Typo3 is quite possibly exactly what you are looking for. It is enterprise-grade quality, it was designed to be multilingual from day one, it has a sophisticated caching system and check out TemplaVoila for templating/theming (the video is very short and may not give you a sense of its power). Security awareness has gone up recently as extensions are now audited for security holes.
A quick overview of features and tutorial videos may help you get a feel for what Typo3 can offer in a CMS.
As with most things, the more power and flexibility you have the steeper the learning curve and Typo3 is no exception.
Enterprise-grade functionality. Many mega-companies like Dassault Systemes in France and Volkswagon in Germany use it. Very powerful, very flexible and very complex. If you like Firefox because of extensions then typo3's (thousands) of extensions will appeal to you.
It's very popular in Europe and is getting some legs here in the US. Check it out at http://typo3.org
The conservative and liberal labels almost always pertain to social issues such as abortion, welfare, gay rights, immigration, death penalty, etc. Here is where they actually switch roles when it comes to governmental intrusion in people's lives.
The Democrats are usually more laissez faire where social issues are concerned and the Republicans become advocates of government intervention.
Republicans are usually hawks on defense issues and the Democrats the doves. Obviously, starting a war is the ultimate in government intrusion so as you can see, philosophies are drawn at the lines of economics and social issues.
The American Democratic Party would find itself more comfortable if transplanted in today's European democracies than the Republicans would but would probably still be considered much more conservative than say the governments found in Scandinavian countries you mentioned.
Politics basically boils down to the distribution of power and wealth. At the Republican core is the belief that governmental meddling in its citizen's lives is a bad thing and things will generally work better without it. Governments are inefficient and hinder the progress of society. The flaw in this lies in the fact that the distibution of power and wealth then falls into the hands of private citizens and when combined with capitalism means that the corporations and the elite are often in control.
The Democrats believe that its citizen's need to be protected by the government lest they be trampled upon by the elite. The flaw in this lies in the fact that governments *can* be inefficient and hinder commerce.
The ideal lies somewhere in between the two.
So basically, the two parties end up functioanlly like this: Republicans == protection of property and wealth Democrats == protection of people
Anyway, just my personal theory - I didn't grab it from a textbook or anything.
I emailed my (Republican) Congressman about this and this was his response for the curious. I disagree with much of what he said but perhaps there are some discussion points here.
Dear Chris:
Thank you for contacting me regarding recent interest group proposals for so-called "net neutrality." It is good to hear from you.
This year, Congress will reauthorize the 1996 Telecommunications Act. One of the key criticisms of that act (and the original 1934 version for that matter) is that, despite supposedly benevolent intentions, Congress essentially picked winners and losers in the various sectors of the telecommunications industry instead of allowing a free marketplace in which competition would lead to new technology, better service, and lower prices for consumers. As a result, many industry experts have concluded that governmental regulation has impeded the emergence of new technology and better applications. Perhaps the biggest example of America's stifled telecommunications progress is that the United States, despite being the world's economic powerhouse, is currently ranked 16 th for Internet broadband deployment. In anticipation of the reauthorization, I believe we must honestly examine and reflect upon the many government regulations already on the books and carefully consider the pros and cons of any newly-proposed regulations before endorsing proposals that may simply sound good on the surface.
One of the issues that Congress will address is the concept known as "net neutrality." Certain interest groups and press editorialists proclaim that Congress should mandate that cable and telephone industry broadband operators offer control of their networks equally to any and all Internet traffic. In fact, several major software and e-commerce firms have already formed a lobbyist organization called the Coalition of Broadband Users and Innovators (CBUI) to petition the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to do just that. In the name of preserving "network neutrality" and Internet "openness," CBUI members argue that the FCC must adopt preemptive "nondiscrimination safeguards" to ensure Internet users open and unfettered access to online content and services in the future. Despite the rhetoric however, there is currently no evidence that broadband operators are going out of their way to block access to any widely used websites or similar online services. In fact, any significant discriminatory behavior on the part of broadband service providers ( BSPs ) would generally be financially counterproductive considering that BSPs make more money by carrying more traffic. On the rare occasion that a BSP may actively regulate traffic or impose differential pricing schemes on their network, it would likely be for rather sensible reasons. Network owners may want to discourage the use of certain devices on their networks to avoid system crashes, interference, or signal theft. They may want to price services differently to avoid network congestion and/or conserve bandwidth. They may want to exclusively partner with other firms to help them reach new customers and ultimately create superior services. And perhaps they may very well direct users towards some content before others because it helps them make the necessary money to recoup the huge investment required to create and build out broadband networks. Outlawing the ability of network owners to favor certain content kills a major financial incentive for entrepreneurs to invent and build new networks in the first place. Ultimately, in the absence of clear harm, government typically does not regulate in the preemptive fashion that CBUI members are requesting.
Please be aware that the House Energy and Commerce Committee recently passed the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Efficiency Act of 2006. Among other points, the act empowers the FCC
I tried installing Dapper on an external firewire drive about a month ago and it couldn't finish install (couldn't install bootloader). I found out this was a known issue.
Is it possible that this has been fixed? I want to give Linux a real world try by seeing if I can do my job in it for a week or so but I have a laptop with precious little space on my internal drive.
I'd like to give Linux a spin so I downloaded the Ubuntu (breezy) dvd install. Installed on my external firewire drive but 75% of the way through it told me it couldn't install the boot loader. Did some googling and it seems you have to jump through some hoops to get it to work right.
My question is this, are there currently any distros that can install and boot from an external firewire drive without having to monkey around with RAM disks, etc.? I don't have the space on my internal drive to sacrifice so my external is the only option.
Thanks.
The tools - overly complex, buried or don't exist
on
Do Kids Still Program?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
When I discovered programming, it was because the coding environment was easily accessible - you turned your computer on and the basic compiler was there inviting you to try soemthing (this was true for the commodore, atari and trs-80 I had when I was a kid). You typed in source code from magazines - it was great.
As far as I know, Windows does not provide a free and easily accessible programming environemnt. Apple does (xcode) as well as a number of open source tools like Perl, PHP, Python, etc.
I have a Mac, so let's see what it would take for my son to start tinkering around as I did when I was his age. Let's say he wanted to start in on Python. He has to first know that he has to go find a shell, which is found in Applications->Utilities->Terminal and then type "python" to bring up the interpreter. This assumes he already knows that python is a language and is one he wants to tinker around in. This is not intuitive.
What about XCode? He has to have a basic understanding of the Unix filesystem and go back to the root directory to find a directory called "Developer". Within the developer directory are the subdirectories ADC Reference Library, Applications, Documentation, Examples, Extras, Headers, Java, Makefiles, Palettes, Private, Tools. He's bright - he chooses Applications. He is then faced with Audio, Graphics Tools, Java Tools, Performance Tools, Utilities, Interface Builder.app and xcode.app. Again, he's smart (or lucky) and doesn't go deeper and follow the subdirectories and chooses xcode.app. He's now faced with a series of screens. First being building with the options "Put build projects in project directory", "Separate location for build projects", "Put intermediate build files with build projects", "Separate location for intermediate build files". At this point, he gives up and moves on never reaching the screen asking him if he wanted to build on of 53(!) types of programs. God knows what other screens are after that.
Anyway, you get the point. A free IDE does not inspire a kid to jump in and make 10 print "my name is Colin" 20 goto 10. Python, Perl and PHP require knowledge that they exist, what they do and how to invoke them before you can even begin to write your first line of code.
It doesn't surprise me that kid don't take up programming as readily these days.
It's not about fitting in or creating a socially acceptable human being through chemistry. It's about relief from the prison of your mind.
As someone that suffers from bouts of major depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), if the treatment leaves me in a state of being "a bit off" but in a state where I can function in day-to-day society - that's okay.
Without treatment, I'm prone to lie in bed all day barely able to speak (the depression) while my mind (figureatively) straps me in front of an IMAX screen and makes me visualize horrible things like blowing my brains out over and over again, throwing my son off a cliff, being gang-raped and other lovely sunny-day thoughts (the O in OCD). Obsessive thoughts are completely unwanted (they don't indicate some subconcious desire) thus feeding the depression which, in turn, makes it harder to block the obsessive thoughts. In my case, I wasn't hurting others (except my family who had to watch me go through those episodes) but I was hurting myself.
While I don't think we should strive for a Stepford Wives kind of norm through medication, the medication is a godsend - not an Orwellian mind-control tactic. While you or someone else may think "so they're odd - leave them alone, it's who they are" it's *not* who they are. Who they are has been dominated and replaced by the condition/disease. I completely understand why someone that has not experienced mental illness might see things in the manner you describe. In fact, most people with mental illness won't tell thier friends or peers about thier condition because of the social stigma that mental illness carries.
With treatment, sure there are days I'm "a bit off" but that's okay - no one's the wiser.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while "oddballs and eccentrics" might not be hurting anyone, they may, in fact, be hurting intensely within - wishing they could rid themselves of the oddness and eccentricity and become the person they really are. The oddness is just a small part of what surfaces to the outside world. That's not to say that all oddballs and eccentrics are mentally ill either and that's truly just who they are.
In regards to wondering whether these conditions are more prevalent than they were in the past - yes, based upon my personal research on the topic.
I hope my personal experience may have answered some of your questions.
I look at the garbage that passes for entertainment and I can't help but think how stupid we've become. I look at how everything in our lives gravitate around the pursuit of pleasure and think how lazy we've become. People can't even be bothered to use their turn signals anymore - why should we expect them to want to understand anything technical? I look at how people vote ("Bush says he's a christian - that's all I need to know when I go to the polls") and I wonder why we go out of our way not to have to think. I watch the news and the top story is continually about how much we're paying for gas and say "Damn straight!" and then piss and moan about how much it costs to drive our SUV's to work.
If we can't be bothered to do difficult things then we deserve to lose the rewards that difficult things reap. Now watch as the "Move to France then!" rebuttals start pouring in - underscoring the whole point of my post.
You don't get out much, do you? GNOME 2.14 is supposed to be extremely fast in comparison to previous releases, which were also faster than their predecessors.
Uhhh...I'm guessing if anyone's not getting out much....well, nevermind. If you can't say something nice don't say it at all.
Your days of struggling like a wounded or dying fish are over. If you so much as take one more bath in a chum bucket - BAM! You won't evven know what hit you.
So I wonder if a majority of Mac users use Google? The demographics are the same. Personally, I use a Mac and there are no other search engines but Google.
With 20 years and 95% market share they had the time, money and resources to create the most advanced operating system ever. Instead, all they ever produced was "good enough" - never on the leading edge, never innovative.
What good have they done? They made the PC a commodity, accessible to all but the most poor. Gone are the days of $7000 proprietary machines that didn't operate with other different computers. These are all good things but they came as a result of market share and fate rather than purposeful design and innovation.
I look back at the last 20 years of Windows and say - what a waste. What a colossal monument to greed and complacency.
AAC is open. It's owned by Dolby Labs and anybody can license it. It is as free for licensing as mp3 is. You do realize that mp3 also requires a license?
You're probably thinking of iTunes music store songs which is AAC in a DRM wrapper. Would you hate mp3 and call it closed if Apple managed to put a DRM wrapper around the mp3 format? Do you rail against the umpteen million models of Windows Media players out there?
The iPod also plays mp3's. So, unless you limit digital audio to a player that plays OGG and FLAC you present yourself as not really knowing what you're talking about.
For most people, the thinking is done when the computer collects/retrieves/processes data which they can then use for its intended purpose (the data to be thought upon). The time wasted on figuring out how to collect/retrieve/process data is time not spent on the actual problem to they need to think about.
If I am researching data I have collected and compiled for a thesis on battlefield tactics used in The Hundred Years War, why do I want to spend time tracking down where it is, how to find it and how to access it? I want to think about collecting the data and presenting it in a coherent manner. Determining if I saved it in/Users/barney/documents or finding what text file I need to tweak to get a desired response from my computer is irrelevant to the task at hand and only taking away time I could devote to my thesis.
Now, if I asked my computer to write the thesis, then I would agree with you.
And it's instantaneous. No indexing when your computer has some idle time to spare. You create the file and BAM!, it shows up in Spotlight (system wide search engine vis-a-vis Google Desktop) and any Smart Folder that its criteria has met.
Ye gads you have no idea. I was talking to a friend who is a.NET programmer for POS systems (no pun intended) and he brought up the Apple move to Intel. He said that "Macs will now be plagued with viruses since all the virus writers have to do now is recompile". I told him that wasn't true and he told me I didn't know what I was talking about since I wasn't a programmer.
Slashdot Mirror
Typo3 is quite possibly exactly what you are looking for. It is enterprise-grade quality, it was designed to be multilingual from day one, it has a sophisticated caching system and check out TemplaVoila for templating/theming (the video is very short and may not give you a sense of its power). Security awareness has gone up recently as extensions are now audited for security holes.
A quick overview of features and tutorial videos may help you get a feel for what Typo3 can offer in a CMS.
As with most things, the more power and flexibility you have the steeper the learning curve and Typo3 is no exception.
Enterprise-grade functionality. Many mega-companies like Dassault Systemes in France and Volkswagon in Germany use it. Very powerful, very flexible and very complex. If you like Firefox because of extensions then typo3's (thousands) of extensions will appeal to you.
It's very popular in Europe and is getting some legs here in the US. Check it out at http://typo3.org
Anybody tried Parralels for Linux here? I assume it's just as wonderful but I'm curious if anybody's had some hands-on experience.
The conservative and liberal labels almost always pertain to social issues such as abortion, welfare, gay rights, immigration, death penalty, etc. Here is where they actually switch roles when it comes to governmental intrusion in people's lives.
The Democrats are usually more laissez faire where social issues are concerned and the Republicans become advocates of government intervention.
Republicans are usually hawks on defense issues and the Democrats the doves. Obviously, starting a war is the ultimate in government intrusion so as you can see, philosophies are drawn at the lines of economics and social issues.
The American Democratic Party would find itself more comfortable if transplanted in today's European democracies than the Republicans would but would probably still be considered much more conservative than say the governments found in Scandinavian countries you mentioned.
Politics basically boils down to the distribution of power and wealth. At the Republican core is the belief that governmental meddling in its citizen's lives is a bad thing and things will generally work better without it. Governments are inefficient and hinder the progress of society. The flaw in this lies in the fact that the distibution of power and wealth then falls into the hands of private citizens and when combined with capitalism means that the corporations and the elite are often in control.
The Democrats believe that its citizen's need to be protected by the government lest they be trampled upon by the elite. The flaw in this lies in the fact that governments *can* be inefficient and hinder commerce.
The ideal lies somewhere in between the two.
So basically, the two parties end up functioanlly like this:
Republicans == protection of property and wealth
Democrats == protection of people
Anyway, just my personal theory - I didn't grab it from a textbook or anything.
I emailed my (Republican) Congressman about this and this was his response for the curious. I disagree with much of what he said but perhaps there are some discussion points here.
:
Dear Chris
Thank you for contacting me regarding recent interest group proposals for so-called "net neutrality." It is good to hear from you.
This year, Congress will reauthorize the 1996 Telecommunications Act. One of the key criticisms of that act (and the original 1934 version for that matter) is that, despite supposedly benevolent intentions, Congress essentially picked winners and losers in the various sectors of the telecommunications industry instead of allowing a free marketplace in which competition would lead to new technology, better service, and lower prices for consumers. As a result, many industry experts have concluded that governmental regulation has impeded the emergence of new technology and better applications. Perhaps the biggest example of America's stifled telecommunications progress is that the United States, despite being the world's economic powerhouse, is currently ranked 16 th for Internet broadband deployment. In anticipation of the reauthorization, I believe we must honestly examine and reflect upon the many government regulations already on the books and carefully consider the pros and cons of any newly-proposed regulations before endorsing proposals that may simply sound good on the surface.
One of the issues that Congress will address is the concept known as "net neutrality." Certain interest groups and press editorialists proclaim that Congress should mandate that cable and telephone industry broadband operators offer control of their networks equally to any and all Internet traffic. In fact, several major software and e-commerce firms have already formed a lobbyist organization called the Coalition of Broadband Users and Innovators (CBUI) to petition the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to do just that. In the name of preserving "network neutrality" and Internet "openness," CBUI members argue that the FCC must adopt preemptive "nondiscrimination safeguards" to ensure Internet users open and unfettered access to online content and services in the future. Despite the rhetoric however, there is currently no evidence that broadband operators are going out of their way to block access to any widely used websites or similar online services. In fact, any significant discriminatory behavior on the part of broadband service providers ( BSPs ) would generally be financially counterproductive considering that BSPs make more money by carrying more traffic. On the rare occasion that a BSP may actively regulate traffic or impose differential pricing schemes on their network, it would likely be for rather sensible reasons. Network owners may want to discourage the use of certain devices on their networks to avoid system crashes, interference, or signal theft. They may want to price services differently to avoid network congestion and/or conserve bandwidth. They may want to exclusively partner with other firms to help them reach new customers and ultimately create superior services. And perhaps they may very well direct users towards some content before others because it helps them make the necessary money to recoup the huge investment required to create and build out broadband networks. Outlawing the ability of network owners to favor certain content kills a major financial incentive for entrepreneurs to invent and build new networks in the first place. Ultimately, in the absence of clear harm, government typically does not regulate in the preemptive fashion that CBUI members are requesting.
Please be aware that the House Energy and Commerce Committee recently passed the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Efficiency Act of 2006. Among other points, the act empowers the FCC
I tried installing Dapper on an external firewire drive about a month ago and it couldn't finish install (couldn't install bootloader). I found out this was a known issue.
Is it possible that this has been fixed? I want to give Linux a real world try by seeing if I can do my job in it for a week or so but I have a laptop with precious little space on my internal drive.
Thank you for your help. I'll do just that.
I'd like to give Linux a spin so I downloaded the Ubuntu (breezy) dvd install. Installed on my external firewire drive but 75% of the way through it told me it couldn't install the boot loader. Did some googling and it seems you have to jump through some hoops to get it to work right.
My question is this, are there currently any distros that can install and boot from an external firewire drive without having to monkey around with RAM disks, etc.? I don't have the space on my internal drive to sacrifice so my external is the only option.
Thanks.
When I discovered programming, it was because the coding environment was easily accessible - you turned your computer on and the basic compiler was there inviting you to try soemthing (this was true for the commodore, atari and trs-80 I had when I was a kid). You typed in source code from magazines - it was great.
As far as I know, Windows does not provide a free and easily accessible programming environemnt. Apple does (xcode) as well as a number of open source tools like Perl, PHP, Python, etc.
I have a Mac, so let's see what it would take for my son to start tinkering around as I did when I was his age. Let's say he wanted to start in on Python. He has to first know that he has to go find a shell, which is found in Applications->Utilities->Terminal and then type "python" to bring up the interpreter. This assumes he already knows that python is a language and is one he wants to tinker around in. This is not intuitive.
What about XCode? He has to have a basic understanding of the Unix filesystem and go back to the root directory to find a directory called "Developer". Within the developer directory are the subdirectories ADC Reference Library, Applications, Documentation, Examples, Extras, Headers, Java, Makefiles, Palettes, Private, Tools. He's bright - he chooses Applications. He is then faced with Audio, Graphics Tools, Java Tools, Performance Tools, Utilities, Interface Builder.app and xcode.app. Again, he's smart (or lucky) and doesn't go deeper and follow the subdirectories and chooses xcode.app. He's now faced with a series of screens. First being building with the options "Put build projects in project directory", "Separate location for build projects", "Put intermediate build files with build projects", "Separate location for intermediate build files". At this point, he gives up and moves on never reaching the screen asking him if he wanted to build on of 53(!) types of programs. God knows what other screens are after that.
Anyway, you get the point. A free IDE does not inspire a kid to jump in and make 10 print "my name is Colin" 20 goto 10. Python, Perl and PHP require knowledge that they exist, what they do and how to invoke them before you can even begin to write your first line of code.
It doesn't surprise me that kid don't take up programming as readily these days.
It's not about fitting in or creating a socially acceptable human being through chemistry. It's about relief from the prison of your mind.
As someone that suffers from bouts of major depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), if the treatment leaves me in a state of being "a bit off" but in a state where I can function in day-to-day society - that's okay.
Without treatment, I'm prone to lie in bed all day barely able to speak (the depression) while my mind (figureatively) straps me in front of an IMAX screen and makes me visualize horrible things like blowing my brains out over and over again, throwing my son off a cliff, being gang-raped and other lovely sunny-day thoughts (the O in OCD). Obsessive thoughts are completely unwanted (they don't indicate some subconcious desire) thus feeding the depression which, in turn, makes it harder to block the obsessive thoughts. In my case, I wasn't hurting others (except my family who had to watch me go through those episodes) but I was hurting myself.
While I don't think we should strive for a Stepford Wives kind of norm through medication, the medication is a godsend - not an Orwellian mind-control tactic. While you or someone else may think "so they're odd - leave them alone, it's who they are" it's *not* who they are. Who they are has been dominated and replaced by the condition/disease. I completely understand why someone that has not experienced mental illness might see things in the manner you describe. In fact, most people with mental illness won't tell thier friends or peers about thier condition because of the social stigma that mental illness carries.
With treatment, sure there are days I'm "a bit off" but that's okay - no one's the wiser.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while "oddballs and eccentrics" might not be hurting anyone, they may, in fact, be hurting intensely within - wishing they could rid themselves of the oddness and eccentricity and become the person they really are. The oddness is just a small part of what surfaces to the outside world. That's not to say that all oddballs and eccentrics are mentally ill either and that's truly just who they are.
In regards to wondering whether these conditions are more prevalent than they were in the past - yes, based upon my personal research on the topic.
I hope my personal experience may have answered some of your questions.
I look at the garbage that passes for entertainment and I can't help but think how stupid we've become. I look at how everything in our lives gravitate around the pursuit of pleasure and think how lazy we've become. People can't even be bothered to use their turn signals anymore - why should we expect them to want to understand anything technical? I look at how people vote ("Bush says he's a christian - that's all I need to know when I go to the polls") and I wonder why we go out of our way not to have to think. I watch the news and the top story is continually about how much we're paying for gas and say "Damn straight!" and then piss and moan about how much it costs to drive our SUV's to work.
If we can't be bothered to do difficult things then we deserve to lose the rewards that difficult things reap. Now watch as the "Move to France then!" rebuttals start pouring in - underscoring the whole point of my post.
Oh wait...there is no upgrade pricing.
That sucks.
You don't get out much, do you? GNOME 2.14 is supposed to be extremely fast in comparison to previous releases, which were also faster than their predecessors.
Uhhh...I'm guessing if anyone's not getting out much....well, nevermind. If you can't say something nice don't say it at all.
Your days of struggling like a wounded or dying fish are over. If you so much as take one more bath in a chum bucket - BAM! You won't evven know what hit you.
Ha!
We've got you now. Bastards.
So I wonder if a majority of Mac users use Google? The demographics are the same. Personally, I use a Mac and there are no other search engines but Google.
With 20 years and 95% market share they had the time, money and resources to create the most advanced operating system ever. Instead, all they ever produced was "good enough" - never on the leading edge, never innovative.
What good have they done? They made the PC a commodity, accessible to all but the most poor. Gone are the days of $7000 proprietary machines that didn't operate with other different computers. These are all good things but they came as a result of market share and fate rather than purposeful design and innovation.
I look back at the last 20 years of Windows and say - what a waste. What a colossal monument to greed and complacency.
From now on, I'm making my used toilet paper available for anyone else's use.
I can't wait to make my PowerBook look and act like a Waindows machine.
AAC is open. It's owned by Dolby Labs and anybody can license it. It is as free for licensing as mp3 is. You do realize that mp3 also requires a license?
You're probably thinking of iTunes music store songs which is AAC in a DRM wrapper. Would you hate mp3 and call it closed if Apple managed to put a DRM wrapper around the mp3 format? Do you rail against the umpteen million models of Windows Media players out there?
The iPod also plays mp3's. So, unless you limit digital audio to a player that plays OGG and FLAC you present yourself as not really knowing what you're talking about.
Other candidates:
Gimme Shelter
You Can't Always Get What You Want
Sympathy for the Devil
Waiting on a Friend
Beast of Burden
The carnal pleasures are not limited to cardinals. In fact, all birds - nay all animals enjoy the carnal pleasures we know as sexual reproduction.
Cardinals are a particular dirty birdy though, I'll grant you that.
if you are an MCSE :)
Kidding.
For most people, the thinking is done when the computer collects/retrieves/processes data which they can then use for its intended purpose (the data to be thought upon). The time wasted on figuring out how to collect/retrieve/process data is time not spent on the actual problem to they need to think about.
/Users/barney/documents or finding what text file I need to tweak to get a desired response from my computer is irrelevant to the task at hand and only taking away time I could devote to my thesis.
If I am researching data I have collected and compiled for a thesis on battlefield tactics used in The Hundred Years War, why do I want to spend time tracking down where it is, how to find it and how to access it? I want to think about collecting the data and presenting it in a coherent manner. Determining if I saved it in
Now, if I asked my computer to write the thesis, then I would agree with you.
Done.
O'Reilly Developer WeblogsOS X Finder
OS X Mail
iTunes
And it's instantaneous. No indexing when your computer has some idle time to spare. You create the file and BAM!, it shows up in Spotlight (system wide search engine vis-a-vis Google Desktop) and any Smart Folder that its criteria has met.
Ye gads you have no idea. I was talking to a friend who is a .NET programmer for POS systems (no pun intended) and he brought up the Apple move to Intel. He said that "Macs will now be plagued with viruses since all the virus writers have to do now is recompile". I told him that wasn't true and he told me I didn't know what I was talking about since I wasn't a programmer.
Oy vey.