One thing you mentioned is lack of drag & drop - not true. Motif, GTK+ (as of 1.2) and Qt (2.x for sure) all support drag and drop. In fact, Qt and GTK+ both support the Xdnd protocol, and are compatible with Motif's DnD protocol. (I just recently spent time tracking down why DnD wasn't working from non-GTK+ apps in XMMS.)
Just because the apps don't support it, doesn't mean the support in the widget sets isn't there - a lot of apps that probably should recognize DnD don't, but (at least in GTK+, and from the look of it, in Qt 2.x/KDE) it's not a huge undertaking to add DnD support in apps where it would be relevant. (Wish some coders would read the widget-set docs more... of course, it'd be nice if someone would finish the GTK+ API docs.)
Computers don't think. They do mathematical operations. They process information. But thinking? Thinking involves awareness, understanding. The computer hasn't the capability to achieve either of those - the user still has to do the thinking.
Don't mistake automation for thought - they aren't the same. Not by a long shot.
This is the EXACT problem with the typical user's thinking about what a computer actually does... They seem to generally believe that it's going to do the thinking for them. They think it's going to allow them to think less.
That's not how a computer works. A computer is a machine - you put input in one end, you get output from the other. If you don't do any thinking, it's not going to either. Primarily because the computer doesn't think - it just does what it's told.
If we could make users understand that the computer doesn't think - that as the user, you are the one with the brain, therefore you're the one that does the thinking - maybe they'd be able to user a computer more easily. I think as long as these people still think that the computer is a "thinking machine", we'll have to have dumbed-down UIs, to accomodate the users who don't want to think.
Uhh. Sendmail attacks? Bind holes? A user install of Linux does not need such things. Why you'd install all that for an end-user setup... well, I would have to hear an explanation of it. Also, portscans are an issue no matter what the OS, it's just a lot easier to use tools that will detect them on Unix and Unix-ish OSes.
And where do you think Apple got the idea for the GUI? You think they pulled it from their collective ass? No, not likely. They "borrowed" it from Xerox's PARC research facility (where Steve Jobs went on a tour some time before starting to develop the Macintosh and its OS).
Don't kid yourself - there's not much innovation left. Everyone's stealing ideas from someone else, that's just the way it works...
But what if you buy a new machine, and you never boot the preinstalled OS? Like, if you blow away all the partitions and install Linux or something? I don't know if they could claim you are bound by their agreement then, if you never used their product or opened the packaging for the preinstalled OS.
I think the answer's obvious, but let me say why I think it is.
Simply, as you said, with something that small there's really not much of a point to color. With the kind of information you'll generally be storing on your PDA, color won't really be a useful addition (grayscale can be handy, but beyond that, color doesn't really improve things much). About the only thing it's really good for is for playing SimCity for Palm (yes, there's really such a thing - I can't find the URL, but I have seen it).
So yes, I'd say it's technology just for the sake of technology... I don't really think it'll be particularly practical. (One reason when buying a Palm, I skipped the IIIc in favor of a Vx.)
Amen. If they're gonna change it so it's not compatible with Kerberos anymore, then don't sport the name, thereby implicitly promising compatibility with the rest of the Kerberos-using world...
Why do you think they bothered to provide the specs to their "improvements" to Kerberos with a clickwrap license that basically says you can READ it, but you can't TALK about it or USE it... What other reason would there BE? Why would they waste the energy if that wasn't exactly what they were looking for?
Reverse-engineering? The EXE file is a self-extracting ZIP file - and a ZIP file extractor (in the case of Linux, the InfoZIP 'unzip' program) will readily extract it, no reverse-engineering required.
They put the PDF containg the summary of their changes to Kerberos under a license that says, effectively, "you can LOOK at this, but you can not TALK to anyone about it, and you can not USE this information for ANYTHING"... It seems like Microsoft was just hoping for someone to violate the license.
I mean, why else provide this info under a license that prohibits everyone from using it? What's the point, other than (a) making a weak attempt at satisfying customer/the DOJ, or (b) baiting people specifically to violate their license. Seems like a major waste of effort otherwise.
I, for one, would like to ask them what their real intention was. Not that they'd provide an honest answer to my question, but I'd at least like to ask it...
Outlook is used via OLE Automation to forward copies of the script to others
mIRC is used via OLE Automation to propagate via IRC
The Windows Scripting Host (apparently widely regarded as a gaping security issue) is used to execute the VB script data that is attached to the message
So... NOW do you see why this has to do with Microsoft?
That's what I do at work - I'm just using the html-trap.procmail filter, and quarantining all that stuff (.vbs,.shs, Happy99.exe, etc.)... it's so rare that anything really legit goes through like that. Better to be a little too paranoid than not enough, I figure.
Exactly. I've said it before - the only time Microsoft cares about "standards" is when they decide they're not getting all the market share they deserve. But then when they HAVE the market share they want (read: the majority, or all of it), then they bastardize the standards and lock users in.
And people wonder why we're saying behavioral remedies won't work on Microsoft?
Porting Linux to a toilet isn't expecting someone to buy an expensive device with crashy, bloated software on it. If someone wants to experiment on their own time porting Linux to all sorts of devices, it doesn't cost anyone anything, so I have no argument with it. But really, for a commercial device, the principle of "Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it SHOULD" really applies more - trying to cram so much stuff in a device like that, and expecting people to put up with crashes and lousy handwriting recognition...
I mean, if someone can really make use of 'em, and they're happy with them, that's great. I hope they're happy. As for me, however, I don't need or want a device like that. A Palm, which does its job (and does it well, mind you), is just what I need.
Hahaha. Hope you carry plenty of spare batteries. Sounds like, as usual, the CE-based devices will be eating batteries for lunch.
Besides, how many MP3s will you really be able to fit on a unit like that at once? Not very many, especially not if you plan on using it for anything else other than MP3 playback.
The PalmOS hasn't "improved" (i.e., changed) too much since, oh, v2.0, in terms of what you see and how you use it. (I only just bought a Palm Vx, but I've seen Palm/PalmPilot devices running PalmOS v2 and better.) But why should it? The guys who developed the Pilot/PalmPilot/Palm were going for simplicity, and trying to do what they wanted to do right the first time. I think that, for the most part, they have succeeded in doing it right from the beginning.
PalmOS improvements have been pretty much just incremental though. I think that says a lot for how well-designed PalmOS really is - they haven't had to add/remove a lot of stuff, because they THOUGHT CAREFULLY during the OS design! They considered ease of use, tap counts, and keeping things simple. They didn't get bogged down in adding every damned whizbang feature out there. (Which, far as I'm concerned, is where Microsoft is falling down - they seem to feel it necessary to try to stuff too many feaures into one device...)
PalmOS v3.3 supports HotSyncing via IrDA. (Probably 3.5 too, I'll bet.) And I don't know that a bigger display or USB support would really provide a quantifiable improvement to the product, considering its mission.
If Microsoft (and their pals) think all that bloat is needed, well, let them produce what THEY like; I'll stick to what I like, and what works for me.
Not likely to enrich our lives with fantastic new technologies, eh? Well, that's NOT what Palm is trying to do, and it's not what a palmtop is all about - what it's about is keeping it simple, doing the essentials without going so far overboard.
A word processor and spreadsheet in a handheld computer? (Without a keyboard, mind you!) How are you going to really make use of these apps? I wouldn't want to try to do serious word-processing on my Palm Vx - but then that's NOT what its Memo Pad is for, either. And trying to do real word processing via handwriting recognition would be such a pain, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
He can't directly, but he could probably put pressure on the DoJ to stop fighting it, and it'd eventually piddle off into nothingness.
One thing you mentioned is lack of drag & drop - not true. Motif, GTK+ (as of 1.2) and Qt (2.x for sure) all support drag and drop. In fact, Qt and GTK+ both support the Xdnd protocol, and are compatible with Motif's DnD protocol. (I just recently spent time tracking down why DnD wasn't working from non-GTK+ apps in XMMS.)
Just because the apps don't support it, doesn't mean the support in the widget sets isn't there - a lot of apps that probably should recognize DnD don't, but (at least in GTK+, and from the look of it, in Qt 2.x/KDE) it's not a huge undertaking to add DnD support in apps where it would be relevant. (Wish some coders would read the widget-set docs more... of course, it'd be nice if someone would finish the GTK+ API docs.)
Computers don't think. They do mathematical operations. They process information. But thinking? Thinking involves awareness, understanding. The computer hasn't the capability to achieve either of those - the user still has to do the thinking.
Don't mistake automation for thought - they aren't the same. Not by a long shot.
This is the EXACT problem with the typical user's thinking about what a computer actually does... They seem to generally believe that it's going to do the thinking for them. They think it's going to allow them to think less.
That's not how a computer works. A computer is a machine - you put input in one end, you get output from the other. If you don't do any thinking, it's not going to either. Primarily because the computer doesn't think - it just does what it's told.
If we could make users understand that the computer doesn't think - that as the user, you are the one with the brain, therefore you're the one that does the thinking - maybe they'd be able to user a computer more easily. I think as long as these people still think that the computer is a "thinking machine", we'll have to have dumbed-down UIs, to accomodate the users who don't want to think.
Uhh. Sendmail attacks? Bind holes? A user install of Linux does not need such things. Why you'd install all that for an end-user setup... well, I would have to hear an explanation of it. Also, portscans are an issue no matter what the OS, it's just a lot easier to use tools that will detect them on Unix and Unix-ish OSes.
And where do you think Apple got the idea for the GUI? You think they pulled it from their collective ass? No, not likely. They "borrowed" it from Xerox's PARC research facility (where Steve Jobs went on a tour some time before starting to develop the Macintosh and its OS).
Don't kid yourself - there's not much innovation left. Everyone's stealing ideas from someone else, that's just the way it works...
How about POP3 and LDAP and IMAP and SMTP and other (standard) protocols?
Wha? How did Paul Steed have _anything_ to do with the demise of LGS? Where did you get this idea?
I'm running XFree86 4.0 with WindowMaker 0.61.1 (debian package), and it's working great. (Even got DRI playing nice with my Voodoo3! woo!)
But what if you buy a new machine, and you never boot the preinstalled OS? Like, if you blow away all the partitions and install Linux or something? I don't know if they could claim you are bound by their agreement then, if you never used their product or opened the packaging for the preinstalled OS.
I think the answer's obvious, but let me say why I think it is.
Simply, as you said, with something that small there's really not much of a point to color. With the kind of information you'll generally be storing on your PDA, color won't really be a useful addition (grayscale can be handy, but beyond that, color doesn't really improve things much). About the only thing it's really good for is for playing SimCity for Palm (yes, there's really such a thing - I can't find the URL, but I have seen it).
So yes, I'd say it's technology just for the sake of technology... I don't really think it'll be particularly practical. (One reason when buying a Palm, I skipped the IIIc in favor of a Vx.)
Amen. If they're gonna change it so it's not compatible with Kerberos anymore, then don't sport the name, thereby implicitly promising compatibility with the rest of the Kerberos-using world...
Why do you think they bothered to provide the specs to their "improvements" to Kerberos with a clickwrap license that basically says you can READ it, but you can't TALK about it or USE it... What other reason would there BE? Why would they waste the energy if that wasn't exactly what they were looking for?
Reverse-engineering? The EXE file is a self-extracting ZIP file - and a ZIP file extractor (in the case of Linux, the InfoZIP 'unzip' program) will readily extract it, no reverse-engineering required.
They put the PDF containg the summary of their changes to Kerberos under a license that says, effectively, "you can LOOK at this, but you can not TALK to anyone about it, and you can not USE this information for ANYTHING"... It seems like Microsoft was just hoping for someone to violate the license.
I mean, why else provide this info under a license that prohibits everyone from using it? What's the point, other than (a) making a weak attempt at satisfying customer/the DOJ, or (b) baiting people specifically to violate their license. Seems like a major waste of effort otherwise.
I, for one, would like to ask them what their real intention was. Not that they'd provide an honest answer to my question, but I'd at least like to ask it...
So... NOW do you see why this has to do with Microsoft?
That's what I do at work - I'm just using the html-trap.procmail filter, and quarantining all that stuff (.vbs, .shs, Happy99.exe, etc.)... it's so rare that anything really legit goes through like that. Better to be a little too paranoid than not enough, I figure.
Exactly. I've said it before - the only time Microsoft cares about "standards" is when they decide they're not getting all the market share they deserve. But then when they HAVE the market share they want (read: the majority, or all of it), then they bastardize the standards and lock users in.
And people wonder why we're saying behavioral remedies won't work on Microsoft?
Porting Linux to a toilet isn't expecting someone to buy an expensive device with crashy, bloated software on it. If someone wants to experiment on their own time porting Linux to all sorts of devices, it doesn't cost anyone anything, so I have no argument with it. But really, for a commercial device, the principle of "Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it SHOULD" really applies more - trying to cram so much stuff in a device like that, and expecting people to put up with crashes and lousy handwriting recognition...
I mean, if someone can really make use of 'em, and they're happy with them, that's great. I hope they're happy. As for me, however, I don't need or want a device like that. A Palm, which does its job (and does it well, mind you), is just what I need.
Shrug. If I want MP3s, I'll carry an MP3 player. Sometimes, one device for _everything_ isn't necessarily the best thing...
Hahaha. Hope you carry plenty of spare batteries. Sounds like, as usual, the CE-based devices will be eating batteries for lunch.
Besides, how many MP3s will you really be able to fit on a unit like that at once? Not very many, especially not if you plan on using it for anything else other than MP3 playback.
The PalmOS hasn't "improved" (i.e., changed) too much since, oh, v2.0, in terms of what you see and how you use it. (I only just bought a Palm Vx, but I've seen Palm/PalmPilot devices running PalmOS v2 and better.) But why should it? The guys who developed the Pilot/PalmPilot/Palm were going for simplicity, and trying to do what they wanted to do right the first time. I think that, for the most part, they have succeeded in doing it right from the beginning.
PalmOS improvements have been pretty much just incremental though. I think that says a lot for how well-designed PalmOS really is - they haven't had to add/remove a lot of stuff, because they THOUGHT CAREFULLY during the OS design! They considered ease of use, tap counts, and keeping things simple. They didn't get bogged down in adding every damned whizbang feature out there. (Which, far as I'm concerned, is where Microsoft is falling down - they seem to feel it necessary to try to stuff too many feaures into one device...)
PalmOS v3.3 supports HotSyncing via IrDA. (Probably 3.5 too, I'll bet.) And I don't know that a bigger display or USB support would really provide a quantifiable improvement to the product, considering its mission.
If Microsoft (and their pals) think all that bloat is needed, well, let them produce what THEY like; I'll stick to what I like, and what works for me.
We ARE talking about Microsoft, after all. Never know what they'll do next to maintain control of The Almighty Platform(TM)...
Not likely to enrich our lives with fantastic new technologies, eh? Well, that's NOT what Palm is trying to do, and it's not what a palmtop is all about - what it's about is keeping it simple, doing the essentials without going so far overboard.
A word processor and spreadsheet in a handheld computer? (Without a keyboard, mind you!) How are you going to really make use of these apps? I wouldn't want to try to do serious word-processing on my Palm Vx - but then that's NOT what its Memo Pad is for, either. And trying to do real word processing via handwriting recognition would be such a pain, anyway.