Because the environments you are talking about are two different animals. In one (windows) it's the operating system, in the other it's the desktop environment. You can choose to not run a desktop environment or run a different one because it is separate from the operating system in unixs. In windows it's integrated.
So just to sum up. In KDE, Konqurer is integrated into the desktop environment, but you can freely use another browser, or another desktop.
In Windows, Internet Explorer is integrated into the operating system but you can freely use another browser, but you are still stuck with Explorer integrated in the operating system.
I'm a wine user, windows user, and linux user. It seems that games under wine work slower then the same app under windows.
I would have thought that because the linux filesystem is faster then fat32 (the fs I'm using under windows) it would be faster in that respect. In other respect it should be equal.
Where are the current bottlenecks and will it ever be close enough to a windows platform that a wine'd application will run as fast as windows, and without any noticable differences?
(BTW, I'm not complaining, the wine crew have done a fantasic job thus far!)
I agree NeHe's tutorials are great. I went and bought the CD from his site. I bought it more as a charity purchase but, have found it to be a great reference for example code, or tutorials.
Well, I'm not sure what the moderator was thinking of either. Wasn't intended as flamebait. Oh well... I think I'm going to move from c++ to C# anyways. (It's similar to Delphi (with C syntax), which compiles so fast it makes it a joy to work with!).
From the page, here is some sample code of an "out" type parameter. (Think of it as a one way reference) out parameters are set to the default initializer for the type of it. For example:
void foo(out int bar)
{
}
int bar = 3;
foo(bar);// bar is now 0
The immediate problem I can see with this, is the same as using references in C++. There is no indication in the calling procedure that the variable passed in can be changed by the called procedure. In C, you can only do this by passing pointers, and as such you know that foo(&bar); can change the bar. (or that the variable you are passing in is a pointer, and thus can change what it's pointed too).
This sort of thing is only important after code has been written, and is now being maintained by other folk. The other folk not being familiar with foo, will have no idea that bar can be changed.
Spatial --- not good/I don't get it
on
GNOME for Grandma
·
· Score: 1
I've played with Nautilus, and after reading this artical I'm realizing why I quickly got frustrated with it.
After describing the "one window per folder" idea, the author quickly shows how to dive into windows using the middle mouse button (on mine it's a hard to click roller ball) which closes the parent after diving into the child folder. You can also hold down the shift key to do it. So you can, in effect just make it work like a browser... Q. Why not just use a browser then? A. Because Spactial will keep the location of the window at the same place it was the last time you used it. Q. Why would I want that? I want windows to open in the same place I'm using them now!
Another feature I don't understand. "Network resources are now accessed conveniently." I find konqueror's method pretty convenient. If I go to a file... There it is! If I go to a web page... There it is! If I go to a site that I have ssh keys for... There it is! If I go to an ftp site... There it is!
Explorer is pretty much the same way. Well except for ssh.
I'm happy that gnome is more stable and faster etc. But I really don't get the spatial. Why is it important, or even desired?
Blowing away my mod points, but I just wanted to congrats on a great artical. The only complaint I have is the title.
Linux desktop is way more advanced the windows. I shudder when I load up my work computer (xp) and have to deal with my dozens of applications on ONE window!!! Like how am I supposed to wade through THAT MESS!
I did a really neat thing once, where I had my website open in one kde window, and my sister's website open in another. I when to my sister's images directory and dragged from one web site to the other. That's right, I dragged those images across the country to a different website. Do it on XP? I think not!
Then let's talk viruses... OK let's not, we all know how MS compares to Linux in that area. But wait, you say viruses have nothing to do with the desktop. Wrong. In XP the desktop is integrated with the OS. You can't have one without the other. Another place where Linux excels. (Just by not doing something stupid!).
Anyways, I didn't really intend to go off on a rant, (but it was so nicely done, I'll just leave it there). I really liked your artical, and even learned a thing or two, and rediscovered a thing or two more.
FYI, it was meant to be a play on words. The idea was that MS would be loosening it's monopolistic hold, and also losing the case.
And for the other Grammer Policeman, who commented about this showing the US having poorer schools, I agree. I'm Canadian, and the fact that it was an airplane joke, shows the poster (whom I assume to be from a US institution) is not up to the Canadian level of education.:)
It doesn't seem right to me that a royalty could be charged for using api's. The api's are there and can be used by any software. Isn't that the purpose of an OS? That is, to provide an interface layer between the programs and the hardware? The royalty is payed for by the consumer when they buy the OS.
It seems to me that most (if not all) spaming and advertising done on the Internet is simply polluting the lines of communication. Like any pollution, it reduces the stuff you want, by increasing the ratio of stuff you don't want, thereby making the whole environment unusable.
Is it possible that this view can be used in any legal way to go after Internet polluters?
Yes! You too will be able to run across America several times. You will recall that when our hero Forest Gump was a tiny lad, he had these very same braces. With the help of a training team he quickly learned to run very fast and long.
The article's main point isn't about burning money, or that money will pop in the Microwave. It is the fact that with rfid tags, the government can track money.
Giving up moderator to reply to this troll. (sigh)
Comparing McDonalds/$nice_restaurant != Open Source/Closed Source.
McDonalds is in expensive, and made for the masses. $nice_restaurant is expensive, and made for the few. Open Source is source code you can see. Closed Source is source code you can't see.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the environments you are talking about are two different animals. In one (windows) it's the operating system, in the other it's the desktop environment. You can choose to not run a desktop environment or run a different one because it is separate from the operating system in unixs. In windows it's integrated.
So just to sum up.
In KDE, Konqurer is integrated into the desktop environment, but you can freely use another browser, or another desktop.
In Windows, Internet Explorer is integrated into the operating system but you can freely use another browser, but you are still stuck with Explorer integrated in the operating system.
get it?
Good point.
Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do know history are doomed to watch it repeat....
This statement while funny is actually rather sad if you think about it.
there's no configure,
there's no makefile,
I don't think this stuff is compatible with Linux!
I was referring to my current install which is fat32. (no bubbles burst here).
Are YOU stupid? Wine doesn't need windows in order to run windows programs. It's not an extra layer. It is the layer.
I'm a wine user, windows user, and linux user. It seems that games under wine work slower then the same app under windows.
I would have thought that because the linux filesystem is faster then fat32 (the fs I'm using under windows) it would be faster in that respect. In other respect it should be equal.
Where are the current bottlenecks and will it ever be close enough to a windows platform that a wine'd application will run as fast as windows, and without any noticable differences?
(BTW, I'm not complaining, the wine crew have done a fantasic job thus far!)
I agree NeHe's tutorials are great. I went and bought the CD from his site. I bought it more as a charity purchase but, have found it to be a great reference for example code, or tutorials.
One of the great sites out there!
Doom Nukem Forever?
Well, I'm not sure what the moderator was thinking of either. Wasn't intended as flamebait. Oh well... I think I'm going to move from c++ to C# anyways. (It's similar to Delphi (with C syntax), which compiles so fast it makes it a joy to work with!).
From the page, here is some sample code of an "out" type parameter. (Think of it as a one way reference)
// bar is now 0
out parameters are set to the default initializer for the type of it. For example:
void foo(out int bar)
{
}
int bar = 3;
foo(bar);
The immediate problem I can see with this, is the same as using references in C++. There is no indication in the calling procedure that the variable passed in can be changed by the called procedure. In C, you can only do this by passing pointers, and as such you know that foo(&bar); can change the bar. (or that the variable you are passing in is a pointer, and thus can change what it's pointed too).
This sort of thing is only important after code has been written, and is now being maintained by other folk. The other folk not being familiar with foo, will have no idea that bar can be changed.
I've played with Nautilus, and after reading this artical I'm realizing why I quickly got frustrated with it.
After describing the "one window per folder" idea, the author quickly shows how to dive into windows using the middle mouse button (on mine it's a hard to click roller ball) which closes the parent after diving into the child folder. You can also hold down the shift key to do it. So you can, in effect just make it work like a browser...
Q. Why not just use a browser then?
A. Because Spactial will keep the location of the window at the same place it was the last time you used it.
Q. Why would I want that? I want windows to open in the same place I'm using them now!
Another feature I don't understand.
"Network resources are now accessed conveniently."
I find konqueror's method pretty convenient. If I go to a file... There it is! If I go to a web page... There it is! If I go to a site that I have ssh keys for... There it is! If I go to an ftp site... There it is!
Explorer is pretty much the same way. Well except for ssh.
I'm happy that gnome is more stable and faster etc. But I really don't get the spatial. Why is it important, or even desired?
Probably because they don't want developers to be inundated with calls from hardware vender's saying pick me pick me.
(PS. I love KDE, it spellchecks this form as I type. Who says Linux isn't innovative).
Blowing away my mod points, but I just wanted to congrats on a great artical. The only complaint I have is the title.
Linux desktop is way more advanced the windows. I shudder when I load up my work computer (xp) and have to deal with my dozens of applications on ONE window!!! Like how am I supposed to wade through THAT MESS!
I did a really neat thing once, where I had my website open in one kde window, and my sister's website open in another. I when to my sister's images directory and dragged from one web site to the other. That's right, I dragged those images across the country to a different website. Do it on XP? I think not!
Then let's talk viruses... OK let's not, we all know how MS compares to Linux in that area. But wait, you say viruses have nothing to do with the desktop. Wrong. In XP the desktop is integrated with the OS. You can't have one without the other. Another place where Linux excels. (Just by not doing something stupid!).
Anyways, I didn't really intend to go off on a rant, (but it was so nicely done, I'll just leave it there). I really liked your artical, and even learned a thing or two, and rediscovered a thing or two more.
AAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh
:)
HELP!!!
The Grammer police are after me!
FYI, it was meant to be a play on words. The idea was that MS would be loosening it's monopolistic hold, and also losing the case.
And for the other Grammer Policeman, who commented about this showing the US having poorer schools, I agree. I'm Canadian, and the fact that it was an airplane joke, shows the poster (whom I assume to be from a US institution) is not up to the Canadian level of education.
(Just joking again...)
It doesn't seem right to me that a royalty could be charged for using api's. The api's are there and can be used by any software. Isn't that the purpose of an OS? That is, to provide an interface layer between the programs and the hardware? The royalty is payed for by the consumer when they buy the OS.
It seems to me that most (if not all) spaming and advertising done on the Internet is simply polluting the lines of communication. Like any pollution, it reduces the stuff you want, by increasing the ratio of stuff you don't want, thereby making the whole environment unusable.
Is it possible that this view can be used in any legal way to go after Internet polluters?
I wouldn't know. I haven't seen the source!
Well after 15 minutes, I've downloaded 1.6M, uploaded 5.8M and I've only got 157 Hours to go....
My download rate is 7 kiB/s, my upload is 15.
I like the idea of Torrent, but it simply doesn't work.
Yes! You too will be able to run across America several times. You will recall that when our hero Forest Gump was a tiny lad, he had these very same braces. With the help of a training team he quickly learned to run very fast and long.
I saw on for sale on ebay (seriously). It hadn't reached it's reserve yet, but people had bid on it.
Oh, here it is. ng-5
Of course, as a previous poster pointed out... There are not RFID tags in money! It's just a bit of wire to help stop counterfiting.
The article's main point isn't about burning money, or that money will pop in the Microwave. It is the fact that with rfid tags, the government can track money.
(The land of the free?)
Sorry, shouldn't flame like that, and usually know better.
The parent post escaped my attention, and your post looked like an stupid thought was trying to escape by acting original.
Sarcasm is easily lost on the web. No offense meant, you're not an idiot after all.
Did you really? I'd love to do that!
Giving up moderator to reply to this troll. (sigh)
Comparing McDonalds/$nice_restaurant != Open Source/Closed Source.
McDonalds is in expensive, and made for the masses.
$nice_restaurant is expensive, and made for the few.
Open Source is source code you can see.
Closed Source is source code you can't see.
My conclusion is that you're an idiot.