Unfortunately, I don't really see any way to get what you want for the long haul. Companies keep changing, and so does the web. Even if you find one, it will produce code that breaks in browsers a few years from now, and sometimes current ones. What I would suggest is (bear with me) hand-coding your layout once, and then working it as a template for a simple CMS. I wouldn't want to hand code an entire website either, and for most a fully blown CMS is overkill (I don't need forums, or accounts at all: my website isn't really social), but there exist CMSs inbetween, and you only have to hand-code a few pages at worst.

I started with WolfCMS or something similar. Make one page, cut the code into snippets, and create a "layout" that includes these snippets. The CMS will fill the content in for you as you create pages. That's all I need, and it still gives me the power/flexibility to form my website into anything I want. Also, I would avoid one that has it's own scripting language. More pain than it's worth, especially for simple websites. You'll need to learn a little web development to get set up, but it should be relatively smooth sailing once installed. Wordpress can also be bent to create a number of different kinds of websites with their template system, though it's a bit more complicated. Handy if you want to include a well-known, well-supported (with plugins!) blog system, though.

As for hand-coding software, I tend to move around. I used GoLive for a time, for the preview, but now I just have some kind of programmer's GUI text editor in one space/virtual desktop, and a browser open in the other. I use Smultron on mac (I think it's been abandoned now though), Geany on linux, and Notepad++ on windows. Geany's my favourite so far.

Ah, but I do go outside. Out there, I don't need any screens.

There's probably a way to only allow the app to see certain things, blinding it to whatever would give away rooted-ness.

In any case, Netflix works on rooted devices, so it's not like there's missing functionality. In theory, Amazon Instant Video should work as well (with flash player) Other than that, I'd need a bigger SD card to fit movies transferred from my computer.

Also, I personally still can't see why I want to watch movies on a 4-inch screen. (or a screen I have to hold, for that matter (tablets))

I don't know if that stupid radioshack logitech I had was just particularly bad, but when I got a "gaming mouse" It felt a lot better. Of course, I mostly use this mouse for photoshop. Where the logitech couldn't seem to sit still or move tiny amounts, the razer is fine. Also, extra buttons are very useful in photoshop for tool properties, etc.

of course, the Gold Plated USB with Gajillion Hz Polling is a little much.

I'm glad that finally works. Last time I tried to up the PPI on windows a bunch of interfaces became unusable as fonts scaled but icons and widget spacing didn't, and other weird problems.

That seems incredibly dumb. Especially since apple advertises the fact that they sell 100ppi displays and higher (or at least used to) so that means their own cinema displays are out of wack. I'm a big fan of OSX, but you'd think for "The Desktop Publishing OS" they'd get that right.

You might want to try the command line though. I think there's something like: defaults write -g AppleDisplayScaleFactor SomeFloatingPointNumber that would help out. Netbook hackintosh users use it to make things fit on the screen without changing resolution. You have to kill finder and restart it for it to take effect. This may be the feature that went "missing" when they switched from NeXTStep.

When will the pixel density of my desktop monitor go up? It's been stuck at about 100ppi for quite some time now, and it's not like the prices for displays have dropped whenever they come out with new technologies like this. Did people really stop caring once they could fit a movie on their screen?

Though I suppose it would be a bad idea (for my eyesight at least) to feed the habit of running text-based consoles at max resolution. Mmmm... Monospaced characters. I'm a real hacker now!

If 3D content creators would stop making window violations and (my favourite) changing the convergence point of the screen without zooming (and vice versa) the idea that 3d is going to give headaches wouldn't have as much fact to go on. I'm sure some people get headaches anyway, but the majority of the people get them because of this stupid filmography. Also, stop changing the 3d depth every shot. I'm looking at you, Avatar.

If you give the brain realistic input that could actually happen, people would be more comfortable with it and it would be more likely to sell.

Also, the ghosting on some glasses is terrible. I could even see it in RealD, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some systems I've used (especially anaglyphs).

I hope it gets good before everyone becomes disinterested, because I'm actually excited for 3d to become kindof standard.

You forget, as I often do, that time spent working is worth money too. It's true that recording a song costs much more money to hire musicians, get/rent equipment, edit, etc, but when you say

It really does. In fact, it can take weeks or even months before the artist is satisfied with their composition. During that time, the composer doesn't get nearly as much money as the people who are just recording, (as they can output faster) with about the same amount of effort (providing the artist isn't procrastinating). They have to make up that money in the end by selling copies of their composition. Granted, this isn't true for every composer, but to simply dismiss composition as a "cheaper" form of art is rather short-sighted. (Unless we're talking about top-20 hits or so, that is cheap composition)

(Side note: My Dad's an artist, and I definitely feel the difference in family budget when his prints are selling or not.)

I've actually never met any audio guys who *use* windows. They've all been mac users, except for this one guy who used linux (his setup was rather strange, though).

My main issue with windows is I have a hell of a time with the audio subsystem. With Mac it just works (yay CoreAudio!), Linux took minimal twiddling with Jack (still not for non-geeky types though), but Windows would always work some days and not others. There were also annoying crackles and pops that would keep showing up no matter what settings or buffer size I used. Same stuff happened on XP, Vista, and 7 - with the same hardware (that works fine on Mac and Linux) Maybe Windows audio doesn't like firewire? - that sounds bad.

It's true that most of the DAW software and such work fine on windows, but I just don't trust the audio back end. I could see it being used for mixing and non realtime-critical tasks though - when I would need those specialized plugins.

While it's true you can't really hear a huge difference over 48khz, it really depends on what you're doing. If you're recording audio, you should probably sample at 96khz so that when you pass it through a plugin that does something temporally with the audio, there's less artifacts. It's true those algorithms fix most stuff, but for anything that sounds "nearly identical," there will be generational loss. 192 khz is for when you feel insane (I've had these moments, but always noticed having no disk space afterwards)

It's a little bit the same way HD downscaled to SD looks better than SD that was recorded as SD originally.

For playback, you don't need 96khz, unless you have thousand-dollar speakers. (I tried some out, the difference exists). In reality the quality comes down more to how good the recording engineer was before you can blame the sample rate.

Also I was under the impression that it was 44.1khz because of the video hardware they hacked together to see what they were doing while developing CDs?

I'm wondering who I have to write to in hopes of keeping Net Neutrality (or something like it) afloat.

A friend of mine lives in an area that is entirely served by Charter Cable. If they get to do whatever they want, it's not like he can drop them and move somewhere else if they start messing with his internet.

Well, I suppose there's dialup (shudder).

There's a Dual CPU 1.8GHz PowerMac G5 happily running in my house, and it sees excessive use every day. Feels about as fast as my 2.4GHz laptop, with the exception of the video card, which has trouble with HD Youtube. (Also doesn't have as much ram)

I've been wanting to gut the case to build a more powerful machine in it, but I can't bring myself to do it until it dies, which it hasn't been doing. Not even a little.

There used to be a Graphite G4 tower in it's place, but that finally bit the dust last year. (It couldn't take facebook's excessive javascript. (Damn that new layout!))

nVidia 9800GT. and my shiny mac was $650, actually.