I've got a challenge: How long before someone creates E and GTK themes that mimic this?
Mimic is the right word, X Window environments tend to adopt the look of a particular OS without coming close to the functionality. This one will be hard to beat. I give 'em about 15 years!
(Seriously, the PDF, antialiasing and media support along with the required consistancy in the interface would be hard as hell to engineer)
Carmack offered to put off his wedding so he could be there for thei introduction of OS X. Jobs refused to let him, and suggested he make a video instead.
John said that if OS X lived up to its promise, he would adopt it as his primary OS for development and general use.
It appears it has. He is obviously very happy with it and the next id game will be written for the Cocca API and will only run under OS X with no backwards compatibility.
This is not a good thing for Windows, but great news for 'nix users and Mac gamers everywhere.
It bothers me that Slashdot would bother posting year old news again just because it has the word "Open Source" in the title.
The Darwin project was announced almost a year ago, that is what Jobs was talking about. A 20 second trip to Apple.com tells you the same. I am surprised that this is the best OS X story/. had to post. There was undoubtably some NEW news to post on this topic, but as always, the "Open Source Posting Bot" saw the two wordes together and overrided all attempts at posting informative articles.
Some things that haven't made it and one example of what does:
New PPC platform annnounced two weeks ago....not important.
OS X Interface Unveiled.....whatever.
SuSE announces PPC version of their distro....let's ignore it.
Gnome panel adds a new default button.....Earth-shattering announcment! Must be posted right away!
Damn it! I get more and more pissed everytime I hear about some new, higher-bandwith connection being availibe.
There is no way in hell that Charter Communications will ever get around to putting in a able modems in my area. It seems that their recent buyout by AT&T has let their plans fall behind schedule!
The PS2 looks like a good product to me, however I wonder if it will foster a whole new breed of ignorant users who will find their way to Usenet. (Actually my news server hasn't given me any new messages for a week, so I can't complain right now!)
It seems that every time we get accustomed to a new lowest common denominator on the Internet, we manage to have a "improved" one.
I think that the online PS2 community will be the largest community of wannabe hackers, warez fiends and crossposters ever. The PS2 is designed to appeal to an age group which is rapidly losing its ability to communicate intelligently or have a attention span longer than 30 seconds.
Some Examples of Why Win98 Sucks
on
The ROX Desktop
·
· Score: 1
Could it be that *gasp* the GUI doesn't suck all that much? And most of the animosity is rooted in silly Microsoft hatred?
I know this is really unpopular on Slashdot, but the Win/98 GUI is currently the best in the world. Yes, you can cite particular features that you might like in particular GUIs, and cite particular pieces of brain damage in Win/98, but on balance it provides the most functionality and efficiency.
I am afriad that you have litte or no concept of, or experiance with, a good GUI.
Here is a set of examples of why the Windows (and other) GUIs are badly designed.
I haven't seen any comments on the fact that the G4 can easily be modified to work in mobile devices while the Athlon runs rather......warm.
Too Many Of The Same Old Mistakes
on
The ROX Desktop
·
· Score: 1
Yes, this applies particularly to the Gnome desktop. Sure, go ahead and mark this comment down as usual, but that doesn't make the fact go away: Gnome has got a long way to go in useability, particularly in the window manager department. Sheesh. I feel like I'm offending sensibilities every time I bring up a point in Gnome that needs fixing. This is wrong. We'll never get Gnome to where it has to be for world domination if every constructive suggestion gets buried and ignored.
I have found in discussions on this topic that have taken place on/. and Usenet, the inevitable question of "Why do many Window Managers look like Windows when we know the GUI sucks?".
On more than one occasion the response has been that the intent wasn't to correct the glaring mistakes made by Microsoft, but to provide a reasonably accessible UI that fits within most users' frame of reference.
I find that attitude detrimental not only to XWindows but to the concept of Linux itself. It isn't just about the cost of the OS, but of the freedom to innovate, and copying mistakes isn't innovation, but the perpetuation of the same crap we are trying to rid ourselves of.
Basically, what I am trying to say is, if it isn't going to be better than what it intends to replace, don't bother with it.
I find the cries of "But it's *SO* configurable!" a excuse often used to deflect criticism of the actual usability of Window Managers. Configurability is a moot point when what you are tweaking isn't very functional in the first place.
I would take a static but productive interface over a configurable but hopelessly inconsistent, non functional and archaic one any day.
Functionality Makes It To A Linux GUI
on
The ROX Desktop
·
· Score: 4
With most major developments in X Windows lately being more directed at the aesthetic aspects, not usability, this comes at a pleasant surprise.
Far too often eye-candy is used to gloss over a terribly underdeveloped interface. Finally someone has acted on the notion that appearance must go hand in hand with functionality to create an effective GUI.
What if the guy eats some week old pizza and ends up with a serious intestinal problem? Or trips and sprains his ankle? Will he be able to go to the doctor, then the pharmacy, then physical therapy, etc? Will it still count?
So the Matrix wasn't made WITH Linux, but what if it is running ON Linux! I always assumed this to be the case in the good-is-really-bad switcharoo that is the Matrix universe. All the bad guys in Neo's world are really the heroes, while the people who are often trusted and respected turn out to be tools of the machines.
With every advance in technology we seem to hear the same thing "Can I do it with Linux?". Often it that is the case. So wouldn't it be logical to assume that the first true AI could be running on Debian or PPC?
Just imagine, the tool of liberation becomes our new slavery.
Perhaps the only good reason to keep Firewire off Linux is that it is too easy to use. Plug in a drive and it is automaticaly mounted, self powered and terminated?
No "real" Linux machine could ever suffer the indignity of such a device!:-)
3. FireWire. This technology will be the fiasco of the decade if it doesn't appear soon on something other than a Macintosh and a camcorder.
Compaq had it on their machines as an option in summer of '98, if I recall correctly. Sony has it standard on the Vaio line, and last time I checked Compaq and Sony didn't make Macs.
This is just another example of Dvorak bashing something because of platform prejuidce and letting the facts fend for themselves. I am surprised he didn't say USB2 is one of the greatest successes of the past 1,000 years.
Many posts here are bashing the concept of a UI standard or even catering to the average user.
The whole "I am ultra computer literate and everyone else can go to hell" attitude will not make Linux more popular with consumers. With all the hype there is right now, many are going to, and will attempt to adopt it as an alternative to what they have now. By not even making a serious effort to accomadate them, the Linux community will come off as unconcerned and otherwise purpetuate the myth that all Linux users have some sort of superiority complex that puts them above those who want their computing experiance to be consistant and easy.
It appears that people are trying to cause a backlash by being high-and-mighty about things. The harsh reality is that most home users don't care about the technical aspects of their OS. Why do you think the current MacOS has been so popular even though the underlying code is extremly outdated?
People enjoy the user experiance, they can do what they want, figure out how to fix problems in a matter of seconds without having to fight with their computer.
No great philosiphy or freedom of choice will bring most users to Linux. Unless they have a good reason to switch, they won't. When you take away all the technical advantages, Linux isn't very compelling. Making people feel bad about the fact they are not willing to throw away what they find a superior user experiance just makes them less likely to bother trying it again in the future.
Alternatives such as OS X and even Be are closing in, and many, many people are willing to pay for an OS they can use than get one they are afraid of for free.
Make newbies welcome, or face the fact they won't be coming back.
Instant Karma! John Lennon?
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 2
>But it must be remembered that a lot of there products have brought the masses (for better or worse) easy *sic* to operate computers with easy to use software.
If that is your reason for keping M$ together, I'll keep my Mac. Which beat them to it years earlier.
Now the question is, will StarOffice for the Mac take advantage of the Carbon libraries? I would love to use it on OS X next year, and if they are going to do a port they might as well get Carbonation out of the way now.
If they don't, I wouldn't be surprised if StarOffice quickly becomes ignored by Mac users who want to take advatage of the features Carbon offers and decide use AppleWorks 6 instead.
While KDE is nice, it lacks the consistency or functionality of even Windows. I think that a balance between the ability to configure the desktop and make things work in a consistent manner would be incredibly good.
Right now KDE and many of the other window managers borrow many ideas from countless OSs. While this is looks pretty, it hasn't been implemented in a way that is seamless.
Form over function is the name of the game right now. Once that changes, the adoption of KDE and others will rise dramatically.
Slashdot Mirror
I went to highlight the text and ended up deleting the first, more complete version of it. I guess I rushed the rewrite.
Jobs demonstrated the "Bomb" app which attempts to crash the OS. He started it up and went on with the demonstration.
It never managed to bring it down.
I've got a challenge: How long before someone creates E and GTK themes that mimic this?
Mimic is the right word, X Window environments tend to adopt the look of a particular OS without coming close to the functionality. This one will be hard to beat. I give 'em about 15 years!
(Seriously, the PDF, antialiasing and media support along with the required consistancy in the interface would be hard as hell to engineer)
M$ simply copied the taskbar idea from NeXT, which is owned by Apple! Another M$ "innovation".
OS X will have a CLI via Terminal.app, offering a plethora of shells to choose from. It might be a optional install however, but who cares?
Carmack offered to put off his wedding so he could be there for thei introduction of OS X. Jobs refused to let him, and suggested he make a video instead.
John said that if OS X lived up to its promise, he would adopt it as his primary OS for development and general use.
It appears it has. He is obviously very happy with it and the next id game will be written for the Cocca API and will only run under OS X with no backwards compatibility.
This is not a good thing for Windows, but great news for 'nix users and Mac gamers everywhere.
He is now the full-time, permanent CEO of Apple computer. He decided to keep the "i" for amusement.
It bothers me that Slashdot would bother posting year old news again just because it has the word "Open Source" in the title.
/. had to post. There was undoubtably some NEW news to post on this topic, but as always, the "Open Source Posting Bot" saw the two wordes together and overrided all attempts at posting informative articles.
The Darwin project was announced almost a year ago, that is what Jobs was talking about. A 20 second trip to Apple.com tells you the same.
I am surprised that this is the best OS X story
Some things that haven't made it and one example of what does:
New PPC platform annnounced two weeks ago....not important.
OS X Interface Unveiled.....whatever.
SuSE announces PPC version of their distro....let's ignore it.
Gnome panel adds a new default button.....Earth-shattering announcment! Must be posted right away!
Damn it! I get more and more pissed everytime I hear about some new, higher-bandwith connection being availibe.
There is no way in hell that Charter Communications will ever get around to putting in a able modems in my area. It seems that their recent buyout by AT&T has let their plans fall behind schedule!
The PS2 looks like a good product to me, however I wonder if it will foster a whole new breed of ignorant users who will find their way to Usenet. (Actually my news server hasn't given me any new messages for a week, so I can't complain right now!)
It seems that every time we get accustomed to a new lowest common denominator on the Internet, we manage to have a "improved" one.
I think that the online PS2 community will be the largest community of wannabe hackers, warez fiends and crossposters ever. The PS2 is designed to appeal to an age group which is rapidly losing its ability to communicate intelligently or have a attention span longer than 30 seconds.
Could it be that *gasp* the GUI doesn't suck all that much? And most of the animosity is rooted in silly Microsoft hatred?
I know this is really unpopular on Slashdot, but the Win/98 GUI is currently the best in the world. Yes, you can cite particular features that you might like in particular GUIs, and cite particular pieces of brain damage in Win/98, but on balance it provides the most functionality and efficiency.
I am afriad that you have litte or no concept of, or experiance with, a good GUI.
Here is a set of examples of why the Windows (and other) GUIs are badly designed.
http://iarchitect.com/mshame.htm
I haven't seen any comments on the fact that the G4 can easily be modified to work in mobile devices while the Athlon runs rather......warm.
Yes, this applies particularly to the Gnome desktop. Sure, go ahead and mark this comment down as usual, but that doesn't make the fact go away: Gnome has got a long way to go in useability, particularly in the window manager department. Sheesh. I feel like I'm offending sensibilities every time I bring up a point in Gnome that needs fixing. This is wrong. We'll never get Gnome to where it has to be for world domination if every constructive suggestion gets buried and ignored.
/. and Usenet, the inevitable question of "Why do many Window Managers look like Windows when we know the GUI sucks?".
I have found in discussions on this topic that have taken place on
On more than one occasion the response has been that the intent wasn't to correct the glaring mistakes made by Microsoft, but to provide a reasonably accessible UI that fits within most users' frame of reference.
I find that attitude detrimental not only to XWindows but to the concept of Linux itself. It isn't just about the cost of the OS, but of the freedom to innovate, and copying mistakes isn't innovation, but the perpetuation of the same crap we are trying to rid ourselves of.
Basically, what I am trying to say is, if it isn't going to be better than what it intends to replace, don't bother with it.
I find the cries of "But it's *SO* configurable!" a excuse often used to deflect criticism of the actual usability of Window Managers. Configurability is a moot point when what you are tweaking isn't very functional in the first place.
I would take a static but productive interface over a configurable but hopelessly inconsistent, non functional and archaic one any day.
With most major developments in X Windows lately being more directed at the aesthetic aspects, not usability, this comes at a pleasant surprise.
Far too often eye-candy is used to gloss over a terribly underdeveloped interface. Finally someone has acted on the notion that appearance must go hand in hand with functionality to create an effective GUI.
Is that a PC only extended disc?
What if the guy eats some week old pizza and ends up with a serious intestinal problem? Or trips and sprains his ankle? Will he be able to go to the doctor, then the pharmacy, then physical therapy, etc? Will it still count?
So the Matrix wasn't made WITH Linux, but what if it is running ON Linux! I always assumed this to be the case in the good-is-really-bad switcharoo that is the Matrix universe. All the bad guys in Neo's world are really the heroes, while the people who are often trusted and respected turn out to be tools of the machines.
With every advance in technology we seem to hear the same thing "Can I do it with Linux?". Often it that is the case. So wouldn't it be logical to assume that the first true AI could be running on Debian or PPC?
Just imagine, the tool of liberation becomes our new slavery.
Perhaps the only good reason to keep Firewire off Linux is that it is too easy to use. Plug in a drive and it is automaticaly mounted, self powered and terminated?
:-)
No "real" Linux machine could ever suffer the indignity of such a device!
3. FireWire. This technology will be the fiasco of the decade if it doesn't appear soon on something other than a Macintosh and a camcorder.
Compaq had it on their machines as an option in summer of '98, if I recall correctly. Sony has it standard on the Vaio line, and last time I checked Compaq and Sony didn't make Macs.
This is just another example of Dvorak bashing something because of platform prejuidce and letting the facts fend for themselves. I am surprised he didn't say USB2 is one of the greatest successes of the past 1,000 years.
Except when you have a 20 year old program that is version 1.1.0958578948b84784738d7-a.47483290
Then it becomes a nightmare when you are searching for a particular version of whatever software you are using.
I have had this occur on several occasions.
Many posts here are bashing the concept of a UI standard or even catering to the average user.
The whole "I am ultra computer literate and everyone else can go to hell" attitude will not make Linux more popular with consumers. With all the hype there is right now, many are going to, and will attempt to adopt it as an alternative to what they have now. By not even making a serious effort to accomadate them, the Linux community will come off as unconcerned and otherwise purpetuate the myth that all Linux users have some sort of superiority complex that puts them above those who want their computing experiance to be consistant and easy.
It appears that people are trying to cause a backlash by being high-and-mighty about things. The harsh reality is that most home users don't care about the technical aspects of their OS. Why do you think the current MacOS has been so popular even though the underlying code is extremly outdated?
People enjoy the user experiance, they can do what they want, figure out how to fix problems in a matter of seconds without having to fight with their computer.
No great philosiphy or freedom of choice will bring most users to Linux. Unless they have a good reason to switch, they won't. When you take away all the technical advantages, Linux isn't very compelling. Making people feel bad about the fact they are not willing to throw away what they find a superior user experiance just makes them less likely to bother trying it again in the future.
Alternatives such as OS X and even Be are closing in, and many, many people are willing to pay for an OS they can use than get one they are afraid of for free.
Make newbies welcome, or face the fact they won't be coming back.
Not going to say a word....
>But it must be remembered that a lot of there products have brought the masses (for better or worse) easy *sic* to operate computers with easy to use software.
If that is your reason for keping M$ together, I'll keep my Mac. Which beat them to it years earlier.
Now the question is, will StarOffice for the Mac take advantage of the Carbon libraries? I would love to use it on OS X next year, and if they are going to do a port they might as well get Carbonation out of the way now.
If they don't, I wouldn't be surprised if StarOffice quickly becomes ignored by Mac users who want to take advatage of the features Carbon offers and decide use AppleWorks 6 instead.
While KDE is nice, it lacks the consistency or functionality of even Windows. I think that a balance between the ability to configure the desktop and make things work in a consistent manner would be incredibly good.
Right now KDE and many of the other window managers borrow many ideas from countless OSs. While this is looks pretty, it hasn't been implemented in a way that is seamless.
Form over function is the name of the game right now. Once that changes, the adoption of KDE and others will rise dramatically.