I'd like to see a soundboard that features one of those thingies. That would reduce the load on the processor, and let computers that don't have enough oomph to play perfect MP3. Too bad manufacturers want to make other things like this a software feature (wavetable synthesis, MPEG video playback, etc).
If what Al Gore said is any indication, the US's computer systems will have a bigger problem than Y2K... But at least we'll have enough reasons to poke fun at our politicians, won't we? *ducks*
I agree with the argument about making the widgets in webpages look the same across different operating systems, it simply spoils the "consistent look and feel" metaphor of any given platform. We Linux users may not give a shoot about it, as we are in part used to disparate user interfaces. But it would give a Mac user nightmares to have one application that doesn't conform with the user interface standards of the Mac OS. Same for the other platforms.
I've always liked the purpose of the XPFE ever since it was announced; I'm aware of how much easier it makes it for the developers to add or change features in the code base that would be reflected on all target platforms with little or no platform-specific modifications. But actually forcing the user to do with a different look and feel on at least a single program is definitely an affront to the user. The possibility of allowing web developers of specifying a look and feel for their pages, and only for their pages is quite an advancement, though. I'd prefer the following: make the default look and feel be that of the hosting platform, but allow the web designer (and the user as well, why not?) to change it. This would allow the inclusion of the new feature, without making it into an insult for some.
It's not about whether or not it looks nice or not. It certainly looks nice, and the Mac UI is pretty nifty (I prefer it over Windoze any time). But they stated that they wanted the widget set to not look like something else, and almost everyone posting here agrees that it looks like Mac, which is against their own statement.
I would like to know what any of you have experienced with both KWM and WindowMaker. Is WM faster? Less of a resource hog? That in itself would be enough reason for me to jump ship and install WM 0.50 on my machine.
> Some things are single click, some are double click.
You won't mind if I remind that you can have single, double, AND triple clicks on a Mac (plus Cmd-click and Option-click).
> Menu bars at the top of the screen. Means you only have to move the mouse up and to the right x location to hit a menu, you won't miss and go over. It reduces the dexterity needed to manipulate the menus.
Well, good thing KDE will feature this very same thing. Better yet, it will be optional, so you can have whichever you like best. Still not yet available for GNOME, but it might get there too.
> The screen fonts are well thought out. _Nothing_ has the clarity of the original mac fonts for screen (low res) readability - Chicago, Geneva and Monaco.
Sure, X's default fonts don't win any beauty contest (if there's anything as a default font for X; I should say "the fonts that are included with the X distribution"), but you can change them to whatever you want.
> Two mice is not a problem. Great for people who suffer from RSI if they make the same motion too often.
Well, you might get pumped up more by using two mice, but not everyone is ambidextrous.
> It may be hard for you all to realize it, but the mac actually does a large number of things right.
This I agree with. The Mac's user interface is still a reference point from which everyone builds upon. It's the kind of design that lets you work the way you want to work, not the way it wants you to work.
Nothing's bloody perfect. The Mac UI is far from perfect. But it's a choice; if you like it, go for it. If you don't, there are other choices. And if you're into Open Source, you can change it what's out there, or you can make your own.
Well, for one, the advertisers paid for it. Second, they are supporting/. by paying for the service. Third, they skrew themselves by placing and ad about a product not many of you would buy anyway. E.g., you wouldn't place an ad for refigerators in Greenland, would you? So,/. benefits the most for this. We win!
Unlike what one might believe by reading jht's comment (he didn't say anything explicitly about this, though), it seems Intel won't go back to AT boards. They leave that to other manufacturers, as they have done until now. The reference board depicted on the marketing/promotional document is actually a rather nifty MicroATX design, with the misterious Socket 370 instead of the damned Slot 1.
I won't be buying one of these, though; I'll intead wait for the K6-3:o).
While freshmeat's new look doesn't appeal to me as much as the old one (that's totally subjective, of course, and I know that many others like it better), it still gets my points for showing how much work has been spent on it. So it's not fair to flame scoop for it. What should be said to all those disrespectful flamers is "take it or leave it". For me, fresmeat should stay as it is now; along with Slashdot, it is one of the better pro-OSS sites anywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, I could just go to LinuxWorld and look for said interview, but the link should've been included in the article in the first place...
I'd like to see a soundboard that features one of those thingies. That would reduce the load on the processor, and let computers that don't have enough oomph to play perfect MP3. Too bad manufacturers want to make other things like this a software feature (wavetable synthesis, MPEG video playback, etc).
If what Al Gore said is any indication, the US's computer systems will have a bigger problem than Y2K... But at least we'll have enough reasons to poke fun at our politicians, won't we? *ducks*
I agree with the argument about making the widgets in webpages look the same across different operating systems, it simply spoils the "consistent look and feel" metaphor of any given platform. We Linux users may not give a shoot about it, as we are in part used to disparate user interfaces. But it would give a Mac user nightmares to have one application that doesn't conform with the user interface standards of the Mac OS. Same for the other platforms.
I've always liked the purpose of the XPFE ever since it was announced; I'm aware of how much easier it makes it for the developers to add or change features in the code base that would be reflected on all target platforms with little or no platform-specific modifications. But actually forcing the user to do with a different look and feel on at least a single program is definitely an affront to the user. The possibility of allowing web developers of specifying a look and feel for their pages, and only for their pages is quite an advancement, though. I'd prefer the following: make the default look and feel be that of the hosting platform, but allow the web designer (and the user as well, why not?) to change it. This would allow the inclusion of the new feature, without making it into an insult for some.
It's not about whether or not it looks nice or not. It certainly looks nice, and the Mac UI is pretty nifty (I prefer it over Windoze any time). But they stated that they wanted the widget set to not look like something else, and almost everyone posting here agrees that it looks like Mac, which is against their own statement.
I would like to know what any of you have experienced with both KWM and WindowMaker. Is WM faster? Less of a resource hog? That in itself would be enough reason for me to jump ship and install WM 0.50 on my machine.
> "... not look like any one particular platform, to avoid the perception of platform imperialism."
However, they bear a quite noticeable resemblance to the Mac UI.
11:36 here. We're getting more powerful every time, methinks :op
Who did they hire??? Are you sure you posted all that was to be posted???
> Some things are single click, some are double click.
You won't mind if I remind that you can have single, double, AND triple clicks on a Mac (plus Cmd-click and Option-click).
> Menu bars at the top of the screen. Means you only have to move the mouse up and to the right x location to hit a menu, you won't miss and go over. It reduces the dexterity needed to manipulate the menus.
Well, good thing KDE will feature this very same thing. Better yet, it will be optional, so you can have whichever you like best. Still not yet available for GNOME, but it might get there too.
> The screen fonts are well thought out. _Nothing_ has the clarity of the original mac fonts for screen (low res) readability - Chicago, Geneva and Monaco.
Sure, X's default fonts don't win any beauty contest (if there's anything as a default font for X; I should say "the fonts that are included with the X distribution"), but you can change them to whatever you want.
> Two mice is not a problem. Great for people who suffer from RSI if they make the same motion too often.
Well, you might get pumped up more by using two mice, but not everyone is ambidextrous.
> It may be hard for you all to realize it, but the mac actually does a large number of things right.
This I agree with. The Mac's user interface is still a reference point from which everyone builds upon. It's the kind of design that lets you work the way you want to work, not the way it wants you to work.
Nothing's bloody perfect. The Mac UI is far from perfect. But it's a choice; if you like it, go for it. If you don't, there are other choices. And if you're into Open Source, you can change it what's out there, or you can make your own.
Well, for one, the advertisers paid for it. Second, they are supporting /. by paying for the service. Third, they skrew themselves by placing and ad about a product not many of you would buy anyway. E.g., you wouldn't place an ad for refigerators in Greenland, would you? So, /. benefits the most for this. We win!
Unlike what one might believe by reading jht's comment (he didn't say anything explicitly about this, though), it seems Intel won't go back to AT boards. They leave that to other manufacturers, as they have done until now. The reference board depicted on the marketing/promotional document is actually a rather nifty MicroATX design, with the misterious Socket 370 instead of the damned Slot 1.
:o).
I won't be buying one of these, though; I'll intead wait for the K6-3
While freshmeat's new look doesn't appeal to me as much as the old one (that's totally subjective, of course, and I know that many others like it better), it still gets my points for showing how much work has been spent on it. So it's not fair to flame scoop for it. What should be said to all those disrespectful flamers is "take it or leave it". For me, fresmeat should stay as it is now; along with Slashdot, it is one of the better pro-OSS sites anywhere.