|
Slow Eddie wrote: Team Viewer's pricing is outrageous! The Google one is free.
I couldn't help but smile at this.
You know that's because the money comes from elsewhere. They can afford to offer their service for "free"... 
|
|
|
|
|
You basically took the words out of my mouth.
|
|
|
|
|
If something is free... you are the product.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. Obviously it took people to develop the product/service, and costs money to run it, so the question to ask is always, what's the incentive for them to offer it for free?
|
|
|
|
|
I replaced TeamViewer with AnyDesk many moons ago. Very happy with it although I use it only for occasional IT support in the family.
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
I had originally installed Tight VNC because the laptop was Win 10 Home not Pro, so no MS RDP. I had also installed a possibly dodgy graphic equalizer app that had two versions, a paid annual subscription and a 'free' version that said it would co-opt your system for third party VPN use when it was not busy. I went for the paid version, but the only way to do that was to install the free, and then upgrade. Who knows what it left behind. However, 'tis all gone now!
|
|
|
|
|
When you said life would get back to normal after June...Julyed!
The less you need, the more you have.
Why is there a "Highway to Hell" and only a "Stairway to Heaven"? A prediction of the expected traffic load?
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
That must have been composed by a Scandinavian!
|
|
|
|
|
kanske!
The less you need, the more you have.
Why is there a "Highway to Hell" and only a "Stairway to Heaven"? A prediction of the expected traffic load?
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
what an august revelation.
they all lie
|
|
|
|
|
|
My cat knocked over my previous monitor and broke it, so I got a new 32" one. This one doesn't have internal speakers (which I didn't realize), so I've ordered a pair of earbuds from Amazon to use. Old monitor was 24" (and had crappy internal speakers), so this is a big upgrade.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
These days I just use big 4k TVs for monitors. It gets expensive, but I find its worth it.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
pleasantly surprised at this. 
|
|
|
|
|
I don't muck around when it comes to my computer. I don't nickel and dime. My last "monitor" cost me $900 and I'd spend it again.
55" of 4k QLED goodness. If I'm going to be staring at something all day, I want it to be worth looking at.
Also this way I don't need to mess around with multiple monitors. I have so much screen real-estate I just use Win+Arrow to rearrange multiple windows around my display as though I was using multiple monitors.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: My last "monitor" cost me $900 and I'd spend it again.
I remember my first LCD monitor (19", 4:3, 1280x1024, I believe) set me back $1600, before taxes. My 4K 40" TV was a bargain, in comparison, at $500. That, I'd do again.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, the bad old days. 
Frankly I don't know why everyone doesn't just use TVs now.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using an old 40" LED TV that has an input port for "computer" for a couple of years now. I have been delighted with it.
It doesn't have any speakers that work, and I haven't tried to make them work. I have a cheap but comfortable, over the ear earphones that I plug into my desktop if i need to listen to anything. This has the advantage of drowning out SWMBO, whenever she is trying to talk to. or yell at me.
enjoy your new monitor and give your cat a good talking to, if you think it will help. It won't.
Happy in NOLA
|
|
|
|
|
I recently bought a my first 34', 3440x1440 @144Hz (4,9 Mpixel) monitor.
There are others better than this for sure (as it is not that expensive), but I am really happy with it.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I scraped codeproject.com to test my markup reader, and wow, the JS here is actually readable.
I'm impressed actually. It's bloody difficult to get script to be that neat on dynamically rendered pages.
Also the page helped me find bugs in my code, so yay.
So to whoever took the time to do it, and whoever paid them to do so, cheers to all of you.
You can tell this site is built and run by coders just by viewing source. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed! It also seems to work flawlessly with debugging enabled...not true for way too many developer sites. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
You could have posted this in the B&S, as the message might go unattended in the lounge.
Or summon CP Staff in your message, so they get the notification for your kudos.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I probably should have. I wasn't thinking along those lines though, because my brain had stubbornly filed it under "random missive" and not "site bugs and suggestions" and wasn't about to be convinced otherwise. Sometimes it has a life of its own. What can you do? That's okay, in the end Matthew saw it.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
Our coding standards ensure that we produce readable code that can be quickly comprehended.
We understand that you write code for people, not computers. It's the next person touching the code that needs to understand what is going on, not the compiler.
Since we are a small developer group here at CodeProject, we also understand that the next person to look at the code will be ourselves, so we are highly motivated to keep the code clean.
Matthew
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Me: A glance at the documentation makes it clear.
OP: I don't know what 'documentation' is.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
