If you find that, let us know. Many of us feel very much the same way (which is why I loved the old greader. new reader ain't as good, but still got the job done... sort of)
Thanks for the kind words about molokai; took a bit to get it ported, but I've enjoyed it a lot since then. 99% of the props should go to the original authors of monokai and Hamish, though :)
Molokai ain't perfect, but I have yet to find one I like more for daily use.
Reflector is a great tool, no denying it, but it's been fairly buggy for me since Red-Gate took it over.
Also, yes, $35 isn't much, provided the license is per-user. If it's per-machine, it would cost most devs a lot more (I'd need at least 5-6 licenses for all my VMs + desktop + laptop). That's a whole different story.
I will say, though, that I have no interest or desire in the debugging or VS integration features; those are useless to me.
Notice many aren't free if you live outside the US and a few other locations; you'll get charged the $2 "international whispernet delivery fee" or whatever they call it.
And even then, they might not even be available (like the one you referenced).
If you want classics, much better to just hit http://manybooks.net or the gutenberg project site and get them directly in kindle format through your desktop/laptop and copy them over USB.
Maybe missing it, but strictly speaking as someone interested in reading (not publishing), I don't really see what the fuzz is. Been an ACM member for almost 10 years (started as a student member) and every single year I've been more than happy to renew my membership.
Sure, would be nice if everything was free, but all the stuff ACM does cost money, and honestly, the fees aren't all that outrageous, and the digital library access itself is very much worth it.
Rather like receiving Communications of the ACM every month (or close to it, anyway); I enjoy reading it and would totally forget about looking the articles online every month otherwise, so it's actually fairly convenient for me. Would much prefer that Queue had been kept around as a printed mag, though.
Personally, I wouldn't worry about directories or code layout; focus instead of functionality/use cases.
When I've had to do this, I usually try a dual approach:
- Reading code, by identifying an interesting function / use case and tracing the code (reading + stepping through debugger) from the top to the bottom. Example: start with a webpage / api and drill down to see how it works.
- Adding features / fixing bugs: Once I've got a basic idea of the code layout, having to try and and do small bug fixes or small features is a great way to learn more about the system.
I've never had any problem with using chat to talk with the original developers; that's what I do most of the time, and several times have had to write some initial "get started"-kind of docs for new developers coming into the project. It's something to ask for; can't hurt.
I used Mozy for a while. It was OK, but the desktop/server distinction doesn't always make sense. Never did have to try it in a substantial restore, though.
Nowadays, I keep most of my stuff backed up locally on external hard-drives, but also started using dropbox recently for smallish set of files (sharing, mostly, but serves as a backup of sorts as well).
Personally, I've always started with the main text, using just a text editor (Vim, being my preference).
What I usually do (and I'll admit it seems archaic) is just put placeholders in the text where I'll need a picture/graphic or a code sample, and then add those later in whatever final tool I end up using for publishing the article (example: Windows Live Writer, for posting to my blog).
Works fine for me, because it lets me concentrate more on the text than on the format/appearance or whatever.
Just my personal experience, but seems to me like the career growth options for coders, while staying technical are more open in product-oriented companies (or starting your own products), than in consulting/outsourcing companies, where project management is seen more valuable by both the company and their clients.
Either that, or you have to go into technical pre-sales, but that's a different story. In the consulting/outsourcing case, anyway, it's about what the company can get its clients to pay for, and many just don't know any better.
But notice they don't say what that IP was, so it's not clear if it was Mono-related or not yet. Not sure what MS would do with any Mono-related IP or if they'd really care about it (except for killing it, of course, and I wouldn't think that is their intention).
So if you can modify the files in the GAC, you're already compromised at that point.