying to find a specific category or piece of info it stinks. I certainly would not go there on a regular basis to find things, but that's my point of view and I know others disagree. Jakob Neilson's reports are based on actual testing of random users sitting at a computer, trying to use a particular piece of software, a web site, what have you, so it's not his opinion. And yeah, you're right -- depending on your audience, your site will have to be designed differently. -Ryan

I've been designing rather seriously for about 2 and a half years now. Whenever I lay out a page, I think about the person with the oldest computer and the slowest internet connection -- cuz that was pretty much where I was three years ago. I always test my sites on the oldest computer I have around, using Netscape 4 on dialup. Especially when you're doing something for a business, you have to be absolutely certain that you don't leave anyone behind. Look through some of Jakob Neilson's (a well-respected usability expert) reports at http://www.alertbox.com/ . He has many good suggestions on making sites compatible, not only with computers, but with people. Many sites suffer from poor design, in text content, navigation, etc. I think that the hardest thing for new designers to grasp is that your website will inevitably look different on every other computer. It's a sad reality of web design. You could have all the fonts, colors, and photos laid out exactly the way you want it on your computer, just to have that orange look like horse puke on someone else's computer, or have the layout ruined by a senior with the highest font setting, etc etc etc. So go simple, and use old technology. I use mostly HTML, with an ocassional drop of JavaScript. I use only JPEG and GIF images. On the one hand, it doesn't have the "oh wow, isn't that cool" effect, but I know that it will work reliably on almost every computer on the internet. So have fun -- there's good money to be had in the web design business. You've got the right idea already, that more is not always better. Don't get too carried away with the power of DreamWeaver . It is always better to err on the side of too simple than on the side of too snazzy. A website is a tool for people to find information, it is not an action movie. -Ryan PS: Despite having said all that, I apologize for the rather sorry state that my website is in at the moment. I've been too busy with school and other jobs to do much with it right now. Check out http://www.chalc.org/, http://www.paradisemc.org, or http://www.countrylanepoultry.com/ -- they're in much better condition.

My top 5: 1. Google 2. Google 3. Google 4. Google 5. AskJeeves.com I've always been extremely pleased with Google -- its speed and its accuracy. Ocassionally, if I'm not having luck finding something, I'll try AskJeeves. But Google is always my first choice. Being on dialup, Yahoo and other sites take too long to load, which becomes unbearable if you're looking through several pages of results. Google is clean and fast. -Ryan

Thanks, guys. I should probably start using SSL then -- it would quite a mess if somebody hacked my accounts. -Ryan

What I did for audio on my church's site is just put the audio files on as highly compressed MP3s, at a rate suitable for streaming. The file can download and play in real time, like it was streaming. Now, you can't jump to the middle of the sermon and have it play; you have to wait for it to load to that point. But hey, it works for what we need. If you want to see it, it's at http://www.paradisemc.org/sermon.shtml . From a consumer point of view, I really like QuickTime for streaming video. The MPEG-4 format performs very nicely at low bitrates, even on dialup, and it pretty speedy to compress and decompress. FWIW. -Ryan

I was just wondering, how vulnerable are my passwords, really, when they're transmitted without encryption? I'm thinking primarily about the cPanel and WHM logins, since up til now I haven't bothered to use the encryption feature. How much difference does it make? -Ryan

My first real "job" was for CHALC, a homeschool organization. (www.chalc.org) The site was already designed, but would need continual maintenance. They decided that the best way to pay would be at $15/hour. The CHALC Board sees this job as somewhat of a "scholarship" they provide to their members. It gives a student good experience in web design, and they get someone to maintain their site. I've just always done work at per-hour pay. When I give someone a quote, I give them a target range (eg, $45-$60 for a simple site, possibly $75 if something goes wrong, or $120-$180 for a small dynamic site, $210 if something goes wrong). That also encourages them to provide information, such as text and photos, in a format that makes life easiest for me -- if I have to clean up after them, it costs them more. I don't have a whole lot of experience in this realm yet, but I hope that helps somewhat. -Ryan