I've also heard many people complain that "drop down and expand to the right" type menus - like the windows start menu, which pops up and selected categories are displayed to the right - are a poor way to handle such an event (many comments in the interview with the UI guy ranted about this). Then will someone tell me what's been proposed as an alternative to such?
If by "such an event" you mean the need to browse a hierarchy, there are several much better ways to do so, including Mac Finder-style navigation (opening children in a new window), tree controls (like in Windows explorer), or browsers like in NEXTSTEP/Mac OS X.
The main problem with hierarchical menus (and especially deeply nested ones like the Windows start menu) has to do with the transient nature of menus and the fact that submenus are selected by pointing rather than clicking. Especially in older versions of Windows, it was frequently difficult to navigate your mouse to the right item five menus deep, and easy to lose your place in the menu forcing you to start over. This has become somewhat less true recently since they've changed menu behavior somewhat to compensate, but at the expense of slowing down menu use in general.
As for a better solution, I like the so-called Explorer Bars that have been introduced recently. If you've got access to a Win2K box, compare how much easier it is to use the Favorites bar than the Favorites menu in IE, especially if you have a deep hierarchy. Mozilla has something like this too. I'd much rather launch programs using something like that. It wouldn't be a stretch to be able to attach these bars to the side of the screen in addition to individual windows.
Furthermore, Graffiti predates the Pilot. It was originally an addon for Newtons and other PDAs. According to this review it was introduced in Nov 1994, which is prior to even the filing date.
Apparently some new techniques are around the corner that should significantly improve accuracy to the point where 20/20 would be considered an absolute minimum, and much better vision would be the norm. They would also avoid the need for "touch up" operations which only increase the risk involved.
There was a decent article about it a few days ago in USA Today.
Also, dselect can be anal about requirments. I decided to install the PCMCIA modules. Dselect says "But wait! You need a kernel image package!" I already have a bleeding kernel! Wouldn't be able to boot the system without one, would I? So, I say no, I don;t want the kernel image package. But, when I go to install... sure enough, it decideds to install the kernel image package despite my having said no. Fortunately, I can just tell it not to configure the kernel, which prevents it from stomping the kernel I so carefully configured.
The binary PCMCIA modules require the specific kernel image that they were built with. I'm pretty sure that this is not a debian-specific problem. If you built your own kernel, you'll need to build your own PCMCIA modules, too. Fortunately, debian makes this relatively easy: just get the pcmcia-source package and after you build your kernel run make-kpkg modules (I think...that's from memory so check the docs under/usr/doc/pcmcia-source).
If you just want to change the compile-time options for a packaged version of the software, apt makes it easy to get the source package. You can easily modify the configure options and rebuild the package yourself.
If you want to compile the latest version of stuff and ignore the package for it entirely, set the install prefix to/usr/local/<package> and use GNU stow to manage it. The only problem with this tactic is that dpkg won't recognize it as installed for dependency purposes (which can be particularly annoying for shared libs). The maintainers are supposedly trying to do something about this.
People use GCC to compile proprietary software all the time (thus including GCC-generated code in the output), and so far as I know that's OK.
Re:Positive-sum games
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 1
All of this presupposes that software is a form of property. Many reject that assumption. You can't "take" software in the same way that you can take food, so talking about the distribution of wealth is kind of meaningless.
Actually, he's right. You are correct that the Unix implementation of TCP/IP was at Berkeley, but this was actually the first implementation of TCP/IP, and was comissioned by DARPA.
Prior to that, the ARPAnet used a protocol called NCP (network control protocol).
For a few months last year, I had been using BeOS as my primary OS on a PMac. It was clearly superior to Mac OS in almost every way. I had used Linux, but didn't particularly want to use it on my own machine.
One day I switched ISPs. My new provider used QMAIL as their MTA. Turns out the mail_daemon that comes with BeOS is buggy, and doesn't actually generate correct SMTP. Most MTAs can still parse it, but QMAIL is a little stricter. The result: I can't send mail from BeOS.
I reported the bug with Be's tracking system, but they assigned it a status of "Will Not Fix". This despite the fact that it's a pretty easy problem to fix.
So maybe they eventually got around to fixing it. I don't know, I stopped using it, having suddenly realized the importance of free software. That sort of bug just doesn't happen.
I also loved the part where it explains that because the book contains the source code to the solitaire cryptography algorithm, the book can't be exported (though can't low levels be exported?)
Printed source code can be exported legally, so he's wrong about that (unless he was referring to an electronic representation of his book).
In fact, this is how PGP was legally exported: you can buy the book with its source code, export it, and scan it in overseas.
Yeah, people have been researching this for years, but there's a big difference between "some people in an R&D lab came up with this" and "this is available commercially now."
It looks pretty nice, and their FAQ is surprisingly good, and it doesn't require weird drivers.
But notice that all of the pictures are missing the cable. The last thing I need is a wire going to my chair, where I can trip over it, roll over it, or pull it out of the machine if I roll too far away.
I have a car. I don't know a whole lot about the car, and I certainly don't consider myself a car expert. I know how to drive it, though, and I can fill it with gas, and check the oil level, and do a few other assorted things that were pretty easy to learn.
If I have any more complex problem, I take it in to a service station.
So in the near future with quality Linux desktop apps, fast net connections and ubiquitous encryption (we can dream, right?), it's conceivable that the face of home computing could change. My mom, instead of buying a computer and paying an ISP for a dialup, might just lease an X Terminal + connection as one service contract. All of the administration would be done by the provider. You and I would still buy PCs.
I think it's pretty likely that admin-ing a system, crash recovery, hard/software installation, etc. will stay too complex possibly forever. The way this sort of problem is solved is by creating a service industry. This is pretty much how it works in an office, the only reason it doesn't in homes is because of access problems.
Photoshop and Cubase are both powerful and relatively easy to use for their intended audience (artists and musicians, not computer pros). Unfortunately, few software designers think about their audience.
Slashdot Mirror
That's sorta the whole point of CORBA--all ORBs can interoperate with each other using the Internet Inter-ORB Protocol.
Don't know about your other questions though.
If by "such an event" you mean the need to browse a hierarchy, there are several much better ways to do so, including Mac Finder-style navigation (opening children in a new window), tree controls (like in Windows explorer), or browsers like in NEXTSTEP/Mac OS X.
The main problem with hierarchical menus (and especially deeply nested ones like the Windows start menu) has to do with the transient nature of menus and the fact that submenus are selected by pointing rather than clicking. Especially in older versions of Windows, it was frequently difficult to navigate your mouse to the right item five menus deep, and easy to lose your place in the menu forcing you to start over. This has become somewhat less true recently since they've changed menu behavior somewhat to compensate, but at the expense of slowing down menu use in general.
As for a better solution, I like the so-called Explorer Bars that have been introduced recently. If you've got access to a Win2K box, compare how much easier it is to use the Favorites bar than the Favorites menu in IE, especially if you have a deep hierarchy. Mozilla has something like this too. I'd much rather launch programs using something like that. It wouldn't be a stretch to be able to attach these bars to the side of the screen in addition to individual windows.
I believe you have to have implemented the idea yourself in order to receive a patent on it.
Furthermore, Graffiti predates the Pilot. It was originally an addon for Newtons and other PDAs. According to this review it was introduced in Nov 1994, which is prior to even the filing date.
Apparently some new techniques are around the corner that should significantly improve accuracy to the point where 20/20 would be considered an absolute minimum, and much better vision would be the norm. They would also avoid the need for "touch up" operations which only increase the risk involved.
There was a decent article about it a few days ago in USA Today.
The binary PCMCIA modules require the specific kernel image that they were built with. I'm pretty sure that this is not a debian-specific problem. If you built your own kernel, you'll need to build your own PCMCIA modules, too. Fortunately, debian makes this relatively easy: just get the pcmcia-source package and after you build your kernel run make-kpkg modules (I think...that's from memory so check the docs under /usr/doc/pcmcia-source).
If you just want to change the compile-time options for a packaged version of the software, apt makes it easy to get the source package. You can easily modify the configure options and rebuild the package yourself.
If you want to compile the latest version of stuff and ignore the package for it entirely, set the install prefix to /usr/local/<package> and use GNU stow to manage it. The only problem with this tactic is that dpkg won't recognize it as installed for dependency purposes (which can be particularly annoying for shared libs). The maintainers are supposedly trying to do something about this.
The Internet existed before TCP/IP, tho.
You should check out Freebirth
Still nothing even remotely like Cubase tho.
There's a link to the actual paper at the bottom of the article.
Actually, it can.
I guess you haven't seen the Qualcomm pdQ phone + Palm computer.
http://terror.hungry.com/products/Ywind ows/
Not much there yet, it seems.
Typically only 2 channels, tho
People use GCC to compile proprietary software all the time (thus including GCC-generated code in the output), and so far as I know that's OK.
All of this presupposes that software is a form of property. Many reject that assumption. You can't "take" software in the same way that you can take food, so talking about the distribution of wealth is kind of meaningless.
Actually, he's right. You are correct that the Unix implementation of TCP/IP was at Berkeley, but this was actually the first implementation of TCP/IP, and was comissioned by DARPA.
Prior to that, the ARPAnet used a protocol called NCP (network control protocol).
I have a story about BeOS
For a few months last year, I had been using BeOS as my primary OS on a PMac. It was clearly superior to Mac OS in almost every way. I had used Linux, but didn't particularly want to use it on my own machine.
One day I switched ISPs. My new provider used QMAIL as their MTA. Turns out the mail_daemon that comes with BeOS is buggy, and doesn't actually generate correct SMTP. Most MTAs can still parse it, but QMAIL is a little stricter. The result: I can't send mail from BeOS.
I reported the bug with Be's tracking system, but they assigned it a status of "Will Not Fix". This despite the fact that it's a pretty easy problem to fix.
So maybe they eventually got around to fixing it. I don't know, I stopped using it, having suddenly realized the importance of free software. That sort of bug just doesn't happen.
I think that it was actually Quartic that made that comment, though. I remember reading this, too, and I'm pretty sure the article was on RHAD.
Printed source code can be exported legally, so he's wrong about that (unless he was referring to an electronic representation of his book).
In fact, this is how PGP was legally exported: you can buy the book with its source code, export it, and scan it in overseas.
Yeah, people have been researching this for years, but there's a big difference between "some people in an R&D lab came up with this" and "this is available commercially now."
It looks pretty nice, and their FAQ is surprisingly good, and it doesn't require weird drivers.
But notice that all of the pictures are missing the cable. The last thing I need is a wire going to my chair, where I can trip over it, roll over it, or pull it out of the machine if I roll too far away.
...and into cognitive science instead.
Though I'm programming professionally now, so a lot of good that did me.
I'm not sure that this has to be the only way.
I have a car. I don't know a whole lot about the car, and I certainly don't consider myself a car expert. I know how to drive it, though, and I can fill it with gas, and check the oil level, and do a few other assorted things that were pretty easy to learn.
If I have any more complex problem, I take it in to a service station.
So in the near future with quality Linux desktop apps, fast net connections and ubiquitous encryption (we can dream, right?), it's conceivable that the face of home computing could change. My mom, instead of buying a computer and paying an ISP for a dialup, might just lease an X Terminal + connection as one service contract. All of the administration would be done by the provider. You and I would still buy PCs.
I think it's pretty likely that admin-ing a system, crash recovery, hard/software installation, etc. will stay too complex possibly forever. The way this sort of problem is solved is by creating a service industry. This is pretty much how it works in an office, the only reason it doesn't in homes is because of access problems.
Photoshop and Cubase are both powerful and relatively easy to use for their intended audience (artists and musicians, not computer pros). Unfortunately, few software designers think about their audience.