Basically, you refuse to admit every choice you make is, in fact, political.
You are mistaken. Example: you buy a song from iTunes. It is your own free choice.
But you have given some money to apple, and some to the music industry, and some to the musician. All of those will now be able to live a bit longer from their work.
Some minuscule fraction of your money will go the RIAA lawyers, some to the developers of snake-oil DRM, some to Steve Jobs, etc.
If enough people make the same decision you did, then the prevalence of the actors you funded is increased, and the rules of society bent towards them. You may perceive this as good or bad.
You cannot, however, honestly tell you it is purely your own private business, because it is yours, and apple's and all the other actors of the merchant transaction you entered in, and through them, the whole society.
Again, this is not in any way a judgement of value, simply that choosing to ignore that your actions, all of them, have consequences however small, is denial of reality.
Especially for actions which are of a commercial nature. When entering into a contract, you are implicitly supporting all actions of the other party, good and bad alike.
You have it in complete reverse. Apple would have floundered if not for opensource.
And yet they try to give back as little as possible, and whenever they can, hijack projects so then can make them as closed as possible.
So the ungrateful arses are the apple management. And pretending they are nice because they pay lip-service to opensource when they are legally obliged to is thinking backwards.
Which is why the userland sucks. GNU userland always was much more user-friendly than BSD (fond memories of aliasing all the Sun utilities to their GNU counterpart...)
Macs Just Workâ. Oh, you mean they don't, people still need tech support? Apple, lying? Impossible!
(2) Piss off Apple customers and turn them away from F/OSS.
Ha! There are not enough FSF supporters for that, I believe. If there were, Apple would not be an issue.
(3) Absolutely no change in Apple policy.
I think this is not important. It might however remind Free Software devs here and there that Apple is a pretty evil company (more so than microsoft, but without power to do as much damage). Developing free software for macs in the optic of promoting free software is good. If it is to mac the Mac Experience better, abstain.
I'm glad to use F/OSS on my Mac, including a great deal of software produced under the FSF umbrella, and I have released software, developed on the Mac, under the GPL. The success of OS X has created a huge new market for those who develop on Unix-type systems. Braindead stunts like this really don't help.
Actually, Apple is an inherently evil company, but the FSF's licences limited the damage they could do, basically forcing them to contribute, although they tried very hard not to, and attempted to hijack those crucial parts of their OS they _could_not_ code, and FOSS devs could.
I am no great fan of the no-compromise/sect nature of the FSF, but apple is there to remind to everyone that sometimes, sheer paranoia is necessary.
Sure, it is absolutely apple's right to generally try to screw their customers as much as possible.
But they don't only do that. They also hijack free projects using embrace and extend tactics which would have made Microsoft at its worst proud. KHTML, GCC... Only because of the FSF's licences is the public somewhat protected from their predatory tactics on free software -- without which the company would have floundered!
They generally hurt the public by being one of those forces which are preventing the opening up of mobile networks -- it is _obviously_ evil to keep 4-3G network from being a free extension of the internet. The general gain for society would be enormous, far higher than any loss the current telcos might suffer.
They routinely perform false advertisement (within _minutes_ their comps with G5s were four times as fast as anything else, and their comps with intel procs were also four times as fast as anything else, including their previous offering)
So apple _is_ evil, and anything which breaks slightly the reality distortion field is Goodâ.
Companies exist to make profit, and this is fine and good. When companies turn into cults, this is worrying. I am no great fan of the FSF for symmetrical reasons, be the adoration apple generates is worrying, and when they attract devs from actually free platforms (linux, BSD) we should all worry.
No, this comes from the fact that people will always find many more ways to break your soft than you could possibly imagine.
With Free Software, releasing early means you will know how your soft gets broken early. And so you can correct/enhance fast.
However, this only works if your soft is actually released. Even if incomplete/buggy. This is what KDE did, and this is why there is such improvement in 4.1 over 4.0. And this is how 4.2 will be even more amazing.
Alternatively, they might have done a release in 2012. It would have been only okay, because it would never have been in wide use. And it would have interested no one. Like enlightenment.
So releasing 4.0 was brave, but it was also intelligent. And the Right Thing To Doâ, even if it hurts.
2.6.0 was basically unusable, as in "lots of hardware did not work".
Because the foundation underwent much, much rethinking/update. And yet, the scheduler and the VM were still to undergo rewrites (remember the VM fiasco ?)
Exactly like KDE 4.0, actually. And as for KDE they were right to release it. Because it is only when your software is actually in wide (-ish) use that you can start polishing.
And in fact this release early thing, it _does_ accelerate your development. For example, KDE never had so many devs looking at the desktop part. So be glad they released KDE 4.0 when they did, because otherwise, the current status would have been reached by Christmas. Or never, because of waning interest (remember e17?)
Actually, although the thumbnail generation is not standard, the location and storing thereof is. So there actually is a standard, interoperable across desktops.
Actually KDE4 is done in the same spirit as KDE3, the foundations just needed to be rebuilt for the desktop part.
But basically, with 4.1, we are pretty much where 3.5 was, and 4.2 should be light-years beyond. And this says a lot about the quality of the new foundations.
So yeah, it's a bit different, but all the power we love from KDE is there, and the wrapping is nicer:)
Gnome is not and has never been the default linux desktop.
1) there is no such thing
2) It is not even a de facto default!
3) you are not even logically coherent: if gnome were the default, KDE would not matter either way. if plasma could kill the linux desktop, then that would imply KDE is the de facto default. Which it is not.
Ready for the desktop could never have been a "point", it is a process by which at some point in reality betting a randomly chosen user will in fact find the interface friendly (that was some time ago), and in perception, when people start believing in desktop-linux in majority.
The perception part is the hardest to win. But also, it might not even be desirable: linux, as all free software, thrives when it attracts contributors. This involves attracting users, but not only. If your project is only good at catering for users, it will eventually die.
If your software only attracts developers, it might well live forever. So there is a class of users that bring nothing to free software: "linux ready for the desktop" objectively must be considered by specifically ignoring those users with no talent, literary, artistic or technical, because they are only a drain on resources.
You are not "getting justice" because the guilty party got punished.
Justice is having the crime recognised, and the sentence be such that there is a strong enough disincentive to not have the crime happen again from the same guilty party. Three life sentence do not produce that effect, though they will deter further crime, albeit at a cost probably much higher for society than an alternative lighter and more just sentence.
Having an ultra-repressive legal system is just costly and unjust. Appealing to the public's lust for blood however, is a form of moral bankruptcy.
There is a kwin plugin that slightly darkens the unfocussed windows.
Alternatively, the colour palette can be altered between focussed and unfocussed windows. It is de-activated by default, because changing the colours of a whole application at once causes flickering.
I don't know what you consider good font rendering. I sure hope it is not what apple produces, because that is horrid, wrong, blurry, and plain sucky. Oh, and _incredibly_ slow.
And then there is the Windows Way(TM): when in doubt, don't antialias... I suppose it is like for everything, after having seen something wrong for many years, you end up thinking it is actually correct. For example, so many people think the absence of ligatures is correct -- or worse, that underlining text is acceptable, because they used MS Word(TM) for so long.
No. Global warming is an attested fact. That humans contribute to it also.
There is debate on the exact amount attributable to humans, and that is all.
Sound science it is. Statistics are the basis of sound science, and if you think no fact can be construed from statistics, than pretty much all science is bunk.
Why is it experiments are repeated, do you think? for the fun of it? Why are papers littered with p-values and "statistically significant" and error bars and so on and so forth?
Hint: statistics are not a magical way of fudging data. On the contrary.
I don't know in what universe you live in, but KDE is still the majority.
Ubuntu was lucky for gnome, or their "market share" would have kept whittling away. But as more and more people will realise it is not the end-all, be-all distribution, this will change again.
Do not confuse marketing noise and statistical fact.
Slashdot Mirror
Basically, you refuse to admit every choice you make is, in fact, political.
You are mistaken. Example: you buy a song from iTunes. It is your own free choice.
But you have given some money to apple, and some to the music industry, and some to the musician. All of those will now be able to live a bit longer from their work.
Some minuscule fraction of your money will go the RIAA lawyers, some to the developers of snake-oil DRM, some to Steve Jobs, etc.
If enough people make the same decision you did, then the prevalence of the actors you funded is increased, and the rules of society bent towards them. You may perceive this as good or bad.
You cannot, however, honestly tell you it is purely your own private business, because it is yours, and apple's and all the other actors of the merchant transaction you entered in, and through them, the whole society.
Again, this is not in any way a judgement of value, simply that choosing to ignore that your actions, all of them, have consequences however small, is denial of reality.
Especially for actions which are of a commercial nature. When entering into a contract, you are implicitly supporting all actions of the other party, good and bad alike.
You have it in complete reverse. Apple would have floundered if not for opensource.
And yet they try to give back as little as possible, and whenever they can, hijack projects so then can make them as closed as possible.
So the ungrateful arses are the apple management. And pretending they are nice because they pay lip-service to opensource when they are legally obliged to is thinking backwards.
Which is why the userland sucks. GNU userland always was much more user-friendly than BSD (fond memories of aliasing all the Sun utilities to their GNU counterpart...)
(1) Interfere with people who need tech support.
Macs Just Workâ. Oh, you mean they don't, people still need tech support? Apple, lying? Impossible!
(2) Piss off Apple customers and turn them away from F/OSS.
Ha! There are not enough FSF supporters for that, I believe. If there were, Apple would not be an issue.
(3) Absolutely no change in Apple policy.
I think this is not important. It might however remind Free Software devs here and there that Apple is a pretty evil company (more so than microsoft, but without power to do as much damage). Developing free software for macs in the optic of promoting free software is good. If it is to mac the Mac Experience better, abstain.
I'm glad to use F/OSS on my Mac, including a great deal of software produced under the FSF umbrella, and I have released software, developed on the Mac, under the GPL. The success of OS X has created a huge new market for those who develop on Unix-type systems. Braindead stunts like this really don't help.
Actually, Apple is an inherently evil company, but the FSF's licences limited the damage they could do, basically forcing them to contribute, although they tried very hard not to, and attempted to hijack those crucial parts of their OS they _could_not_ code, and FOSS devs could.
I am no great fan of the no-compromise/sect nature of the FSF, but apple is there to remind to everyone that sometimes, sheer paranoia is necessary.
Sure, it is absolutely apple's right to generally try to screw their customers as much as possible.
But they don't only do that. They also hijack free projects using embrace and extend tactics which would have made Microsoft at its worst proud. KHTML, GCC... Only because of the FSF's licences is the public somewhat protected from their predatory tactics on free software -- without which the company would have floundered!
They generally hurt the public by being one of those forces which are preventing the opening up of mobile networks -- it is _obviously_ evil to keep 4-3G network from being a free extension of the internet. The general gain for society would be enormous, far higher than any loss the current telcos might suffer.
They routinely perform false advertisement (within _minutes_ their comps with G5s were four times as fast as anything else, and their comps with intel procs were also four times as fast as anything else, including their previous offering)
So apple _is_ evil, and anything which breaks slightly the reality distortion field is Goodâ.
Companies exist to make profit, and this is fine and good. When companies turn into cults, this is worrying. I am no great fan of the FSF for symmetrical reasons, be the adoration apple generates is worrying, and when they attract devs from actually free platforms (linux, BSD) we should all worry.
No, this comes from the fact that people will always find many more ways to break your soft than you could possibly imagine.
With Free Software, releasing early means you will know how your soft gets broken early. And so you can correct/enhance fast.
However, this only works if your soft is actually released. Even if incomplete/buggy. This is what KDE did, and this is why there is such improvement in 4.1 over 4.0. And this is how 4.2 will be even more amazing.
Alternatively, they might have done a release in 2012. It would have been only okay, because it would never have been in wide use. And it would have interested no one. Like enlightenment.
So releasing 4.0 was brave, but it was also intelligent. And the Right Thing To Doâ, even if it hurts.
2.6.0 was basically unusable, as in "lots of hardware did not work".
Because the foundation underwent much, much rethinking/update. And yet, the scheduler and the VM were still to undergo rewrites (remember the VM fiasco ?)
Exactly like KDE 4.0, actually. And as for KDE they were right to release it. Because it is only when your software is actually in wide (-ish) use that you can start polishing.
And in fact this release early thing, it _does_ accelerate your development. For example, KDE never had so many devs looking at the desktop part. So be glad they released KDE 4.0 when they did, because otherwise, the current status would have been reached by Christmas. Or never, because of waning interest (remember e17?)
Actually, although the thumbnail generation is not standard, the location and storing thereof is. So there actually is a standard, interoperable across desktops.
Yay !
Which is irrelevant as the KDE libs are LGPL. How do you think Apple could get away with Safari?
Actually, they are LGPL...
âoeSupport for icons on the background has been removedâ
Liar. Just tried it, and sure enough, you can have icons on the background.
Actually KDE4 is done in the same spirit as KDE3, the foundations just needed to be rebuilt for the desktop part.
But basically, with 4.1, we are pretty much where 3.5 was, and 4.2 should be light-years beyond. And this says a lot about the quality of the new foundations.
So yeah, it's a bit different, but all the power we love from KDE is there, and the wrapping is nicer :)
He said âoein plasma, you can write your own desktop which behaves the way you wantâ.
He wrote a desktop the way _he_ wants after thoughts on design and usability you might or not agree with (I do, many do, some, however, hate it).
This is irrelevant: if you want a different desktop, you take the existing one, change it, and release it as a _new_ plasma container.
One line changed in a config file later, you have your desktop. You upload it to kde-apps.org, et voilÃ, instant karma with the trolls.
Of course, complainers were much too busy to insult Aaron rather than spend 1-2 hours to implement their stuff in their own container.
Of course they get called stupid...
Gnome is not and has never been the default linux desktop.
1) there is no such thing
2) It is not even a de facto default!
3) you are not even logically coherent: if gnome were the default, KDE would not matter either way. if plasma could kill the linux desktop, then that would imply KDE is the de facto default. Which it is not.
Ready for the desktop could never have been a "point", it is a process by which at some point in reality betting a randomly chosen user will in fact find the interface friendly (that was some time ago), and in perception, when people start believing in desktop-linux in majority.
The perception part is the hardest to win. But also, it might not even be desirable: linux, as all free software, thrives when it attracts contributors. This involves attracting users, but not only. If your project is only good at catering for users, it will eventually die.
If your software only attracts developers, it might well live forever. So there is a class of users that bring nothing to free software: "linux ready for the desktop" objectively must be considered by specifically ignoring those users with no talent, literary, artistic or technical, because they are only a drain on resources.
You are not "getting justice" because the guilty party got punished.
Justice is having the crime recognised, and the sentence be such that there is a strong enough disincentive to not have the crime happen again from the same guilty party. Three life sentence do not produce that effect, though they will deter further crime, albeit at a cost probably much higher for society than an alternative lighter and more just sentence.
Having an ultra-repressive legal system is just costly and unjust. Appealing to the public's lust for blood however, is a form of moral bankruptcy.
Not in the file dialog, no. It has a preview pane, but no inline previews.
That sucks, and I really wish this feature will be back soon.
There is a kwin plugin that slightly darkens the unfocussed windows.
Alternatively, the colour palette can be altered between focussed and unfocussed windows. It is de-activated by default, because changing the colours of a whole application at once causes flickering.
I don't know what you consider good font rendering. I sure hope it is not what apple produces, because that is horrid, wrong, blurry, and plain sucky. Oh, and _incredibly_ slow.
And then there is the Windows Way(TM): when in doubt, don't antialias... I suppose it is like for everything, after having seen something wrong for many years, you end up thinking it is actually correct. For example, so many people think the absence of ligatures is correct -- or worse, that underlining text is acceptable, because they used MS Word(TM) for so long.
No. Global warming is an attested fact. That humans contribute to it also.
There is debate on the exact amount attributable to humans, and that is all.
Sound science it is. Statistics are the basis of sound science, and if you think no fact can be construed from statistics, than pretty much all science is bunk.
Why is it experiments are repeated, do you think? for the fun of it? Why are papers littered with p-values and "statistically significant" and error bars and so on and so forth?
Hint: statistics are not a magical way of fudging data. On the contrary.
I don't know in what universe you live in, but KDE is still the majority.
Ubuntu was lucky for gnome, or their "market share" would have kept whittling away. But as more and more people will realise it is not the end-all, be-all distribution, this will change again.
Do not confuse marketing noise and statistical fact.
I call bullshit. digikam is a much better _GUI_ program than iPhoto. Better designed, less irritating, more powerful.
I know the truth hurts, but in terms of easy-to-use power, MacOS was overtaken by KDE 3 years ago...