I appreciate your opinon, but would like to suggest another way to handle it. I tested this in Safari / Leopard [yet another workaround for a bad user interface]
This is even worse as a workaround than the previous one. No other button on the page requires you to click, hold, and verify that it hasn't changed before releasing. Time-based user interfaces are annoying enough when they're consistent, as a special case workaround they're plumb loco. Just give it up: a combo button dependent on asynchronous state is a bad idea.
Press CTRL/CMD-backspace or CTRL/CMD-W before hitting submit next time. The fact that it's possible to avoid using a bad user-interface doesn't mean it's not a bad user-interface.
If you want to run some minimalist browser under Ratpoison, you're welcome to it.
I really hate the combo button. Safari introduced this and I started running into the following problems:
1. A page is loading slowly (slow site, busy computer, DNS lookup failure,...) and I go to click "stop", but the load finishes just before I click, the stop icon changed to a reload, and now I have to wait through it loading again.
2. A page is refreshing on a schedule. I decide I want to reload it sooner, so I go to click the reload button... just as it starts reloading, so now the automatic reload gets stopped.
Moving it to the end of the address box in the latest Safari is just an extra layer of manure on the sandwich.
And whichever way you went, you ended up with a toy computer, and hardly any software unless you replaced the 8088 with a NEC V-20 so you could run a CP/M emulator. Or you could put together a homebrew 8080/z80 box and cut out the middleman.
Doesn't anybody remember how crappy the first PC clones were?
Doesn't anybody remember how crappy the PC was? Crippled CPU (in too many ways to list), edge-triggered interrupts, no software (one of the most popular upgrades was a chip that let you run CP/M-80 on it), bizarre wasteful memory map, premium price for an entry-level product? Of course the clones were going to suck. Sheesh.
Since I can't mod you down, I'll just note that they've now had over a year to change the passwords and otherwise secure the allegedly compromised LAN.
I haven't been in the loop on WinMo in a few years, since I gave up on my Jornada and switched back to Palm, but at that time the Windows Powered SDK was a free download from Microsoft.
Seefa Schnee isn't involved with this one, right?
on
Robotic Mold
·
· Score: 1
Just so long as it's not used to create a nanovirus that infects people with creativity-enhancing Tourette's syndrome, I think we're OK.
Networks do not deal with blocks, they deal with bits. There's no natural power of two in networking, you can put bits on the wire in chunks of 8, 36, or 8192. Once upon a time disks were the same way, if you were running TOPS-20 on a 36-bit DECsystem-20 your disks were formatted for sectors that stored 36 bit words. But disks have been byte and power-of-two-block oriented for years. You can only put bits on disk in chunks of 4096 or 16384 (depending on whether it's using 512 byte or 2k sectors).
There are NO disks with a storage capacity that is a multiple of exactly 1000, 1000000, or 1000000000 bytes. There never have been. There never will be. There HAVE been ones with storage that was a multiple of 2^10, 2^20, and even 2^30 bytes.
Adobe as an app dev is subject to the whims of Apple, not the other way around.
Apple delayed the release of what became OS X for THREE YEARS to satisfy Adobe. Because Apple needed Adobe more than Adobe needed Apple. Apple *still* needs Adobe more than Adobe needs Apple, if Adobe quit developing Photoshop and the rest of their suite for Mac, Apple would be in deep ****.
Apple tells you they will take Carbon to 64 bit. Do you bother going Cocoa?
Of course not. As long as Apple kept updating their transitional technology for Adobe... creating Carbon, porting Carbon to Intel, and updating Carbon to 64 bit, Adobe has no reason to actually finish the transition.
It's not because people are going to "virtual trade shows". It's because the whole Internet serves the same purpose. Holding "virtual trade shows" on the Internet is like holding Macworld in the foyer at Comdex.
Virtual trade shows? Let's wait until they're actually successful before tossing them in the pot?
Kindle? It's a marketing success, but regular PDAs and even some cellphones were already "good enough" for reading and are often a good deal cheaper. Kindle's marketing punch is that it's better than "good enough".
Hardly. Apple has had plenty of goodies to bring to the party, including QuickTime, iPhone, OpenDoc...
And these are relevant to the Adobe-Apple relationship how?
Meanwhile, with the resources to port to Cocoa, Adobe could be testing CS3, porting to Linux, or any of a number of interesting things.
I don't think they would have been doing that in 1997, when they first told Apple to take a hike, so Apple created Carbon as a transitional API for the likes of them.
It's a good thing that they employ lots of developers like myself who absolutely love converting thousands of dialogs from one platform to another.
That's what Adobe gets from leaving things until the last minute.
Slashdot Mirror
So what's wrong with those drongos in Argentina?
Backslider!
I appreciate your opinon, but would like to suggest another way to handle it. I tested this in Safari / Leopard [yet another workaround for a bad user interface]
This is even worse as a workaround than the previous one. No other button on the page requires you to click, hold, and verify that it hasn't changed before releasing. Time-based user interfaces are annoying enough when they're consistent, as a special case workaround they're plumb loco. Just give it up: a combo button dependent on asynchronous state is a bad idea.
Quentin Bryce is head of state for France and Norway?
But France, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom do.
Press CTRL/CMD-backspace or CTRL/CMD-W before hitting submit next time. The fact that it's possible to avoid using a bad user-interface doesn't mean it's not a bad user-interface.
If you want to run some minimalist browser under Ratpoison, you're welcome to it.
One reason the triple button might not be such a good idea is that when you want to stop a page load, you might accidentally cause a refresh instead
Happened for me within minutes of installing Safari. There's no "might" about it.
Botheration, that should be it sucks dirty swamp water through used oil filters.
The nicest feature IMO looks to be the combo stop/refresh/go button. That makes so much sense that I'm surprised I haven't seen it before.
You have, in Safari, it sucks dirty swamp water through used oil filters.
I really hate the combo button. Safari introduced this and I started running into the following problems:
1. A page is loading slowly (slow site, busy computer, DNS lookup failure, ...) and I go to click "stop", but the load finishes just before I click, the stop icon changed to a reload, and now I have to wait through it loading again.
2. A page is refreshing on a schedule. I decide I want to reload it sooner, so I go to click the reload button... just as it starts reloading, so now the automatic reload gets stopped.
Moving it to the end of the address box in the latest Safari is just an extra layer of manure on the sandwich.
And whichever way you went, you ended up with a toy computer, and hardly any software unless you replaced the 8088 with a NEC V-20 so you could run a CP/M emulator. Or you could put together a homebrew 8080/z80 box and cut out the middleman.
Doesn't anybody remember how crappy the first PC clones were?
Doesn't anybody remember how crappy the PC was? Crippled CPU (in too many ways to list), edge-triggered interrupts, no software (one of the most popular upgrades was a chip that let you run CP/M-80 on it), bizarre wasteful memory map, premium price for an entry-level product? Of course the clones were going to suck. Sheesh.
Since I can't mod you down, I'll just note that they've now had over a year to change the passwords and otherwise secure the allegedly compromised LAN.
OK, that's a change. You used to be able to get the whole toolchain free.
I haven't been in the loop on WinMo in a few years, since I gave up on my Jornada and switched back to Palm, but at that time the Windows Powered SDK was a free download from Microsoft.
Just so long as it's not used to create a nanovirus that infects people with creativity-enhancing Tourette's syndrome, I think we're OK.
You really don't know about "ls -s"?
(let alone "du" and "df")
Networks do not deal with blocks, they deal with bits. There's no natural power of two in networking, you can put bits on the wire in chunks of 8, 36, or 8192. Once upon a time disks were the same way, if you were running TOPS-20 on a 36-bit DECsystem-20 your disks were formatted for sectors that stored 36 bit words. But disks have been byte and power-of-two-block oriented for years. You can only put bits on disk in chunks of 4096 or 16384 (depending on whether it's using 512 byte or 2k sectors).
There are NO disks with a storage capacity that is a multiple of exactly 1000, 1000000, or 1000000000 bytes. There never have been. There never will be. There HAVE been ones with storage that was a multiple of 2^10, 2^20, and even 2^30 bytes.
Are they going to break compatibility with every other version of UNIX and change the way "df", "du", "ls", and other utilities report disk space?
Adobe as an app dev is subject to the whims of Apple, not the other way around.
Apple delayed the release of what became OS X for THREE YEARS to satisfy Adobe. Because Apple needed Adobe more than Adobe needed Apple. Apple *still* needs Adobe more than Adobe needs Apple, if Adobe quit developing Photoshop and the rest of their suite for Mac, Apple would be in deep ****.
Apple tells you they will take Carbon to 64 bit. Do you bother going Cocoa?
Of course not. As long as Apple kept updating their transitional technology for Adobe... creating Carbon, porting Carbon to Intel, and updating Carbon to 64 bit, Adobe has no reason to actually finish the transition.
Who goes to physical trade shows any more?
It's not because people are going to "virtual trade shows". It's because the whole Internet serves the same purpose. Holding "virtual trade shows" on the Internet is like holding Macworld in the foyer at Comdex.
Virtual trade shows? Let's wait until they're actually successful before tossing them in the pot?
Kindle? It's a marketing success, but regular PDAs and even some cellphones were already "good enough" for reading and are often a good deal cheaper. Kindle's marketing punch is that it's better than "good enough".
Hardly. Apple has had plenty of goodies to bring to the party, including QuickTime, iPhone, OpenDoc...
And these are relevant to the Adobe-Apple relationship how?
Meanwhile, with the resources to port to Cocoa, Adobe could be testing CS3, porting to Linux, or any of a number of interesting things.
I don't think they would have been doing that in 1997, when they first told Apple to take a hike, so Apple created Carbon as a transitional API for the likes of them.
It's a good thing that they employ lots of developers like myself who absolutely love converting thousands of dialogs from one platform to another.
That's what Adobe gets from leaving things until the last minute.
Are the newspapers going to provide similar transparency for the coverage they provide local businesses?
Sounds like the Autoverse in Greg Egan's novel "Permutation City".