What a fucking clueless moron you are.
You are seriously telling us that some UI Phd knows more about what I and OP like, than we do ourselves? The new interface sucks and I hate it, as do many others. Coming here to tell us that we are wrong about how we feel is disingenious on such a level, it is really quite astonishing.
I belive you are quite right, let me expand on what you are saying with a quote from one of my posts on dpreview.
quote follows below:
edispics wrote:
So how would you suggest that all the online software companies should sell their software, online?
It's not the selling online part that is the Problem, piracy happens for online and offline sales.
Keeping in mind that the solution has to protect the companies from piracy as well.
I have several responses to this point:
1) I don't have to find a solution, DRM is unethical, end of story. For your education I will provide further information, but this one single reason should be enough for anybody.
2) DRM doesn't work. Even the best schemes have been cracked, including single player games requiring the player to be online at all times (a truly infuriating concept).
3) companies don't have to use DRM. Piracy has been happening for a long time, and it's only the last few years where companies have been using the truly draconian DRM schemes, such as those requiring am Internet connection. Companies have been doing fine before that, it's only greed that motivates them really. Look at the history of music DRM and you will see an extremely clear example. Music is now mostly sold without DRM as the companies have finally realized that it doesn't help them, and several instances where DRM servers were shut down (forever, not just temporarily) showed the customers how vulnerable DRM leaves their purchases. Look up PlaysForSure on Wikipedia, never has a DRM scheme been named with more irony.
4) Companies need to shift their focus from protecting against piracy to serving the needs of their customers, then piracy will be less of a problem - it can never be solved completely. Fair prices, good value, not relying in ridiculous forced borders (region locked content, heavily variable pricing etc.), establishing a connection with the customer (not just treating him as a source of income), and appeals to customers moral senses - those things help combat piracy. Some people will always be pirates or not use the product at all. Those people will never be real customers, and punishing actual customers for the behavior of pirates just alienates your loyal customers.
5) in the case of music and movies and video games, studies have repeatedly shown that the people pirating the most content are also those that make the most legitimate purchases (do a Google search on this). For expensive software this is somewhat different, but those cases are mostly about low income persons (students etc. ) just not being able to afford to buy the software legally.
My very first Linux distro was gentoo, and I would still prefer it over ubuntu any day (mostly because ubuntu has gone to shit the last few years).
Arch Linux is not bad for beginners, but if you want to have it a bit easier you can try Manjaro. It is based on Arch but has a somewhat more user friendly installer. Definitely give it a go, it's the only distro that allows you to have it your way without getting bogged down in too many details you don't care about. Arch really cares about KISS and it shows.
The very first Linux I used was gentoo which is even more notorius for being difficult, and that never hurt me. You seem like you are willing to learn, so Arch Linux is a really good choice I think.
If you want installation to be easier you can try Manjaro. It is based on Arch Linux but installation is a bit more user friendly.
I have been thinking long and hard about this particular "dilemma" myself - On the one hand it improves support for linux games, on the other hand it also strengthens a DRM scheme I abhor. I am not quite sure what my stance should be yet.
I have installed the linux steam client so I can play around with the games I purchased when I still didn't realize exactly how bad DRM was, and also to raise awareness of Linux in the surveus, but I do not think I will give Valve any new money for the foreseeable future.
There are many people like you who think that steam is DRM done right. But by the very definition, DRM is always a burden to the legitimate purchaser, and only to him, it can therefore never be done right.
Sure steam works pretty well, but I can tell you it really does not agree with me that valve reserves the right to forbid me access at any time for any reason. Yes I know, valve is not evil (in that particular sense) and won't just disable my account on a whim. But it makes no difference - for all I care Valve could be led by heavenly saints, but when I make a purchase the seller should not have any right at all to hinder me in making use of my purchase. There cannot be any argument about this, it is just wrong.
DRM is evil. By accepting DRM you are making life harder for everyone else, because you show the companies that they can get away with it. This truly is a black and white issue, there can be no neutral stance on it.
Look, sometimes you are just wrong - this is one of them. Nothing to be ashamed of, we all get it wrong from time to time. The difference is in how you deal with it, so far you are not doing it very well...
If you think that the good parts from a point and shoot camera are the features and the good parts of the DSLR are the looks then you are doing it wrong.
I know exactly how you feel, been like this all my life. When I'm walking with other people I constantly have to remind myself to slow down because they can't keep up.
I really wanted to like the movie but I just couldn't - is that now somehow my fault and am I being a jerk for it? It doesn't matter how hard they tried, how little resources they had, whatever else excuses you want to list. I watched the movie, and it was bad, that is all that matters. The previous movies done by the blender foundation were awesome but this one is pure shit - with the exception of the technology itself.
The CGI is fine, maybe even Hollywood level, the acting was surprisingly decent, but the screenplay/storyboard, the premise, the plot, all the stuff that really really matters in a movie, that was utterly pure horseshit. And no matter how cool blender is, you won't get me to say otherwise. And I'm not being a jerk, I'm just being honest. But some people apparently can't handle honesty.
I read these comments before watching the movie and thought it was just some troll spreading his hate. But after watching it... I am sorry to say that even Lucas could have done better than that. That was the absolutely lamest thing I have seen in a long time. Yuck.
It's not even good for a tech demo, because the overall crappiness distracts from the CGI.
And if you don't like reading complaints about changes to the original book, then perhaps you are reading the wrong website. If you don't like it, you can FUCKING GO SOMEWHERE ELSE you fucking child.
Just for the record, I did not actually mean for my post to sound as harsh or insulting as it did. I'm not sure how to better express what I was trying to say, so I will not even make an attempt now.
That being said, I honestly don't see "how that works". Because most likely you just made that up and don't actually think that anyone not dependent on soft drinks (etc...) is pathetic.
The alternative is even worse, you actually think like that, in which case you have a serious mental problem. No sane person will think someone who is not addicted to unhealthy food and drinks as pathetic.
That doesn't mean I don't enjoy them once in a while, but I am in no way addicted to them as some people seem to be.
Not to excuse the TSA, expensive airport prices, or anything else - but if you are so dependent on soft drinks or coffee (or similar non-water drink), then you are quite pathetic in my book.
In cases of mismanagement where blame was placed on some people lower down, I have often found the phrase useful: "You can't delegate the overall responsibility away", meaning that management is still responsible for failures lower down, because they did not prevent these failures.
I believe it is only fair to say that it works the other way around as well (for praise instead of blame). In spite of everything I dislike about Steve Jobs and Apple, there is no point in denying that he succeeded somewhere where all other companies have failed so far. Sure, after the IPhone, some companies started TRYING to produce better smartphones, but when you look at the ratio of actually good devices and awful abominations, it is clear that manufacturers are STILL struggling.
Maybe Steve Jobs didn't personally design every last detail of i-devices himself, but he certainly got involved and he made damn sure that his workforce ended up producing good usable products. I don't agree with many things in the Apple world, but Apple has a clear goal with it's products and it makes sure that those goals are met. That is admirable, and Steve deserves praise/fame for it.
Sorry, but I have done just that several times. Coming home from a party, but not feeling like going to bed quite yet, I sometimes (used to) play a round of battlefield. And very often (but not always) I kicked ass, some of my best rounds have been played while being drunk. On average, I would estimate that my drunk rounds were ever so slightly better than my sober rounds.
Now I have done that only a 4-5 times so far (playing several rounds each time), so the sample size is very low. But I'm not sure it's as clear cut as you make it out to be.
In theory - and I realize that for the most part it is strictly theoretical - advertising can consist of information without distorting reality or lying. I would not classify such advertising as evil.
I wish there was a law that forbade anything but dissemination of simple facts in advertising. No smiling people, no crass attention seeking colors, no selling on emotions of any kind. You can inform that product xyz is available now and you may list facts that are verifiable/repeatable in the scientific sense. No more.
I have seen this movie a long time ago on TV and wanted to see it again since, but I simply had no idea what it was called. So thanks for reminding me!
You may not care about this story, but there are lots of other people here who do. So just shut up or make your own news blog where everything is like you want it to be, I'm sure it'll be real popular.
Ubuntu seems to be doing their best to take the worst "features" of windows, macOs and linux and combine them into something worse than any of them. Ugh. If I look back from 2007 to now, I can only shake my head in disbelief.
I've since moved on to arch linux and am happier for it.
Slashdot Mirror
You think they will stop when we are sick of it? If only that were true...
What a fucking clueless moron you are. You are seriously telling us that some UI Phd knows more about what I and OP like, than we do ourselves? The new interface sucks and I hate it, as do many others. Coming here to tell us that we are wrong about how we feel is disingenious on such a level, it is really quite astonishing.
I belive you are quite right, let me expand on what you are saying with a quote from one of my posts on dpreview.
quote follows below:
It's not the selling online part that is the Problem, piracy happens for online and offline sales.
I have several responses to this point:
My very first Linux distro was gentoo, and I would still prefer it over ubuntu any day (mostly because ubuntu has gone to shit the last few years).
Arch Linux is not bad for beginners, but if you want to have it a bit easier you can try Manjaro. It is based on Arch but has a somewhat more user friendly installer. Definitely give it a go, it's the only distro that allows you to have it your way without getting bogged down in too many details you don't care about. Arch really cares about KISS and it shows.
The very first Linux I used was gentoo which is even more notorius for being difficult, and that never hurt me. You seem like you are willing to learn, so Arch Linux is a really good choice I think.
If you want installation to be easier you can try Manjaro. It is based on Arch Linux but installation is a bit more user friendly.
I have been thinking long and hard about this particular "dilemma" myself - On the one hand it improves support for linux games, on the other hand it also strengthens a DRM scheme I abhor. I am not quite sure what my stance should be yet.
I have installed the linux steam client so I can play around with the games I purchased when I still didn't realize exactly how bad DRM was, and also to raise awareness of Linux in the surveus, but I do not think I will give Valve any new money for the foreseeable future.
There are many people like you who think that steam is DRM done right. But by the very definition, DRM is always a burden to the legitimate purchaser, and only to him, it can therefore never be done right.
Sure steam works pretty well, but I can tell you it really does not agree with me that valve reserves the right to forbid me access at any time for any reason. Yes I know, valve is not evil (in that particular sense) and won't just disable my account on a whim. But it makes no difference - for all I care Valve could be led by heavenly saints, but when I make a purchase the seller should not have any right at all to hinder me in making use of my purchase. There cannot be any argument about this, it is just wrong.
DRM is evil. By accepting DRM you are making life harder for everyone else, because you show the companies that they can get away with it. This truly is a black and white issue, there can be no neutral stance on it.
Look, sometimes you are just wrong - this is one of them. Nothing to be ashamed of, we all get it wrong from time to time. The difference is in how you deal with it, so far you are not doing it very well...
If you think that the good parts from a point and shoot camera are the features and the good parts of the DSLR are the looks then you are doing it wrong.
This, a thousand time this. Unfortunately my mod points just expired.
I know exactly how you feel, been like this all my life. When I'm walking with other people I constantly have to remind myself to slow down because they can't keep up.
I really wanted to like the movie but I just couldn't - is that now somehow my fault and am I being a jerk for it? It doesn't matter how hard they tried, how little resources they had, whatever else excuses you want to list. I watched the movie, and it was bad, that is all that matters. The previous movies done by the blender foundation were awesome but this one is pure shit - with the exception of the technology itself.
The CGI is fine, maybe even Hollywood level, the acting was surprisingly decent, but the screenplay/storyboard, the premise, the plot, all the stuff that really really matters in a movie, that was utterly pure horseshit. And no matter how cool blender is, you won't get me to say otherwise. And I'm not being a jerk, I'm just being honest. But some people apparently can't handle honesty.
I read these comments before watching the movie and thought it was just some troll spreading his hate. But after watching it... I am sorry to say that even Lucas could have done better than that. That was the absolutely lamest thing I have seen in a long time. Yuck.
It's not even good for a tech demo, because the overall crappiness distracts from the CGI.
And if you don't like reading complaints about changes to the original book, then perhaps you are reading the wrong website. If you don't like it, you can FUCKING GO SOMEWHERE ELSE you fucking child.
Just for the record, I did not actually mean for my post to sound as harsh or insulting as it did. I'm not sure how to better express what I was trying to say, so I will not even make an attempt now.
That being said, I honestly don't see "how that works". Because most likely you just made that up and don't actually think that anyone not dependent on soft drinks (etc...) is pathetic.
The alternative is even worse, you actually think like that, in which case you have a serious mental problem. No sane person will think someone who is not addicted to unhealthy food and drinks as pathetic.
That doesn't mean I don't enjoy them once in a while, but I am in no way addicted to them as some people seem to be.
Not to excuse the TSA, expensive airport prices, or anything else - but if you are so dependent on soft drinks or coffee (or similar non-water drink), then you are quite pathetic in my book.
And boring as shit to play. Space combat in independence war just isn't fun. At all.
In cases of mismanagement where blame was placed on some people lower down, I have often found the phrase useful: "You can't delegate the overall responsibility away", meaning that management is still responsible for failures lower down, because they did not prevent these failures.
I believe it is only fair to say that it works the other way around as well (for praise instead of blame). In spite of everything I dislike about Steve Jobs and Apple, there is no point in denying that he succeeded somewhere where all other companies have failed so far. Sure, after the IPhone, some companies started TRYING to produce better smartphones, but when you look at the ratio of actually good devices and awful abominations, it is clear that manufacturers are STILL struggling.
Maybe Steve Jobs didn't personally design every last detail of i-devices himself, but he certainly got involved and he made damn sure that his workforce ended up producing good usable products. I don't agree with many things in the Apple world, but Apple has a clear goal with it's products and it makes sure that those goals are met. That is admirable, and Steve deserves praise/fame for it.
Sorry, but I have done just that several times. Coming home from a party, but not feeling like going to bed quite yet, I sometimes (used to) play a round of battlefield. And very often (but not always) I kicked ass, some of my best rounds have been played while being drunk. On average, I would estimate that my drunk rounds were ever so slightly better than my sober rounds.
Now I have done that only a 4-5 times so far (playing several rounds each time), so the sample size is very low. But I'm not sure it's as clear cut as you make it out to be.
In theory - and I realize that for the most part it is strictly theoretical - advertising can consist of information without distorting reality or lying. I would not classify such advertising as evil.
I wish there was a law that forbade anything but dissemination of simple facts in advertising. No smiling people, no crass attention seeking colors, no selling on emotions of any kind. You can inform that product xyz is available now and you may list facts that are verifiable/repeatable in the scientific sense. No more.
meh...
Thank you good sir!
I have seen this movie a long time ago on TV and wanted to see it again since, but I simply had no idea what it was called. So thanks for reminding me!
You may not care about this story, but there are lots of other people here who do. So just shut up or make your own news blog where everything is like you want it to be, I'm sure it'll be real popular.
> I do not thing size matters at all actually.
In your case I'm inclined to agree.
Ubuntu seems to be doing their best to take the worst "features" of windows, macOs and linux and combine them into something worse than any of them. Ugh. If I look back from 2007 to now, I can only shake my head in disbelief.
I've since moved on to arch linux and am happier for it.