BeOS was user friendly from a strict UI standpoint. I was able to get on the Internet much easier with RH7 then with BeOS. Don't get me wrong, I wanted to use BeOS because of some of the cool music software that was coming out for it, but it was too much of a pain in the ass to use. If I can't set it up, my mom certaintly can't. The problem is most people who post to/. are very technically apt, and they really can not subjectively determine if an OS is user friendly or not.
OSS will always win. This is because there is no testing policy. If MS releases a Windows Update that crashes computers they look horrible. If you download a Beta or Alpha patch and it breaks something, you just shrug and go back to the earlier version. Personally, we just have to wait to see who releases a fully tested (regression, functional, etc.) patch first. This is much harder to quantify.
There is some legitimacy in your feelings, but remember here at/. we like to blow up small issues when it comes to MS. Although we still have a justice system that can be bought, that is not at all what has happened here./.'s nice editors like to get us riled up with emotionally charged statements like "now must be penalized in the usual Microsoft fashion - they must promise not to do it again.". When looking at the facts they followed normal marketing procedeurs (eg: they exagerated) and have reconciled this behavior before the FTC investigation based on the consumer complaints. A lot of the issue also has to do with the ease of "opting out". Like most every other free service (eg Yahoo, IWon) opting out has become harder and harder. Essentially the FTC wants MS to make it easier to opt out. With MS issuing multiple statements claiming to have already complied with the majority of these requests, it seems to me like this is a very legitimate situation as long as you don't have a pair of/. tinted glasses on. Read some of the PR from MS. Sure, it's MS PR, but it will give you a good idea of their attitude.
Are the people who use Windows in their business happy?
Incredibly. We have less then 1/10th of a sysadmins time devoted to supporting 12+ servers and over 40 workstations.
Happy to have increased licensing costs for a "yearly" subscription? It depends. Does the yearly subscription reduce overall costs and simplify upgrades by abstractin the concept of buying a new version? Or, is it just a horrible pricing scheme that ends up costing us more money with no practical value. We'll just have to see as no MS vendor has even mentioned this concept to us.
Happy to have an operating system with security holes the size of my Aunt Lilly's ass?
Clarification: We don't use Win95 on our workstations. Win2K's security may leave something to be desired, but most server exploits are due to poorly configured boxes (eg: installing example code on production servers) or Outlook (Outlook is the real source of most desktop security problems. Eliminate Outlook, eliminate the problem).
Happy that Microsoft is about to release the details of API's - but you can only use some of them if you "license" their use?
I don't care. We've been doing fine without the API's, and I'm glad that they're being more open about it. Obviously, as with the release of ANY intellectual property (even OSS), there's going to be a license.
Hmmm. I've never been paid (nor asked to be) for anything I've ever written.
And how do you feed your family and pay your bills? By supporting said software? Other serious professions don't give away their work for free (Does Boing get free Engineering plans for their latest jets), why should we? Sure, it's cool to come together and work on a community project, but that's not what we do full time. We have a job, and a job pays money - even if you work for a non-profit organization.
Mind if I ask what training (preferably formal education including theory as well as practice) you've had in doing database work?
Well, I'm not the person you're asking, but I have to say that it doesn't take formal education or training to learn about RDBMS's, the concept of ACiD (not the drug, or the music software), or the ability to design a reliable and scalable database. Nevertheless, I agree with your overall post. Many who say that MySql has everything they need probably don't fully appreciate what an RDBMS offers. If all you are using MySql for is a guestbook for your personal website, I'd almost rather use XML.
What's insteresting is Slashdot runs off of MySql, and although it's gotten better, this site doesn't exactly have the award for highest uptime. What I mean by uptime is the ability to post, because the site goes into "static" mode when MySql goes down, which used to happen quite often. Also, the performance of Slashdot is directly linked to a pretty decent caching system, so MySql is generally not doing a lot of work unless there are a ton of simultaneous posts.
So how the hell are we here on earth? Via the big bang and evolution? You have to have some belief system. Believing that religion is BS is still a belief. This is your worldview (again, for lack of a better term).
We all have beliefs of why we are here, how we got here, etc. Not all of us do...
This is the pacifist mentality I was talking about. Sure, none of us _know_ what happend n years ago when the earth formed, but there is a lot of evidence and a lot of theories to at least study. Still, even this defines your worldview. Not caring is still a belief: A belief that it really doesn't matter.
Is a manual on toothbrushing, by virtue of the fact that it doesn't give praise to god
You make a good point, however I'm talking about Fictional writings. I'm not talking about "looking" to "find out where an author stands". I'm saying that in writings such as Tolkiens, one can see how his worldview has influenced his writing. The same can be said for political views, etc. Any personal convictions (religious, political, scientific, etc.) can influence an authors writings, that's all I'm saying.
they were just called "Christians" as if that serves to place them in the same camp on these issues.
The simple definition of a Christian is one who believes in Christ. It has little to do with "the church" or other theological viewpoints. Although Tolkien may have differed with Lewis theologically, I believe they could both be accurately labeld as Christians.
Describing atheism as a worldview is like describing "non-tennis playing" as a sport.
This pascifistic mantality doesn't quite work. Your worldview (for lack of a better term) is composed of your beliefs. Atheism is a belief that there is no higher being, and that what we see is what we get. We all have beliefs of why we are here, how we got here, etc. Whethor by pure chance or by some higher being or higher beings, these beliefs affect what we write. In many cases it doesn't take long to figure out where an author stands on such issues, regardless of his religion or lack thereof.
I'd also distinguish Tolkien's works from Lewis' Christian allegories.
I would too. Tolkien was far more radical with his allegories, and less obvious then lewis as you mention.
Calling them both "Christians" doesn't do justice to their complex opinions on the matter of its relation to fantasy fiction.
I'm not sure what this means. They either are Christians, or they aren't. Sure, they both differ in theological opinion, and they both express their beliefs differently, but this has nothing to do with whether or not they are Christians.
Considering that the word Christ doesn't even appear in the script, it's difficult to say that it's Christian propeganda. All authors are inspired by their worldviews. That doesn't make their fictional stories propeganda. I think that you are too sensative towards the issue. C.S. Lewis was not some crazy Television Evangelist. He just had strong convictions that are found in his writings, just like any other decent author.
Narnia has been banned from my local school district do to 'religious' content.
Although there was religious inspiration, there was no religious dogma. The same goes for LoTR. Both Lewis and Tolkien collaborated at times and both were known Christians. And what about Madeleine L'Engle? An incredible author with incredible books, also influenced by Christianity. Also, Atheism is just as much a world view as [Insert Religion Here]. All books are influenced by the authors worldview. The problem comes when these worldviews are taught as "The Right View" in a public school system. I don't think any of the mentioned books are selling a worldview of any sort. It's one thing to study a religious text in class, and then preach it as being the Truth. It's another to read a fictional story that is mearly influenced by the authors worldview.
I looked around there website, and I feel kind of blind, but I can't find a free download of it.
Let's not worry about who copied who.
on
GUIs for Everyone
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
So far, Linux-based OS's have advantages over Windows in terms of performance, and some run cute little tab and dock apps that help launch your favorite apps (ho hum) but none of these products (OSX included) have revolutionized or even attempted to improve upon the Windows GUI. But what did Windows revolutionize from the Mac or Xerox in the first place? Although I personally believe that Windows _has_ innovated in the GUI, it's still a good question to ponder. Another quote that I found funny when talking about the Windows interface,
Windows... It's dumb and arrogant.
Here's a great quote on the problem of Linux on the desktop:
Microsoft will continue to make a better Windows while Linux desktops will continue to emulate them, be perceived as a step behind, and ultimately be a bargin bin item.
You put words in my mouth - I didn't say that you "just need to know how to run it". That's much more true with Linux or FreeBSD anyway. It's too bad your box doesn't run well. Our entire office (~50 desktops, ~12 servers) managed by a very part time sysadmin. If things crashed every 2 weeks or if Exchange died often then we'd need a full time person managing it. Even our firewall is run on Windows (Checkpoint). Now, even for me, that's kind of crazy (I'd prefer OpenBSD). Nevertheless, it wasn't my decision, and it's never gone down since I've been working there (18+ months).
Stop being a religious zealot filled with petty hatered towards MS and look at the reality. Hundreds of the Fortune 1000 use Windows (and Exchange) to an incredibly high degree of success. This doesn't make Windows the best, but it doesn't make it CRAP either, which is what I was arguing against.
A Java/Cocoa app is totally indistinguishable from a "fully native" app (Objective-C/Cocoa).
Exactly, so it's not cross platform. One of the things that people harp on against.NET is that the GUI lib's are native Windows code and not cross-platform. With Java/Cocoa, it's the same issue. I, for one, believe this is the way to go. Resource intensive API's should be kept native while the rest of an app runs on a virtual machine.
I have... and it's slow as hell. I'm talking about JBuilder of course. Maybe now it's better but a year ago it was unusable. I will admit that my experience with IDE's is relatively limited, but that doesn't take away the fact that VS.NET is a stable IDE.
If you read the latest threads regarding.NET you'd see that one of the biggest problems with.NET is marketing..NET as a technology (The Framework) is incredible and should not be put into the same boat as.NET the initiative (Hailstorm/My services/Passport) because they are totally unrelated.
For the uninformed: The slang "Pretty much" denotes a generalization. It is obvious that I appreciated the obvious fact that there are exceptions to the rule.
I respect HP's decision. However, I think this shows yet again how much power a corporation has over an individual. Welcome to the United Corporations of America.
they're still a very rock solid product. Not much the same can be said for most of the current M$ products, save perhaps Win 2k.
Or, if you want to be objective instead of bashing based on bias:
Software: Win 2K (as mentioned) SqlServer 2000 .NET (the Framework) and ASP.NET Exchange Server 2000 VS.NET IE 6.0.2600 (gotta love that build number!) IIS 6.0 (okay, this isn't fair because it isn't even out - but _I_ know that it rocks from experience:-) VS.NET (still needs work but is probably one of the most stable IDE's I've ever used)
Hardware: MS IntelliMouse XBox and peripherals (incredibly high quality, regardless of your console preference) MS Joysticks (all of them) OK... pretty much all MS hardware.
If you don't want the Microsoft Tax buy an Apple box. It's not one or the other it's commercialzed competition. I don't need to modify my source code for that.
OSX is the proof that all those people screaming that Linux on Joe Average's desktop is impossible are wrong.
Absolutely not. It has nothing to do about the technology and everything to do with the company, or lack thereof. Programming is only a fraction of software development, and the Open Source community is made up of mainly programmers and software testers.
OSX is proof that a proper balance of both Open Source and Proprietary software is required to make a good consumer OS. While Linux has spent years trying to get it right, Apple got it right in a short period of time. Apple has invested millions in market research, usability studies, product design, and more. They would not profit off of this investment had this all gone open source. However, what they did do is base the core OS on the OSS model. This makes sense as there is less room for proprietary innovation, and more room for community investment. It's this balance that allowed OS X to create the first successful Unix on the Desktop.
Slashdot Mirror
BeOS was user friendly from a strict UI standpoint. I was able to get on the Internet much easier with RH7 then with BeOS. Don't get me wrong, I wanted to use BeOS because of some of the cool music software that was coming out for it, but it was too much of a pain in the ass to use. If I can't set it up, my mom certaintly can't. The problem is most people who post to /. are very technically apt, and they really can not subjectively determine if an OS is user friendly or not.
But will the KDE team have regression tested their fix?
OSS will always win. This is because there is no testing policy. If MS releases a Windows Update that crashes computers they look horrible. If you download a Beta or Alpha patch and it breaks something, you just shrug and go back to the earlier version. Personally, we just have to wait to see who releases a fully tested (regression, functional, etc.) patch first. This is much harder to quantify.
There is some legitimacy in your feelings, but remember here at /. we like to blow up small issues when it comes to MS. Although we still have a justice system that can be bought, that is not at all what has happened here. /.'s nice editors like to get us riled up with emotionally charged statements like "now must be penalized in the usual Microsoft fashion - they must promise not to do it again.". When looking at the facts they followed normal marketing procedeurs (eg: they exagerated) and have reconciled this behavior before the FTC investigation based on the consumer complaints. A lot of the issue also has to do with the ease of "opting out". Like most every other free service (eg Yahoo, IWon) opting out has become harder and harder. Essentially the FTC wants MS to make it easier to opt out. With MS issuing multiple statements claiming to have already complied with the majority of these requests, it seems to me like this is a very legitimate situation as long as you don't have a pair of /. tinted glasses on. Read some of the PR from MS. Sure, it's MS PR, but it will give you a good idea of their attitude.
This is not the anti-trust trial by any means.
Are the people who use Windows in their business happy?
Incredibly. We have less then 1/10th of a sysadmins time devoted to supporting 12+ servers and over 40 workstations.
Happy to have increased licensing costs for a "yearly" subscription?
It depends. Does the yearly subscription reduce overall costs and simplify upgrades by abstractin the concept of buying a new version? Or, is it just a horrible pricing scheme that ends up costing us more money with no practical value. We'll just have to see as no MS vendor has even mentioned this concept to us.
Happy to have an operating system with security holes the size of my Aunt Lilly's ass?
Clarification: We don't use Win95 on our workstations. Win2K's security may leave something to be desired, but most server exploits are due to poorly configured boxes (eg: installing example code on production servers) or Outlook (Outlook is the real source of most desktop security problems. Eliminate Outlook, eliminate the problem).
Happy that Microsoft is about to release the details of API's - but you can only use some of them if you "license" their use?
I don't care. We've been doing fine without the API's, and I'm glad that they're being more open about it. Obviously, as with the release of ANY intellectual property (even OSS), there's going to be a license.
Troll. If you read anything you'll find that now that the XBox sales have picked up that they are profiting from the venture.
Hmmm. I've never been paid (nor asked to be) for anything I've ever written.
And how do you feed your family and pay your bills? By supporting said software? Other serious professions don't give away their work for free (Does Boing get free Engineering plans for their latest jets), why should we? Sure, it's cool to come together and work on a community project, but that's not what we do full time. We have a job, and a job pays money - even if you work for a non-profit organization.
Right, which results in a duopoly (or more) which is almost as bad as a monoploy.
Mind if I ask what training (preferably formal education including theory as well as practice) you've had in doing database work?
Well, I'm not the person you're asking, but I have to say that it doesn't take formal education or training to learn about RDBMS's, the concept of ACiD (not the drug, or the music software), or the ability to design a reliable and scalable database. Nevertheless, I agree with your overall post. Many who say that MySql has everything they need probably don't fully appreciate what an RDBMS offers. If all you are using MySql for is a guestbook for your personal website, I'd almost rather use XML.
What's insteresting is Slashdot runs off of MySql, and although it's gotten better, this site doesn't exactly have the award for highest uptime. What I mean by uptime is the ability to post, because the site goes into "static" mode when MySql goes down, which used to happen quite often. Also, the performance of Slashdot is directly linked to a pretty decent caching system, so MySql is generally not doing a lot of work unless there are a ton of simultaneous posts.
No, atheism describes ones lack of theism.
So how the hell are we here on earth? Via the big bang and evolution? You have to have some belief system. Believing that religion is BS is still a belief. This is your worldview (again, for lack of a better term).
We all have beliefs of why we are here, how we got here, etc. Not all of us do...
This is the pacifist mentality I was talking about. Sure, none of us _know_ what happend n years ago when the earth formed, but there is a lot of evidence and a lot of theories to at least study. Still, even this defines your worldview. Not caring is still a belief: A belief that it really doesn't matter.
Is a manual on toothbrushing, by virtue of the fact that it doesn't give praise to god
You make a good point, however I'm talking about Fictional writings. I'm not talking about "looking" to "find out where an author stands". I'm saying that in writings such as Tolkiens, one can see how his worldview has influenced his writing. The same can be said for political views, etc. Any personal convictions (religious, political, scientific, etc.) can influence an authors writings, that's all I'm saying.
they were just called "Christians" as if that serves to place them in the same camp on these issues.
The simple definition of a Christian is one who believes in Christ. It has little to do with "the church" or other theological viewpoints. Although Tolkien may have differed with Lewis theologically, I believe they could both be accurately labeld as Christians.
Describing atheism as a worldview is like describing "non-tennis playing" as a sport.
This pascifistic mantality doesn't quite work. Your worldview (for lack of a better term) is composed of your beliefs. Atheism is a belief that there is no higher being, and that what we see is what we get. We all have beliefs of why we are here, how we got here, etc. Whethor by pure chance or by some higher being or higher beings, these beliefs affect what we write. In many cases it doesn't take long to figure out where an author stands on such issues, regardless of his religion or lack thereof.
I'd also distinguish Tolkien's works from Lewis' Christian allegories.
I would too. Tolkien was far more radical with his allegories, and less obvious then lewis as you mention.
Calling them both "Christians" doesn't do justice to their complex opinions on the matter of its relation to fantasy fiction.
I'm not sure what this means. They either are Christians, or they aren't. Sure, they both differ in theological opinion, and they both express their beliefs differently, but this has nothing to do with whether or not they are Christians.
Considering that the word Christ doesn't even appear in the script, it's difficult to say that it's Christian propeganda. All authors are inspired by their worldviews. That doesn't make their fictional stories propeganda. I think that you are too sensative towards the issue. C.S. Lewis was not some crazy Television Evangelist. He just had strong convictions that are found in his writings, just like any other decent author.
Narnia has been banned from my local school district do to 'religious' content.
Although there was religious inspiration, there was no religious dogma. The same goes for LoTR. Both Lewis and Tolkien collaborated at times and both were known Christians. And what about Madeleine L'Engle? An incredible author with incredible books, also influenced by Christianity. Also, Atheism is just as much a world view as [Insert Religion Here]. All books are influenced by the authors worldview. The problem comes when these worldviews are taught as "The Right View" in a public school system. I don't think any of the mentioned books are selling a worldview of any sort. It's one thing to study a religious text in class, and then preach it as being the Truth. It's another to read a fictional story that is mearly influenced by the authors worldview.
I looked around there website, and I feel kind of blind, but I can't find a free download of it.
So far, Linux-based OS's have advantages over Windows in terms of performance, and some run cute little tab and dock apps that help launch your favorite apps (ho hum) but none of these products (OSX included) have revolutionized or even attempted to improve upon the Windows GUI. ... It's dumb and arrogant.
But what did Windows revolutionize from the Mac or Xerox in the first place? Although I personally believe that Windows _has_ innovated in the GUI, it's still a good question to ponder. Another quote that I found funny when talking about the Windows interface, Windows
Here's a great quote on the problem of Linux on the desktop:
Microsoft will continue to make a better Windows while Linux desktops will continue to emulate them, be perceived as a step behind, and ultimately be a bargin bin item.
You put words in my mouth - I didn't say that you "just need to know how to run it". That's much more true with Linux or FreeBSD anyway. It's too bad your box doesn't run well. Our entire office (~50 desktops, ~12 servers) managed by a very part time sysadmin. If things crashed every 2 weeks or if Exchange died often then we'd need a full time person managing it. Even our firewall is run on Windows (Checkpoint). Now, even for me, that's kind of crazy (I'd prefer OpenBSD). Nevertheless, it wasn't my decision, and it's never gone down since I've been working there (18+ months).
Stop being a religious zealot filled with petty hatered towards MS and look at the reality. Hundreds of the Fortune 1000 use Windows (and Exchange) to an incredibly high degree of success. This doesn't make Windows the best, but it doesn't make it CRAP either, which is what I was arguing against.
A Java/Cocoa app is totally indistinguishable from a "fully native" app (Objective-C/Cocoa).
.NET is that the GUI lib's are native Windows code and not cross-platform. With Java/Cocoa, it's the same issue. I, for one, believe this is the way to go. Resource intensive API's should be kept native while the rest of an app runs on a virtual machine.
Exactly, so it's not cross platform. One of the things that people harp on against
I have... and it's slow as hell. I'm talking about JBuilder of course. Maybe now it's better but a year ago it was unusable. I will admit that my experience with IDE's is relatively limited, but that doesn't take away the fact that VS.NET is a stable IDE.
If you read the latest threads regarding .NET you'd see that one of the biggest problems with .NET is marketing. .NET as a technology (The Framework) is incredible and should not be put into the same boat as .NET the initiative (Hailstorm/My services/Passport) because they are totally unrelated.
For the uninformed: The slang "Pretty much" denotes a generalization. It is obvious that I appreciated the obvious fact that there are exceptions to the rule.
I respect HP's decision. However, I think this shows yet again how much power a corporation has over an individual. Welcome to the United Corporations of America.
they're still a very rock solid product. Not much the same can be said for most of the current M$ products, save perhaps Win 2k.
.NET (the Framework) and ASP.NET :-)
Or, if you want to be objective instead of bashing based on bias:
Software:
Win 2K (as mentioned)
SqlServer 2000
Exchange Server 2000
VS.NET
IE 6.0.2600 (gotta love that build number!)
IIS 6.0 (okay, this isn't fair because it isn't even out - but _I_ know that it rocks from experience
VS.NET (still needs work but is probably one of the most stable IDE's I've ever used)
Hardware:
MS IntelliMouse
XBox and peripherals (incredibly high quality, regardless of your console preference)
MS Joysticks (all of them)
OK... pretty much all MS hardware.
If you don't want the Microsoft Tax buy an Apple box. It's not one or the other it's commercialzed competition. I don't need to modify my source code for that.
OSX is the proof that all those people screaming that Linux on Joe Average's desktop is impossible are wrong.
Absolutely not. It has nothing to do about the technology and everything to do with the company, or lack thereof. Programming is only a fraction of software development, and the Open Source community is made up of mainly programmers and software testers.
OSX is proof that a proper balance of both Open Source and Proprietary software is required to make a good consumer OS. While Linux has spent years trying to get it right, Apple got it right in a short period of time. Apple has invested millions in market research, usability studies, product design, and more. They would not profit off of this investment had this all gone open source. However, what they did do is base the core OS on the OSS model. This makes sense as there is less room for proprietary innovation, and more room for community investment. It's this balance that allowed OS X to create the first successful Unix on the Desktop.
Since when does the usage of a GUID make it a COM object? My database uses GUID's for productID's, are my products based on COM?