If you want people to make the comparison and agree with you, it would help if you provided a URL of screenshots of Gnome 1.4+.
After trying to find them on my own and finding http://www.gnome.org/seegnome.html, I'm of the opinion that KDE 3.0 looks way better. I always find the Gnome icons and color schemes so melancholy, gray, and lifeless. But then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If these are outdated shots, please provide a better URL; if Gnome looks better than this, I definitely want to know about it.
(disclaimer: I don't use KDE or GNOME, so couldn't care less which one is more l33t; to me they're just bloatware)
If you're talking about the LinuxToday astroturfing then I believe the astroturfer was an anti-linux editor at the place, not a linux zealot. Furthermore, he didn't astroturf for Linux and he didn't bash Microsoft, but instead he bashed other competing web sites, sometimes even Linux itself as I understand it.
If you have links to actual Linux astroturfing (say, a linux company sending out loads of fake letters in support of Linux), then by all means post them; I'd be interested to know. As of yet I'm not aware of any such sleezy things perpetrated by our camp.
So what if all 450 uploads haven't been verified; all it takes is one with the watermark removed, and the rest don't matter. It's quite possible that one of the first few uploads they checked was successful, and hence made checking the rest not necessary. That would explain the leak was so soon after the closing of the contest.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to get rid of the bad aspects of that quality, while preserving its good aspects?
Sure: provide the source code. Although not a perfect solution, it does provide the most flexibility, allowing the largest possible number of people to be able to use the program. Even if the app is written for GNOME and you have KDE, someone will port it, or to whatever else you have; with just a binary release you have precisely 1 option: install the exact system configuration that the software wants. This is one of the reasons I don't see commercial software making big inroads into the Linux/BSD/etc world.
Re:What was it Gandhi said?
on
Free Solaris 8
·
· Score: 1
I believe the quote is: "First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."
Even if one could manage to simulate the brain with a gargatuan neural net, by the virtue that it simulates the human brain, it will not be omniscient and all powerful the instant it is switched on. At the very least you will need 20 or more years to have it learn everything that we know. Perhaps much longer, if it takes the evolutionary path of some of the "first post" trolls on/.
Not to mention that the author assumes that the very first prototype they build will work correctly. What about all the years of research to figure out the best neural net configuration (something which even now is something of a black art)...
Summary: wishful thinking.
BTW, what makes him think that, with an intelligence equal or higher than ours, the computers would want to join the human race? A little obnoxious assumption, if you ask me.
You, on the other hand, make it sound like it is an extremely important thing (the GUI). The Linux (and UNIX) emphasis is always to make the app powerful and flexible rather than cute and cuddly.
And perchance if you are going to say that the UNIX apps are too difficult to use and unwieldly, I disagree. I, like most Linux users who have used it for over a year or two, find it much more logical and straightforward than most of the Windows stuff.
"The only *intuitive* interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned."
eat less, live longer - a reference
on
AAAS under way
·
· Score: 1
A highly detailed paper on this (by another researcher) can be found in most university libraries (especially the medical ones, as this is a famous medical journal):
R. Weindruch et al (New England Journal of Medicine 1997; 337:986-993)
(I forget the exact title, only have this reference handy)
Slashdot Mirror
I think the expression "false dichotomy" is more appropriate, instead of the "excluded middle".
If you want people to make the comparison and agree with you, it would help if you provided a URL of screenshots of Gnome 1.4+.
After trying to find them on my own and finding http://www.gnome.org/seegnome.html, I'm of the opinion that KDE 3.0 looks way better. I always find the Gnome icons and color schemes so melancholy, gray, and lifeless. But then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If these are outdated shots, please provide a better URL; if Gnome looks better than this, I definitely want to know about it.
(disclaimer: I don't use KDE or GNOME, so couldn't care less which one is more l33t; to me they're just bloatware)
If you have links to actual Linux astroturfing (say, a linux company sending out loads of fake letters in support of Linux), then by all means post them; I'd be interested to know. As of yet I'm not aware of any such sleezy things perpetrated by our camp.
30 gigs??? That's it??? I think you meant terabytes. :)
Sure, GNU/Linux is technically more correct, but the world has standardized on Linux.
The world has also standardized on closed, commercial software. Until RMS came along.
Thanks to his death grip on his ideals we have a lot of quality, yet free, tools. I say we let his work (and that of FSF) be acknowledged.
So what if all 450 uploads haven't been verified; all it takes is one with the watermark removed, and the rest don't matter. It's quite possible that one of the first few uploads they checked was successful, and hence made checking the rest not necessary. That would explain the leak was so soon after the closing of the contest.
Sure: provide the source code. Although not a perfect solution, it does provide the most flexibility, allowing the largest possible number of people to be able to use the program. Even if the app is written for GNOME and you have KDE, someone will port it, or to whatever else you have; with just a binary release you have precisely 1 option: install the exact system configuration that the software wants. This is one of the reasons I don't see commercial software making big inroads into the Linux/BSD/etc world.
I believe the quote is: "First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."
Even if one could manage to simulate the brain with a gargatuan neural net, by the virtue that it simulates the human brain, it will not be omniscient and all powerful the instant it is switched on. At the very least you will need 20 or more years to have it learn everything that we know. Perhaps much longer, if it takes the evolutionary path of some of the "first post" trolls on /.
Not to mention that the author assumes that the very first prototype they build will work correctly. What about all the years of research to figure out the best neural net configuration (something which even now is something of a black art)...
Summary: wishful thinking.
BTW, what makes him think that, with an intelligence equal or higher than ours, the computers would want to join the human race? A little obnoxious assumption, if you ask me.
You, on the other hand, make it sound like it is
an extremely important thing (the GUI). The Linux (and UNIX) emphasis is always to make the app
powerful and flexible rather than cute and cuddly.
And perchance if you are going to say that the UNIX apps are too difficult to use and unwieldly, I disagree. I, like most Linux users who have used it for over a year or two, find it much more logical and straightforward than most of the Windows stuff.
"The only *intuitive* interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned."
A highly detailed paper on this (by another researcher) can be found in most university libraries (especially the medical ones, as this is a famous medical journal):
R. Weindruch et al (New England Journal of Medicine 1997; 337:986-993)
(I forget the exact title, only have this reference handy)