I've seen inside LJ. ELJ was being done by the same (already busy) staff as LJ without any extra help. The magazine business is tough, and between that and some management issues I'm surprised ELJ lasted as long as it did. It's too bad but hey, live to fight another day.
Yes, they are. When I plug in a mouse, it better work. When I plug in a headset, it better work. When I ask for suspend or hibernate, it better work. The fact is neither Linux (which irritates me) nor any of the BSDs correctly do the above (though the Linux suspend-to-swap patch looks interesting, I'm very wary of using third-party patches on a production system).
...is that MacOS is the only mainstream system that actually puts drive icons on the desktop.
But that it does it in an intuitive way. Put in a new disk, get another disk icon on the desktop. Take that disk out, the icon goes away. In the context it was created (there was no such thing as heirarchical folders or multiple users) this made sense and even now it makes a lot of sense. Users stored files on disks, the desktop was just a place to put things temporarily. Files on the desktop were by necessity attached to a disk but because the default on creation was the system disk this wasn't typically an issue (though if another disk had desktop items they would appear when that disk was inserted). In general, however, this metaphor works very well for a single user system.
The difficulty that we now face is that presenting the user with a view of the underlying hardware doesn't make as much sense when the file structure is no longer oriented towards storing the user's files (of the root directories in a UNIX style system how many actually store user data? exactly).
I believe that a distinction should be drawn between permanent storage and removable storage. Permanent storage (hard disks mostly) should get taken care of by the system and not presented to the user. This means that appropriate back end software needs to exist to manage the addition, removal, backup, and restore of hard drives in an efficient manner so that the system functions well with the automated system and the user need only mess with it if he/she/it knows how to do better. This would provide for hassle-free management of storage without drive letters (the curse of DOS) or manual mount point management (the curse of UNIX).
In this context the idea of a home directory makes sense but I think that the home directory should be mounted directly on the desktop and thus somewhat "invisible" to the user. User-accessible removable disks--this would likely include network shares--must also appear on the desktop (MacOS style) clearly marked as such, possibly cascading down from the opposite side as the regular icon origin (the location newly created files and folders appear, upper right on MacOS, upper left on Windows/KDE).
The user should not have cause to browse outside of their little sandbox for their daily work and thus this environment should be pretty much complete from the user perspective.
AOL for Linux has been floating around for a while now. Gateway made (makes?) Linux-based internet appliance type box that ran the software and at DC9 there was a group demoing the software extracted to and executing on a laptop. I think they were even passing out CDs. It was actually (IMHO) a better interface than the current Windows version, but then again it's not like an AOL user would switch to another platform even though AOL is available.
AOL's great advantage is that it provides a consistant environment with messaging and web features all integrated into one interface. The type of person who really likes this sort of interface is hardly going to throw away a platform and software package that's working fine to try out alternative software and a new operating system, neither of which backed by commercial support. Mod me down if you like, but the main reason why open source alternatives to common software (e.g. W/O/A - Windows/Office/AOL) is not that it doesn't work as well but that it doesn't look or act the same.
Want to convert W/O/A users? Make an interface that looks and acts like W/O/A. Then make it cheaper. Then ship it with a manufacturer's computers. Then be prepared to play catch-up to the real deal until you have a large enough user base to have some real clout.
Embrace and extend. That's Microsoft business tactics 101 for you.
You obviously don't understand what a window manager is. Neither explorer.exe nor the Finder are window managers. You can run MacOS without the Finder resident and you can run Windows without explorer.exe resident. In both cases the window manager is integrated into the operating system.
But I believe about 0.01% of these calls are necessary.
When it really comes down to it, your telephone is not necessary. Nor is your nice little 328, the cup of coffee in your hand, even having a job or living where you do now. This isn't about necessity, this is about convenience. Once the early adopters have worked out the bugs, wireless 'net will probably replace a home internet line in the great majority of households.
While counting lines of code is all very well and good, if you really want any semblance of a measure of the kernel's complexity you've got to count just the core kernel and exclude drivers. Just because there are more drivers now doesn't mean that the kernel is inherently that much more complex or that much bigger (unless you build everything and put it into a static kernel...). z
It's not that the machines use Windows-only hooks on purpose, it's that they use the newer power management standard (ACPI) and Linux has historically had very poor support for ACPI. There aren't any big disclaimers on the ACPI in 2.4 though, so I may end up loading it on my VAIO.
I had one (don't ask). The handwriting sucks. I mean, _really_ sucks. Really, really, sucks. If they don't make huge (and I do mean huge) improvements before they ship, I would recommend going with PalmOS or WinCE.
Say you are a big agency watching the formation of a fairly powerful OS useful for a great many things, things that you don't want the people you're watching to have. What do you want to do? You want to undermine the credibility of the OS in the eyes of the enemy. How is this done? Simple: Contribute. As soon as the NSA has its finger in the pot countries like China will back away, at least to some extent. Very subtle, very effective. And eminently deniable.
Slashdot Mirror
"The Shockwave Rider" by John Brunner, 1975.
True. Then again there's the cache.
I've seen inside LJ. ELJ was being done by the same (already busy) staff as LJ without any extra help. The magazine business is tough, and between that and some management issues I'm surprised ELJ lasted as long as it did. It's too bad but hey, live to fight another day.
"He said increased unease about terrorist attacks makes it even more important that the nation's radioactive waste be consolidated."
Eggs. Basket. z
Yes, they are. When I plug in a mouse, it better work. When I plug in a headset, it better work. When I ask for suspend or hibernate, it better work. The fact is neither Linux (which irritates me) nor any of the BSDs correctly do the above (though the Linux suspend-to-swap patch looks interesting, I'm very wary of using third-party patches on a production system).
1. Photoshop
2. Power management
3. Full hardware autodetection
Time appears to have removed it.
[fnord] http://baked.ath.cx/imac/ [/fnord]
Oh well.
...is that MacOS is the only mainstream system that actually puts drive icons on the desktop.
But that it does it in an intuitive way. Put in a new disk, get another disk icon on the desktop. Take that disk out, the icon goes away. In the context it was created (there was no such thing as heirarchical folders or multiple users) this made sense and even now it makes a lot of sense. Users stored files on disks, the desktop was just a place to put things temporarily. Files on the desktop were by necessity attached to a disk but because the default on creation was the system disk this wasn't typically an issue (though if another disk had desktop items they would appear when that disk was inserted). In general, however, this metaphor works very well for a single user system.
The difficulty that we now face is that presenting the user with a view of the underlying hardware doesn't make as much sense when the file structure is no longer oriented towards storing the user's files (of the root directories in a UNIX style system how many actually store user data? exactly).
I believe that a distinction should be drawn between permanent storage and removable storage. Permanent storage (hard disks mostly) should get taken care of by the system and not presented to the user. This means that appropriate back end software needs to exist to manage the addition, removal, backup, and restore of hard drives in an efficient manner so that the system functions well with the automated system and the user need only mess with it if he/she/it knows how to do better. This would provide for hassle-free management of storage without drive letters (the curse of DOS) or manual mount point management (the curse of UNIX).
In this context the idea of a home directory makes sense but I think that the home directory should be mounted directly on the desktop and thus somewhat "invisible" to the user. User-accessible removable disks--this would likely include network shares--must also appear on the desktop (MacOS style) clearly marked as such, possibly cascading down from the opposite side as the regular icon origin (the location newly created files and folders appear, upper right on MacOS, upper left on Windows/KDE).
The user should not have cause to browse outside of their little sandbox for their daily work and thus this environment should be pretty much complete from the user perspective.
_That_ is how I would prefer things.
"It's like having my eyelids forced open to watch the XP launch or something!"
I will have my eyelids forced open to watch the XP launch on Thursday.
Hehe...
z
AOL for Linux has been floating around for a while now. Gateway made (makes?) Linux-based internet appliance type box that ran the software and at DC9 there was a group demoing the software extracted to and executing on a laptop. I think they were even passing out CDs. It was actually (IMHO) a better interface than the current Windows version, but then again it's not like an AOL user would switch to another platform even though AOL is available.
AOL's great advantage is that it provides a consistant environment with messaging and web features all integrated into one interface. The type of person who really likes this sort of interface is hardly going to throw away a platform and software package that's working fine to try out alternative software and a new operating system, neither of which backed by commercial support. Mod me down if you like, but the main reason why open source alternatives to common software (e.g. W/O/A - Windows/Office/AOL) is not that it doesn't work as well but that it doesn't look or act the same.
Want to convert W/O/A users? Make an interface that looks and acts like W/O/A. Then make it cheaper. Then ship it with a manufacturer's computers. Then be prepared to play catch-up to the real deal until you have a large enough user base to have some real clout.
Embrace and extend. That's Microsoft business tactics 101 for you.
z
You obviously don't understand what a window manager is. Neither explorer.exe nor the Finder are window managers. You can run MacOS without the Finder resident and you can run Windows without explorer.exe resident. In both cases the window manager is integrated into the operating system.
As I already pointed out.
Finder != window manager
Desktop environments.
Speaking of Apple... Anyone else think that some of the notebooks on the link look suspiciously like the older PowerBooks?
z
But I believe about 0.01% of these calls are necessary.
When it really comes down to it, your telephone is not necessary. Nor is your nice little 328, the cup of coffee in your hand, even having a job or living where you do now. This isn't about necessity, this is about convenience. Once the early adopters have worked out the bugs, wireless 'net will probably replace a home internet line in the great majority of households.
z
While counting lines of code is all very well and good, if you really want any semblance of a measure of the kernel's complexity you've got to count just the core kernel and exclude drivers. Just because there are more drivers now doesn't mean that the kernel is inherently that much more complex or that much bigger (unless you build everything and put it into a static kernel...). z
It's not that the machines use Windows-only hooks on purpose, it's that they use the newer power management standard (ACPI) and Linux has historically had very poor support for ACPI. There aren't any big disclaimers on the ACPI in 2.4 though, so I may end up loading it on my VAIO.
z
I had one (don't ask). The handwriting sucks. I mean, _really_ sucks. Really, really, sucks. If they don't make huge (and I do mean huge) improvements before they ship, I would recommend going with PalmOS or WinCE.
z
Uh... There's a chair in the background of one of the pics. Take a look. The thing is probably two feet in diameter (.6M for you metric people). z
Because their early machines were total shit and that scared off a lot of people. I'm not going to buy Fujitsu for a _long_ time. z
Ok, you're an inventive little son of a bitch. z
So? The very thought casts suspicion and makes the Russians/Chinese/whoever nervous. z
Look, all they have to do is clock the damn thing up and it'll rock. A 1GHz Crusoe should be just fine. And it's not like they're not about to.
z
Say you are a big agency watching the formation of a fairly powerful OS useful for a great many things, things that you don't want the people you're watching to have. What do you want to do? You want to undermine the credibility of the OS in the eyes of the enemy. How is this done? Simple: Contribute. As soon as the NSA has its finger in the pot countries like China will back away, at least to some extent. Very subtle, very effective. And eminently deniable.
z