Billy Ripkin already has that trademarked...
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Didn't Handspring--now defunct--already do this like 12 years ago? There were all sorts of devices for their PDAS, including a GSM module.
Eclipse has to be the worst environment ever made--and I've used Lotus Designer.
It's great Adobe made a legit IDE for their various tech(Flash, ActionScript, ColdFusion). But when it's built on top of the steaming pile that's Eclipse, how effective of a tool can it really be?
I do Flash and ColdFusion development. I've tried to use Flex Builder 3, and the Flash Builder 4 betas. It just isn't good. Every time I try to write code with something based on Eclipse, I'm fighting the IDE more than I'm actually writing code. The same can be said for CFEclipse, or Aptana.
There NEEDS to be better tools. But as soon as I see Eclipse, it's a pass.
The ended up frying his brain so he would forget the woman--and all sorts of other stuff like his job. I think in the end it was actually something different and they fried his brain for nothing.
This problem was solved in the 80's with The Animal: The Animal
Spirit Rover engineers should have played with more 80's toys. Can anything stop...THE ANIMAL?!
I don't know why people like to toss that extra "en" in there. It's like when people spell ligthening for lightning.
They aren't paying you money to ask a bunch of guys on Slashdot. Do it your damn self or find another job that you're actually qualified to do without submitting an "Ask Slashdot" anonymously to do it.
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THE HURD IS THE WORD!
September starts the NFL season, the NHL is kicking off to get ready in October. Baseball is entering the playoff stretch.
Get some concrete information on the holiday releases, as well as a couple great games that get released a bit before the season.
It's getting cool enough where outdoor activities are really enjoyable.
All sorts of great stuff happens in Sept/Oct
Trademarks help protect corporate and product identity, and Photoshop is one of Adobe's most valuable trademarks. By following the below guidelines, you can help Adobe protect the Photoshop brand name.
The Photoshop trademark must never be used as a common verb or as a noun. The Photoshop trademark should always be capitalized and should never be used in possessive form, or as a slang term. It should be used as an adjective to describe the product, and should never be used in abbreviated form. The following examples illustrate these rules:
Trademarks are not verbs.
CORRECT: The image was enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
INCORRECT: The image was photoshopped.
Trademarks are not nouns.
CORRECT: The image pokes fun at the Senator.
INCORRECT: The photoshop pokes fun at the Senator.
Always capitalize and use trademarks in their correct form.
CORRECT: The image was enhanced with Adobe® Photoshop® Elements software.
INCORRECT: The image was photoshopped.
INCORRECT: The image was Photoshopped.
INCORRECT: The image was Adobe® Photoshopped.
Trademarks must never be used as slang terms.
CORRECT: Those who use Adobe® Photoshop® software to manipulate images as a hobby see their work as an art form.
INCORRECT: A photoshopper sees his hobby as an art form. INCORRECT: My hobby is photoshopping.
Trademarks must never be used in possessive form.
CORRECT: The new features in Adobe® Photoshop® software are impressive.
INCORRECT: Photoshop's features are impressive.
Trademarks are proper adjectives and should be followed by the generic terms they describe.
CORRECT: The image was manipulated using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
INCORRECT: The image was manipulated using Photoshop.
Trademarks must never be abbreviated.
CORRECT: Take a look at the new features in Adobe® Photoshop® software.
INCORRECT: Take a look at the new features in PS.
The trademark owner should be identified whenever possible.
Adobe and Photoshop are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries.
In the United States it varies state to state. But I'm in Pennsylvania, and that's how it is here. You get a DUI, they will charge you with both. The state considers them separate offenses.
They probably have 10 different laws on the books that overlap. They can just pick one of the others to charge you with.
It's like when you get a DUI, and they charge you for both "drunk driving" and "driving with a BAC of
How long does a bear have to be? Is it proportional to long cat?
So when is one of Obama's relatives going to buy him a Cadillac so Jack Klompus can start the impeachment hearings?
Let's just hope Biden didn't steal anyone's marble rye.
Which goes against the thinking for a lot of developers. They seem to take reviews of code personally, and believe everything they did is correct.
I go the other way. If my code is good, it will stand the test of a review. If one or a group of my colleagues looks at my code and doesn't find a fault then I KNOW it's good. I don't have to just THINK it because I believe so. If I can't explain why I did something in a review, it shouldn't get into production code.
Sometimes it's even simple stuff. I Do X, and someone goes "oh, we had to do it too, and wrote this bunch of code for it. Maybe we could combine the code into one usable module for both". It's stuff like that you can only really do in a good code review. It shouldn't JUST be done at a commit. It's something that should be part of the development process.