Well large managed networks is two miles away in the distance on the scale of things Linux is awesome at. Active Directory, Exchange, Terminal Services... Windows really does have a very impressive offering in this area, while Linux stays behind the scenes and rarely faces the user.
For one, OSX != Linux. But that's irrelevant to my post. I use puppetas does Google. Works a treat.
You set up configs for the machine groups you want, it will change files, install applications, run upgrades etc. in an idempotent fashion.
Shame it's not supported - governments won't use it.
I'm pretty sure Australian governments are just about to declare they are standardising on.doc formats again for another term (not sure how long the term is though).
If it's a pretty horrible protocol, why has it become so popular?
If windows is such a horrible OS, why has it become so popular?
If a product has a bad aspect, it can still succeed as long as it has enough aspects deemed good by customers. Whether or not customers are smart is another can of worms.
I think you miss my point. I can get many many windows 3.11 apps that will install and run without a hitch on windows XP. They install with a few clicks and uninstall just as easily.
I think you've hit the nail on the head when you say "mixing and matching versions of core components isn't even an option you have available to you with the closed source systems". It shouldn't be an easily available option. You should need to have to TRY to mix versions of core components. It should be hard to do things that most people don't want to do.
In windows, if I screw up a system file it tries to repair it for me.. It makes it hard to screw it up.
Applications written for Debian Linux will run on Debian Linux, too.
I kinda disagree with this statement. They work provided you have all the dependencies sorted and in my experience even that doesn't always go smoothly. In windows, the tools to make an installer are a lot more mature.
Yes, and I do think tagging all links with nofollow is an excellent way to throw out the baby with the bath water.
How do you figure? It was exactly this situation that nofollow links were designed for. Links created by unverified sources.
That said, and as other posters have mentioned, ideally Wikipedia would only add nofollow to links that have been edited recently, and after a certain period of time (say 3 months) take the nofollow tag off them.
The _problem_ is that spammers can add the links in the first place. Or, really, that anyone can add any undesireable content.
That's like saying "The problem with humanity is people".
You can always chop off a tree at the root and get rid of the problem of the tree, but you also remove the advantages of it. We could just chop down all the trees in the world cause they sometimes fall down. Same goes for everything! Everyone has a different definition of undesirable - how do you decide what is undesirable and what isn't?
Well I think they were really going for as thin as possible, as Steve himself made note of it.
I'm not sure about you, but when I dial a number without looking at the screen I'll look at it at some stage to confirm that I did indeed press the right keys. I'd venture that more people do this than not. No device will be everything to everyone, and I think the trade off is worth it.
This way it's simpler, has no moving parts etc.. And with it's iPod-like docking socket, I'm sure car kits will come out on no time that let you dial via a knob near the steering wheel or something similar.
Another thing to note is the general trend is that things that are MORE usable tend to be less general purpose.
I think it's great, especially in regards to the picture zoom function! that's one of the most intuitive uses of gestures I've ever seen.
For the record I've never owned any Apple products.
There is no tactile feel. I can dial a $20 cell phone without having to see or hear it
Most dialling is done through the address book, where you have to look at the screen anyway. I can't think of many situations when you couldn't just glance at the screen to type 8 numbers! Also the space saved from not having the keyboard is better used as a screen - what do you suggest? You'd prefer a bigger phone?
besides, you need to hear the phone to talk to someone!
Apple can always just include voice dialling and then you could still dial without needing to see the phone.
The benefits of this phone layout far outweigh the downsides of not having a clicky keypad.
Second, the GIMP's current UI is very powerful and very usable. Personally, I prefer it to Photoshop's UI, mainly for the ease with which it can be customized to fit exactly the thing I need to do right now.
This sounds like utter rot to me. Tell me how do i change the colour of a text layer to a colour picked from the background image? In fact, all the text handling is seriously underpowered. I'd love to know how to use different anti-aliasing methods on the text you're editing.
Layer Grouping (or the lack thereof) is pretty lame too. How are you meant to effectively work on a picture with a large number of layers?
Okay, what if i want to stroke a layer? Can i do that non-destructively like in photoshop?
Also I'd love GIMP to include a MDI style interface.. Even Firefox understands that it's good to be able to group various things in one logical window - they have tabs.. desktop icons just get in the way of what you're editing.
These are just things at the top of my head.. as an old time photoshop user this lack of functionality turns me off the Gimp straight away. And let's not even get into its name!
Slashdot Mirror
Well large managed networks is two miles away in the distance on the scale of things Linux is awesome at. Active Directory, Exchange, Terminal Services... Windows really does have a very impressive offering in this area, while Linux stays behind the scenes and rarely faces the user.
For one, OSX != Linux. But that's irrelevant to my post. I use puppet as does Google. Works a treat.
You set up configs for the machine groups you want, it will change files, install applications, run upgrades etc. in an idempotent fashion.
Shame it's not supported - governments won't use it.
.doc formats again for another term (not sure how long the term is though).
I'm pretty sure Australian governments are just about to declare they are standardising on
If windows is such a horrible OS, why has it become so popular?
If a product has a bad aspect, it can still succeed as long as it has enough aspects deemed good by customers. Whether or not customers are smart is another can of worms.
I think you miss my point. I can get many many windows 3.11 apps that will install and run without a hitch on windows XP. They install with a few clicks and uninstall just as easily.
I think you've hit the nail on the head when you say "mixing and matching versions of core components isn't even an option you have available to you with the closed source systems". It shouldn't be an easily available option. You should need to have to TRY to mix versions of core components. It should be hard to do things that most people don't want to do.
In windows, if I screw up a system file it tries to repair it for me.. It makes it hard to screw it up.
I kinda disagree with this statement. They work provided you have all the dependencies sorted and in my experience even that doesn't always go smoothly. In windows, the tools to make an installer are a lot more mature.
How do you figure? It was exactly this situation that nofollow links were designed for. Links created by unverified sources.
That said, and as other posters have mentioned, ideally Wikipedia would only add nofollow to links that have been edited recently, and after a certain period of time (say 3 months) take the nofollow tag off them.
That's like saying "The problem with humanity is people".
You can always chop off a tree at the root and get rid of the problem of the tree, but you also remove the advantages of it. We could just chop down all the trees in the world cause they sometimes fall down. Same goes for everything! Everyone has a different definition of undesirable - how do you decide what is undesirable and what isn't?
Well I think they were really going for as thin as possible, as Steve himself made note of it. I'm not sure about you, but when I dial a number without looking at the screen I'll look at it at some stage to confirm that I did indeed press the right keys. I'd venture that more people do this than not. No device will be everything to everyone, and I think the trade off is worth it. This way it's simpler, has no moving parts etc.. And with it's iPod-like docking socket, I'm sure car kits will come out on no time that let you dial via a knob near the steering wheel or something similar. Another thing to note is the general trend is that things that are MORE usable tend to be less general purpose. I think it's great, especially in regards to the picture zoom function! that's one of the most intuitive uses of gestures I've ever seen. For the record I've never owned any Apple products.
Most dialling is done through the address book, where you have to look at the screen anyway. I can't think of many situations when you couldn't just glance at the screen to type 8 numbers! Also the space saved from not having the keyboard is better used as a screen - what do you suggest? You'd prefer a bigger phone?
besides, you need to hear the phone to talk to someone!
Apple can always just include voice dialling and then you could still dial without needing to see the phone.
The benefits of this phone layout far outweigh the downsides of not having a clicky keypad.
talk about being a typical slashdotter and not RTFM.
Anyone interested in Firefox 2.0's new persistent storage feature can check out the demo i whipped up here.
This is a total killer feature for me :-) Can't wait until other browsers support it.
Anyone know when Firefox 3.0 will get this feature?
This sounds like utter rot to me. Tell me how do i change the colour of a text layer to a colour picked from the background image? In fact, all the text handling is seriously underpowered. I'd love to know how to use different anti-aliasing methods on the text you're editing.
Layer Grouping (or the lack thereof) is pretty lame too. How are you meant to effectively work on a picture with a large number of layers?
Okay, what if i want to stroke a layer? Can i do that non-destructively like in photoshop?
Also I'd love GIMP to include a MDI style interface.. Even Firefox understands that it's good to be able to group various things in one logical window - they have tabs.. desktop icons just get in the way of what you're editing.
These are just things at the top of my head.. as an old time photoshop user this lack of functionality turns me off the Gimp straight away. And let's not even get into its name!