You did, by complaining about the number of mouse buttons. Linux users are used to learning different key bindings for different apps anyway; learning to command-click wouldn't phase them.
Well so much for generalizations. I boot into Windows for games but I spend 90% of my computing time in Linux. If you knew Linux/Unix then you must know that paste can be performed by the middle button which can be simulated with 2 buttons without going back to the keyboard. I prefer this. Is that really so hard to understand? Just because I don't want to do something (use the keyboard to simulate a 2nd button) doesn't mean I'm not capable of learning it. Another example is Nedit, my favorite text-editor: A lot of the things you can do to manipulate the text involves combinations of all 3 mouse-buttons and the keyboard; I'd need to be a yoga master to simulate the 2nd and 3rd button on the keyboard at the same time as press those additional keys while moving the pointer with the touchpad;-)
Anyways, its clear you're happy with that arrangement, so that's cool. Just understand that some people have reasons for wanting at least a 2-button mouse/touchpad to be standard.
Gotta reach way over for that control key. Whew, that's tough.
No, I don't "gotta" since I don't have an Apple laptop. But are you claiming the control key on the powerbooks magically installs a second mouse button? Or is this a workaround? I could also mimic the rest of the mouse functionality on the keyboard, but I don't WANT to. Remember, I'm responding to the "myths", my point being Apple has standardized on a less capable mouse paradigm, namely one-button.
Endless Apple myths:... Can't use multi button mouse...
Oh cool, is it possible to replace the built-in touchpad with a 2 (or 3) button version? That's the only reason I won't consider a powerbook. Yes, I know I can use an external mouse, but I don't always want to attach that (like on the commuter train).
-chris
Re:XML is NOT just text!
on
XML and Perl
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The whole point of XML is that it is NOT just a string of text. That's why Perl isn't particularly any better than Java or C++ or VB or whatever for processing XML - you're going to be using a library that gives you SAX or DOM access to your XML, and you'll never need to know that there's a text representation being serialized onto some wires somewhere.
I'll respond to you though many others are making similar arguments. First of all, when you say "XML is NOT just text!" do you mean "XML is NOT merely text" or "XML is not solely text"? I'll agree with the first, but the second is generally not true.
What noone seems to be mentioning is what you get out of those libraries: you get the entire structure in nodes thanks to the library's parser, but what are the contents of those nodes? Text! You might argue that the element names and most of the attributes are either defined by the dtd/schema, etc. but at least CDDATA will often be abitrary text. And, at least in my experience (mostly web-based applications), there will often be a need to process some of that text, e.g. extract links which are embedded in the text, convert newlines to <br>s, and many other things. And then, isn't it handy when the language reading the contents of those nodes has strong text-handling abilities?
Just a thought.
-chris
Re:Is KDE trying to be Windows?
on
KDE 3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Without going to the trouble of addressing your individual points I'd like to point out that almost everything you've mentioned (If I understood you correctly) is configurable in the control center under Look & Feel->Window Behaviour (at least in 3.0.x). There you can set, among other things: Focus Policy:Click to Focus, Focus follows mouse, Focus under mouse, Focus strictly under mouse. For the last 3 additionally: Auto Raise and/or click raise.
Window Actions: For each of 3 mouse buttons you can configure actions for Inactive and Active Titlebars, as well as inactive inner windows, including actions like: raise, lower, activate and raise, activate and lower, activate, shade, and whether or not to pass the click to inactive inner windows.
etc.....
-Chris
Re:Vertical maximization?
on
KDE 3.1 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If you like to vertically maximize a lot, just go ahead and configure that as your double-click on the titlebar behaviour: In KDE 3.0.x: Control Center->Look & Feel->Window Behaviour->Actions->Title bar double-click
In KDE 3.1: I'm not sure since I haven't finished compiling 3.1 and I wiped the release candidate already;-)
It makes little difference to the accident. Don't forget that the extra weight is near the ground, so the two people will collide, the person on the segway will stop, and the person hit will fly off at at most 12 mph.
Oh what a relief.
The segway won't contribute much, since the leverage to the struck person is poor from down at shin level, where most of its weight is.
Ah, so I don't have to worry about the momentum being transferred to my whole body, it will be concentrated at my shins:-)
It should be quite comparable to being hit by a jogger
So it's no worse than a jogger doing a flying kick to my shins with steel-toed boots? And here I was thinking it could hurt
They accepted the Chinese community with open arms when they came in.
Though I agree with the gist of your post, I have to point out that the Chinese community was already there in the 19th Century -- a tad earlier than the first sighting of a hippie, I think, and the Chinese were only really 'accepted' while they were building the railroads; that was followed by a pretty long period of heavy discrimination.
Actually, I'm surprised we haven't heard from the KDE team; after all, Apple is distributing a desktop which doesn't have Konq, KMail, and KOffice as the default applications, and probably even removed the "About KDE" box -- those were mortal sins last time I checked, and I fully expect Mosfet and others to publish ringing denunciations of how Apple has broken KDE.
First of all, most of the vocal complaints were confined to a very small subset of the KDE developers. Second of all, the complaints were focused on the fact that the user is presented with "KDE", but in such a way that some of KDE's key advantages don't come into play, which supposedly (I haven't seen Redhat's KDE myself) made KDE look worse than it is. This is the exact opposite: No one is in any way thinking that the Mac desktop is representative of KDE, and Apple made it very clear that the heart of their browser is from KDE, but not e.g. the GUI.
What I read several times in there amounted to "we don't care that KHTML doesn't always work right, because it was easy to use". Not exactly the sort of rationalization that I go in for.
That's odd. I read: "We decided it will be easier to make Khtml work right, than to make the Gecko code easier to use/integrate" Which is not a rationalization, but a simple balancing of time/cost factors.
but what about really generic things, like images? Do I want to view a JPEG or edit it? In the Palm design, files like that would be under the care of some one application capable of doing all relevant operations on them - but on my desktop I don't have an application like that. I have no one app that's as handy for viewing as xv and as powerful for editing as the GIMP or Photoshop, so the typical GUI model of a "default file-extension/application binding" doesn't work too well for me
Interestingly, this paradigma already exists in, at least, KDE; I'm not sure about other environments. You can select an 'edit' application and a 'view' application for a file-type or category (e.g. all text/*), when you middle click you open the file to 'edit', when you left-click you open the file to 'view'.
Insofar as the prevalent reason d'etre around here is anyone who doesn't wholly agree with your stance is a "fucking M$ suporter" [sic], how is this surprising to you?
But since walmart.com has a presence in almost every state they can get away with charging us sales tax even though they dont carry these computers in stores...
Ummm... what does Walmart gain by charging sales tax? At best they're just passing it along to the state, at worst it's more paperwork for them.
LOTR was always 1 novel consisting of 6 books. Tolkien wanted it printed in 1 volume, but the publisher insisted on splitting it into 3 volumes, each with 2 books.
I'm having trouble consolidating these two statements into one reality:
Actually Swing is quite adequate for desktop applications And... The main problem with Swing is that if anything, it's *too* complex and tends to run visibly slow on anything less than a 1GHz machine.
With the twist that each congressional delegation (all the representatives from a state) has 1 vote, e.g. all the Californian representatives would vote among themselves and then submit California's vote and so forth.
Slashdot Mirror
touchy much?
-chris
You did, by complaining about the number of mouse buttons. Linux users are used to learning different key bindings for different apps anyway; learning to command-click wouldn't phase them.
;-)
Well so much for generalizations. I boot into Windows for games but I spend 90% of my computing time in Linux. If you knew Linux/Unix then you must know that paste can be performed by the middle button which can be simulated with 2 buttons without going back to the keyboard. I prefer this. Is that really so hard to understand? Just because I don't want to do something (use the keyboard to simulate a 2nd button) doesn't mean I'm not capable of learning it. Another example is Nedit, my favorite text-editor: A lot of the things you can do to manipulate the text involves combinations of all 3 mouse-buttons and the keyboard; I'd need to be a yoga master to simulate the 2nd and 3rd button on the keyboard at the same time as press those additional keys while moving the pointer with the touchpad
Anyways, its clear you're happy with that arrangement, so that's cool. Just understand that some people have reasons for wanting at least a 2-button mouse/touchpad to be standard.
-chris
Who said I use Windows?
Gotta reach way over for that control key.
Whew, that's tough.
No, I don't "gotta" since I don't have an Apple laptop. But are you claiming the control key on the powerbooks magically installs a second mouse button? Or is this a workaround? I could also mimic the rest of the mouse functionality on the keyboard, but I don't WANT to. Remember, I'm responding to the "myths", my point being Apple has standardized on a less capable mouse paradigm, namely one-button.
Endless Apple myths: ... ...
Can't use multi button mouse
Oh cool, is it possible to replace the built-in touchpad with a 2 (or 3) button version? That's the only reason I won't consider a powerbook. Yes, I know I can use an external mouse, but I don't always want to attach that (like on the commuter train).
-chris
The whole point of XML is that it is NOT just a string of text. That's why Perl isn't particularly any better than Java or C++ or VB or whatever for processing XML - you're going to be using a library that gives you SAX or DOM access to your XML, and you'll never need to know that there's a text representation being serialized onto some wires somewhere.
I'll respond to you though many others are making similar arguments. First of all, when you say "XML is NOT just text!" do you mean "XML is NOT merely text" or "XML is not solely text"? I'll agree with the first, but the second is generally not true.
What noone seems to be mentioning is what you get out of those libraries: you get the entire structure in nodes thanks to the library's parser, but what are the contents of those nodes? Text! You might argue that the element names and most of the attributes are either defined by the dtd/schema, etc. but at least CDDATA will often be abitrary text. And, at least in my experience (mostly web-based applications), there will often be a need to process some of that text, e.g. extract links which are embedded in the text, convert newlines to <br>s, and many other things. And then, isn't it handy when the language reading the contents of those nodes has strong text-handling abilities?
Just a thought.
-chris
Without going to the trouble of addressing your individual points I'd like to point out that almost everything you've mentioned (If I understood you correctly) is configurable in the control center under Look & Feel->Window Behaviour (at least in 3.0.x). There you can set, among other things:
Focus Policy:Click to Focus, Focus follows mouse, Focus under mouse, Focus strictly under mouse.
For the last 3 additionally: Auto Raise and/or click raise.
Window Actions: For each of 3 mouse buttons you can configure actions for Inactive and Active Titlebars, as well as inactive inner windows, including actions like: raise, lower, activate and raise, activate and lower, activate, shade, and whether or not to pass the click to inactive inner windows.
etc.....
-Chris
If you like to vertically maximize a lot, just go ahead and configure that as your double-click on the titlebar behaviour:
;-)
In KDE 3.0.x: Control Center->Look & Feel->Window Behaviour->Actions->Title bar double-click
In KDE 3.1: I'm not sure since I haven't finished compiling 3.1 and I wiped the release candidate already
-chris
It's probably about the same as being hit by a car at 12 mph, which if you think about it, isn't bad at all.
Only relatively speaking. I'm pretty sure that would hurt a hell of a lot, even if it isn't fatal/tragic. You're free to demonstrate though.
-chris
The weight of a segway is about ankle high. At worst its going to scoop you off your feet
And if your feet have traction? Will it then literally scoop you off your feet?
-chris
It makes little difference to the accident. Don't forget that the extra weight is near the ground, so the two people will collide, the person on the segway will stop, and the person hit will fly off at at most 12 mph.
:-)
Oh what a relief.
The segway won't contribute much, since the leverage to the struck person is poor from down at shin level, where most of its weight is.
Ah, so I don't have to worry about the momentum being transferred to my whole body, it will be concentrated at my shins
It should be quite comparable to being hit by a jogger
So it's no worse than a jogger doing a flying kick to my shins with steel-toed boots? And here I was thinking it could hurt
-chris
They accepted the Chinese community with open arms when they came in.
Though I agree with the gist of your post, I have to point out that the Chinese community was already there in the 19th Century -- a tad earlier than the first sighting of a hippie, I think, and the Chinese were only really 'accepted' while they were building the railroads; that was followed by a pretty long period of heavy discrimination.
-chris
Actually, I'm surprised we haven't heard from the KDE team; after all, Apple is distributing a desktop which doesn't have Konq, KMail, and KOffice as the default applications, and probably even removed the "About KDE" box -- those were mortal sins last time I checked, and I fully expect Mosfet and others to publish ringing denunciations of how Apple has broken KDE.
First of all, most of the vocal complaints were confined to a very small subset of the KDE developers. Second of all, the complaints were focused on the fact that the user is presented with "KDE", but in such a way that some of KDE's key advantages don't come into play, which supposedly (I haven't seen Redhat's KDE myself) made KDE look worse than it is. This is the exact opposite: No one is in any way thinking that the Mac desktop is representative of KDE, and Apple made it very clear that the heart of their browser is from KDE, but not e.g. the GUI.
-chris
Not yet but see this thread where someone has started porting the Webcore to Windows.
-chris
What I read several times in there amounted to "we don't care that KHTML doesn't always work right, because it was easy to use". Not exactly the sort of rationalization that I go in for.
That's odd. I read: "We decided it will be easier to make Khtml work right, than to make the Gecko code easier to use/integrate" Which is not a rationalization, but a simple balancing of time/cost factors.
-chris
but what about really generic things, like images? Do I want to view a JPEG or edit it? In the Palm design, files like that would be under the care of some one application capable of doing all relevant operations on them - but on my desktop I don't have an application like that. I have no one app that's as handy for viewing as xv and as powerful for editing as the GIMP or Photoshop, so the typical GUI model of a "default file-extension/application binding" doesn't work too well for me
Interestingly, this paradigma already exists in, at least, KDE; I'm not sure about other environments. You can select an 'edit' application and a 'view' application for a file-type or category (e.g. all text/*), when you middle click you open the file to 'edit', when you left-click you open the file to 'view'.
-chris
Insofar as the prevalent reason d'etre around here is anyone who doesn't wholly agree with your stance is a "fucking M$ suporter" [sic], how is this surprising to you?
So you're an anti-slashdot zealot?
-chris
Dude, you need to take Sarcasm 101. He even gave you an extra hint at the end of his post:
(Naturally the people who see no problem in the original poster's statements will see no problem in mine...sigh. See other less cerebral post.)
But since walmart.com has a presence in almost every state they can get away with charging us sales tax even though they dont carry these computers in stores...
Ummm... what does Walmart gain by charging sales tax? At best they're just passing it along to the state, at worst it's more paperwork for them.
-chris
There is a difference between the words "book", "novel", and "volume".
See here under definition 1 d of book:
'a major division of a treatise or literary work'
LOTR was always 1 novel consisting of 6 books. Tolkien wanted it printed in 1 volume, but the publisher insisted on splitting it into 3 volumes, each with 2 books.
-chris
I'm having trouble consolidating these two statements into one reality:
;-)
Actually Swing is quite adequate for desktop applications
And...
The main problem with Swing is that if anything, it's *too* complex and tends to run visibly slow on anything less than a 1GHz machine.
-Chris
Remember, it's not just the bandwidth, latency is also important...
I thought that was the original screenplay!
No he didn't. Au contraire -- he wrote it as one book and was most miffed that it was published as three separate volumes.
I believe it was one novel, 6 books, published in 3 volumes. Tolkien wanted it to be one volume, but he still wrote it as 6 books.
-Chris
With the twist that each congressional delegation (all the representatives from a state) has 1 vote, e.g. all the Californian representatives would vote among themselves and then submit California's vote and so forth.