|
I like Russ Meyer films, too.
Don't really see the connection here, though.
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: I like Russ Meyer films, too.
I don't really see the connection either. I quoted Mehgerbil saying "and there is a squirrel running up a tree..." I think of the movie UP: http://movies.disney.com/up[^]
Oh... just looked up Russ because I was clueless, I may have watched his movies when I was in my 20's but at that time I didn't care who created the movie. I could see him creating a movie called UP, but there wouldn't be any connection with the movie I was thinking of. There's quite a difference between what he and Pixar would cook "up" (See, multiple meanings for the word) for a movie. For a fan of Russ, I could see why you wouldn't have watched a Pixar film and therefore miss the connection I had made.
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, maybe I was just yanking someone's chain.
Which, as far as I know, was not a Russ Meyer movie.
Hmm. Feel like watching Beneath The Valley of the Ultra-Vixens now. Sigh.
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: On the other hand, maybe I was just yanking someone's chain.
Which I suspected at the beginning, but started the reply like you weren't. As soon as I saw Russ's profile, I was pretty certain that was happening.
Well, may as well yank back. 
|
|
|
|
|
Do we like him when he's not?
I think we should be told.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
That would probably make me angry.
|
|
|
|
|
 Like
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So making you angry is what is bad in that it would make you angry, but not liking you when you are not angry will make you angry as not being liked is worth getting angry, as not getting angry is not being liked. Luckily the few that do like you when you are not angry might also agree that they will not be liking you when you are angry, not to mention those that did not like you when you were not angry will now like you being angry, the very few that liked you when you were not angry will like you more when you do get angry, ignoring those that did not like you when you are not angry and still will not be liking you when you do get angry. 
I would suggest getting angry and then liking yourself getting angry. Who knows you might just start growing bigger and bigger as you are getting blue from not breathing (Well what did you expect? Obviously you are not the Hulk or anything) 
Loading signature...
. . . Please Wait . . .
|
|
|
|
|
I'm no longer angry, I'm confused.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm neither, I had a beer instead.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should start a new religion.
Granted, it would be the repackaging of a very old one - but I see you making good cash at it.
|
|
|
|
|
I've read "angry" so many times it doesn't look like a real word any more
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote:
I'm no longer angry, I'm confused.
I hadn't read CBadger's missive before I sent mine. I probably wouldn't have sent mine if I had. Mine is much simpler than C's but basically says the same thing in a very abbreviated form. (And you just answered my question about you being in a continual state of angry. NOT)
The Hulk is kind of strange, he can stop being The Hulk or get angrier (and stronger) when he gets confused. Depends on whether or not he is getting hurt at the same time. Like someone else said, you aren't The Hulk.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote:
That would probably make me angry.
So, liking you when you're not angry would probably make you angry. Would not liking you make you happy or are you in a continual state of angry? I'm starting to like you whether or not you're angry.
|
|
|
|
|
For me, the Internet browser is just a tool, which allows me to do various things.
I have five different browsers installed on this machine, just like I have seven different text editors, and four full-blooded word processors.
I don't expect all text editors/word processors to behave the same; in fact, the reason that I have variety is precisely because they don't all behave the same -- I use text editor 3 for doing A, because it does it better than text editor 2, etc.
I dare say that most people who subscribe to CP also have multiple text editors/IDEs/graphics apps.
But you don't hear everyone bitching because NotePad+ and TextPad do things differently!
So chrome has its own thinghy for doing whatzit.
I don't give a cr@p.
-- If I want to do whatzit, I'll open chrome.
-- If I want to do a complex document with conditional text, I'll open framemaker or Madcap Flare.
-- If I want to edit Java, I'll open Eclipse.
-- If I want to edit a photo, I'll open PaintShop Pro.
-- If I want to use saved/saveable browser sessions, I'll open Opera.
-- If I want to create a flow diagram, I'll open Visio.
-- If I want to edit C#, I'll open VS.
-- If I want to use Sharepoint I'll open IE.
-- If I want to cry, I'll open Word 2010.
Get over it, eh?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
As developers we embrace complexity.
Most people who use computers just want to do a couple of simple tasks.
|
|
|
|
|
That's not complexity.
You don't use a dishwasher for washing clothes, or a microwave for watching soap operas (although it would probably be preferable).
"If you want to play this game, you have to open this page in [browser name]" wouldn't confuse anyone.
Browsers are not idols that you have to worship at the feet of, so we -- as in us in CP, and those like us -- have to stop making it look like people have to *LOVE* one browser and *HATE* all others.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'd agree there is no reason for snobbery.
However, my parents think Google is the name of their browser.
True story.
|
|
|
|
|
And people thought that that other browser was named Netscape and a spreadsheet app was named Lotus.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: "If you want to play this game, you have to open this page in [browser
name]" wouldn't confuse anyone.
Good point.
The same with video games and consoles -- not all games are available for all consoles.
And apps and phones/tablets.
|
|
|
|
|
But do you have one dishwasher for cleaning pots, and another dishwasher for cleaning pans?
|
|
|
|
|
Stryder_1 wrote: do you have one dishwasher for cleaning pots, and another dishwasher for
cleaning pans?
Only the polygamists have those.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Stryder_1 wrote: But do you have one dishwasher for cleaning pots, and another dishwasher for cleaning pans?
No, but if a pot doesn't fit into the dishwasher, or if the dishwasher can't clean it, I clean it with something else.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I think the analogy kinda breaks down there. Both are supposed to clean both. But if push comes to shove you can always clean by hand. But you can't render a HTML page in your head.
|
|
|
|
|
It wasn't supposed to be a major, definitive, profound analogy; it was just something I threw into a forum posting.
If you want to extend it along sensible lines, try looking at the pans -- why do you need more than one? People all over the world manage with a single pot or wok, so why should your kitchen have over a dozen?
The point is that there is no "best" browser, and certainly nothing that comes close to being the best for everything, so encouraging people to install multiple browsers is preferable -- certainly preferable to the current situation, where browser-lovers are still acting like schoolboys/d1ckheads over their personal browser preferences.
It's not just HTML, any more. Expecting browsers to handle everything will result in their needing a gigabyte of memory to function at all.
Oh. It already has.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
