You could always press the Super/"windows" key or whatever itls labelled on your keyboard. Gets you to the overview without needing to lift your hands off the keyboard - pretty much everything in gnome-shell can be done with keyboard shortcuts, often the same shortcuts that worked in Gnome 2 (ctrl-alt-up/down arrow to switch workspaces for example).
To launch an application, I press Super, type the first few letters of the program name (or what it does, like "mail", which gets me Thunderbird), hit Enter and go. Much quicker than the Gnome 2/Windows way of clicking Applications, mousing down to the correct submenu, and selecting from there.
You mean you never worked out how to unmaximise a window in Gnome 3? It's the opposite of maximising - drag the title bar to the top of the screen and the window will snap to maximised, drag the window away from the top and it will snap back to its previous size. It's really simple and actually discoverable, unlike some other things in Gnome 3.
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet "Window maximizing and tiling: You can maximize a window by dragging it to the top edge of the screen. Alternatively, you can double-click the window title. To unmaximize, pull it down again. By dragging windows to the left and right edges of the screen you can tile them side by side. "
It is probably valid music but it doesn't carry much variation.
So you don't like Steve Reich much either? Some of the best techno relies on the effect that even the smallest variations to the sound can have. The repetition is the substrate from which the music builds.
I used to be a drummer (spent my youth playing everything from orchestral percussion through jazz to punk and metal) and I love techno,drum n bass, dubstep etc. The rigid machine beat is part of the appeal - it's what gives those styles their distinct characters in the same way that the crotchet-swung quaver ride and hi-hat offbeat makes swing.
There's shitty music in every genre, but musical talent will always shine through no matter whether it's acoustic instruments being played or software ones. Ignore the mass-market entertainment corporation shite, and there's a lot of extremely interesting electronic music being made - check out Clark, Rusty, Apparat, Plastikman, etc.
But yes, SAW produced some abominations, and Cowell is merely taking their business model to its logical conclusion.
I've never had a problem with it either. I also quite like Gnome 3, systemd, etc. Satisfied people are less likely to make a song and dance about their experiences though, so the moaning always dominates.
Why does it have to be mitigated at 65mph? Are your toddlers holding the steering wheel and brake pedal, preventing you from pulling over to sort out the problem?
Child-proof seat buckles are available if getting out of the seat is a recurring issue.
Worse as Microsoft has patented it, it stops other application writes from using the same interface - thereby making Microsoft programs have different interfaces from other vendors and increasing the learning curve of non-Microsoft applications.
Sorry but I'm just NOT going to be convinced the ribbon is a good idea.
This is exactly why the ribbon is a good idea, for Microsoft at least. Why make it easy to switch away from MS products? Anything that increases vendor lock-in is good for MS.
Not the government. The school. I doubt the teachers illegally spying on their students were sending the video stream to the department for education (or whatever the local equivalent is).
Meh. If I'm going to watch girl stuff, I'll stick with Jane Austen adaptations. The "Pride and Prejudice" with Colin Perth is really good. Superb production, acting, and music.
Do you mean the 1990s BBC adaptation with Colin Firth? Mr Darcy coming out of the pond with his shirt all wet was a defining moment in the sexual development of many female Brits born in the late 70s/early 80s.
The real WTF was that you have an OS/software combination that (intentionally) refuses to do what you ask of it (ie "play this media"), and thus forces you to go out of your way to find an illicit rip from the Internet. Yet another example that shows that DRM is definitely not made with the customer's best intentions in mind.
A week ago, I went to watch a DVD on my computer (anime TV series, ~20 discs in set). MPClassic could not play it properly, and WMP said I did not have rights to view the disc. So I torrented the whole series and watched that.
So you downloaded several tens of gigabytes to avoid DRM on one product? VLC for Windows is only 20MB. Mplayer is about 35MB. Even a full-blown super-fat linux distro (which will never tell you you don't have rights to watch some media) is 3.5GB and most are less. You must have a lot of patience. I'm glad I'm not sharing a contended ADSL link with you.
Personally, I buy music direct from the musicians' websites or in person from the musician at a gig. I only buy games that specifically do not have DRM. I recognise that creative artists are being screwed over by the bloated middlemen and so I cut the middlemen out and directly reward the people whose labours produce my entertainment.
BBC Radio 4 recently dramatised the series to good effect. It should stil be available on their iPlayer service if you have a UK IP. There was also a BBC TV version in the mid to late 90s which was a lot of fun.
Are all of those people strictly necessary to produce a movie? What exactly does a "second second assistant director" do, that a "second assistant director" cannot?
Here's the full crew of a feature-length movie that made over 60 times its production costs at the box office:
Produced by Shane Carruth producer
Original Music by Shane Carruth
Film Editing by Shane Carruth
Casting by Shane Carruth
Production Design by Shane Carruth
Sound Department Shane Carruth sound designer Reggie Evans location sound David Ho sound re-recording mixer (uncredited)
Camera and Electrical Department Daniel Bueche camera operator James Russell assistant camera Anand Upadhyaya camera operator
Editorial Department Omar Godinez telecine colorist
Other crew Chip Carruth caterer Kathy Carruth caterer David Sullivan production assistant
This is a film which I have paid to see, bought on DVD and recommended to my friends (several of whom bought copies themselves). It was highly profitable, yet required only 12 people (plus cast) to make.
I agree that many people work on films that do not earn huge amounts of money. Cutting the fee of a leading actor by a few million dollars might actually mean that everyone else could get a pay rise - or is it right that the people who spend most time making a movie are paid only maybe 1/500th that of the person whose face is on the poster?
If Hollywood needs special laws made just to benefit its obsolete and inefficient business model, then it needs to change the way it does business, not change civil society to fit its needs.
Incidentally, you could have replied to my post with a single post of your own, and been less obnoxious about it. I'm polite - why aren't you?
Using your arguments (which have been repeated ad nauseum here and similarly minded sites like TechDirt), the admission charged by theaters, athletic events, and museums should be voluntary whenever the venue is not filled to capacity. Same with trains and buses. In fact, since the venues might not have gotten the memo, people shouldn't have to ask permission; they should just barge in and claim it is their right as a free citizen to see the Broadway show or science exhibit for free, because their presence isn't costing anybody anything. Then we have the First Amendment that allows these wonderful guests to post the obligatory "it was a crappy show anyway, I would NEVER have paid a cent for that and they should pay me for spending my time".
The fact is that people need to be paid to offer these things, and that holds true for digital products like music as well as theater events. There are substantial capital expenditures, operating expenses, labor costs, financing and marketing costs, all of which are conveniently ignored by the young Slashdot crowd.
If you feel so strongly about your argument, why don't you organize a flash mob to storm into your local science museum without paying? And please remember to record the event and post it on youtube, that will be highly entertaining. Thank you.
In the UK, many museums (including the Science Museum in London) are free to enter. I've been to free theatre performances, free movie showings, even free music festivals. In some cases the costs were covered by corporate sponsors, more often the cost was covered by the state. If these things are valued by society, then why shouldn't society make these things happen?
Public funding of creative works which are then distributed free of charge is entirely possible. It works in science, where funding bodies are requiring open access publishing of work they fund.
Much of what comes out of Hollywood cannot be considered "quality entertainment".
I spend a large proportion of my (small) disposable income on watching films and buying music and games. I buy music direct from an artist's website wherever possible, or from small local retailers (especially if those small local retailers sell online). I only buy games which are not encumbered with DRM, as I would like to be able to play them on more than one system, which may or may not be connected to the internet, or even be able to read the original physical media the game came on.
I support artists, but I do not support most anti-piracy measures as they inevitably hurt my interests and by extension those of the artists.
Maybe there needs to be a market readjustment in the cost of movie making. Does spending a couple of weeks in front of a camera pretending to be someone else really justify a fee of several tens of millions of dollars? Does every assistant need an assistant? Do you really give everyone on your workforce their meals for free during a shoot?
And why spend at least $20 million on marketing? Every half-sucessful indie band knows how to sell themselves using the internet, for nothing more than the cost of their time. Much modern film marketing is redundant - for example, I don't want to see trailers that end up showing almost the whole plot of the movie - why would I bother going to see a film when you've just spent 5 minutes telling me exactly what's going to happen? Stop trying to force me to watch films in forced-stereoscopy "3D" - I won't pay extra just to be given a headache. Another lost sale. Why bother with promotional deals with fast-food outlets? Does getting a piece of plastic along with your burger really make you want to go and see the latest Transformers crap-fest? More wasted money.
Almost every other industry in the world is suffering from the financial climate. They are cutting costs in order to maintain profits. Why can't Hollywood do the same? The world has changed, and the studios' 20th century business model is obsolete.
Interesting that my comment was moderated Flamebait. Is it because pointing and laughing at poor stereotype-based attempts at humour is frowned upon, or because I criticised the modding* ? Whatever, my Karma is Excellent, I'll take the hit:)
This sounds like something you would find in a 1950s guesthouse in Bognor Regis. The sort with a "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" sign in the window, and where every meal was served with boiled cabbage and watery gravy.
I'm sure a certain sector of British society still longs for a return to those days, where women and forrins knew their place, and Britain still had an Empire of sorts. I expect to see an a reader offer for such a tap-mixer extension somewhere in the back pages of the Telegraph.
Slashdot Mirror
You could always press the Super/"windows" key or whatever itls labelled on your keyboard. Gets you to the overview without needing to lift your hands off the keyboard - pretty much everything in gnome-shell can be done with keyboard shortcuts, often the same shortcuts that worked in Gnome 2 (ctrl-alt-up/down arrow to switch workspaces for example).
To launch an application, I press Super, type the first few letters of the program name (or what it does, like "mail", which gets me Thunderbird), hit Enter and go. Much quicker than the Gnome 2/Windows way of clicking Applications, mousing down to the correct submenu, and selecting from there.
You mean you never worked out how to unmaximise a window in Gnome 3? It's the opposite of maximising - drag the title bar to the top of the screen and the window will snap to maximised, drag the window away from the top and it will snap back to its previous size. It's really simple and actually discoverable, unlike some other things in Gnome 3.
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet
"Window maximizing and tiling: You can maximize a window by dragging it to the top edge of the screen. Alternatively, you can double-click the window title. To unmaximize, pull it down again. By dragging windows to the left and right edges of the screen you can tile them side by side. "
But everybody knows that the appereciation of bebop is much enhanced by a nice spliff, and the late Beethoven string quartets are amazing on acid.
>
It is probably valid music but it doesn't carry much variation.
So you don't like Steve Reich much either? Some of the best techno relies on the effect that even the smallest variations to the sound can have. The repetition is the substrate from which the music builds.
I used to be a drummer (spent my youth playing everything from orchestral percussion through jazz to punk and metal) and I love techno,drum n bass, dubstep etc. The rigid machine beat is part of the appeal - it's what gives those styles their distinct characters in the same way that the crotchet-swung quaver ride and hi-hat offbeat makes swing.
There's shitty music in every genre, but musical talent will always shine through no matter whether it's acoustic instruments being played or software ones. Ignore the mass-market entertainment corporation shite, and there's a lot of extremely interesting electronic music being made - check out Clark, Rusty, Apparat, Plastikman, etc.
But yes, SAW produced some abominations, and Cowell is merely taking their business model to its logical conclusion.
Sorry, got the wrong end of the stick there. Stupid limited-bandwidth text interface. :)
I've never had a problem with it either. I also quite like Gnome 3, systemd, etc. Satisfied people are less likely to make a song and dance about their experiences though, so the moaning always dominates.
This is exactly the reason why nobody in the world is ever a passenger in a car, bus, plane, train, or boat.
Why does it have to be mitigated at 65mph? Are your toddlers holding the steering wheel and brake pedal, preventing you from pulling over to sort out the problem?
Child-proof seat buckles are available if getting out of the seat is a recurring issue.
No, Viz is the Beano for grown-ups. The Sun is a comic for children who happen to be chronologically adult.
Worse as Microsoft has patented it, it stops other application writes from using the same interface - thereby making Microsoft programs have different interfaces from other vendors and increasing the learning curve of non-Microsoft applications.
Sorry but I'm just NOT going to be convinced the ribbon is a good idea.
This is exactly why the ribbon is a good idea, for Microsoft at least. Why make it easy to switch away from MS products? Anything that increases vendor lock-in is good for MS.
(naturally, posted via my trusty old Debian derivative running Nokia)
In Soviet Russia, my trusty old Nokia is running Debian derivative!
Not the government. The school. I doubt the teachers illegally spying on their students were sending the video stream to the department for education (or whatever the local equivalent is).
Meh. If I'm going to watch girl stuff, I'll stick with Jane Austen adaptations. The "Pride and Prejudice" with Colin Perth is really good. Superb production, acting, and music.
Do you mean the 1990s BBC adaptation with Colin Firth? Mr Darcy coming out of the pond with his shirt all wet was a defining moment in the sexual development of many female Brits born in the late 70s/early 80s.
Fair enough.
The real WTF was that you have an OS/software combination that (intentionally) refuses to do what you ask of it (ie "play this media"), and thus forces you to go out of your way to find an illicit rip from the Internet. Yet another example that shows that DRM is definitely not made with the customer's best intentions in mind.
A week ago, I went to watch a DVD on my computer (anime TV series, ~20 discs in set). MPClassic could not play it properly, and WMP said I did not have rights to view the disc. So I torrented the whole series and watched that.
So you downloaded several tens of gigabytes to avoid DRM on one product? VLC for Windows is only 20MB. Mplayer is about 35MB. Even a full-blown super-fat linux distro (which will never tell you you don't have rights to watch some media) is 3.5GB and most are less. You must have a lot of patience. I'm glad I'm not sharing a contended ADSL link with you.
Personally, I buy music direct from the musicians' websites or in person from the musician at a gig. I only buy games that specifically do not have DRM. I recognise that creative artists are being screwed over by the bloated middlemen and so I cut the middlemen out and directly reward the people whose labours produce my entertainment.
Apparently it can't - reviews have been terrible.
BBC Radio 4 recently dramatised the series to good effect. It should stil be available on their iPlayer service if you have a UK IP. There was also a BBC TV version in the mid to late 90s which was a lot of fun.
Are all of those people strictly necessary to produce a movie? What exactly does a "second second assistant director" do, that a "second assistant director" cannot?
Here's the full crew of a feature-length movie that made over 60 times its production costs at the box office:
Produced by
Shane Carruth producer
Original Music by
Shane Carruth
Film Editing by
Shane Carruth
Casting by
Shane Carruth
Production Design by
Shane Carruth
Sound Department
Shane Carruth sound designer
Reggie Evans location sound
David Ho sound re-recording mixer (uncredited)
Camera and Electrical Department
Daniel Bueche camera operator
James Russell assistant camera
Anand Upadhyaya camera operator
Editorial Department
Omar Godinez telecine colorist
Other crew
Chip Carruth caterer
Kathy Carruth caterer
David Sullivan production assistant
This is a film which I have paid to see, bought on DVD and recommended to my friends (several of whom bought copies themselves). It was highly profitable, yet required only 12 people (plus cast) to make.
I agree that many people work on films that do not earn huge amounts of money. Cutting the fee of a leading actor by a few million dollars might actually mean that everyone else could get a pay rise - or is it right that the people who spend most time making a movie are paid only maybe 1/500th that of the person whose face is on the poster?
If Hollywood needs special laws made just to benefit its obsolete and inefficient business model, then it needs to change the way it does business, not change civil society to fit its needs.
Incidentally, you could have replied to my post with a single post of your own, and been less obnoxious about it. I'm polite - why aren't you?
Using your arguments (which have been repeated ad nauseum here and similarly minded sites like TechDirt), the admission charged by theaters, athletic events, and museums should be voluntary whenever the venue is not filled to capacity. Same with trains and buses. In fact, since the venues might not have gotten the memo, people shouldn't have to ask permission; they should just barge in and claim it is their right as a free citizen to see the Broadway show or science exhibit for free, because their presence isn't costing anybody anything. Then we have the First Amendment that allows these wonderful guests to post the obligatory "it was a crappy show anyway, I would NEVER have paid a cent for that and they should pay me for spending my time".
The fact is that people need to be paid to offer these things, and that holds true for digital products like music as well as theater events. There are substantial capital expenditures, operating expenses, labor costs, financing and marketing costs, all of which are conveniently ignored by the young Slashdot crowd.
If you feel so strongly about your argument, why don't you organize a flash mob to storm into your local science museum without paying? And please remember to record the event and post it on youtube, that will be highly entertaining. Thank you.
In the UK, many museums (including the Science Museum in London) are free to enter. I've been to free theatre performances, free movie showings, even free music festivals. In some cases the costs were covered by corporate sponsors, more often the cost was covered by the state. If these things are valued by society, then why shouldn't society make these things happen?
Public funding of creative works which are then distributed free of charge is entirely possible. It works in science, where funding bodies are requiring open access publishing of work they fund.
Much of what comes out of Hollywood cannot be considered "quality entertainment".
I spend a large proportion of my (small) disposable income on watching films and buying music and games. I buy music direct from an artist's website wherever possible, or from small local retailers (especially if those small local retailers sell online). I only buy games which are not encumbered with DRM, as I would like to be able to play them on more than one system, which may or may not be connected to the internet, or even be able to read the original physical media the game came on.
I support artists, but I do not support most anti-piracy measures as they inevitably hurt my interests and by extension those of the artists.
But a critically acclaimed mind-bending SF time-travel story could be told with no CGI effects whatsoever. It cost $7000 to make yet made over $400 000 at the box office.
Maybe there needs to be a market readjustment in the cost of movie making. Does spending a couple of weeks in front of a camera pretending to be someone else really justify a fee of several tens of millions of dollars? Does every assistant need an assistant? Do you really give everyone on your workforce their meals for free during a shoot?
And why spend at least $20 million on marketing? Every half-sucessful indie band knows how to sell themselves using the internet, for nothing more than the cost of their time. Much modern film marketing is redundant - for example, I don't want to see trailers that end up showing almost the whole plot of the movie - why would I bother going to see a film when you've just spent 5 minutes telling me exactly what's going to happen? Stop trying to force me to watch films in forced-stereoscopy "3D" - I won't pay extra just to be given a headache. Another lost sale. Why bother with promotional deals with fast-food outlets? Does getting a piece of plastic along with your burger really make you want to go and see the latest Transformers crap-fest? More wasted money.
Almost every other industry in the world is suffering from the financial climate. They are cutting costs in order to maintain profits. Why can't Hollywood do the same? The world has changed, and the studios' 20th century business model is obsolete.
Interesting that my comment was moderated Flamebait. Is it because pointing and laughing at poor stereotype-based attempts at humour is frowned upon, or because I criticised the modding* ? Whatever, my Karma is Excellent, I'll take the hit :)
* (which now seems to have been rectified)
This sounds like something you would find in a 1950s guesthouse in Bognor Regis. The sort with a "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" sign in the window, and where every meal was served with boiled cabbage and watery gravy.
I'm sure a certain sector of British society still longs for a return to those days, where women and forrins knew their place, and Britain still had an Empire of sorts. I expect to see an a reader offer for such a tap-mixer extension somewhere in the back pages of the Telegraph.