I think I learned quite a bit. I learned that when you get people in front of a camera talking about your product, they don't really pay very much attention to what they are seeing. If you look like a representative of the company, most people are going to say kind things.
Which to me, says an awful lot about the Mojave Experiment. It doesn't really matter what people say they think in that setting. It matters what they think when they install the OS on their own computer, and for Vista that hasn't been very good.
It also makes me question the effectiveness of usability labs I've sat through in the process of developing software for corporations. It's a painful process, and now I wonder if it is very accurate at all.
The original Burners-Lee design was that the tag would allow American browsers to totally ignore everything British. It was later shortened to <br>, and a very poor implementation by Microsoft led to its use today as a line feed. Microsoft's inability to implement standards has saddled the browsing public incapable of ignoring the British, leaving us to read the endless sarcasm.
Wow, insightful? Suggesting source is the standard way is just awful. Source doesn't resolve its own dependencies. Source can result in a several day install. Source isn't appropriate at all for underpowered devices and devices with very limited drive space, such as a Zaurus or an Asus EEE (and why shouldn't small devices be able to participate in a standard?). Source distribution is extremely network inefficient compared to binaries. Source has no guarantee of building on your system (trust me, I ran Gentoo for years). Source is provided by a developer, not a maintainer, someone who isn't concentrating on making sure its going to work properly on your system.
Source is a great thing(tm). Don't get me wrong. But it is not a good format for distribution - at all.
The problem has been resolved and won't happen again
These folks really are into denying the inevitable. Though, since Zonk stopped approving stories in April, I guess there is at least a chance they won't be repeat-Slashdotted next week.
The "if the code works, use it" attitude is what gave us the DOS, Windows, and MS Office monopolies.
The fact that when these things came to dominance they were the best readily available product (based on price and platform) on the market seems to totally slip by your radar. I agree with your point, but you start it off with emotionally charged nonsense that it makes your comment suspect.
I think Skype is a good example of why I avoid closed source software. While I appreciate that Skype has produced a Linux client, the Linux client is full of bugs, some dubiously obvious. For instance, under Sound Devices settings the Ringer output device and Sound Out device are listed separate, but the client ignores the Ringer setting and sends the ringer to the main output. When I tell the sound to go to my Bluetooth headset, I never hear the phone ringing because it's going to the headset, making Skype pretty annoyingly useless to me unless I want to keep the Bluetooth headset on at all times.
If Skype was open source, I could possibly fix that, or at least find someone to report the bug to. As it is, I'm just stuck. As far as I can tell, I don't see Skype putting much additional work into the Linux client. They don't have much monetary incentive to do so, since Linux is so niche. Which is just another reason why we are better off with Open Source where monetary incentive isn't the primary driver of work.
To a non techie if it doesn't run windows it's not a PC.
Interesting that you state that as a matter of fact. My non-techie fiance uses an Eee every day and the only thing I've ever heard her say is how much she loves it. Of course, she doesn't even know what a "PC" is. She does know computers don't usually fit neatly into her purse, weigh next to nothing, and start up quickly.
Further, many non-techies love OSX. I'm not sure where you got your opinion from.
And instead of distributions including beta 5 we'd have Firefox beta 5 under the name of Release instead. Political pressure to adopt release schedules doesn't necessary mean the actual software gets finished any faster.
Really? I know the projects I've worked on seem to get done a lot quicker when there is a firm deadline involved. It's certainly incentive to work some extra hours, concentrate a bit harder, and to trim the less important requirements that can't meet the deadline.
This shows the true ownership belongs to the government. We are merely "leasing" the land from the government.
You make it sound so us vs. the man. I know I'll probably be beat around the neck and shoulders for saying this around here, but last I checked, weare the government in the U.S. We pay taxes on our property to the common "us" so that we get roads to that property, police keep our property safe from criminals, fire departments save our property, and armies protect that property from being invaded by other countries.
Of course, you could always buy property in a third-world country where property taxes are low or non-existent, and see how having none of those benefits works out for you. I know someone who has done just that, and he's paying more for armed guards than I pay for property taxes. He also runs the risk of losing everything the next time the government changes hands.
Sounds to me like you might be interested in Netvibes' Universal Widget API. It allows you to write widgets that will work on NetVibes (of course), Mac, Windows Vista, Windows Live, iGoogle, iPhone/IPod Touch, Opera, and Yahoo Widgets (not the same as My Yahoo). I just found out about it today, so I haven't had a chance to try it out, but I will be trying it soon.
Safari does? Hmm... that's odd. Typically, I've found WebKit to be the best renderer out there as far as standards go. I use it as my "reference" renderer when designing sites, as something that renders fine w/ WebKit will almost certainly render the same in every other standards-compliant browser.
Your statements conflict. You are basically saying, "if I can get it to work on Safari, it will work anywhere." That doesn't mean it is the most compliant, rather the opposite.
The gimp is not Photoshop, and is still missing some features that professionals really need, it isn't a viable replacement yet.
Hmm, last I checked, I am a professional. And I use the Gimp regularly. True, I am not a full-time graphic artist, but my work is seen by many people. It can do everything I need it to do. I'm not trying to imply it's ready for every professional, but I do think your presumption is overstated.
There are things that Photoshop will do ten years from now that it doesn't do today, and things it does today that it didn't do 10 years ago. It's just so strange to me that professionals always feel they must have the exact feature set Photoshop has at this point in its history to make an alternative like the Gimp viable.
I'm not missing his point. I do understand it, and I realize it was in response to a post about Flash. The point I was trying to make is that accessibility isn't a reason to choose Silverlight in an application funded by public money, intended for public consumption, when it makes itself inaccessible to a larger group of people than the blind. I'm definitely not implying Flash is a better choice.
I know this probably isn't politically correct, but here goes. There's appx 6-700,000 legally blind persons in the US. There are far more than that using platforms unsupported by Silverlight.
So, great, Silverlight is accessible to the blind. Last I checked, so is HTML (especially XHTML).
You know, I wonder if you speak from real experience. As we speak, I am watching 300 on BluRay. While there is a bit of grain, it still looks fantastic. It is a noticeable improvement over DVD, which was a noticeable improvement over VHS.
I still think the $600 I spent for the PS3 is some of the best money I've ever spent. This device does everything I could hope for. Excellent games and a great BluRay DVD player. A great DLNA client that lets me play all the music, video, and pictures on my main computer seamlessly. Not to mention, every couple of months a new update comes out that gives me new features for free. And now you can get it for $400 (if you don't need PS2 compatibility).
I remember people paying thousands for CD players early in their life, so I just don't understand the amount of talk around the expense of BluRay. Compared to early DVD players, and taking inflation into account, I think BluRay is already a better deal than DVD was at this point in its young life.
You are exactly right. There is no software freedom in these requirements. This may not be true for all open source, but free software absolutely can not use these terms.
They basically say "The EU made us do it" in the document. So Microsoft sat back and said to themselves "How can we make money from open source." And this initiative spells out the result in detail. Boo, I say, boo.
Have you tried to learn Photoshop recently? It's learning curve is no less. At all. You are just used to it, just like you would be with Gimp if you'd put in the same amount of time.
You act like old dogs and confronted with new tricks. I really grow tired of the idea that OSS should clone every Window's and Mac app. You had to learn Photoshop, Word, and Excel. Stop criticizing the need to learn a new piece of software, without applying that criticism to the software you already learned.
OSS cannot excel at innovation if the developers spend all their time cloning.
First, can you not wait to see the result before jumping to the bloat criticism.
Secondly, the world does want eye candy (see OSX or the IPhone). Gnome is competing with OSX, Vista, KDE 4, and others. In comparison, Gnome is behind in the eye candy department.
I know I've converted more people to Linux by showing them Compiz/Beryl/Compiz Fusion than anything else, by far. When I show them Avant Window Navigator and Compiz in the same desktop, they are snatching the live CD from my fingers. Like it or not shell huggers, eye candy sells.
When you say "do we need more eye candy", I guess you are referring to the "we" that is 0.8% of the browsing public using Linux. In that case, I guess "we" don't need eye candy. But "I" would like to see more people interested in open source and free(dom) software, and eye candy in Linux is one of the best ways to make that happen.
Slashdot Mirror
I think I learned quite a bit. I learned that when you get people in front of a camera talking about your product, they don't really pay very much attention to what they are seeing. If you look like a representative of the company, most people are going to say kind things.
Which to me, says an awful lot about the Mojave Experiment. It doesn't really matter what people say they think in that setting. It matters what they think when they install the OS on their own computer, and for Vista that hasn't been very good.
It also makes me question the effectiveness of usability labs I've sat through in the process of developing software for corporations. It's a painful process, and now I wonder if it is very accurate at all.
"a lovable, cuddly, stuffed penguin sitting down after having gorged itself on herring." -- Linus Torvalds
That was the original intent of the tag <british>
The original Burners-Lee design was that the tag would allow American browsers to totally ignore everything British. It was later shortened to <br>, and a very poor implementation by Microsoft led to its use today as a line feed. Microsoft's inability to implement standards has saddled the browsing public incapable of ignoring the British, leaving us to read the endless sarcasm.
Wow, insightful? Suggesting source is the standard way is just awful. Source doesn't resolve its own dependencies. Source can result in a several day install. Source isn't appropriate at all for underpowered devices and devices with very limited drive space, such as a Zaurus or an Asus EEE (and why shouldn't small devices be able to participate in a standard?). Source distribution is extremely network inefficient compared to binaries. Source has no guarantee of building on your system (trust me, I ran Gentoo for years). Source is provided by a developer, not a maintainer, someone who isn't concentrating on making sure its going to work properly on your system.
Source is a great thing(tm). Don't get me wrong. But it is not a good format for distribution - at all.
Holy crap, that explains a lot. All these years I've been trying to give my body away to women for free.
If you are going to correct someone's spelling, don't use the word "gonna" to do it.
These folks really are into denying the inevitable. Though, since Zonk stopped approving stories in April, I guess there is at least a chance they won't be repeat-Slashdotted next week.
The fact that when these things came to dominance they were the best readily available product (based on price and platform) on the market seems to totally slip by your radar. I agree with your point, but you start it off with emotionally charged nonsense that it makes your comment suspect.
I think Skype is a good example of why I avoid closed source software. While I appreciate that Skype has produced a Linux client, the Linux client is full of bugs, some dubiously obvious. For instance, under Sound Devices settings the Ringer output device and Sound Out device are listed separate, but the client ignores the Ringer setting and sends the ringer to the main output. When I tell the sound to go to my Bluetooth headset, I never hear the phone ringing because it's going to the headset, making Skype pretty annoyingly useless to me unless I want to keep the Bluetooth headset on at all times.
If Skype was open source, I could possibly fix that, or at least find someone to report the bug to. As it is, I'm just stuck. As far as I can tell, I don't see Skype putting much additional work into the Linux client. They don't have much monetary incentive to do so, since Linux is so niche. Which is just another reason why we are better off with Open Source where monetary incentive isn't the primary driver of work.
Are you sure about that? I'm the disorganized type myself, and I can never remember where I've placed the body.
Who do you suggest invented the wheel, an ancient race of Hilton heiresses?
Further, many non-techies love OSX. I'm not sure where you got your opinion from.
Really? I know the projects I've worked on seem to get done a lot quicker when there is a firm deadline involved. It's certainly incentive to work some extra hours, concentrate a bit harder, and to trim the less important requirements that can't meet the deadline.
You make it sound so us vs. the man. I know I'll probably be beat around the neck and shoulders for saying this around here, but last I checked, we are the government in the U.S. We pay taxes on our property to the common "us" so that we get roads to that property, police keep our property safe from criminals, fire departments save our property, and armies protect that property from being invaded by other countries.
Of course, you could always buy property in a third-world country where property taxes are low or non-existent, and see how having none of those benefits works out for you. I know someone who has done just that, and he's paying more for armed guards than I pay for property taxes. He also runs the risk of losing everything the next time the government changes hands.
Sounds to me like you might be interested in Netvibes' Universal Widget API. It allows you to write widgets that will work on NetVibes (of course), Mac, Windows Vista, Windows Live, iGoogle, iPhone/IPod Touch, Opera, and Yahoo Widgets (not the same as My Yahoo). I just found out about it today, so I haven't had a chance to try it out, but I will be trying it soon.
The article cleary states they sold out of in store stock. You have stated otherwise more than once. Sorry if I sound hostile.
Where did you get that information? I'm guessing you made it up, because in store models were reportedly selling out.
Your statements conflict. You are basically saying, "if I can get it to work on Safari, it will work anywhere." That doesn't mean it is the most compliant, rather the opposite.
Hmm, last I checked, I am a professional. And I use the Gimp regularly. True, I am not a full-time graphic artist, but my work is seen by many people. It can do everything I need it to do. I'm not trying to imply it's ready for every professional, but I do think your presumption is overstated.
There are things that Photoshop will do ten years from now that it doesn't do today, and things it does today that it didn't do 10 years ago. It's just so strange to me that professionals always feel they must have the exact feature set Photoshop has at this point in its history to make an alternative like the Gimp viable.
I'm not missing his point. I do understand it, and I realize it was in response to a post about Flash. The point I was trying to make is that accessibility isn't a reason to choose Silverlight in an application funded by public money, intended for public consumption, when it makes itself inaccessible to a larger group of people than the blind. I'm definitely not implying Flash is a better choice.
I know this probably isn't politically correct, but here goes. There's appx 6-700,000 legally blind persons in the US. There are far more than that using platforms unsupported by Silverlight.
So, great, Silverlight is accessible to the blind. Last I checked, so is HTML (especially XHTML).
You know, I wonder if you speak from real experience. As we speak, I am watching 300 on BluRay. While there is a bit of grain, it still looks fantastic. It is a noticeable improvement over DVD, which was a noticeable improvement over VHS.
I still think the $600 I spent for the PS3 is some of the best money I've ever spent. This device does everything I could hope for. Excellent games and a great BluRay DVD player. A great DLNA client that lets me play all the music, video, and pictures on my main computer seamlessly. Not to mention, every couple of months a new update comes out that gives me new features for free. And now you can get it for $400 (if you don't need PS2 compatibility).
I remember people paying thousands for CD players early in their life, so I just don't understand the amount of talk around the expense of BluRay. Compared to early DVD players, and taking inflation into account, I think BluRay is already a better deal than DVD was at this point in its young life.
Do you realize how many tubes you are offering?
You are exactly right. There is no software freedom in these requirements. This may not be true for all open source, but free software absolutely can not use these terms.
They basically say "The EU made us do it" in the document. So Microsoft sat back and said to themselves "How can we make money from open source." And this initiative spells out the result in detail. Boo, I say, boo.
Have you tried to learn Photoshop recently? It's learning curve is no less. At all. You are just used to it, just like you would be with Gimp if you'd put in the same amount of time.
You act like old dogs and confronted with new tricks. I really grow tired of the idea that OSS should clone every Window's and Mac app. You had to learn Photoshop, Word, and Excel. Stop criticizing the need to learn a new piece of software, without applying that criticism to the software you already learned.
OSS cannot excel at innovation if the developers spend all their time cloning.
First, can you not wait to see the result before jumping to the bloat criticism.
Secondly, the world does want eye candy (see OSX or the IPhone). Gnome is competing with OSX, Vista, KDE 4, and others. In comparison, Gnome is behind in the eye candy department.
I know I've converted more people to Linux by showing them Compiz/Beryl/Compiz Fusion than anything else, by far. When I show them Avant Window Navigator and Compiz in the same desktop, they are snatching the live CD from my fingers. Like it or not shell huggers, eye candy sells.
When you say "do we need more eye candy", I guess you are referring to the "we" that is 0.8% of the browsing public using Linux. In that case, I guess "we" don't need eye candy. But "I" would like to see more people interested in open source and free(dom) software, and eye candy in Linux is one of the best ways to make that happen.