Microsoft (oddly enough) has a more inclusive notion of what it's ecosystem should include and tolerates "duplicate functionality" much more than Apple does. Microsoft's platform benefits from Free Software including stuff that Lemmings would be prone to accuse of "being shoddy".
Microsoft (oddly enough) is less arrogant and seems less inclined to pointlessly shoot itself in the foot.
Ditto. This thing pegged me as downloading something from "Lil Wayne" while not correctly identifying the things that I have actually torrented. Although I usually stay away from stuff that RIAA or MPAA have any jurisdiction over.
So they aren't going to publically shame me over downloading Centos? I'm so dissapointed.
Thinking ahead and having a backup plan and some reserves help avoid the situation where you are running around like Chicken Little. Hopefully Intel runs things better than you do.
Free Software allows you to focus on what's important while ignoring those things that really should be a commodity already but aren't due to expansive copyright and vendor lock.
Free Software to allows you the ability to let that which does not matter truly slide.
The loss seems all big and impressive and such until you actually bother to look at both numbers and realize that it really isn't so bad after all. What this really goes to show just how BIG the PC business is and how a relatively small setback can be portrayed as this dire tragedy.
The real problem here is that there is a large gap between what the two types of drives (cheaply) hold and"normal users" are likely to fall somewhere in between.
You don't need to be a video hoarder to run out of space on a smaller drive. You just need to use your machine for more than a web terminal. If you are a producer or consumer of anything, all of the stuff together will likely exceed the capacity of a smaller SSD drive.
It's not just one thing but a combination of things that could push you over the rather meagre 120G you are likely to find on a cheap-enough SSD.
Beyond that, things tend to get expensive quick.
At that point, an oversized and somewhat overpriced HDD is still cheaper.
Except this kind of how taxes for corporations and independent contractors work. If you don't want to pay taxes on it, then you can just blow it on a Mac Book Air or hangar space for NASA.
This is why republican rhetoric about "raising taxes on the rich" is so bogus. They don't pay taxes in the same way as normal people and certainly don't in the manner that the "jobs rhetoric" would seem to imply.
Talking like that it is clear that the only one posting from their basement is you.
Billion dollar enterprises quite happily use Linux and other Free Software. Free Software is not the best licensing model for being a software robber baron. However, most companies don't fit that mold.
No. You've got it backwards. By being able to use readily available components, it's his time to market that improves while his competitors are trying to do a clean room copy of his product.
THAT is what advantage he gains from Free Software.
> Windows has done this for a long time and Macs have done it for even longer.
You removed this and started ranting about Linux. This isn't about Linux. This is about the fact that EVERY REAL PLATFORM does network printing and it's pretty damn trivial to set up.
> It makes life 100x easier for the casual home computer network tech guy.
No it doesn't. All it does is create another artificial barrier. It creates another point of failure. It's another thing where you have to worry about "being compatible" and there's really no good reason for it.
This is an important part of your fantasies you are neglecting. Everyone you deal with has that extra nonsense to consider including your mythical ski lodge.
Had you actually ever been anywhere but your mother's basement, you would understand this.
A good shell is a handy way to get around features that aren't complete or well automated in GUI products. It can allow you "features" that would cost you $50,000 in a highly proprietary product otherwise.
Some ideas have just never made it into GUIs and probably never will.
Although the real point here is that a good GUI makes you want to reach for an alternate LESS rather than MORE.
Re:Only part of the population can think abstractl
on
The Condescending UI
·
· Score: 1
> Try it: use Expose in OS X
All that really demonstrates is that it's a good reason for having a different "view" of the data when it's being accessed in that manner. What the app "looks like from a distance" is a rather silly design goal when you are imposing that on how the app actually works.
Nope. It just makes it less obvious to the end user that they are being sold 10 year old technology for a higher price than the latest and greatest. It's sleight of hand to distract from the fact that things are running on the equivalent of a 500Mhz Pentium or less.
It is a complex bit of software that can do more than the most simple things yet people try to use it for the most simple things. The fact that they try do this infrequently doesn't help.
Simpler tools need to be better. Most aren't. They make compromises on technicial correctness and hope n00bs won't notice. It's not just the UI that gets dumbed down but the "guts" do too.
The old version of XP allowed you to do that quite simply by dragging the desktop icon to the main panel. You could make the main panel larger and have one row of "dock icons" and your usual program list.
This is a much clearer way to present the information. It also gives you a nice visible cue that you have 20 windows of an app open better than the current UI in Win7.
Some parts like "useful dock applets" might actually be not so important to the sorts of total rubes that everyone seems to be pandering too lately. I can get why the average Mac user doesn't do much with the system menu. So having it "multitask" and be useful for something else might be pretty low on Apple's list of priorities.
That's why my Mac collects dust and I use something else.
That's also why it's stupid that developers want to make similar interfaces in Linux more "Mac like".
Getting under foot when I am no longer a complete novice?
The problem with "UI experts" is that they quite often ignore their own principles when it suits them. The current nonsense is a beautiful example of that.
> This is why OS X ships with a fully functional UNIX environment
If you need to use it, your GUI is broken.
It's nice that it's there but it really shouldn't be the first excuse you make for bad and incomplete interfaces. Most users are simply not going to bother.
It's funny how some ideas get eviscerated in one product and bragged about in another.
Linux Journal simply isn't a very hip magazine despite the fact that they've tried to embrace the whole "no paper" thing. It's a great magazine for an admin or someone who wants to do a very geeky build. It's very much the magazine that it started out as. If I am interested in the newer Linux developments that have happened this century, it's not so great.
Other magazines seem much better suited for information about desktop stuff.
So on second thought the GNOME3 thing might make some sense. They're not really desktop users to begin with, not even "desktop power users".
No. It's the wide criticism for both GNOME3 and Unity that makes people think the poll was rigged. If you can't understand why users would dislike either, you are badly out of touch.
Trying to be the first one to engage in insults won't change that.
Your entire attitude smacks of the "change for the sake of change" attitude that some here are complaining about.
> well who the fuck wants an OS with no damned sound?
Your post is mindless hysterical nonsense and FUD. The situation is not nearly as bad as you're trying to make it out to be. Sound works quite well in Linux.
You might have problems with a particular bit of hardware but that's a different sort of problem and one that hiding behind monopolyware won't necessarily protect you from (especially if you are clinging to XP).
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft (oddly enough) has a more inclusive notion of what it's ecosystem should include and tolerates "duplicate functionality" much more than Apple does. Microsoft's platform benefits from Free Software including stuff that Lemmings would be prone to accuse of "being shoddy".
Microsoft (oddly enough) is less arrogant and seems less inclined to pointlessly shoot itself in the foot.
Even if you could last for the entire movie you appear to be getting your fact from, that still leaves plenty of time for other things.
Ditto. This thing pegged me as downloading something from "Lil Wayne" while not correctly identifying the things that I have actually torrented. Although I usually stay away from stuff that RIAA or MPAA have any jurisdiction over.
So they aren't going to publically shame me over downloading Centos? I'm so dissapointed.
Been there. Done that.
Thinking ahead and having a backup plan and some reserves help avoid the situation where you are running around like Chicken Little. Hopefully Intel runs things better than you do.
Nope.
Free Software allows you to focus on what's important while ignoring those things that really should be a commodity already but aren't due to expansive copyright and vendor lock.
Free Software to allows you the ability to let that which does not matter truly slide.
The loss seems all big and impressive and such until you actually bother to look at both numbers and realize that it really isn't so bad after all. What this really goes to show just how BIG the PC business is and how a relatively small setback can be portrayed as this dire tragedy.
Yup.
"Getting laid" simply doesn't take that much time.
Leaves plenty of time for other persuits...
The real problem here is that there is a large gap between what the two types of drives (cheaply) hold and"normal users" are likely to fall somewhere in between.
You don't need to be a video hoarder to run out of space on a smaller drive. You just need to use your machine for more than a web terminal. If you are a producer or consumer of anything, all of the stuff together will likely exceed the capacity of a smaller SSD drive.
It's not just one thing but a combination of things that could push you over the rather meagre 120G you are likely to find on a cheap-enough SSD.
Beyond that, things tend to get expensive quick.
At that point, an oversized and somewhat overpriced HDD is still cheaper.
Except this kind of how taxes for corporations and independent contractors work. If you don't want to pay taxes on it, then you can just blow it on a Mac Book Air or hangar space for NASA.
This is why republican rhetoric about "raising taxes on the rich" is so bogus. They don't pay taxes in the same way as normal people and certainly don't in the manner that the "jobs rhetoric" would seem to imply.
Talking like that it is clear that the only one posting from their basement is you.
Billion dollar enterprises quite happily use Linux and other Free Software. Free Software is not the best licensing model for being a software robber baron. However, most companies don't fit that mold.
No. You've got it backwards. By being able to use readily available components, it's his time to market that improves while his competitors are trying to do a clean room copy of his product.
THAT is what advantage he gains from Free Software.
He has to recreate less.
You also seemed to neglect the "mostly" part.
Are you trying to suggest that those of us that were here in the 90s wouldn't tell him to keep the secret sauce secret?
If so, I am here to tell you that you're wrong.
You are a dishonest idiot.
> Windows has done this for a long time and Macs have done it for even longer.
You removed this and started ranting about Linux. This isn't about Linux. This is about the fact that EVERY REAL PLATFORM does network printing and it's pretty damn trivial to set up.
> It makes life 100x easier for the casual home computer network tech guy.
No it doesn't. All it does is create another artificial barrier. It creates another point of failure. It's another thing where you have to worry about "being compatible" and there's really no good reason for it.
This is an important part of your fantasies you are neglecting. Everyone you deal with has that extra nonsense to consider including your mythical ski lodge.
Had you actually ever been anywhere but your mother's basement, you would understand this.
A good shell is a handy way to get around features that aren't complete or well automated in GUI products. It can allow you "features" that would cost you $50,000 in a highly proprietary product otherwise.
Some ideas have just never made it into GUIs and probably never will.
Although the real point here is that a good GUI makes you want to reach for an alternate LESS rather than MORE.
> Try it: use Expose in OS X
All that really demonstrates is that it's a good reason for having a different "view" of the data when it's being accessed in that manner. What the app "looks like from a distance" is a rather silly design goal when you are imposing that on how the app actually works.
Nope. It just makes it less obvious to the end user that they are being sold 10 year old technology for a higher price than the latest and greatest. It's sleight of hand to distract from the fact that things are running on the equivalent of a 500Mhz Pentium or less.
...that's the catch right there.
It is a complex bit of software that can do more than the most simple things yet people try to use it for the most simple things. The fact that they try do this infrequently doesn't help.
Simpler tools need to be better. Most aren't. They make compromises on technicial correctness and hope n00bs won't notice. It's not just the UI that gets dumbed down but the "guts" do too.
The old version of XP allowed you to do that quite simply by dragging the desktop icon to the main panel. You could make the main panel larger and have one row of "dock icons" and your usual program list.
This is a much clearer way to present the information. It also gives you a nice visible cue that you have 20 windows of an app open better than the current UI in Win7.
Of course they got rid of it.
Some parts like "useful dock applets" might actually be not so important to the sorts of total rubes that everyone seems to be pandering too lately. I can get why the average Mac user doesn't do much with the system menu. So having it "multitask" and be useful for something else might be pretty low on Apple's list of priorities.
That's why my Mac collects dust and I use something else.
That's also why it's stupid that developers want to make similar interfaces in Linux more "Mac like".
Good or bad for what exactly?
Getting under foot when I am no longer a complete novice?
The problem with "UI experts" is that they quite often ignore their own principles when it suits them. The current nonsense is a beautiful example of that.
It's software.
There's no good reason that EVERYONE can't be accommodated.
Oddly enough, Microsoft of all people managed to stumble upon this.
Creating new options is cool. Destroying old ones is not.
> This is why OS X ships with a fully functional UNIX environment
If you need to use it, your GUI is broken.
It's nice that it's there but it really shouldn't be the first excuse you make for bad and incomplete interfaces. Most users are simply not going to bother.
It's funny how some ideas get eviscerated in one product and bragged about in another.
Linux Journal simply isn't a very hip magazine despite the fact that they've tried to embrace the whole "no paper" thing. It's a great magazine for an admin or someone who wants to do a very geeky build. It's very much the magazine that it started out as. If I am interested in the newer Linux developments that have happened this century, it's not so great.
Other magazines seem much better suited for information about desktop stuff.
So on second thought the GNOME3 thing might make some sense. They're not really desktop users to begin with, not even "desktop power users".
No. It's the wide criticism for both GNOME3 and Unity that makes people think the poll was rigged. If you can't understand why users would dislike either, you are badly out of touch.
Trying to be the first one to engage in insults won't change that.
Your entire attitude smacks of the "change for the sake of change" attitude that some here are complaining about.
> well who the fuck wants an OS with no damned sound?
Your post is mindless hysterical nonsense and FUD. The situation is not nearly as bad as you're trying to make it out to be. Sound works quite well in Linux.
You might have problems with a particular bit of hardware but that's a different sort of problem and one that hiding behind monopolyware won't necessarily protect you from (especially if you are clinging to XP).