|
I can't say what I'd do in your case. When I had known my wife for 3 months, we were already married for a month and a half.
But, usually we 3-way alternate, once with her family, once with my family, and once just the 2 of us. But we make exceptions when convenient.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
That's way too rational. How did you stumble into that!? 
|
|
|
|
|
You dont decide, She always do. Get used to it.
|
|
|
|
|
Has to be at least a year to go to visit only one family together unless you're already married or have a child together. 
“If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people together to collect wood and don't assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea”
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
John C wrote: Has to be at least a year to go to visit only one family together unless you're already married or have a child together. Smile
i concur!
|
|
|
|
|
After three months I don't think there should be an expectation that you would go to hers. If there is I'd ask why? Slow and steady wins the race in my limited experience.
|
|
|
|
|
jgasm wrote: how do you decide
This is a temporary problem and is cured by age and us old farts don't need to worry about it - all four parents are dead.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
I'd stay home, and give thanks that I don't have to put up with my bluddy family.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Any of you guys out there use it? I'm referring to the unmanaged C++/COM based one, here[^].
The docs seem to imply that you can *only* work with it by supplying XAML *and* initializing it by hand. Is that really the case? You can just work with the whole thing programmatically? If so, that seems kind of lame.
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Crafton wrote: Any of you guys out there use it?
Right now, I am trying to get used to it (By using new MS products), then I will try to implement.
|
|
|
|
|
Rutvik Dave wrote: Right now, I am trying to get used to it (By using new MS products)
I'm going the other way. I'm phasing out the use of MS products, solely and only because the ribbon has ruined their usability.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Wallace wrote: the ribbon has ruined their usability.
Oh you're just being stubborn. 
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: Oh you're just being stubborn.
I wish I were.
The ribbon is fine, for people who only have to write letters to granny -- it's not the casual and inexpert users who complain about the ribbon -- but it's a humongous waste of time and effort for power users.
The idiot who dreamed up the idea of having to click back and forth from tab to tab on a ribbon to find functions, rather than just click the functions' buttons on a toolbar, should be locked up before he goes totally ga-ga and picks up a chain saw.
I figure that the "usability specialist" they paid a fortune to look at the UI came to the conclusion that the menu/toolbar combination is about as good as it can ever get, but had to do something to justify her existence, so bullsh1tted it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
heh.
No ribbon is the single largest reason I refuse to consider Open Office Dot Org for personal use. The 2nd largest being that they've decided dot org makes sense as part of their name. 
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
I would use OpenOffice.org if it did not suck so awfully much.
Eduardo León
|
|
|
|
|
Actually they're getting rid of that. Oracle owns the trademark for the OpenOffice.org name, and they forked the project to get it out of Oracle's hands.
So unless Oracle donates the trademark, they'll be using their new name... LibreOffice
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Shlasko wrote: LibreOffice
You're kidding, right? Please, that sounds so friggin stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Not kidding... Look it up.
The new group is called "The Document Foundation"... Generic, but I can't complain... And they're poaching all of the OO.o developers from Oracle, so it looks like it'll be a complete move.
|
|
|
|
|
No, that just means that oracle will be making suckage called openoffice.org and someone else will be making suckage called libreoffice. 
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Shlasko wrote: So unless Oracle donates the trademark, they'll be using their new name... LibreOffice
Either way, JavaOffice sucks.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'm looking forward to it; primarily because it should wipe that smug grin off Steve Jobs face.
CPallini wrote: You cannot argue with agile people so just take the extreme approach and shoot him.
:Smile:
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Shlasko wrote: and they forked the project to get it out of Oracle's hands.
Forked it up good!
WE ARE DYSLEXIC OF BORG. Refutance is systile. Your a$$ will be laminated.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: People who know binary and people who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
I dunno... I'm torn on the ribbon.
When you're doing the "usual" stuff... The simplest possible operations... Then it's great, because it puts everything right where you need it.
But when you're doing anything even the slightest bit difficult, whether it's adjusting margins, adding page numbers, etc... Then it's just a huge pain and needs to #%*(&#ing #(%*&@#.
I've been using Office 2010 at home since the beta started... Now I'm wondering whether to buy it (Beta just expired) or just stick with OpenOffice/LibreOffice.
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Shlasko wrote: But when you're doing anything even the slightest bit difficult, whether it's adjusting margins, adding page numbers, etc... Then it's just a huge pain and needs to #%*(&#ing #(%*&@#.
Try setting up multi-level numbered headings (previously quite a simple operation, with the Outline Numbering dialogue). It's an absolute fr1gging nightmare.
You have to keep jumping between the "normal" numbering dialogue and the multi-level dialogue, and half the time it forgets what you you did -- especially if you don't, when it's all over, open the Styles dialogue, click the down arrow for the style, click modify, and select "for all docs".
I dread to think of the number of times I had to go back and redo changes again, because the process of one-dialogue-two dialogue... nine dialogue (all in precisely the right order, or it loses some of the changes) because it keeps defaulting to "for this document only" unless you happen to go through precisely the right dialogues in precisely the right order.
It shouldn't even be remotely difficult -- and it wasn't, in earlier versions -- but they got caught up in some marketing cretin's big talk about how great a concept the ribbon is, and completely lost the usability plot.
Even uber-simple stuff, like "remove from quick styles" -- why the **** do the unwanted styles keep coming back? Why do I have to perform two operations (involving a right click and three separate clicks) to make a change stick? Have they lost their ****ing minds?
I always lauded MS Word as the greatest computer program ever written (which it was!), but they've turned it into a piece of junk.
Let's see 'em do cr@p like that to VS (which is comparatively simple, as applications go), and see what ensues -- all the inexperienced "I'm a programmer because I read a web page on how to do programmatification" kiddies will love it, but CP residents...?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link, nice article. This also seems to indicate that you *have* do the layout via XAML, you can't do this programmatically. Is this correct or did I miss something?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
