I have been playing with PHP and didn't really fill like installing a web server and PHP on my fresh installed desktop just to do some testing with PHP. So I just did everything on my personal server, but again, I did not want to install a FTP server just to upload a few simple files, so I was just pasting things into my VI editor through Putty. Well soon after putting up some PHP, I started noticing, if there were any comments in my PHP that when I pasted the code in, it would end up commenting out everything below it. Not good.

So as a temporary solution, I just removed the comments, which was OK for a little bit, but I knew there had to be a better way. After playing with VI editor more, I noticed it does some auto formating when you start doing comments in PHP (which is done two forward slashes '//') that when you hit return, VI automatically starts a comment on the next line.

So I did some Googling and found an article of copying and pasting within the VI editor and some of the issues which mentioned a method to help prevent the auto formating. So I tried it and ta-freakin-da it pasted exactly how I had it in Aptana. To prevent auto-formating, while in command mode, type this without the quotes ":set paste" and when you go into insert mode, you will now see "-- INSERT (paste) --" instead of the normal insert prompt. To go back to normal insert, ":set nopaste".

I doubt this will help most of the readers of this site, but hopefully someone out there will find it useful.

Google announced a new Operating System (OS) that will initially target the new market of netbooks. The name of the OS is Google Chrome OS and is not set to replace Android (Google's mobile OS). The goal of the new OS is to be fast (boot and operation speed), safe, simple, and Internet centric. Though it was just announced a few days ago and their is tons (literally, just Google it (that's funny)) of stories on it, there is not much actually known about the OS. No pictures, no hands on experiences, just a lot of speculation and a few facts. So unfortunately, that is what this post is, the facts and my two cents (which should be worth more than that, you would think).

I really am not quite sure why everyone is getting so excited. The concept is basically load just enough things to let you browse the Internet; in fact, they are saying if you want to develop for the OS, you can go ahead and do it now because it's focus, like everything Google, is web applications. So you can download the Google Gears API and develop with that, everything should work the same. This is why I do not think the OS shows a real threat to Microsoft Windows, in fact, I see the two going hand-in-hand. I have this cool mode on my laptop (which I never really use but I love the idea) where I can boot into this limited mode that only allows me to watch movies. This mode boots quicker than a full Windows boot and saves battery life by not having to load, run, and handle a bunch of other processes. So why not have a similar thing but for Internet browsing? Have a button that boots to Chrome OS and lets you get to your e-mail to look up that number in under a minute, sounds nice right? And you can have a full OS to run everything else.

The fact that the OS will have Google Chrome points to a hint that the now popular Google Chrome web browser for Linux is getting closer to being completed. Windows only users may not know this, but there is no official release of Chrome for Linux (or Mac), only development builds are available. So this could be good news for the Linux community who has been asking to use Chrome since it was initially announced the browser would be cross-platform.

The only application that is "officially" announced is the Chrome web browser, which it only mentions once in the blog post and I almost did not catch it. But I am sure just like the Android, it will come with a bunch of Google apps.

Why some have been scared that this will hurt the open source community, namely Linux itself, I see it as a good thing. One of the reasons why people are scared of Linux is because they are not use to it. People have grown up around Windows and it has become so second nature to some people, that anything different seems hard because they have to learn something new. With brand popularity of Google, people are going to use it, so they will become more familiar with how Linux works which makes them more likely to try other distros because they may now know how to work with it. It is the same exact thing Mac did, majority of the people using a Mac now do not know OSX is running Unix in the background. While troubleshooting my sister's Mac, I had no idea what to do in the GUI, so I found the command prompt and started probing my way through command prompt. So if Google does a good job with the new window system, they could change they way people look at Linux, literal.

We will see what Chrome OS will become, but right now most everything is speculation. If you want to see my source for most this information, you can check out the Google blog.

Just yesterday Firefox 3.5 was officially moved from Release Candidate to an official release and if you fully update your Firefox you will receive the 3.5 version. So why am I posting this if it's an update? Well there is some really cool new features in the release that are definitely worthy of mentioning.

Firefox 3.5 for starters is faster, in fact according to recent benchmark tests, its is over twice as fast as 3.0 which moves it to the third fastest browser with Google Chrome still being number one.

The coolest new feature in my opinion is the new HTML 5 <video> tag which supports the free, open Ogg video container that is part of the new HTML 5 standard that is being worked on. This tag is important because it means videos can be placed directly into a site like YouTube without the need of an additional plugin such as Flash or Silverlight. And the video can actually interact with the rest of the page. Firefox 3.5 is the first browser to support this new tag and you can find an example of this video format at over at dailymotion.com or you can watch the What's New video from Mozilla. Keep in mind that HTML 5 is a work in progress and so there will be improvements to the standards as time goes on (and since currently Firefox 3.5 is the only browser that supports <video> you will need that to see the them in that format).

And taking a page from the Chrome book (Chrome borrowed quite a bit, but isn't that the point of software, why re-invent the wheel? Just improve it) 3.5 now includes a "Private Mode" that doesn't keep any of the history/cookies/data/cache from the pages viewed in the private mode will not be kept. <Fill in your own joke about using this for naughty purposes instead of keeping Christmas shopping a secret>.

For more info, you can check out What's New video of page (if you don't have the latest Firefox or are using another browser, they have Flash version too). Or better yet, download it and give it a try for yourself and enjoy browsing safer, faster, and smarter.

This is a quick update to the site, I have plans for some really cool tips coming up throughout this week, so keep coming back.

This update is for any web developers who happen to run into the same issue I did last week where you need to have some HTML/Javascript/CSS to appear over a Flash object. Well this doesn't sound (or at least appear) to be like it will be a problem, but it poses a problem for many people.

One option that you can do, but really is not the best way since it only works in Internet Explorer, is change the Z-index of the object to one that is greater to the Flash object, I used 100. But like I said, this only seems to work in Internet Explorer and only for certain HTML objects like <div>.

So what is the more efficient way to do this so it works in Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome (probably others, but this is all I have to test with)? Between your <object> open and close tags, you need to add a parameter tag whose name is "wmode" and value is set to "transparent". So basically a typical Flash object would look like this:

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="flashFile.swf">
    <param name="movie" value="flashFile.swf" />
    <param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>

Blink-182 fell apart after the release of their last CD which was self-entitled. Not their best CD, over produced and slow at parts. I don't care what you call me, but I have always enjoyed (earlier work more than later) Blink-182. The band split after tensions between the band members with Tom DeLonge making Angels And Airwaves while Mark Hoppus and Travis Barker started up +44. Call me bias, but I enjoyed +44.

Well almost five years after the band's last performance together, they are coming back together and will be touring summer 2009 and are be working on a new album with six songs already completed and hoping for a 2009 release. Unfortunately, they will not be going back to a more of a original style; Tom has stated that the new album will be a fusion of Box Car Racer (a side project of Tom's during the life of Blink-182) and Angels And Airwaves. So if you are a fan of Blink-182, look out for a new album this year and keep checking out their web site for the latest tour dates.

If you ask me, they need to go back to the sound that made them popular to begin with: a fast, pop punk sound. Look at almost every single song that has been a hit: Dammit, Carousel, Josie, What's My Age Again?, The Rock Show, and even some of the newer songs like All The Small Things and Feeling This all had a fast, pop punk sound. It's not me being a bickering old fan, just pointing out my observations of needing more speed and less post-editing effects.

There is such a thing as to much of a good thing. I have loved Call of Duty from the very first one when it came out on the PC. Me and some of my friends would get together and play for hours the intense multiplayer. Two years later, in 2005, I once again got to experience another incredible game from Infinity Ward, Call of Duty 2 for the 360. Both of these games had good experiences for campaign and multiplayer. So you could imagine my disappointment when only a year later, the third full installment to the Call of Duty series was released, but not developed by Infinity Ward, but instead by Treyarch.

Call of Duty 3 was just... I don't know... unfinished? Playing on veteran was never a simple task, but in COD3, most parts were not hard because of a smart A.I., instead it was glitchy. Thinking you have a head shot because looking through the scope of your sniper rifle and it's lined up; you are just far enough our to have your gun around the corner; you pull the trigger, nothing... pull the trigger again and still he lives. The next thing you know, he shoots you so you get behind the corner, and yet even though you should be fully protected, he kills you. That was an all to common scenario through the campaign.

The point of my rambling, you can't rush good games. Infinity Ward had between 2005 and 2008 to make Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare, once again incredible game. Between COD4 and Call of Duty: World at War Activision announced that they would like to release a new COD every year, with the two developers, Infinity Ward and Treyarch, releasing every two years alternating. There is a term for this, flooding the market. Instead of having a nice break in between releases, people will just get tired of the series that much faster, especially if every other game just feels thrown together compared to the other.

I haven't played World at War yet, just because COD3 left a bad impression for Treyarch. But it has been announced that Infinity Ward will be releasing Modern Warfare 2 and is currently on schedule for sometime "this holiday season." Unless I can try WaW before buying it and absolutely enjoy it, I will probably just wait for this holiday season to come around.

And yes, I know it's been a while. Good news, I have finished both of my degrees and have been enjoying a little down time. Thanks to everyone still visiting. Oh, and if you have played World at War, leave a comment or drop me an email letting me know what you think.