ober

Maybe I'm seeing things.... but I don't notice any change. ?

I only have one minor gripe, and maybe I'm the only one that thinks this: The nav is almost "childish" big. I know a lot of people think that tiny = professional but I don't totally agree with that. However, this kinda takes it to the other extreme. I'd knock it down just a hair in the nav. Otherwise, it's pretty solid. I don't know how I feel about the footer links sitting above that bottom bar either... it's just ... different.

That looks like it can't even find the page with the Perl script. Normally Perl errors result in a CGI Error screen or something with information about the script itself. And why are you posting this on a PHP forum??? Surely there are places out there for help on Perl.

I would try to make it work in 8.5, since that is the current stable version and it usually takes people a while to upgrade. The main difference between fixed and full width for you will be your content management. Right now some of your pages have content sprawled all over the page. If you can contain the content and give it defined areas to stay in, then full width will be fine. But right now some of your pages look very unorganized and poorly designed on bigger resolutions.

Just a technicality... "Web 2.0" does not refer to user-generated content websites. It refers to the use of web services, AJAX and syndication methods, as well as things like Web Forms 2.0 (a thread about this is in Miscellaneous). So calling a "bookmark" site "web 2.0" is a bit of a mis-use of the term. Also, I'm not sure if you installed 8.5 or the beta version of Opera, but it shows up fine in the Beta version. I don't notice any difference between your site in Opera and Firefox. Besides, Opera is THE most standards compliant browser available, so I'd suggest if it doesn't work in Opera, that it's probably your usage of the standard. Also, you should provide some visuals of what the user will see when he logs in.... kind of like a "tour" from the main page. And as far as the width of the site, I'd rather see you use fixed-width nicely than full-width poorly. Just my opinion.

*ugh* That's my first impression. I know why your friends think it's one of those parked sites. You've got no life. You need a banner image. You need definition. You need more content. I think my biggest gripe at the moment is the fact that your lack of content doesn't look good at full-width. For a site like this, it would look much better and your content would be much more controlled with a fixed-width layout. It's very very simple and I don't see a demo of how the inside works or anything. Show me what it does before I login and you'll attract more people. Hiding things doesn't convey trust, my friend. My other big gripe is that you've left out Opera users. Our numbers are growing and you really can't ignore the Opera browser anymore. Try it out if you haven't. I've converted a lot of people on this site to being Opera users, and now that it's completely free (no ads either), there's no reason not to try it.

It's not bad, it's just ..... boring. 1) Too much white space... all of your elements just "float" on an undefined white space. There's no definition and nothing to contain the site. Sure, it's centered and appears to be lined up, but it lacks containment. 2) Colors. I'd like to get some clue as to where you decided to pull purple from for the nav. There's not another touch of purple on the entire site and it looks REALLY out of place. Try to play up the green a little more and get rid of some of that black while you're at it. I'd throw in some background color to kill some of that white space as well. 3) It's dead... you're using strictly images for the navigation and what's worse is that you don't even change the nav on hover or depending on what page you're on. I'd replace the nav images with CSS (I'm not even sure why you're using images on the left... you could EASILY do that with CSS) and throw in some hover effects and a "current" class to show what page you're currently on. 4) Flash. Why you use it for the main page is beyond me. Flash is fine for the demo, but I personally avoid flash otherwise. 5) Contact page: You have an email address, yet you're still forcing the user to open his own email client to email you. Provide a form and use some scripting (PHP) to do all the mail work for the user. 6) Images: I mentioned about images before and that you over use them in the nav... like I said, replace the nav with CSS and use images for the header... I should see plants overflowing the site and blooming out of every corner... that's the point you want to get across, right? It's got potential, but right now it's just.... blah.

I don't know of anything in PHP that can do this, but it might be possible. You may have to set something up on the server that will get the info for you and put it in a text file and then PHP can read the text file and display the results.

I was on bf2s.com last night checking out their files list and they had a map/mod for a flight test map (modified version of Wake Island) with 6 carriers, 4 jets and 4 choppers on each. If that's not cool enough, they all had special skins. The F-15 had the Blue Angel skin (which looked awesome) and everything else looked special too. I screwed around with it for about 20 min. Pretty cool if you ask me.

Sounds interesting and probably would be useful for the right group. I don't think I'd personally use it, however.

Yeah... I've done that. That SUCKS.

I'm kind of on the fence. I like the first one, but the second one has potential. I'd drop the green highlights in the random places, but I think that one could work out quite well.

Opera has no spyware or anything like that. Why would you think that when Firefox is free yet you don't question them? Same goes for Netscape. Opera is fast, THE MOST standards compliant browser available (to a fault at times because it isn't like IE and won't fix poor coding), and like Mark said: security security security. It's also very customizable and has a ton of nice tools for development. The only time I EVER switch over to IE is when someone codes a site poorly. I've had some issues with e-commerce sites in the past with Opera too, but I haven't ordered anything with the latest version yet (Opera 9 Beta was just released a few days ago... but weekly and preview versions have been available for a while). The only thing I liked about Firefox is now available in Opera via a menu addition (see the Resources thread->Tools in Website Critique).

The only case I could imagine is if you were dealing with more than one DBMS and you wanted to close one and open another. *shrug* I've just never dealt with anything that big (although I might soon at work... they want me to graph some test results with 10Hz data... 2 tests with 12000 records each compared on one graph!)

Well, all the work that I do gets stored on a webserver somewhere. So I try to keep a mental note of what I change and I just overwrite the files on one pc or the other before I start work.

There is no program that I'm aware of that can interact with all of them. They all have their own ways of creating tables and keys and schemas and so on. If you find such a tool, you should post it here, because I'd love to know about it.

It would help if you told use what line #35 was. And please use code blocks when posting code.

Why not use a second array?

MS Access is slow, buggy, the SQL is very Access-specific (more so than MySQL IMO), and everytime they come out with a new release of Access, you have so many headaches in the upgrades. And Access is meant to be a single user database. It is not designed for a multi-user, network based database. MySQL should be your database of choice, but postgresql, MSSQL, and Oracle are all good choices as well. I've never used dbqwik, but you should do your research before settling with it. Just keep in mind that once you understand one of these, understanding the rest is a minimal task. They all just have their own little features that makes one better than the other.... or worse in the case of MS Access.

[a href=\"http://olav.dk/wf2/demo/default.asp\" target=\"_blank\"]http://olav.dk/wf2/demo/default.asp[/a] Awesome demo. I've been hearing a lot about this, and I'm curious about what you need to run it. It's built for IE, but I think it should work in FF and the beta release of Opera 9 (put out in the past few days) supports it as well. Is anyone using this stuff? It's extremely powerful and makes forms SOOO much easier! Oh, and it seems that Opera's support for the validation part is much more detailed than IE's. SWEET. HAHAHAHA... when you open it in FF, you get this at the top: [!--quoteo--][div class=\'quotetop\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\'quotemain\'][!--quotec--]If you were using Internet Explorer 6 on a Windows machine or Opera 9, this demo would actually work![/quote]

I never use them. It's closed automatically for you at the end of script execution, so why bother?

I have moved this thread to PHP Help. The only reason that error occurs is if you have something wrong with your query. I suggest you run the query directly against the MySQL database (phpmyadmin or any of the MySQL tools) to see if it returns valid results. Also make sure that your connection works properly. Also keep in mind that "date" is a very poor choice for a column name since it is a function name in PHP and is a datatype in many systems. "number" is also a relatively poor choice.

I'm with Mark on this one. I have waaaaaaay to many resources to fit on a handheld and be useful. If I did anything like that I'd probably keep it all on my webserver and access it from there. But I just have a stash on my work PC and on my home PC. I try to keep both as syncronized as I can.

The difference is almost negligable. mysql_functionname go to mssql_functionname You can't use some of the specific MySQL options (LIMIT being the big one) I use both and it's never really a problem for me. If you run into any problems or have a question about something specific, post it here or PM me.

Yes, but you don't use move_uploaded_file() with the FTP functions. Look up FTP on php.net