>What I want from a mouse is for it to not require me to take my hands from the keyboard, and I don't mean a touchpad.
I've seen the alternative.j Trust me, it SUCKED.
It was on a 486 Zenith laptop. They made the J key a J key _and_ a pointing device. Tap it and it makes a letter. Wiggle jand smush it and it moves the mouse. Tap another key j(or something like that) along with it and it "clicked". Ugggh...
I found it It hard to control, and it occasionally made udiciously placed mistakes. What a oke. jjj
Maybe there are better ideas. I'd like to see jthem...
I used to get that ALL the time from my teacher during typing class in high school. That and "you can't hit the backspace key".
IMHO, It's an idea from the rickety manual typwriter days. The days when a backspace meant a twist of a platen and using a scrape pencil to take the top layer of paper off.
I once looked a lot at my hands as I typed. I think of it like training wheels. After a couple of months, you will eventually realize you can type without looking at your keyboard. Until then, you probably need to. That's why they printed the letters on the keyboard. For the beginners. The tits are there for the experts.
I still make a lot of mistakes. But, I type just under 80 WPM uncorrected (about 55 WPM corrected). I consider that a decent rate. I really don't care that my mistakes take a 30% hit on my typing rate, because I notice them as I type, and correct them before I'm finished. My mistake level was much higher. As time goes on my mistake level will go down, my speed up.
'Till then, I'll just have to keep using my electric Smith Corona with the Auto-Correct tape. Maybe one day I can graduate to the manual. One day...;)
As far as the CTS, well, doesn't that always seem to happen to the most dedicated people? The ones who spend hours at their terminals without breaks...
Just a quick question, does Opera support JavaScript (I've never used it before)? I just ask because I remember getting a different page with a link through to the main site that complained when I turned off JavaScript. Their site seems bugged all over the place to make the shopper's life hell. >:-D
I suppose turning off JavaScript is always an option, but when you check out Toyota's site, as you'll notice, they use quite a bit of JavaScript (or so it appears).
I just tried toyota.ca in mozilla 0.7 and it still breaks without an escape link with JavaScript turned on.
I really shouldn't have to toggle JavaScript on and off just to view websites. I guess with more and more popup ads on sites nowadays, I'll just have no choice.:-(
I hope the letter has some impact. I'm really not trying to insult anyone over there - but it really sucks to make your site purposefully inaccessible.
Heh, if you browse www.toyota.ca with any browser but Netscape or IE it won't even let you in the proverbial front door. Just a rejection message and not even a link to the next page. Their entire site was bugged with JavaScript to forward you to this error page if you viewed any page on their site.
Yeah, I could disable JavaScript, but their site was very dependent on it.
So I sent them this letter:
"My family and I are devoted Toyota customers. We currently own a '99 Toyota Camry and a '98 Toyota Tercel. We are shopping for a new car to replace '98 Toyota Tercel. We are strongly considering the Toyota Corolla, much due to the Toyota brand name and assurance of a high quality product that name delivers.
However, when I access your site, I receive an error indicating I'm not using a supported browser (www.toyota.ca/errors/error_v4.html). I am
using Mozilla 0.7 [www.mozilla.org]. My ID string should be: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; 0.7) Gecko/20010109.
I can appreciate the difficulty involved in attempting to make your site
compatible with the largest share of browsers [I do a little HTML myself]. I also fully understand your need to inform me, as a customer, of your inability to provide me with a quality browsing experience when using your site.
Unfortunately, your error page has no link to the real site. When I finally guessed at a couple of pages that do exist, just after they have loaded your JavaScript quickly forces me to view that same error page
again.
Adding a link to the real site at the bottom of your unsupported browser page and turning off the forced redirection on all but the/index.html
page would be a fix, and would still allow you to tell customers you don't support them. Customers can then decide for themselves if they wish to
get more information about Toyota through a possibly broken site (for their browser), or shop elsewhere, rather than being forced to make the latter decision.
Just a suggestion."
The people at toyota.ca were prompt in their reply. Tony Iafolla replied in under an hour with a personalised message (nice touch) explaining that he will forward my issue on to their website administrators, and that they will reply with more info. It's nice to see a company that cares enough about their customers to read their mail. I remember emailing TrippLite about a UPS Cable and waiting a month to get a reply. Ugggh...
So, who knows, if you actually send a letter, maybe you too can get these pages fixed.
While very few at slashdot agree with this AC's opinion, it is VALID and ON-TOPIC. Just because people are going to flame him for it neither makes it FLAMEBAIT or TROLL MEAT.
By modding it down due to personal feelings, you let the world know you SUPPORT this guy. Why? You are punishing people for using their freedom of speech, just like this guy advocates.
>I happen to have a completely unique custom-built house which was designed for me by an architect
I wanted to add more info about that my own personal case of this in, but I never got a chance.
The house I'm talking about (not the addition, but the blueprints) was ours. The copyright on the custom blueprint is under our name since we decided to contract out our own work (we basically hired another person to do all the contracting for us, but we ensured the blueprint was under our name). We hired the architect to take our scribblings and redraw them into a "buildable" house. We did not give him permission to retain copyright.
Even with all this work, we are saddened by the fact there are at least two houses on the same street with the same look and feel [IMHO] (never entered the homes, so I don't know about inside). But hey, what can you do?:-/
>Vigiliatism is a response to something when it happens - not a response to something before it happens.
Not according to the Oxford dictionary. I'm using my jaws of life to keep it open before it shuts on my hand because I'm going to copy a definition from it;-)
Vigilante: Member of a self-appointed group trying to prevent crime etc. in a disorderly community.
Microsoft is self appointed. Preventing is to keep from happening (ie: before it happens). And the warez groups are pretty damn disorderly.
It fits to a tee. Microsoft should wear its new definition with pride.:-)
Your argument about the SUV is well taken, but, about the house, I did say:
"you modified it too much (by adding an extension) from the copyrighted blueprints"
blueprints being the important word. I can't see the difference between a blueprint and a computer program, myself, when it comes to easily making exact duplicates.
If the blueprints used to design your house are stolen, does that give the blueprint owners the right to lock those people with copied houses outside without the right to legal representation and due course?
What's happening is the end of pay software. It's going to be bloody. Why? Because your own words describe the situation of non-free software so well (I'll quote them here):
"I'd be happy if someone could make an exact duplicate of a house for nothing. Of course the developers wouldn't be too happy since they'd go out of business pretty fast with their current business models"
Think program instead of house, and software engineer instead of developer. And you have the dilemma. Are we to go against the ideals that the modern free world is created about, and again make knowledge a privelege and a commodity, like an SUV? I hope not. It's their (soon, I hope, to be my) job to adapt to the world. It isn't the world's job to adapt to them.
No, but I could very easily make an exact copy (or exact enough copy) of the blueprints for my house, or a book (two of my examples). And either way, lets talk legality. Legally I can't copy Windows for other people, and I can't build an exact duplicate of a Ford Explorer. Enforcement of this is the job of the authorities. Not Microsoft. Vigilantees are not welcome by anyone, most especially the police. And that's was MS now is, a vigilante.
I'm surprised the FBI isn't displeased about these vigilante measures. Microsoft is basically telling them they aren't doing their job. Wow. If that isn't a slap in the face, I don't know what will be.
>all software developers have a right to protect their work
I just wish I could see your reaction when your house won't let you back in because you modified it too much (by adding an extension) from the copyrighted blueprints and haven't talked to the (now deceased) architect. Or when your SUV won't start in the middle of junkyville because you replaced the exploding Firestones without an approved license upgrade. Or you aren't allowed to use your table saw because you decided to put a different, non-approved, blade in it. Or, better yet, your books won't open anymore because you decided to add some margin notes, and didn't send copies of your notes to the publisher.
While I have not received such a message either, I also don't plan to cancel. Ebay, in my opinion, is decent in all other respects.
But, I, as a consumer, in addition to the right of choice, have the right to complain. If I receive this email, I plan to respond. I'll probably phone 'em. If I don't get a live person, then I'll send a letter. That way _someone_, _somewhere_ is going to get my message. An email is worthless -- I don't know how many companies on the 'net I've emailed and never gotten a response from.
You don't have to manufacture the whole thing... The Shugart example shows that perfectly (although differently). They never made their magnetic heads to start with.
Of course you aren't going to have a $1 million clean room. But the only thing you're going to do different from IBM is the controller (heck, to be technical probably just one chip on the controller).
Make a deal with IBM that you want some large order of their drives without controllers. Why wouldn't they say no? (Even if they did, heck, buy them new with controllers at market price). Design your own contoller (doesn't need a clean room).
Boom. Hard drive minus CPRM. Your drive might cost 50% more (since you don't make it in house), but what's $100 to protect your data?
And... since were talking commodity, look at monitors (these have been a commodity for even longer than hard drives). I've an old Trinitron in front of me "made by NCD" (a 17Cr to be exact). Really it's made by Sony, NCD barely made ANYTHING inside. Infact, I think they made nothing... they probably contracted out to get the plastic case with their name made.
NCD is probably 1,000x smaller than Sony in money and people, but -- they "made" a monitor. Just by ordering the parts and slapping on a case.
I know you don't just "slap" a controller onto a hard drive; that's a lot more complicated than making a monitor case. But certainly not out of reach for a small business, IMHO.
I like the split. Lets you know if the newbies are talking about their distribution or their kernel without asking. Easier to support, and you don't have to make them feel bad when they get the two confused.
Al Shugart says his hard drive business was started on $20,000 (two $10,000 investments). Of course others invested along the way, but this was the beginning. The history of the company is very interesting, in that experiments at IBM on making hard drives seemed to have been done with exactly the kind of stuff you'd find in a garage.
Nowadays I'd suggest inflation would require a $100,000 investment - but that really isn't all that much, that is, for many of the small time Taiwanese manufacturers. Heck, if you were lucky, you could probably sell your car and get a mortgage to raise that cash.
And Watcom C, Miracle C, Visual C(++), lcc, AT&T C, egcs, EiC, DJGPP, and probably a LOT more that I've missed.
Check out yahoo...
>anyone can, but if you dont know C then your just lookign at a bunch of greek symbols.
If you were writing in Greek I'd feel the same way. Us English people have it easy: The kernel is already half written in our language. We want it more simple?
It took me about 6 months to learn C, I'm sure anyone with more motivation could have done it in 2 months, without previous computer experience. It isn't that hard.:-)
I use this kernel feature at my College to network boot machines without local storage. They get their IP Address inside the kernel boot and never run dhcpcd. They can do NFS mounts (obviously, since one is required at boot to do anything:-), normal TCP/IP stuff, and anything else that dhcpcd would have offered (except, I suppose, renewing the IP).
To enable DHCP in the kernel, enter the "Networking Options" section. Enable "IP: kernel-level configuration support". Choose DHCP support. The help doesn't mention anything about dhcpcd.
But, like I said, I'm using 2.2.16 to check this... Maybe 2.2.0 didn't have the feature.:)
I've tried other Linux distros (RedHat, Mandrake, Corel) and nothing compares to what your used to.
Since the other distros are reasonably similar (in file structure and basic configuration) there isn't a lot of work involved metally if you switch to another distro.
When you get used to Slackawre (my first install was a little while after RedHat released their "Mother's Day 0.001" version) you just find it difficult to adjust to another distro. The init scripts are strange and in the wrong directory, the config files are weird, other distros use different configs (and worse yet different programs [where's my xv on this RedHat box), customized tools differ highly between Slackware and other distros, directory structure is strange, etc... You just have to stick with what your best at sometimes.
Now we'll just have to wait a week for a new Slackware while Patrick Volkerding compiles a 2.4 kernel on his 386 for us.
Slashdot Mirror
>What I want from a mouse is for it to not require me to take my hands from the keyboard, and I don't mean a touchpad.
I've seen the alternative.j Trust me, it SUCKED.
It was on a 486 Zenith laptop. They made the J key a J key _and_ a pointing device. Tap it and it makes a letter. Wiggle jand smush it and it moves the mouse. Tap another key j(or something like that) along with it and it "clicked". Ugggh...
I found it It hard to control, and it occasionally made udiciously placed mistakes. What a oke. jjj
Maybe there are better ideas. I'd like to see jthem...
>DON'T LOOK AT YOUR FINGERS
;)
I used to get that ALL the time from my teacher during typing class in high school. That and "you can't hit the backspace key".
IMHO, It's an idea from the rickety manual typwriter days. The days when a backspace meant a twist of a platen and using a scrape pencil to take the top layer of paper off.
I once looked a lot at my hands as I typed. I think of it like training wheels. After a couple of months, you will eventually realize you can type without looking at your keyboard. Until then, you probably need to. That's why they printed the letters on the keyboard. For the beginners. The tits are there for the experts.
I still make a lot of mistakes. But, I type just under 80 WPM uncorrected (about 55 WPM corrected). I consider that a decent rate. I really don't care that my mistakes take a 30% hit on my typing rate, because I notice them as I type, and correct them before I'm finished. My mistake level was much higher. As time goes on my mistake level will go down, my speed up.
'Till then, I'll just have to keep using my electric Smith Corona with the Auto-Correct tape. Maybe one day I can graduate to the manual. One day...
As far as the CTS, well, doesn't that always seem to happen to the most dedicated people? The ones who spend hours at their terminals without breaks...
Just my 2 cents.
FWIW & IIRC, Acer bought out TI's notebook division.
I wouldn't be surprised that if your notebook is still working to your satisfaction that your model is a direct copy of the TI notebook design.
Just a quick question, does Opera support JavaScript (I've never used it before)? I just ask because I remember getting a different page with a link through to the main site that complained when I turned off JavaScript. Their site seems bugged all over the place to make the shopper's life hell. >:-D
:-(
I suppose turning off JavaScript is always an option, but when you check out Toyota's site, as you'll notice, they use quite a bit of JavaScript (or so it appears).
I just tried toyota.ca in mozilla 0.7 and it still breaks without an escape link with JavaScript turned on.
I really shouldn't have to toggle JavaScript on and off just to view websites. I guess with more and more popup ads on sites nowadays, I'll just have no choice.
I hope the letter has some impact. I'm really not trying to insult anyone over there - but it really sucks to make your site purposefully inaccessible.
Heh, if you browse www.toyota.ca with any browser but Netscape or IE it won't even let you in the proverbial front door. Just a rejection message and not even a link to the next page. Their entire site was bugged with JavaScript to forward you to this error page if you viewed any page on their site.
/index.html
Yeah, I could disable JavaScript, but their site was very dependent on it.
So I sent them this letter:
"My family and I are devoted Toyota customers. We currently own a '99 Toyota Camry and a '98 Toyota Tercel. We are shopping for a new car to replace '98 Toyota Tercel. We are strongly considering the Toyota Corolla, much due to the Toyota brand name and assurance of a high quality product that name delivers.
However, when I access your site, I receive an error indicating I'm not using a supported browser (www.toyota.ca/errors/error_v4.html). I am
using Mozilla 0.7 [www.mozilla.org]. My ID string should be: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; 0.7) Gecko/20010109.
I can appreciate the difficulty involved in attempting to make your site
compatible with the largest share of browsers [I do a little HTML myself]. I also fully understand your need to inform me, as a customer, of your inability to provide me with a quality browsing experience when using your site.
Unfortunately, your error page has no link to the real site. When I finally guessed at a couple of pages that do exist, just after they have loaded your JavaScript quickly forces me to view that same error page
again.
Adding a link to the real site at the bottom of your unsupported browser page and turning off the forced redirection on all but the
page would be a fix, and would still allow you to tell customers you don't support them. Customers can then decide for themselves if they wish to
get more information about Toyota through a possibly broken site (for their browser), or shop elsewhere, rather than being forced to make the latter decision.
Just a suggestion."
The people at toyota.ca were prompt in their reply. Tony Iafolla replied in under an hour with a personalised message (nice touch) explaining that he will forward my issue on to their website administrators, and that they will reply with more info. It's nice to see a company that cares enough about their customers to read their mail. I remember emailing TrippLite about a UPS Cable and waiting a month to get a reply. Ugggh...
So, who knows, if you actually send a letter, maybe you too can get these pages fixed.
You haven't tried voting twice yet, have you? ;-)
Trust me, slashdot _knows_ what you check, which computer/IP you used to check it, and when.
If you are logged in like me they even know who checked it.
But I'm ok with that in this case. I feel safe in putting at least that much trust in CmdrTaco.
Yeah, I mean why do they have a corrections section in a newspaper anyways?
[because if they don't JVC would sue them for slander. think CYA].
Please check the moderation rules again.
While very few at slashdot agree with this AC's opinion, it is VALID and ON-TOPIC. Just because people are going to flame him for it neither makes it FLAMEBAIT or TROLL MEAT.
By modding it down due to personal feelings, you let the world know you SUPPORT this guy. Why? You are punishing people for using their freedom of speech, just like this guy advocates.
Think about it.
>I happen to have a completely unique custom-built house which was designed for me by an architect
:-/
I wanted to add more info about that my own personal case of this in, but I never got a chance.
The house I'm talking about (not the addition, but the blueprints) was ours. The copyright on the custom blueprint is under our name since we decided to contract out our own work (we basically hired another person to do all the contracting for us, but we ensured the blueprint was under our name). We hired the architect to take our scribblings and redraw them into a "buildable" house. We did not give him permission to retain copyright.
Even with all this work, we are saddened by the fact there are at least two houses on the same street with the same look and feel [IMHO] (never entered the homes, so I don't know about inside). But hey, what can you do?
You forgot (and so did they -- at leat on the press release) to mention that Linux is a trademarked name, owned by Linus Torvalds.
:-)
He might have a case against them.
Unix(R) is a trademark not owned by Linus or the FSF.
;-)
Therefore you have to please a certain company (whomever it is that own the trademark today -- is it still AT&T?) to be able to call your OS Unix.
Since that's a total waste of time and money, full POSIX compliance will have to do.
>Vigiliatism is a response to something when it happens - not a response to something before it happens.
;-)
:-)
Not according to the Oxford dictionary. I'm using my jaws of life to keep it open before it shuts on my hand because I'm going to copy a definition from it
Vigilante: Member of a self-appointed group trying to prevent crime etc. in a disorderly community.
Microsoft is self appointed. Preventing is to keep from happening (ie: before it happens). And the warez groups are pretty damn disorderly.
It fits to a tee. Microsoft should wear its new definition with pride.
Your argument about the SUV is well taken, but, about the house, I did say:
"you modified it too much (by adding an extension) from the copyrighted blueprints"
blueprints being the important word. I can't see the difference between a blueprint and a computer program, myself, when it comes to easily making exact duplicates.
If the blueprints used to design your house are stolen, does that give the blueprint owners the right to lock those people with copied houses outside without the right to legal representation and due course?
What's happening is the end of pay software. It's going to be bloody. Why? Because your own words describe the situation of non-free software so well (I'll quote them here):
"I'd be happy if someone could make an exact duplicate of a house for nothing. Of course the developers wouldn't be too happy since they'd go out of business pretty fast with their current business models"
Think program instead of house, and software engineer instead of developer. And you have the dilemma. Are we to go against the ideals that the modern free world is created about, and again make knowledge a privelege and a commodity, like an SUV? I hope not. It's their (soon, I hope, to be my) job to adapt to the world. It isn't the world's job to adapt to them.
No, but I could very easily make an exact copy (or exact enough copy) of the blueprints for my house, or a book (two of my examples). And either way, lets talk legality. Legally I can't copy Windows for other people, and I can't build an exact duplicate of a Ford Explorer. Enforcement of this is the job of the authorities. Not Microsoft. Vigilantees are not welcome by anyone, most especially the police. And that's was MS now is, a vigilante.
:-)
I'm surprised the FBI isn't displeased about these vigilante measures. Microsoft is basically telling them they aren't doing their job. Wow. If that isn't a slap in the face, I don't know what will be.
Just my 2 cents.
This was the worst MS-Office 2K stab in the back, if you ask me.
>all software developers have a right to protect their work
I just wish I could see your reaction when your house won't let you back in because you modified it too much (by adding an extension) from the copyrighted blueprints and haven't talked to the (now deceased) architect. Or when your SUV won't start in the middle of junkyville because you replaced the exploding Firestones without an approved license upgrade. Or you aren't allowed to use your table saw because you decided to put a different, non-approved, blade in it. Or, better yet, your books won't open anymore because you decided to add some margin notes, and didn't send copies of your notes to the publisher.
Would you support these measures?
While I have not received such a message either, I also don't plan to cancel. Ebay, in my opinion, is decent in all other respects.
But, I, as a consumer, in addition to the right of choice, have the right to complain. If I receive this email, I plan to respond. I'll probably phone 'em. If I don't get a live person, then I'll send a letter. That way _someone_, _somewhere_ is going to get my message. An email is worthless -- I don't know how many companies on the 'net I've emailed and never gotten a response from.
>I want power.
It seems they do too.
You don't have to manufacture the whole thing... The Shugart example shows that perfectly (although differently). They never made their magnetic heads to start with.
Of course you aren't going to have a $1 million clean room. But the only thing you're going to do different from IBM is the controller (heck, to be technical probably just one chip on the controller).
Make a deal with IBM that you want some large order of their drives without controllers. Why wouldn't they say no? (Even if they did, heck, buy them new with controllers at market price). Design your own contoller (doesn't need a clean room).
Boom. Hard drive minus CPRM. Your drive might cost 50% more (since you don't make it in house), but what's $100 to protect your data?
And... since were talking commodity, look at monitors (these have been a commodity for even longer than hard drives). I've an old Trinitron in front of me "made by NCD" (a 17Cr to be exact). Really it's made by Sony, NCD barely made ANYTHING inside. Infact, I think they made nothing... they probably contracted out to get the plastic case with their name made.
NCD is probably 1,000x smaller than Sony in money and people, but -- they "made" a monitor. Just by ordering the parts and slapping on a case.
I know you don't just "slap" a controller onto a hard drive; that's a lot more complicated than making a monitor case. But certainly not out of reach for a small business, IMHO.
Just my 2 cents.
I like the split. Lets you know if the newbies are talking about their distribution or their kernel without asking. Easier to support, and you don't have to make them feel bad when they get the two confused.
Nowadays I'd suggest inflation would require a $100,000 investment - but that really isn't all that much, that is, for many of the small time Taiwanese manufacturers. Heck, if you were lucky, you could probably sell your car and get a mortgage to raise that cash.
And Watcom C, Miracle C, Visual C(++), lcc, AT&T C, egcs, EiC, DJGPP, and probably a LOT more that I've missed.
:-)
Check out yahoo...
>anyone can, but if you dont know C then your just lookign at a bunch of greek symbols.
If you were writing in Greek I'd feel the same way. Us English people have it easy: The kernel is already half written in our language. We want it more simple?
It took me about 6 months to learn C, I'm sure anyone with more motivation could have done it in 2 months, without previous computer experience. It isn't that hard.
>Not true. There was more to it that a recompile.
:-), normal TCP/IP stuff, and anything else that dhcpcd would have offered (except, I suppose, renewing the IP).
:)
I use this kernel feature at my College to network boot machines without local storage. They get their IP Address inside the kernel boot and never run dhcpcd. They can do NFS mounts (obviously, since one is required at boot to do anything
To enable DHCP in the kernel, enter the "Networking Options" section. Enable "IP: kernel-level configuration support". Choose DHCP support. The help doesn't mention anything about dhcpcd.
But, like I said, I'm using 2.2.16 to check this... Maybe 2.2.0 didn't have the feature.
I've tried other Linux distros (RedHat, Mandrake, Corel) and nothing compares to what your used to.
Since the other distros are reasonably similar (in file structure and basic configuration) there isn't a lot of work involved metally if you switch to another distro.
When you get used to Slackawre (my first install was a little while after RedHat released their "Mother's Day 0.001" version) you just find it difficult to adjust to another distro. The init scripts are strange and in the wrong directory, the config files are weird, other distros use different configs (and worse yet different programs [where's my xv on this RedHat box), customized tools differ highly between Slackware and other distros, directory structure is strange, etc... You just have to stick with what your best at sometimes.
Now we'll just have to wait a week for a new Slackware while Patrick Volkerding compiles a 2.4 kernel on his 386 for us.
Maybe it's new to the later revisions of 2.2.x but they include DHCP autoconfig as a kernel option.
So not totally SOL, just an extra recompile away.