If there's one great KDE application, it's konqueror.
You mean, it was one great KDE application. Unfortuntely, it encountered one of those interface lightbulb moments - not where the light goes on, but where it completely shatters. I enjoyed using Konqueror up until the point that someone got the bright of idea to implement a horizontal bookmarks menu that hijacks my entire screen, and worse, without giving the user an option to enjoy a more standard option, which is a menu that scrolls vertically. I no longer use Konqueror because of this.
I get down to basics - are they selling what I'm there to buy, at a price I'm willing to pay? That's all there is to it. If they are, I usually pay cash. I ESPECIALLY don't do rebates unless it's awarded at the register during checkout. And I NEVER buy extended warranties. Ultimately, my business will go to whomever can give me the best deal with the least amount of hassle.
Same with groceries. I am a value buyer. I buy what's on sale, what I need, and nothing more. It would be damn funny if I was told not to come back because I didn't buy enough of the over-priced brand-name crap they're selling.
When companies start playing games with semantics, especially when it comes to what it's called. There's a very easy way around it:
Caller: "I'm having a problem with my video card." Tech: "What kind of issues are you experiencing." Caller: "blah problem blah blah" Tech: "blah blah yadda yadda issue blah blah" Caller: "Please be aware that this ISSUE is a real PROBLEM for me."
At least locally, we have a law that forbids faxing advertisements. Well, guess what...we get about 2-3/day. Yes, there is supposedly a stiff fine for each violation. But the issue isn't the penalty, it's the willingness of the offended party to take legal action. Because so few are willing to devote the resources required for enforcement, it's almost as though the law doesn't even exist. I've wondered if telemarketing might eventually become the same type of nuisance, for the same reason.
I'd hook all the CD's up with the district's physics department, and investigate the effects of using the CD's in something like a home-built rail gun. It would be quite a site to see a CD shatter at high velocity, and there's plenty of stock there to use for testing.
I can't imagine saying "no" to the user regarding a feature...
I always try not to confuse the "what" (features) and the "how" (implementation). Users can tell me what they need to accomplish, and I can then use this information to develop a reasonable implementation based on current standards and practices. Saying "no" (or at least pointing out the problems) with respect to certain implementation requests can sometimes be a good thing.
We were supposed to convert a large number of documents from one format to another by a certain deadline. The management had overestimated the per-person productivity, and as a result, we started falling behind. The owner of the business mistakenly believed that if he tripled the number of people, he'd get triple the output (we had 3 8-hour shifts running at one point). He found out how wrong he was, but couldn't bring himself to understand why. Eventually we got through it, but there were a lot of bumps and bruises along the way.
Nowadays, it seems like corporate managers look down on the programmers and the software, as if it's a given that software is some mindless trivial crap that takes two seconds to bang together, and the fact that it takes a really long time to engineer is scorned and look down upon.
Much of it is mindless trivial crap. We have Microsoft, at least in part, to thank for this, a la Visual Basic and its other "visual" stuff. This phenomenon is a natural consequence of a process that has been dumbed down, and fueled by a market that was, at least at one point, saturated with people who were only after the money.
I come back to the argument. If you are doing nothing wrong then there will be no probable cause to get the info.
I guess you've never heard of TIA and its successors. This isn't about due process, it's about fishing. If you cast a wide enough net, you're bound to catch someone doing something wrong. But this is entirely backward, because it relies on a presumption of guilt- the kind of thing you'd find in a police state.
I can't stand the way that KDE and most (if not all) Linux apps handle task-bar-like functionality. For example....if I click on a window that belongs to the Gimp, only that one window is made active. The Gimp is an app, and an app usually consists of a collection of windows, palettes, etc - when I activate an app, ALL of the associated windows should be brought forward, not just the one. The way it is now, I have to fish each window out of the pile separately, and that is a pain.
As long as sucking on Bill's teat doesn't create any issues with respect to journalistic integrity, I'm not worried, and find it rather funny that M$ is supporting the competition.
This is a major weakness of Open Source because since software is under constant development and bug fixing and security hole patching is priority, few programs ever become feature complete.
Hm..I consider most software to be an evolutionary process. You start out with a need, you write the software, and then someone else sees a little bit further out and says, "gee, I like what you've done, but it would be so much more useful if it [insert most wanted feature here]". I can't think of a single piece of software I've used that had everything I wanted. I don't think there will ever by one, either. It's like the bear and the mountain - each new version is another mountain, and once we get to the other side, we're apt to see more things we'd like the software to do for us.
Some are just stupid. Drinking and driving, for example. Promiscuous sex. Obesity. The list goes on. These are all well within our ability to control and/or moderate, but we choose not to.
While I might agree that this is a missing feature, I'd be interested in knowing if this is one of the specific features he's referring to, or if it's just something that isn't there. Further, I'd be interested in knowing the percentage of users that actually incorporate this feature into their general office productivity.
IN another section of the article, he states, "There's no e-mail program, and it definitely lacks the sophisticated features of Office 2003, but it's free."
Based on what you quoted, this (other) point of his is entirely irrelevant. He also neglects to mention exactly which sophisticated features are missing, why they're such a godsend, and the throngs of people clamoring for an upgrade in order to gain access to them.
I've used OpenOffice at work (on a linux box), and I have to say that there is nothing I haven't been able to do yet that would make me wish I had MS Office installed. The more I use it, the more I like it. Recently, I had to re-create some business forms. Not a problem - OpenOffice handled this with ease, and they printed exactly as they were on the screen - no surprises. Although I did encounter a few annoyances, none of them were show-stoppers.
Microsoft currently has no reason to pursue any of the more lame patents they hold. As long as business is good, it would be a waste of resources. However, when things start cooling down a little as more and more people opt for the open source route, revenue starts falling, what was once a well-fed, reasonably friendly lap dog, now becomes a snarling pit bull.
Likewise, limited copying and sharing with friends isn't copyright infringment!
I would take issue with this. If by limited copying, you mean a 10-20 second segment of a song, then I might agree. Anything other than this implies free distribution, and I do not believe it was ever the intent of copyright law to allow someone to freely distribute the creative works of another.
And I'd argue that this (even though it might be the current standing of the U.S. Supreme Court), has no merit, and the reason is simple: Our society is built on an infrastructure that, for all practical purposes requires that I do certain things. I have little choice but to place my trash out on a curb for pickup, because there are few, if any other practical options. The fact that I have few (if any) other practical options does not portend or in any way grant anyone a "right" to take advantage of something merely because it is available, and especially because its availability is a byproduct of the infrastructure itself. I use the infrastructure because, as a pragmatic and civil-minded denizen, I must.
Let's address the issue with the "publicly available" information. While there are certain records that are unquestionably public information, I'd argue that what I purchase is NOT public information- each purchase is a contract between myself and those vendors with which I choose to do business. Unfortunately, the easy availability, and wide use of credit, have allowed institutions to hijack, retain, sell, and otherwise use the specific details associated with each transaction, and make them available as they see fit.
Something to think about - Let's say I cut my finger while preparing dinner. I use a kleenex to clean the wound, before applying a bandaid. What am I now to do with the kleenex? It has my blood on it, and presumably, can serve as a "sample" for anyone interested in fishing it out of my garbage. What am I to do? I don't believe that anyone has has a right to acquire this without my permission, or without a warrant. I am placing it in the garbage not because I have any intention of making it available to the public, but because this is the proper and accepted method of disposal.
Here you can see the quandary imposed by a) the infrastructure, and b) the court's current standing. I don't believe it is fair, and I hope to see it change at some point in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
If there's one great KDE application, it's konqueror.
You mean, it was one great KDE application. Unfortuntely, it encountered one of those interface lightbulb moments - not where the light goes on, but where it completely shatters. I enjoyed using Konqueror up until the point that someone got the bright of idea to implement a horizontal bookmarks menu that hijacks my entire screen, and worse, without giving the user an option to enjoy a more standard option, which is a menu that scrolls vertically. I no longer use Konqueror because of this.
I get down to basics - are they selling what I'm there to buy, at a price I'm willing to pay? That's all there is to it. If they are, I usually pay cash. I ESPECIALLY don't do rebates unless it's awarded at the register during checkout. And I NEVER buy extended warranties. Ultimately, my business will go to whomever can give me the best deal with the least amount of hassle.
Same with groceries. I am a value buyer. I buy what's on sale, what I need, and nothing more. It would be damn funny if I was told not to come back because I didn't buy enough of the over-priced brand-name crap they're selling.
When companies start playing games with semantics, especially when it comes to what it's called. There's a very easy way around it:
Caller: "I'm having a problem with my video card."
Tech: "What kind of issues are you experiencing."
Caller: "blah problem blah blah"
Tech: "blah blah yadda yadda issue blah blah"
Caller: "Please be aware that this ISSUE is a real PROBLEM for me."
At least locally, we have a law that forbids faxing advertisements. Well, guess what...we get about 2-3/day. Yes, there is supposedly a stiff fine for each violation. But the issue isn't the penalty, it's the willingness of the offended party to take legal action. Because so few are willing to devote the resources required for enforcement, it's almost as though the law doesn't even exist. I've wondered if telemarketing might eventually become the same type of nuisance, for the same reason.
Kind of sad just the same, since there are plenty of linux-based hosting companies available.
Nice link. But like my own high school chemistry class, it's pretty dull if you can't get your hands dirty once in a while.
I'd hook all the CD's up with the district's physics department, and investigate the effects of using the CD's in something like a home-built rail gun. It would be quite a site to see a CD shatter at high velocity, and there's plenty of stock there to use for testing.
And ultimately, its objective will entail the creation of the very kind of centralized monstrosity its owners complained about.
I can't imagine saying "no" to the user regarding a feature...
I always try not to confuse the "what" (features) and the "how" (implementation). Users can tell me what they need to accomplish, and I can then use this information to develop a reasonable implementation based on current standards and practices. Saying "no" (or at least pointing out the problems) with respect to certain implementation requests can sometimes be a good thing.
We were supposed to convert a large number of documents from one format to another by a certain deadline. The management had overestimated the per-person productivity, and as a result, we started falling behind. The owner of the business mistakenly believed that if he tripled the number of people, he'd get triple the output (we had 3 8-hour shifts running at one point). He found out how wrong he was, but couldn't bring himself to understand why. Eventually we got through it, but there were a lot of bumps and bruises along the way.
Nowadays, it seems like corporate managers look down on the programmers and the software, as if it's a given that software is some mindless trivial crap that takes two seconds to bang together, and the fact that it takes a really long time to engineer is scorned and look down upon.
Much of it is mindless trivial crap. We have Microsoft, at least in part, to thank for this, a la Visual Basic and its other "visual" stuff. This phenomenon is a natural consequence of a process that has been dumbed down, and fueled by a market that was, at least at one point, saturated with people who were only after the money.
The fifth-grade mentality behind most of the messages will be right there, center stage, for everyone to marvel at. A real treasure.
I come back to the argument. If you are doing nothing wrong then there will be no probable cause to get the info.
I guess you've never heard of TIA and its successors. This isn't about due process, it's about fishing. If you cast a wide enough net, you're bound to catch someone doing something wrong. But this is entirely backward, because it relies on a presumption of guilt- the kind of thing you'd find in a police state.
I can't stand the way that KDE and most (if not all) Linux apps handle task-bar-like functionality. For example....if I click on a window that belongs to the Gimp, only that one window is made active. The Gimp is an app, and an app usually consists of a collection of windows, palettes, etc - when I activate an app, ALL of the associated windows should be brought forward, not just the one. The way it is now, I have to fish each window out of the pile separately, and that is a pain.
As long as sucking on Bill's teat doesn't create any issues with respect to journalistic integrity, I'm not worried, and find it rather funny that M$ is supporting the competition.
This is a major weakness of Open Source because since software is under constant development and bug fixing and security hole patching is priority, few programs ever become feature complete.
Hm..I consider most software to be an evolutionary process. You start out with a need, you write the software, and then someone else sees a little bit further out and says, "gee, I like what you've done, but it would be so much more useful if it [insert most wanted feature here]". I can't think of a single piece of software I've used that had everything I wanted. I don't think there will ever by one, either. It's like the bear and the mountain - each new version is another mountain, and once we get to the other side, we're apt to see more things we'd like the software to do for us.
Some are just stupid. Drinking and driving, for example. Promiscuous sex. Obesity. The list goes on. These are all well within our ability to control and/or moderate, but we choose not to.
While I might agree that this is a missing feature, I'd be interested in knowing if this is one of the specific features he's referring to, or if it's just something that isn't there. Further, I'd be interested in knowing the percentage of users that actually incorporate this feature into their general office productivity.
IN another section of the article, he states, "There's no e-mail program, and it definitely lacks the sophisticated features of Office 2003, but it's free."
Based on what you quoted, this (other) point of his is entirely irrelevant. He also neglects to mention exactly which sophisticated features are missing, why they're such a godsend, and the throngs of people clamoring for an upgrade in order to gain access to them.
I've used OpenOffice at work (on a linux box), and I have to say that there is nothing I haven't been able to do yet that would make me wish I had MS Office installed. The more I use it, the more I like it. Recently, I had to re-create some business forms. Not a problem - OpenOffice handled this with ease, and they printed exactly as they were on the screen - no surprises. Although I did encounter a few annoyances, none of them were show-stoppers.
Microsoft currently has no reason to pursue any of the more lame patents they hold. As long as business is good, it would be a waste of resources. However, when things start cooling down a little as more and more people opt for the open source route, revenue starts falling, what was once a well-fed, reasonably friendly lap dog, now becomes a snarling pit bull.
Let's face it, most people aren't making enough copies to warrant this sort of action by the labels.
Just curious, but what is enough copies? And what if thousands of people are doing it (more like 10's of thousands, if not even more)?
Likewise, limited copying and sharing with friends isn't copyright infringment!
I would take issue with this. If by limited copying, you mean a 10-20 second segment of a song, then I might agree. Anything other than this implies free distribution, and I do not believe it was ever the intent of copyright law to allow someone to freely distribute the creative works of another.
And I'd argue that this (even though it might be the current standing of the U.S. Supreme Court), has no merit, and the reason is simple: Our society is built on an infrastructure that, for all practical purposes requires that I do certain things. I have little choice but to place my trash out on a curb for pickup, because there are few, if any other practical options. The fact that I have few (if any) other practical options does not portend or in any way grant anyone a "right" to take advantage of something merely because it is available, and especially because its availability is a byproduct of the infrastructure itself. I use the infrastructure because, as a pragmatic and civil-minded denizen, I must.
Let's address the issue with the "publicly available" information. While there are certain records that are unquestionably public information, I'd argue that what I purchase is NOT public information- each purchase is a contract between myself and those vendors with which I choose to do business. Unfortunately, the easy availability, and wide use of credit, have allowed institutions to hijack, retain, sell, and otherwise use the specific details associated with each transaction, and make them available as they see fit.
Something to think about - Let's say I cut my finger while preparing dinner. I use a kleenex to clean the wound, before applying a bandaid. What am I now to do with the kleenex? It has my blood on it, and presumably, can serve as a "sample" for anyone interested in fishing it out of my garbage. What am I to do? I don't believe that anyone has has a right to acquire this without my permission, or without a warrant. I am placing it in the garbage not because I have any intention of making it available to the public, but because this is the proper and accepted method of disposal.
Here you can see the quandary imposed by a) the infrastructure, and b) the court's current standing. I don't believe it is fair, and I hope to see it change at some point in the future.