> Note: If it doesn't have a working market place when you open the box, it's not a tablet. It's a truly half-baked rushed
Nope. If it can't do everything that I want a device to do then it's just an overpriced toy.
This includes all kinds of tablets.
Perhaps Android users are just more clued in and realize that a "working market place" filled with things that are only there because the platform is intentionally crippled is nothing to brag about.
More importantly, there isn't a powerful lobbying group or a cabal of rich corporations to object to the sorts of things that these people are passing around amongst themselves. There's no one actively lobbying congress and handing out bribes to everyone to ensure that the penalties for these people become more severe or that more resources be aligned against them.
...the real problem here being the fact that those that run "app stores" are jack*ss control freaks and they set up their terms of service specifically to keep Free Software out.
So you immediately lose the software do-gooder crowd that might provide software for free without it being some scam.
What you are left with are varying degrees of amoral scum.
> It's almost as though downloading random apps from the Internet to run on a device you use for personal information might be a bad idea....except mobile apps (at least on the iThing) are supposed to be "curated".
Their current success is as a consumer electronics company. Their OS still languishes as an also ran just like it did when all Microsoft really had to offer was MS-DOS.
Apple is the iPod company, not the MacOS company.
Trying to steal their dumber ideas from the desktop is not very useful.
The terminal is only in common usage out of PERSONAL CHOICE.
I think you are trying to throw around the name of Windows 3.1 just because you think it sounds old. I doubt you have any clue what that comparison implies. Although you might. However it would be better for you to plead ignorance rather than that level of dishonesty.
> When they reach Windows 95 levels then let me know.
No. It was WinDOS that was playing catch up until they finally moved consumer Windows to an NT kernel with XP.
A castrated desktop doesn't really address that however.
Once again, the champions of "usability" fixate on all of the wrong details....and Apple interfaces are terribly for "watching a TV show". They have been "simplified" to the point of being less useful even from an "appliance" perspective.
Blindly following the likes of Apple is really very foolish.
They have to be willing to let a date slip and do things right. This isn't about money, it's about having discipline with regards to how you approach your work.
They can't take the "but we can patch it after we shove it out" approach to development.
Although to be fair, this is by no means limited to the likes of Canonical.
Unless you are a Slashdot or Engadget user then you are likely barely aware of Macs. Never mind actually keeping up with their cutesy names for releases.
...after 10 years of using Linux he switches to Apple because it "just works"?
Stuff "just worked" on Mandrake and that came along less than 10 years after the beginning of Linux.
MacOS is less transparent, tends to castrate the usefulness of interfaces, tends to make dealing with legacy and alien data harder and tends to give you these all encompassing uber-apps that are like the exact opposite of the Unix approach to building tools.
Macs are very much like Windows machines in that you probably want to avoid the OS vendor apps as much as you can.
Strangely enough, Ubuntu is kind of the same way. You probably want to avoid the apps they champion. Unity is a great example of this.
...this is one area where Canonical continues to not practice what it preaches. It likes to pretend to be like Apple but it never really executes. This is in contrast to other distributors in the past that have actually made efforts to make meaningful improvements to Linux either by contributing to these drivers or to useful hardware documentation. (Yes, this is my "Why can't Canonical be more like old Suse" rant.)
One of my biggest frustrations with my most recent current Mac is the fact that there is no transparency when it comes to basic power management features that are mundane and standard even in Linux (namely CPU scaling).
I dunno. I always found power management just annoying. On Windows machines it always seems to take more time to recover from hibernation than it would take for a complete restart. Also, power management tends to kick in at random and very inconvenient times. Modern Linux can boot up fast enough that not powering of the machine completely (even to the point of disconnecting from mains) is less and less meaningful.
Also, I switched to Ubuntu because it gave me the "Mac style laptop experience" that some of these fanboys like to crow about.l
It represents a level of selection that other competitors are unwilling or unable to match.
It's insulated from most of the pricing and availability issues that plague streaming. Spinny disks allow an operation like RedBox or Netflix to fall back on the retail distribution channel if they find wholesale channels blocked by beligerent content owners. It is still more than sufficiently profitable (unlike say Dell trying the same thing).
> The ribbon UI in Office was designed for the convenience > of the full-time clerical worker, which is not the self-image > the geek likes to project.
It's not the self image of 90% of the people that are forcibly subjected to Microsoft's monopoly products.
> The ribbon UI in Office was designed for the > convenience of the full-time clerical worker, > which is not the self-image the geek likes to project.
My spouse despises the new interface. While she is not a "clerical" worker, she does work with documents all day. The word processor is one of her key working tools.
This idea that "ribbon is for everyone but geeks" is just more of the recent Apple fanboy assinine anti-intellectual nonsense.
Genuine clerical workers can be just as "geeky" as computer professionals when it comes to their own tools. It amazes me how anyone that tries to talk about these things can't be aware of that.
It seems that all of the self proclaimed champions of "ease of use" and the "non-geek" don't actually bother to interact with real users.
Of course the non-geeks aren't going to complain. They don't know any better. They aren't aware that they can have something better. They aren't aware that there is anything for them to complain about. It's part of their ignorance.
It's the same as being blissfully satisfied with Budweiser, a Big Mac, or a Ford.
Slashdot Mirror
> Note: If it doesn't have a working market place when you open the box, it's not a tablet. It's a truly half-baked rushed
Nope. If it can't do everything that I want a device to do then it's just an overpriced toy.
This includes all kinds of tablets.
Perhaps Android users are just more clued in and realize that a "working market place" filled with things that are only there because the platform is intentionally crippled is nothing to brag about.
More importantly, there isn't a powerful lobbying group or a cabal of rich corporations to object to the sorts of things that these people are passing around amongst themselves. There's no one actively lobbying congress and handing out bribes to everyone to ensure that the penalties for these people become more severe or that more resources be aligned against them.
There's no megacorp to keep pressing the issue.
...the real problem here being the fact that those that run "app stores" are jack*ss control freaks and they set up their terms of service specifically to keep Free Software out.
So you immediately lose the software do-gooder crowd that might provide software for free without it being some scam.
What you are left with are varying degrees of amoral scum.
> It's almost as though downloading random apps from the Internet to run on a device you use for personal information might be a bad idea. ...except mobile apps (at least on the iThing) are supposed to be "curated".
Apple was never successful as an OS company.
Their current success is as a consumer electronics company. Their OS still languishes as an also ran just like it did when all Microsoft really had to offer was MS-DOS.
Apple is the iPod company, not the MacOS company.
Trying to steal their dumber ideas from the desktop is not very useful.
Stupid lemming troll.
The terminal is only in common usage out of PERSONAL CHOICE.
I think you are trying to throw around the name of Windows 3.1 just because you think it sounds old. I doubt you have any clue what that comparison implies. Although you might. However it would be better for you to plead ignorance rather than that level of dishonesty.
> When they reach Windows 95 levels then let me know.
No. It was WinDOS that was playing catch up until they finally moved consumer Windows to an NT kernel with XP.
A castrated desktop doesn't really address that however.
Once again, the champions of "usability" fixate on all of the wrong details. ...and Apple interfaces are terribly for "watching a TV show". They have been "simplified" to the point of being less useful even from an "appliance" perspective.
Blindly following the likes of Apple is really very foolish.
No. Polish and features requires discipline.
They have to be willing to let a date slip and do things right. This isn't about money, it's about having discipline with regards to how you approach your work.
They can't take the "but we can patch it after we shove it out" approach to development.
Although to be fair, this is by no means limited to the likes of Canonical.
....I will say it again.
Ease off the cool-aid.
Unless you are a Slashdot or Engadget user then you are likely barely aware of Macs. Never mind actually keeping up with their cutesy names for releases.
...after 10 years of using Linux he switches to Apple because it "just works"?
Stuff "just worked" on Mandrake and that came along less than 10 years after the beginning of Linux.
MacOS is less transparent, tends to castrate the usefulness of interfaces, tends to make dealing with legacy and alien data harder and tends to give you these all encompassing uber-apps that are like the exact opposite of the Unix approach to building tools.
Macs are very much like Windows machines in that you probably want to avoid the OS vendor apps as much as you can.
Strangely enough, Ubuntu is kind of the same way. You probably want to avoid the apps they champion. Unity is a great example of this.
> Linux is a great server OS
Except pretty much the same things that make an OS great for servers makes it good for the desktop.
The kinds of problems you are complaining about for "desktop Linux" are even less tolerable for "server Linux".
...this is one area where Canonical continues to not practice what it preaches. It likes to pretend to be like Apple but it never really executes. This is in contrast to other distributors in the past that have actually made efforts to make meaningful improvements to Linux either by contributing to these drivers or to useful hardware documentation. (Yes, this is my "Why can't Canonical be more like old Suse" rant.)
> The problem is, even non-apple folks can generally identify the names of the Apple OSX versions.
I think you need to lay off the cool-aid.
This is funny.
One of my biggest frustrations with my most recent current Mac is the fact that there is no transparency when it comes to basic power management features that are mundane and standard even in Linux (namely CPU scaling).
I dunno. I always found power management just annoying. On Windows machines it always seems to take more time to recover from hibernation than it would take for a complete restart. Also, power management tends to kick in at random and very inconvenient times. Modern Linux can boot up fast enough that not powering of the machine completely (even to the point of disconnecting from mains) is less and less meaningful.
Also, I switched to Ubuntu because it gave me the "Mac style laptop experience" that some of these fanboys like to crow about.l
Can I make a deal with the state? You don't help me through college and I don't have to pay any extra taxes for my increased salary afterwards.
How about that?
You are a short sighted idiot.
A better educated populace and workforce is a benefit to you personally even if you don't have an college age kids.
...and not-streaming is even more huge.
It represents a level of selection that other competitors are unwilling or unable to match.
It's insulated from most of the pricing and availability issues that plague streaming. Spinny disks allow an operation like RedBox or Netflix to fall back on the retail distribution channel if they find wholesale channels blocked by beligerent content owners. It is still more than sufficiently profitable (unlike say Dell trying the same thing).
They think that they are above the law. There are plenty of willing peasants to defend them.
You could have seen the same thing 500 years ago. Replace Steve Jobs with King Henry.
I am against a sloppy application of the law.
The fact that a certain sort of nonsense was tolerated before really doesn't matter.
This isn't about being "against trademarks". Thats just stupid bad rhetoric.
This is about being against trademarks that fail the basic rules for being an enforceable trademark.
Being against this sort of nonsense is like advocating that the speed limit be enforced.
> Please, stop making absurd comparisons. "Windows" doesn't really describe the product itself.
It most certainly does.
Window is the W in W.I.M.P.
> The ribbon UI in Office was designed for the convenience
> of the full-time clerical worker, which is not the self-image
> the geek likes to project.
It's not the self image of 90% of the people that are forcibly subjected to Microsoft's monopoly products.
> The ribbon UI in Office was designed for the
> convenience of the full-time clerical worker,
> which is not the self-image the geek likes to project.
My spouse despises the new interface. While she is not a "clerical" worker, she does work with documents all day. The word processor is one of her key working tools.
This idea that "ribbon is for everyone but geeks" is just more of the recent Apple fanboy assinine anti-intellectual nonsense.
Genuine clerical workers can be just as "geeky" as computer professionals when it comes to their own tools. It amazes me how anyone that tries to talk about these things can't be aware of that.
It seems that all of the self proclaimed champions of "ease of use" and the "non-geek" don't actually bother to interact with real users.
Of course the non-geeks aren't going to complain. They don't know any better. They aren't aware that they can have something better. They aren't aware that there is anything for them to complain about. It's part of their ignorance.
It's the same as being blissfully satisfied with Budweiser, a Big Mac, or a Ford.
Some of us "geeks" were using GUIs long before they became generally accepted even by the biggest "UI champions" whining here today.