Messages

901

Living Room / Re: Coders' Watches

« on: October 29, 2007, 05:01 PM »

I too wear mine 24/7, but the reason is simple.

-Ralf Maximus (October 29, 2007, 03:24 PM)

Ummm. Don't you take it off in the shower at least, so you can clean underneath it? Eeewww.

And what about during ... ummm ... romantic moments? 

902

General Software Discussion / Re: SQLNotes...what is it exactly?

« on: October 29, 2007, 04:59 PM »

Interesting, but I've got mixed feelings.

To tell the truth, I was about to post a dismissive reply based on the name only, but to be fair I had to look at the web site first. The concept that's described there looks quite interesting.

However:

• The name. This was my first complaint. I object in principle to software that is named for the technology that it's implemented in. This is common in the java world, for example the photo album builder "jAlbum" (which, to be fair, is best of its type). The thing is, the end user wants software that works, and doesn't care about the technology platform.
• The price. Something described on the order of $100 for the liteversion, and up from there. It looks to me like the main competition will be programs like Zoot, which costs $99 for a full version.

903

General Software Discussion / Re: Managing projects with OUTLOOK

« on: October 24, 2007, 09:53 AM »

It looks like you have two distinct areas of need. On one hand you cited a number of planning tools like MS Project. On the other hand you mention a specific need for managing a set of current tasks through Outlook.

For the first set of requirements, I'm not aware of anything that integrates well with Outlook, but other than that there were already excellent options posted like Open Workbench.

For Outlook-integrated task management, I'd suggest looking at Zoot (http://www.zootsoftware.com/). This organizer is in many ways a successor to Ecco in the way that it allows a grid view of data. It allows hierarchical folders for your items, and you can define rules determining how things are placed into folders automatically (and in fact things can be in multiple folders, and can be allocated there dynamically!).

The biggest criticism of Zoot is that it's a 16-bit, text-only application. However, there's currently a public beta of a 32-bit port, and my understanding is that once its ported, rich text support will be the next feature added.

904

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Qimage, "Professional Photographic Printing Software" - a second look

« on: October 18, 2007, 05:04 PM »

Yes, lots of money 

I'm cheap, so here's what I use: Monitor Calibration Wizard 1.0 http://www.majorgeek...om/download3912.html

Just matching the monitor to the printer isn't sufficient, depending on how much of a purist you are. For example, it may be that both are too dark, so your output doesn't match the original photograph (even if it matches what you see on the monitor).

IMHO, this is more important for the printer, since in my experience printers can be off far more significantly.

Using DDI's Profile Prism, you get a card with known, well-defined colors on it. You print out another card on your printer, using your desired ink and paper. Put both papers through your scanner, and put the result into PP. By comparing the two, PP can "factor out" the inaccuracies of your scanner, and arrive at an absolute color profile to allow your printer to precisely match what's defined in the image file (or at least as close as is possible). You can then put this profile into Qimage so that it automatically corrects for the "errors" that are expected from the printer.

You can also take a photograph of the provided card and analyze it to get a profile to correct your camera. I don't think this is worth the time, because I think that the profile will vary depending on the ambient light level, shutter speed, ISO speed, etc. There are too many variables to be able to generate an accurate profile, unless you're working in tightly-controlled studio conditions.

905

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Qimage, "Professional Photographic Printing Software" - a second look

« on: October 18, 2007, 01:02 PM »

I'm a long-time user of Qimage. To me, the important features are image scaling and managing color profiles. I have to agree that beyond very basic operations, the UI really takes time to learn.

Image scaling in Qimage is definitely superior to that in Paint Shop Pro (even the bloated version 11  ). However, with the latest crop of digicams (mine is 7.1 megapixel, 3000 x something images) there's not very much scaling required anymore.

Proper color management is a topic that few people are even aware of, and their print images definitely suffer as a result. The image that comes out of your printer differs from what you see on the screen, and if you want the best output you need to account for this difference. Unfortunately this is easier said than done, as the process is rather confusing. Qimage makes it as streamlined as I've ever seen it. And in fact, you should consider also buying DDI's product "Profile Prism" (http://www.ddisoftware.com/prism/) in order to generate accurate color profiles for your camera and printer (and, in fact, various combinations of paper and ink). The difference you see may be subtle, but once you've seen it done right, it's hard to go back (we were all satisfied with VHS before DVD came along, right?).

There a number of strange things in the UI, and unfortunately it takes a fair amount of wasted paper and ink before you really get a handle on them. Things like the two levels of margins, and the fact that each can be an interior or exterior measurement, took a while to get through my thick head. And I wish they'd never added the skinning support. It doesn't serve any purpose, and the development time could have been better spent on other things.

As other posters have noted, this software should be used for image output (and possible for scaling). I wouldn't even consider it for actual image editing (noise removal, sharpening, color balance, etc.). IMHO, these features are unnecessary bells & whistles here, which just clutter a UI that's already overflowing.

Still, I do think this is part of any serious photographer's tool chest. I personally own the Professional Edition, the mid-level version of the program.

906

Living Room / Re: UK Government wants your crypto keys... by law.

« on: October 17, 2007, 05:20 PM »

Sadly, cultures that have adopted a farming or animal rearing ... way of life tend to view the land that sustains them as belonging to them ... and thus have a clear concept of "ownership" of the land. Rather than being in tune with, or part of, nature, they tend to see themselves as masters of nature .... Unfortunately, it's a short intellectual leap from "mastering" nature to "mastering" other people...

-Darwin (October 04, 2007, 05:13 PM)

That's certainly the prevailing PC view, but it's dead wrong. Viewing the land as held in common leads directly to the "tragedy of the commons".

On the other hand, when any resource is viewed as property, the owner of that property will safeguard it. This is known as the Coase Theorem http://en.wikipedia....g/wiki/Coase_theorem. For example, corporations dumping pollution into a river would never be able to get away with their behavior if someone owned the river; the owner would sue the dumper so fast your head would spin. But since there's no river owner, everyone uses up their little bit of it.

Ownership, even if for selfish reasons, does result in positive outcomes. I noticed this bit in the news the other day, addressing a hunting group that safeguards wetlands: http://www.businesst...html?utmsource=ducks. Sure, they do it because they love to hunt ducks rather than through altruism, but what's the difference why?

Holding the land (and other resources) in common is the surest way to flush it all down the toilet.

907

General Software Discussion / Re: Today's GiveAway is the fastest photo resizer I have tried

« on: October 16, 2007, 07:13 PM »

A quite different kind of resizer, Liquid Resize, can be found at thegedanken.com

-Curt (October 16, 2007, 12:08 PM)

I found this some time ago, and downloaded it to try. I didn't get very far because it's so darned slow (on my Athlon 2400+ w/ 1GB RAM). I let it run for 5 minutes with no response, and quit.

Perhaps this would work quicker with images that are less than 7.1 megapixels -- but resizing is supposed to be the point of the program, right?

908

General Software Discussion / Re: Have any web-based applications replaced desktop apps for you?

« on: October 11, 2007, 05:13 PM »

The best internet connection I can get at my house is DSL 512K up/128K down (and I live in NJ, the most densely populated state in the nation). So web-based apps are non-starters for me.

I've lately seen a few photo-editing and even video-editing sites. I can't fathom this, even with a fast connection.

Besides this practical concern, I want to be responsible for my own data. I don't want it in anyone else's hands. I don't have any concrete reason for feeling this way, it's just a gut thing.

909

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Flash Renamer free on Giveaway of the Day today, 2007-09-20

« on: September 21, 2007, 07:28 AM »

Is there really *any* program that a programmer shouldn't consider developing?

-wraith808 (September 20, 2007, 04:21 PM)

Well, of course they're within their rights to do so. But building a business plan around a bulk renamer or an MP3 tag editor is clearly destined for failure.

910

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Flash Renamer free on Giveaway of the Day today, 2007-09-20

« on: September 20, 2007, 10:56 AM »

There are a few types of applications that no developer should even consider building:

• File rename
• Backup
• MP3 tag editor
• Multimedia format converter

Does the world really need any more of these? Aren't the ones that we have sufficient? 

911

Living Room / Re: Programming Can Ruin Your Life: A Fantastic Blog Essay on the Mind of a Code

« on: September 14, 2007, 08:39 PM »

I don't think that anyone so far has suggested that all of this might actually be a good thing. While it's a necessity for programming, isn't the ability to systematically decompose a problem, or to plan a coordinated sequence of steps to solve it, valuable in the "real world"? Honestly, when I think of how many people seem to act like sheep, taking the whole world at face value without questioning "why?", I'm now thinking that we'd be better off if more of them were programmers. 

912

Living Room / Re: Programming Can Ruin Your Life: A Fantastic Blog Essay on the Mind of a Code

« on: September 14, 2007, 10:43 AM »

It's not necessarily programming that builds these circuits in your mind. I think I started to pick it up in high school, in the freshman math class where we did geometric proofs (vertical angles are equal, etc.). These proofs require the same way of thinking that programming does (in my opinion).

By the way, I'm an ENTP. Before our wedding, the minister gave my now-wife and I these tests. It turns out that she's ESTJ. The interesting thing was how he used this as a tool to point out where we might have conflicts due to our differing personalities, and how if we understood these differences, they could be used to leverage our own strengths while supplementing the weak points of the spouse. And so far, this has been very successful.

913

Living Room / Re: Forum Signature Spam: Let's discuss how to handle..

« on: September 13, 2007, 08:07 AM »

i don't think this is realistic because well before they get to n+1, we will have spotted fake posts and deleted the user.

-mouser (September 13, 2007, 07:59 AM)

But at the top of the thread, you said

So in addition to this being spam, it's also likely to result in wasted efforts by helpful people trying to answer their questions.

-mouser (September 12, 2007, 04:15 AM)

Apparently these posts aren't immediately obvious as spam.

I still say go with a 30-day probation, or just require that someone donate before they can have a sig.

914

Living Room / Re: Forum Signature Spam: Let's discuss how to handle..

« on: September 13, 2007, 07:38 AM »

I agree with mouser and his idea of a minimum post restriction. But i would expand that with a minimum time restriction: You need to be registered at least one month before your signature becomes active or you even can define one.

-OGroeger (September 13, 2007, 05:46 AM)

As was noted before, if it's just requiring n posts before signatures will be shown, then the spammer will just post n+1, and that makes the problem worse. The time restriction is a good one: after a month waiting period, the spammer's web site is probably going to be shut down, so there's no point in his following through with it.

Can defining a signature simply be made a privilege of becoming a donating user?

And of course those exponential "karma" suggestions are one more reason to revisit the karma debate 

915

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Kaspersky Internet Security 7

« on: September 13, 2007, 06:19 AM »

do not lose your licence key

-Grorgy (September 13, 2007, 05:32 AM)

I have an ESD-download version, along with which they send you a license key. I burned the software itself as well as the license key to a CD. So now I don't need to worry about misplacing it, so long as I've got the disc. I think this works pretty well.

916

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Kaspersky Internet Security 7

« on: September 13, 2007, 05:25 AM »

Doesn't seem to mention firewall on the website and there doesn't appear to be one in the software window in the first post above.

-Carol Haynes (September 13, 2007, 05:04 AM)

There is a firewall. From the product website:

# Personal firewall with an IDS / IPS system. Improved!

I noted in my review three advanced features that I chose not to install: Anti-Spam, Firewall, Parental filters. As others in the thread have noted, software firewalls (notably ZoneAlarm) tend to be a nuisance. I prefer a hardware firewall.

917

General Software Discussion / Re: IrfanPaint - a painting plug-in for IrfanView

« on: September 12, 2007, 09:30 AM »

I took a look at the web page. It appears that you need a specially-modified version of IrfanView, which is supplied only in Italian.

918

What's the Best? / Re: Anti-Virus Package

« on: September 12, 2007, 09:28 AM »

Ooo...Kaspersky mini-review!  I'll be looking forward to that!

-superboyac (September 10, 2007, 01:20 PM)

And, as promised, here it is: https://www.donation...dex.php?topic=9965.0

919

Mini-Reviews by Members / Kaspersky Internet Security 7

« on: September 12, 2007, 09:22 AM »

Basic Info

App Name	Kaspersky Internet Security 7
App URL	http://www.kaspersky...ky_internet_security
App Version Reviewed	7.0.0.125
Test System Specs	Windows XP Pro; AMD Athlon 2400+; 1GB RAM
Supported OSes	Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista
Support Methods	Online requests; knowledge base
Upgrade Policy	No policy that I know of, but $25 rebate is currently available
Trial Version Available?	30-day time-limited: http://www.kaspersky.com/trials
Pricing Scheme	$80/3 licenses http://usa.kaspersky.com/store/ $25 competitive/upgrade discount available from http://shop4.outpost.com/product/5365948
Reviewer Donation Link	Donate to CWuestefeld, the Author
Relationship btwn. Reviewer and Product	Review was done on a free not-for-resale copy. No strings were attached.

Intro:

The field of desktop antivirus and "Internet security" is pretty large these days. Despite having been around for quite some time, there's still a great deal of variety between the approach and quality of the offerings. I've been through many of them, driven in equal parts by upgrade pricing and reported quality.

I've been using Kaspersky Internet Security 7 for about 10 days now. I installed as part of a complete rebuild of my system following a bad infection that ruined my whole OS, under the watch of Panda (which the virus managed to deactivate). So I was looking to lean far more toward the quality side of the equation, rather than pricing.



Who is this app designed for:

This offering from Kaspersky is targeted at home desktop PCs. The basic out-of-box configuration seems well-suited to basic computer users; some of the more advanced options (like behavioral protections) will require power user skills to use effectively.

The Good

• Resource usage - many security applications drain a significant portion of your CPU cycles and/or disk bandwidth. KIS is currently registering no load at all, and is typically quite low.
• Resistance to tampering - the system (optionally) requires a password to make any changes to its operation, including to disable it. This makes me feel more secure than Panda, which completely let me down in this regard. (caveat: I have no way to actually test this)
• Scheduling - KIS allows you to schedule 3 escalating levels of scanning. You can decide when they will be run, and how much scanning they should do. This is in contrast with Panda which has no scheduling whatsoever.
• Near-realtime updates - My system is getting updates from Kaspersky about every 2 hours, so I don't have to wait long for protection from 0-day exploits. I don't know how much of a difference this really makes, but it feels nice.
• Some degree of rootkit protection (although I have no indication of how effectively they do this)

The needs improvement section

• Confusing alerts - The behavioral alerts (like when it observes keylogger behavior) are confusing. They could provide better explanations, and more clearly label the options.
• Horrible "stuck pig squeal" sound in alerts - I immediately turned off the audible alerts.
• Updates sometimes need reboot - In 10 days of usage, the automatic updates have twice asked that I reboot my system. This is in contrast with Norton, from which I recall this only once in 1 year of usage.
• To build a rescue disc (which you should do!), you must first download and install BartPE; KIS isn't capable of building a boot disc on its own. This method works fine for a power user, and was even fairly quick, but I can't imagine my mom going through the process.

My experience

The installation was relatively quick and easy. Just a minute or two and a reboot, and I was ready to go. While configuring the system, I noticed a few things right away:

• I was given the opportunity to set a password that will be required for changing KIS's behavior in the future. This is great, and gives me much more confidence. Since the infection that I’m recovering from seems to be due in part to my old Panda software being shut down by the attacker, I’m more optimistic about KIS's ability to protect me.
• I noticed in the options for email protection that NNTP traffic is covered. This isn’t something that I use, but I know that this is a significant medium in the transmission of malware. I've never seen another program that protects from this, and I’m pleased to see it here.
• I chose not to enable a number of options:
  
  • Anti-Spam – I already use one of the best spam blockers available, SpamBayes, so I didn't think that KIS would have anything additional to offer.
  • Firewall – I'm using a hardware firewall device, and I personally find programs like this (notably Zone Alarm) to be far too annoying.
  • Parental filters – I'm not a parent.

The ability to schedule multiple levels of scanning strikes a good compromise between monopolizing the computer versus ensuring constant protection. I think this is a home run, and stands in stark contrast with Panda's refusal to provide any scheduling at all.

Within a couple minutes of my initial reboot, KIS began squealing (it does so with a horrible sound that I can only describe as a squealing stuck pig; I quickly disabled the audio alerts). It was alerting me to a keylogger. Looking at the information provided, it was easy for me determine that it was the application supporting the configurable keys on my multimedia keyboard - not a problem, and something I want to allow in the future. But I expect that this is a rather common occurrence, and likely to panic someone who understands less than I do. A more informative message might help, something like "We've detected a program trying to monitor what you type. If you have - or have just installed - a multimedia keyboard, this may be normal."

Deciding that I want to allow that application to run was easy; deciding how to allow it was another question. The notification windows take some understanding; in fact, I'm not sure I fully understand them now. It’s not really clear to me, for example when I received the keylogger alert, what option was necessary for disabling permanently (and in particularly, disabling keylogger alerts only for this one application) versus allowing it "just this once", or blocking the offender. I skimmed quickly through the User Guide but didn’t find a section dealing with this, nor pictures of the popup I was trying to understand. I think more descriptive verbiage on the popups are called for. In my experience, Norton Internet Security does this better.

Since I'm rebuilding my system after an infection, the very first thing that I want to do is a complete system scan. It appears that actually scanning a file is a lengthy process, at least compared to other scanning software. I started a full scan at about 10pm, and it was 2/3 done the next morning at 7am. The documentation indicates that the first time should take the longest – the system builds a database of files (which itself takes time) so that on subsequent scans, unchanged files may be skipped to speed the process. If this is able to reduce the time so that the whole thing can happen while I'm asleep, I'll be happy; beyond that, it doesn't really matter. Further experience shows that this works pretty well. Examining the log files shows that it is using some smarts about what it can skip.

The first scan showed up good news: KIS was able to detect the remnants of the infection that were left on my data drives.

So far, realtime scanning hasn't proved to be a burden. In the short time I was using the system with this in place, I didn't notice any performance degradation.

I really appreciate how the historical reports are set up. Having a categorized, searchable history of everything the program is done is (at least to me, a power user) invaluable in both understanding when a problem is spotted, as well as in maintaining a feeling of confidence that everything is running as it should. I think that KIS's reports are another home run.


How does it compare to similar apps

In contrast with Panda's Internet security app, Kasperskey 7 is a big winner. With protection from tampering, scheduling updates, and light resource usage, it wins in the important categories.

I don't have objective numbers to back this up, but subjectively I feel that KIS 7 is better on resource usage than either Norton or McAfee.

In lab reviews, KIS consistently performs very well in detecting and preventing malware. My research before this purchase indicated that they are always rated either at the very top tier, or just a slight notch below that.

Conclusions

I'm as excited about KIS 7 as I can imagine being about an Internet Security application. While I acquired this copy as a Not For Resale promo (no strings were attached), I have just ordered an additional 3 licenses to cover all computers in my home.

Links to other reviews of this application

AV-Comparitives rates “Advanced+”: http://www.av-comparatives.org/ (Select "Comparatives", Nr. 15, "Online results") [edit: deep link was forbidden]

CNet rates 8 of 10: http://reviews.cnet....3667_7-32531226.html

920

What's the Best? / Re: Anti-Virus Package

« on: September 10, 2007, 12:31 PM »

In my view Panda is *greatly* underestimated.

-Lusher (September 09, 2007, 02:27 AM)

I'm working on a mini-review on Kaspersky, since I just switched to it after an infection bad enough that I had to pave over my whole system. I had been using Panda, but the virus managed to deactivate it. So I no longer have any confidence in that package.

921

Living Room / Re: encrypting an already encrypted file

« on: September 05, 2007, 03:25 PM »

I can't imagine this causing any problems, but you're not going to buy yourself much security, either (I assume you're not trying to hide the plans to a nuclear warhead!).

As a matter of fact, TrueCrypt has a built-in feature that chains multiple layers of encryption, if that's what you want.

922

General Software Discussion / Re: BufferZone and other virtual machine like safe program executors

« on: August 28, 2007, 05:12 PM »

I just spent a day and a half with BufferZone, and nuked it. I was rebuilding my machine after being pretty seriously hacked over the weekend, and thought this might prevent a recurrence.

My first problem with it was that I couldn't install Microsoft Office with BufferZone running. That is, simply running -- I wasn't trying to install office into the buffer zone, I was trying to do a regular install and BZ happened to be running. I wasted 1.5 hours getting to the bottom of that.

I had already installed Firefox, but I wanted to install all of the FF extensions I use at work. I'd packaged them all with FEBE, so I just needed to install them from the local disk. Unfortunately, this doesn't work. I restarted FF, and they were gone -- probably because you read them from protected disk space or something. So then I told BZ to "surf out of buffer zone", and installed the extensions there. Then I hopped back into the buffer zone, and FF wouldn't even start anymore! Played around some, and nothing would work. I went back to "surf out of buffer" and it won't work there anymore, either. I uninstalled BZ, and it still wouldn't work. I uninstalled and re-installed FF, and it still wouldn't work. Finally I blasted the directories that FF stores settings and extensions in, and that allowed it to work.

So the bottom line is that BZ is incompatible with some programs. And its sandboxing approach fundamentally clashes with the way FF handles extensions, at least if you ever intend to hop in and out of sandboxed surfing (I suspect any sandbox would have this problem).

923

Developer's Corner / Re: Best Language for Employability?

« on: August 15, 2007, 04:31 PM »

CWuestefeld response sounded harsh to me, i don't think he was meaning it to be.

-mouser (August 15, 2007, 03:55 PM)

I'll consider myself duly rebuked  To clarify, I didn't intend to be mean, but I did intend to make a firm statement, because I think it's important.

I've just come from a couple of months trying to hire 3 mid-to-senior level developers. The quantity of people available (at least that we could get through 2 headhunters and various web sites) is extremely low. And the vast majority of candidates I just can't see being any kind of asset to my team.

In Ehtyar's defense, many of the candidates I can reject because a 20-minute phone conversation -- or even just their resume -- reveals that they don't have the depth of knowledge that I think is necessary for a developer grow to the point of making correct decisions independently. The number of CompSci graduates with a couple of year's experience who can't describe a virtual function is appalling. To the degree that Ehtyar's plan fills that requirement, I owe him an apology.

One of our biggest sources for entry-level applicants is Rutgers University, as they're just 10 minutes from here. I was surprised to learn that the only language that a CompSci student there must learn is Java. I've got nothing against that language. But how can you understand how a computer works without having experienced assembly language, even if you'll never actually use it? How can you understand the benefits of encapsulation if you've never been burned using global variables in C or Fortran or something? The list goes on; the point is that to advance to real expertise, you need a broad foundation underlying your experience. But CompSci curricula seem to be building more academics, while what we need in the real world is really software engineers.

I don't need rogue programmers, not even prodigies. The scale of the systems we're building is such that no one can do it alone. And no matter how good you are on your own, if you can't do shoulder-to-shoulder with others, you'll never be any more use to me than writing backend batch import and cleanup scripts.

So when I'm interviewing someone, I look for:

• Correct answers to my questions
• The way you answer. Your choice of terminology, e.g., reveals much of your underlying understanding. And if you don't know the answer, trying to figure it out orally reveals your thought processes as well as understanding, which can be just as good as the correct answer.
• Ability to accept constructive criticism. When you don't know an answer and I explain it to you, I want to see you demonstrate that you now understand the concept. This shows that you have the foundation to learn new stuff as well skills to work and play well with others. Ehtyar failed this dismally by refusing to accept the suggestions of several posters, insisting that his own approach was sacrosanct.
• Enthusiasm for the problem domain. I want someone who is interested in the things we're going to do. If you're just dreaming about being in, say, graphics development, then go out on a limb and tell that to such a company.

• Communication skills. I don't care how smart you are, if you can't make your ideas understood by the rest of the team, it's all wasted.

924

Developer's Corner / Re: Best Language for Employability?

« on: August 15, 2007, 02:22 PM »

Ehtyar, your attitude is convincing me not to hire you 

For an entry-level developer I want you to be familiar with the platform and able to work enthusiastically with the team. Your argument here violates both -- you are refusing to work with the team (viz the normal dev environments, most likely VS.Net by far) in order to avoid using important parts of the platform.

I really don't care if you can do from memory what IntelliSense will prompt you for anyway, especially since with IntelliSense you can save time by not having to type the whole word. I don't care if you know the names of every little Property that the GUI designer will generate into your code; you'll (almost) never need to do it by hand, and you're just wasting time typing it yourself.

For an experienced developer, where you've shown the ability to function in many different environments, I don't care a lot about the specific language. As long as you've got a good track record and can demonstrate mastery of something in the same language family, I'll be satisfied. That is, I'm really looking for C#, but any C++-derived language is sufficient to show that you've got the mindset for OO in a statically-typed structured language.

Another bit of advice: a single programming language doesn't go very far anymore. A non-trivial application is going to include elements from many different areas. You're likely to need to understand other things like SQL, XSL, etc.

I also want a lot more than just programming. I want to know that you're good with design and documentation. I want you to show me that you'll be good through the whole lifecycle (requirements gathering including customer communication; design; implementation; testing; deployment; support).

925

General Software Discussion / Re: Anyone familiar with Zortam MP3 Media Studio

« on: August 07, 2007, 06:54 PM »

Yes, I think you'll find some references to it. I suppose that Zortam can play music, but I wouldn't use it for that. It's a great organizer and library, letting you download tags, move files around, etc. But I don't think it's got much in the way of actual audio. But for what it does do, I think it's about the best.