Yes, this can absolutely be an annoyance, and I fully agree with you in that it can take a lot of physical movement to reach from one side of a screen to the other in order to hit, for example, the File menu in OSX. I've run into this on several jobs. But you're conflating annoyance in certain configurations with the overall usefulness of an interface.
It all depends on how you tend to arrange your windows on screen, what pointing device you use, what programs you use and how they utilize individual windows and whether those draw menus using Apple's API or not, etc. The benefit of having an infinite vertical target to play with when hitting that stationary menu has been shown to trump the effort it takes to reach that area. Whether or not your particular setup produces a situation of frequent laborious (not sarcastically used) trips to the menu bar has nothing to do with whether or not it's a good idea to build a general computing UI that way. Having the option to include multiple instances of the menu bar on multiple screens would be ugly as hell, but still faster than bar-per-window.
Dual 30"ers? Awesome? Yeah. Necessary for lots of people? Absolutely. But you're nowhere near the total desktop aspect ratio of the vast majority of users.
Also, not flaming, just verbose.
Also, also, nothing I said has anything to do with Windows Phone.
I believe you're running into a "feature" that's causing some confusion. If you manually change a document's open with application it segregates itself from the pool of documents that change when you hit "change all" on other documents. In case it's 12:30 and I'm not making sense I'll give an example...
You have a.tif, b.tif, and c.tif. The default program for opening.tif files is Preview and all three files in question are opening with the default. You change a.tif to open with Photoshop. You then change b.tif to open with Firefox and hit the "change all" button. You'd then be left with b and c.tif opening in Firefox, and a.tif opening in Photoshop because you changed it manually from the default. At some point in the future hitting change all on a.tif will both return it to the default pool along with b and c and change the default.tif program to whatever a.tif is set to at that moment.
I think for one reason or another these avi files think they're all out of the pool. You can change the files already on your drive to use the default quickly by using the Find command to find all files ending in.avi on the computer, then hitting select all and then command-option-i to bring up the inspector. Then change them to open with the program of your choice and hit change all.
Hope this helps, works, makes sense, and wasn't too wordy (I don't know how well you know your way around the MacOS so I explained a bit more than usual).
I don't want to be trollish or a dick or anything...but that doesn't make any sense. Grand Central Dispatch's purpose is to provide a unified and efficient way to write multithreaded programs for OSX. I'm not sure why they would develop that for Windows. That's more of Microsoft's core OS division's job, not Apple's.
I've never personally heard of Google doing anything with people's data that I'd mind terribly.
Most notably I use their email service, I'll use my Wave account if and when it becomes particularly useful, and I just might use their DNS server because I am pretty tired of my ISP's slow responses. So if they decided to at some point they could do some serious damage to my privacy.
But up to this point they've only provided services that I find useful and generally superior to other free alternatives and have only asked for statistics and a reasonable amount of screen real estate for ads. I'm definitely not one to trust a company with too much information, but so far that's perfectly acceptable to me.
If someone can give me a good, currently applicable, practical reason to, though, I'll avoid their DNS like the plague.
Plus, you know, we're talking about tools. I don't care if Sears lets me buy molds so that I can forge my own hammer and bolt on my own handmade handle. If one of SnapOn's models has a sweet Hello Kitty handle that suits my needs I'll buy it from SnapOn even though they ultimately give me less choice in the matter.
Same with Apple. They may not let you choose your case or main board or the make of your ram, but they give you a box that works at a fair price (by OEM standards).
And I doubt they'll ever totally dominate the computer market, pushing out all competition and forging a one configuration world where we all pay $1499.99 for their Mac XIIs, so-named because it's the twelfth model to come out since the Great Amalgamation. It's not Wrong to be closed, just different.
You know. I, for one, really like the ability of these people who actually cast the votes to not follow what the votes as reported by the people in charge of the election. You know, cause sometimes not being legally tied to the results of things like...voting machines could be a good thing? You know?
(This is what gave people the bad impression, but what's the alternative? If Microsoft game installers a pass, like Apple does, they would have been crucified for insecurity.)
Well, that's not really true. Any time an app in OSX is altered it throws up a warning on the next launch, and any time you install or update something it requires an admin pass (unless it's an update of a drag and drop install that didn't require a pass in the first place).
"continued imprisonment would be legal only if there was some likelihood that ultimately he would comply with the order" you mean that after twelve years, or hell, two, it was still unclear that he committed to his story?
...personal encounter with a second decimal point in a version number. Although I was just a high school kid at the time I can still remember all the geeks on the other side of the Mac/PC divide claiming it was aberrant and wrong.
Thus my general disrespect for proponents of the Windows operating system was born.
...is that prison will be able to provide true justice in this case. There comes a time where you have to cut your losses. There's no way to make things right, so we have to try to make him truly understand what he's done and to feel remorse for what he's done to people who had just as much of a right to be happy as he did, and from whom he stole that possibility.
What better path to that realization than buttsecks? Lots and lots of sweaty buttsecks.
Why you're wrong is as simple as the difference between advanced research funded by the government in the hopes of advancing science and narrow research funded by corporations in order to keep their profit margins at an acceptable level while not falling behind their competitors.
The really big gains over the past 50 years have seldom been privately funded because that is simply not their goal. If they make a breakthrough it's either by accident or because they've pushed their current capability to the point which requires a breakthrough to avoid stagnation.
I'm no WoW expert and have only logged a few hours total before being turned off by the game, and it's exactly the things that turned me off that make the game addictive. It takes a long....long time to even be competent at it, let alone good. Then there's the sense of losing ground to other players if you stop playing, the constant chance of getting that next best loot on your next dungeon run. The whole experience is designed to keep you coming back both from expectations of advancement and fear of losing your status.
Talent at playing the game is only worth something as long as you're willing to put in hundreds of hours to attain levels and gear.
The only advantage you have with a company over the government is you can always count on the company to be actively trying to screw you out of as much money as possible. The government is a bit more unpredictable because you can never be sure in whose name they're screwing you over, but every once in a while they can't find someone to pay them to screw you, or they have too many people screaming at them to get away with it. That almost never happens with a company.
You're kinda missing the point of the free market. You're thinking of wild west I can gun any man down sort of freedom. The free market is free as in freely competed within. Which is why the US and EU and many other governments have groups that are supposed to maintain exactly that, the ability for anyone to enter and compete within the market based on their goods. Not on their ability to pay people to use them.
Free markets aren't the natural progression of capitalism but something that has to be enforced.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, this can absolutely be an annoyance, and I fully agree with you in that it can take a lot of physical movement to reach from one side of a screen to the other in order to hit, for example, the File menu in OSX. I've run into this on several jobs. But you're conflating annoyance in certain configurations with the overall usefulness of an interface.
It all depends on how you tend to arrange your windows on screen, what pointing device you use, what programs you use and how they utilize individual windows and whether those draw menus using Apple's API or not, etc. The benefit of having an infinite vertical target to play with when hitting that stationary menu has been shown to trump the effort it takes to reach that area. Whether or not your particular setup produces a situation of frequent laborious (not sarcastically used) trips to the menu bar has nothing to do with whether or not it's a good idea to build a general computing UI that way. Having the option to include multiple instances of the menu bar on multiple screens would be ugly as hell, but still faster than bar-per-window.
Dual 30"ers? Awesome? Yeah. Necessary for lots of people? Absolutely. But you're nowhere near the total desktop aspect ratio of the vast majority of users.
Also, not flaming, just verbose.
Also, also, nothing I said has anything to do with Windows Phone.
"Ferman said her office is 'looking to see whether there are potential violations of Pennsylvania criminal laws'" ...there better f*%king be?
Glad to help.
I believe you're running into a "feature" that's causing some confusion. If you manually change a document's open with application it segregates itself from the pool of documents that change when you hit "change all" on other documents. In case it's 12:30 and I'm not making sense I'll give an example...
You have a.tif, b.tif, and c.tif. The default program for opening .tif files is Preview and all three files in question are opening with the default. You change a.tif to open with Photoshop. You then change b.tif to open with Firefox and hit the "change all" button. You'd then be left with b and c.tif opening in Firefox, and a.tif opening in Photoshop because you changed it manually from the default. At some point in the future hitting change all on a.tif will both return it to the default pool along with b and c and change the default .tif program to whatever a.tif is set to at that moment.
I think for one reason or another these avi files think they're all out of the pool. You can change the files already on your drive to use the default quickly by using the Find command to find all files ending in .avi on the computer, then hitting select all and then command-option-i to bring up the inspector. Then change them to open with the program of your choice and hit change all.
Hope this helps, works, makes sense, and wasn't too wordy (I don't know how well you know your way around the MacOS so I explained a bit more than usual).
No, you're a 12 year old homophobe playing Gears of War and watching Harry Potter movies.
That's much better.
To always open a particular file type with a particular program you...
For example:
1) Select any .avi file in the Finder
2) Get info
3) Change the "Open with:" program and hit the "Change All..." button
Same thing with any other file type.
I don't want to be trollish or a dick or anything...but that doesn't make any sense. Grand Central Dispatch's purpose is to provide a unified and efficient way to write multithreaded programs for OSX. I'm not sure why they would develop that for Windows. That's more of Microsoft's core OS division's job, not Apple's.
I've never personally heard of Google doing anything with people's data that I'd mind terribly.
Most notably I use their email service, I'll use my Wave account if and when it becomes particularly useful, and I just might use their DNS server because I am pretty tired of my ISP's slow responses. So if they decided to at some point they could do some serious damage to my privacy.
But up to this point they've only provided services that I find useful and generally superior to other free alternatives and have only asked for statistics and a reasonable amount of screen real estate for ads. I'm definitely not one to trust a company with too much information, but so far that's perfectly acceptable to me.
If someone can give me a good, currently applicable, practical reason to, though, I'll avoid their DNS like the plague.
"...Air Cars" is an amazingly deceptive headline :(
Plus, you know, we're talking about tools. I don't care if Sears lets me buy molds so that I can forge my own hammer and bolt on my own handmade handle. If one of SnapOn's models has a sweet Hello Kitty handle that suits my needs I'll buy it from SnapOn even though they ultimately give me less choice in the matter.
Same with Apple. They may not let you choose your case or main board or the make of your ram, but they give you a box that works at a fair price (by OEM standards).
And I doubt they'll ever totally dominate the computer market, pushing out all competition and forging a one configuration world where we all pay $1499.99 for their Mac XIIs, so-named because it's the twelfth model to come out since the Great Amalgamation. It's not Wrong to be closed, just different.
You know. I, for one, really like the ability of these people who actually cast the votes to not follow what the votes as reported by the people in charge of the election. You know, cause sometimes not being legally tied to the results of things like...voting machines could be a good thing? You know?
(This is what gave people the bad impression, but what's the alternative? If Microsoft game installers a pass, like Apple does, they would have been crucified for insecurity.)
Well, that's not really true. Any time an app in OSX is altered it throws up a warning on the next launch, and any time you install or update something it requires an admin pass (unless it's an update of a drag and drop install that didn't require a pass in the first place).
Only if you want the chimp to survive. Some stories unfold when man and ape work in close quarters that just shouldn't be allowed to be told.
Same thing, I guess. Poor Russians.
"continued imprisonment would be legal only if there was some likelihood that ultimately he would comply with the order" you mean that after twelve years, or hell, two, it was still unclear that he committed to his story?
...personal encounter with a second decimal point in a version number. Although I was just a high school kid at the time I can still remember all the geeks on the other side of the Mac/PC divide claiming it was aberrant and wrong.
Thus my general disrespect for proponents of the Windows operating system was born.
I think you're still missing the point. That's like only punching someone in the left hand because that's the one that stole your wallet.
...is that prison will be able to provide true justice in this case. There comes a time where you have to cut your losses. There's no way to make things right, so we have to try to make him truly understand what he's done and to feel remorse for what he's done to people who had just as much of a right to be happy as he did, and from whom he stole that possibility.
What better path to that realization than buttsecks? Lots and lots of sweaty buttsecks.
Why you're wrong is as simple as the difference between advanced research funded by the government in the hopes of advancing science and narrow research funded by corporations in order to keep their profit margins at an acceptable level while not falling behind their competitors.
The really big gains over the past 50 years have seldom been privately funded because that is simply not their goal. If they make a breakthrough it's either by accident or because they've pushed their current capability to the point which requires a breakthrough to avoid stagnation.
(you people spend far too much time complicating what should be such a simple comment)
I'm no WoW expert and have only logged a few hours total before being turned off by the game, and it's exactly the things that turned me off that make the game addictive. It takes a long....long time to even be competent at it, let alone good. Then there's the sense of losing ground to other players if you stop playing, the constant chance of getting that next best loot on your next dungeon run. The whole experience is designed to keep you coming back both from expectations of advancement and fear of losing your status.
Talent at playing the game is only worth something as long as you're willing to put in hundreds of hours to attain levels and gear.
...can I get some government cheddar and have my student loans forgiven by a court because I have a mental illness? That would be nice. Kthnx.
The only advantage you have with a company over the government is you can always count on the company to be actively trying to screw you out of as much money as possible. The government is a bit more unpredictable because you can never be sure in whose name they're screwing you over, but every once in a while they can't find someone to pay them to screw you, or they have too many people screaming at them to get away with it. That almost never happens with a company.
You're making the assumption that government is more likely to refuse you than a private company.
You're kinda missing the point of the free market. You're thinking of wild west I can gun any man down sort of freedom. The free market is free as in freely competed within. Which is why the US and EU and many other governments have groups that are supposed to maintain exactly that, the ability for anyone to enter and compete within the market based on their goods. Not on their ability to pay people to use them.
Free markets aren't the natural progression of capitalism but something that has to be enforced.