If all use you is one Window Manager and environment in Linux then yes the GUI is consistent, as long as you use programs written for that environment. I don't know about you but I quite often use GNOME apps on KDE. They don't act the same and definitely look different. And what about common programs not written for either environment? Star Office, WordPerfect, GIMP and Netscape come to mind. All have different interfaces.
The diversity of UI's on Linux means there is very little consistency and every programmer seems to feel the need to re-invent the wheel. It would be nice if they would all write to a single spec but then it wouldn't be Linux would it?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Windows is the pinnacle of UI's but it has much more consistency than Linux. Not to mention that KDE and GNOME are poor and incomplete copies of the Windows interface, complete with task bar and Start button.
Every question you asked about the Windows interface goes double for Linux, it is by far more complicated to use and inconsistent. Every Window Manager has it's own way of doing things as do KDE and GNOME.
Do I double-click (GNOME) or do I single-click (KDE)? How do I close a window? Is the close button on the left or right? How do I run a program? Oh never mind open an xterm and type the filename, jeez why use a GUI?
Listen I like Linux too but to claim that it's is easier to use and is more consistent is ridiculous.
Another thing, the install program will fdisk and format the drive, you're just not given a lot of choices when it does. After several hundred successful Win98 installs I can attest to this.
Upgrading to IE 5.01 SP1 will fix the problem on ALL versions of Windows. Upgrading to IE 5.5 however doesn't fix it on W2K. At least so says Microsoft.
That's a bug of the windows- and xwindows-mouse handling. On MacOS you can move the mouse a bit while double clicking. (That's the problem when you copy a GUI without looking at it carefully)
Personally I think Windows is nothing like the MacOS. I really have to shift my thinking when going between the two but I digress...
Windows too allows you to move the mouse a tiny bit when you double-click. The tolerance is only a couple of pixels. But if that's not good enough for you, at least Windows gives you the option of turning double-clicking off.
2. Two button mice were "developed" (note the quotes) to give users contextual menues. Contextual menues were developed to make up for the fact that a particular OS that shall remained unnamed (ok, windows) had such a terrible set of rules for system menues that it was almost impossible to get stuff done. Menues attached to application windows, menues attached document windows, menues attached to folder windows.... where the $@#%! is "copy" or "paste"? Hence, the second button.
No... the prize for contextual menus goes to OS/2. MS later stole the idea.
3. Contextual menues were also the saviour to the crisis of badly designed hot keys. I want to close a window... is it ctrl-w, alt-w or alt-F4 (nobel prize for counter-intuitive design to whoever came up with that one). Quitting an application? Could be q, could be x. On the mac, quit is always cmd-Q, close is always cmd-W, undo is always Z. Always. With these commands standardized across all apps, contextual menues are unneccessary...
Really? Alt-F4 is the way to close an app... period. It is built into Windows. Any other key combo used to close an app is something put in by the app's programmer. Also Cut, copy paste are always Ctrl-X,C & V. There are also lot's of other standard Windows key commands that work the same in all apps, any deviation from the standard was the doing of the apps' programmers. I actually prefer the keyboard shortcuts, I can get things done faster. And if there's no mouse I can still use the OS. Try that on a Mac.
4. In order to get some mindshare off the Winders flock, Apple caved in and offered contextual menues. Just hold down the control key. No second mouse button required.
Now that's intuitive, use two hands when one could suffice.
Well, windows 9x might have, NT is a different story. To install NT 4 (and windows 2000) on a ATA/66 drive. Well, guess what? HAL didn't (and doesn't) support ATA/66. I had to re-arange the entire IDE setup of the computer. Sure, after I had NT installed, I didn't have a problem, I could install the driver, then move the drive over....
Sigh, W2K supports ATA-66 right out of the box, never had a problem and I've already done a number of installs. As for NT you have to install the ATA-66 driver like a SCSI driver by pressing F6 at the beginning of the installation. It's all in the docs.
I don't know if this functionality has bee extended to include mounting physical disks as folders.
Yes MS finally saw the light, W2K will let you mount physical disks or partitions as folders. I triple boot on my computer (DOS, W2K and Linux) and I access the DOS partition from W2K as a folder. Just go to Disk Management in the Computer Management Console to mount other partitions and drives.
You know what, it's just a computer. One that I particularly don't find interesting. The iMac was a deliberate marketing attempt by Apple to regain market share by aiming it at newbies (not that there's anything wrong with that). To call it anything else is ridiculous. If you still think I'm missing it, so be it, I don't think there's anything to catch.
This has been fun, DB, this my last post to this thread, so take care.
My point exactly, it's not a technologically innovative machine, hence my comment on it borrowing a lot from the PC, but it maybe from a marketing perspective.
True enough, I just wish the Mac crowd would stop proclaiming the iMac as innovative, it isn't. The word 'innovative' is getting abused quite a bit lately. Just look how MS throws it around.
As for Windows 98 driving USB sales I have one little thought to pop that bubble - safe mode. It kind of blows when your USB keyboard won't register with your OS when you are trying to recover from a crash.
Just pop into the BIOS and enable legacy USB keyboard support and the USB keyboard will work everytime. Yes even in Safe mode, DOS, Linux, NT etc.
Please don't get me wrong I'm not a Mac basher, I just don't like the iMac, even my Mac using friends dislike them. My beef is that I just don't think the iMac is very innovative, from a marketing perspective maybe, but not technologically and that's what really counts not coloured plastic.
The iMac is the best selling computer now, two years running.
The iMac maybe the best selling computer model, but the Intel-compatible side has literally hundreds (thousands?) of models and still outsell Apple almost 20 to 1.
Steve Jobs changed the face of computing - he (re)introduced design and styling as an aspect of the purchase. Wintel cloners took twelve months to catch up to this, as well as other Mac innovations like widespread use of USB (which if you remember was originally derided).
USB was invented by Intel, MS and Compaq and appeared on PCs at least a year before the iMac appeared. Granted it took the iMac to kickstart the USB peripheral market (Windows 98 may have had something to do with it too) but that was largely because that was one the few ways to expand the iMac. PCs had many other ways to expand and add peripherals, USB wasn't that important. And don't forget all the other PC inspired technology in the iMac (IDE drives, PCI bus, etc). It wouldn't exist if it weren't for technologies originally created for the PC. As for design innovations you can keep the coloured plastic. It's ugly and I wish PC manufacturers would leave alone.
That'll do it. But it might be better to use the Add/Remove Programs applet to delete WSH.
I found a good solution is to change the default action for VBS files to EDIT rather than OPEN. So when you double-click on a VBS file it will open in Notepad instead of executing. You still have the option of running the script by right clicking and selecting OPEN. This way you can keep the many benefits of the WSH and be safe too. It's a good idea to do this to JS (JavaScript) files too.
Sorry but this does not stop the ILUVYOU virus. What you suggest disables scripts in HTML formatted email and that does stop viruses like Bubbleboy for example. It DOES NOT stop scripts sent as email attachments (ala ILUVYOU, Melissa etc) BIG DIFFERENCE. Many people seem to be having trouble understanding this. Scripts in HTML email are run by the IE script engine and are controlled by the settings in Internet Options. These are the kind of scripts that can run in the preview pane automatically. Email attachment scripts are run by the Windows Scripting Host and are run outside of Outlook (or any other emailer) and have to be run by the user. The way to fix this problem is to either remove the WSH or change the default association for VBS and JS script files.
/* printf("Welcome to Windows 3.11"); */ /* printf("Welcome to Windows 95"); */ printf("Welcome to Windows 98"); if (system_ok()) { bsod(random_err()); crash(to_dos_prompt); } else system_memory = open("a:\swp0001.swp", O_CREATE);
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you mean Star Raiders? I loved that game.
If all use you is one Window Manager and environment in Linux then yes the GUI is consistent, as long as you use programs written for that environment. I don't know about you but I quite often use GNOME apps on KDE. They don't act the same and definitely look different. And what about common programs not written for either environment? Star Office, WordPerfect, GIMP and Netscape come to mind. All have different interfaces.
The diversity of UI's on Linux means there is very little consistency and every programmer seems to feel the need to re-invent the wheel. It would be nice if they would all write to a single spec but then it wouldn't be Linux would it?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Windows is the pinnacle of UI's but it has much more consistency than Linux. Not to mention that KDE and GNOME are poor and incomplete copies of the Windows interface, complete with task bar and Start button.
Thank you for that, I found it quite amusing.
Every question you asked about the Windows interface goes double for Linux, it is by far more complicated to use and inconsistent. Every Window Manager has it's own way of doing things as do KDE and GNOME.
Do I double-click (GNOME) or do I single-click (KDE)? How do I close a window? Is the close button on the left or right? How do I run a program? Oh never mind open an xterm and type the filename, jeez why use a GUI?
Listen I like Linux too but to claim that it's is easier to use and is more consistent is ridiculous.
Another thing, the install program will fdisk and format the drive, you're just not given a lot of choices when it does. After several hundred successful Win98 installs I can attest to this.
The CD doesn't boot
Excuse me, but the Win98 CD does boot. Try it sometime.
Their latest version, 5.0, is roughly comparable to Linux 2.3. Since the current version of Linux is 6.2, this is clearly unacceptable.
Ummm... the latest version of Linux is 2.2.16. Don't confuse Red Hat version numbers with the Linux version numbers.
Upgrading to IE 5.01 SP1 will fix the problem on ALL versions of Windows. Upgrading to IE 5.5 however doesn't fix it on W2K. At least so says Microsoft.
It's available here.
That's a bug of the windows- and xwindows-mouse handling. On MacOS you can move the mouse a bit while double clicking.
(That's the problem when you copy a GUI without looking at it carefully)
Personally I think Windows is nothing like the MacOS. I really have to shift my thinking when going between the two but I digress...
Windows too allows you to move the mouse a tiny bit when you double-click. The tolerance is only a couple of pixels. But if that's not good enough for you, at least Windows gives you the option of turning double-clicking off.
2. Two button mice were "developed" (note the quotes) to give users contextual menues. Contextual menues were developed to make up for the fact that a particular OS that shall remained unnamed (ok, windows) had such a terrible set of rules for system menues that it was almost impossible to get stuff done. Menues attached to application windows, menues attached document windows, menues attached to folder windows.... where the $@#%! is "copy" or "paste"? Hence, the second button.
No... the prize for contextual menus goes to OS/2. MS later stole the idea.
3. Contextual menues were also the saviour to the crisis of badly designed hot keys. I want to close a window... is it ctrl-w, alt-w or alt-F4 (nobel prize for counter-intuitive design to whoever came up with that one). Quitting an application? Could be q, could be x. On the mac, quit is always cmd-Q, close is always cmd-W, undo is always Z. Always. With these commands standardized across all apps, contextual menues are unneccessary...
Really? Alt-F4 is the way to close an app... period. It is built into Windows. Any other key combo used to close an app is something put in by the app's programmer. Also Cut, copy paste are always Ctrl-X,C & V. There are also lot's of other standard Windows key commands that work the same in all apps, any deviation from the standard was the doing of the apps' programmers. I actually prefer the keyboard shortcuts, I can get things done faster. And if there's no mouse I can still use the OS. Try that on a Mac.
4. In order to get some mindshare off the Winders flock, Apple caved in and offered contextual menues. Just hold down the control key. No second mouse button required.
Now that's intuitive, use two hands when one could suffice.
Well, windows 9x might have, NT is a different story. To install NT 4 (and windows 2000) on a ATA/66 drive. Well, guess what? HAL didn't (and doesn't) support ATA/66. I had to re-arange the entire IDE setup of the computer. Sure, after I had NT installed, I didn't have a problem, I could install the driver, then move the drive over....
Sigh, W2K supports ATA-66 right out of the box, never had a problem and I've already done a number of installs. As for NT you have to install the ATA-66 driver like a SCSI driver by pressing F6 at the beginning of the installation. It's all in the docs.
We in Canada (unlike the U.S.) do NOT have the right to free speech, the Federal Government regulates what we can or cannot say
Have you ever read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which is part the Canadian constitution? We DO have the right to free speech.
I quote:
Fundamental Freedoms
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication.
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
It can't be any clearer than that.
I don't know if this functionality has bee extended to include mounting physical disks as folders.
Yes MS finally saw the light, W2K will let you mount physical disks or partitions as folders. I triple boot on my computer (DOS, W2K and Linux) and I access the DOS partition from W2K as a folder. Just go to Disk Management in the Computer Management Console to mount other partitions and drives.
You know what, it's just a computer. One that I particularly don't find interesting. The iMac was a deliberate marketing attempt by Apple to regain market share by aiming it at newbies (not that there's anything wrong with that). To call it anything else is ridiculous. If you still think I'm missing it, so be it, I don't think there's anything to catch.
This has been fun, DB, this my last post to this thread, so take care.
just not in the traditional nerd sense
My point exactly, it's not a technologically innovative machine, hence my comment on it borrowing a lot from the PC, but it maybe from a marketing perspective.
True enough, I just wish the Mac crowd would stop proclaiming the iMac as innovative, it isn't. The word 'innovative' is getting abused quite a bit lately. Just look how MS throws it around.
As for Windows 98 driving USB sales I have one little thought to pop that bubble - safe mode. It kind of blows when your USB keyboard won't register with your OS when you are trying to recover from a crash.
Just pop into the BIOS and enable legacy USB keyboard support and the USB keyboard will work everytime. Yes even in Safe mode, DOS, Linux, NT etc.
Please don't get me wrong I'm not a Mac basher, I just don't like the iMac, even my Mac using friends dislike them. My beef is that I just don't think the iMac is very innovative, from a marketing perspective maybe, but not technologically and that's what really counts not coloured plastic.
The iMac is the best selling computer now, two years running.
The iMac maybe the best selling computer model, but the Intel-compatible side has literally hundreds (thousands?) of models and still outsell Apple almost 20 to 1.
Steve Jobs changed the face of computing - he (re)introduced design and styling as an aspect of the purchase. Wintel cloners took twelve months to catch up to this, as well as other Mac innovations like widespread use of USB (which if you remember was originally derided).
USB was invented by Intel, MS and Compaq and appeared on PCs at least a year before the iMac appeared. Granted it took the iMac to kickstart the USB peripheral market (Windows 98 may have had something to do with it too) but that was largely because that was one the few ways to expand the iMac. PCs had many other ways to expand and add peripherals, USB wasn't that important. And don't forget all the other PC inspired technology in the iMac (IDE drives, PCI bus, etc). It wouldn't exist if it weren't for technologies originally created for the PC. As for design innovations you can keep the coloured plastic. It's ugly and I wish PC manufacturers would leave alone.
That'll do it. But it might be better to use the Add/Remove Programs applet to delete WSH.
I found a good solution is to change the default action for VBS files to EDIT rather than OPEN. So when you double-click on a VBS file it will open in Notepad instead of executing. You still have the option of running the script by right clicking and selecting OPEN. This way you can keep the many benefits of the WSH and be safe too. It's a good idea to do this to JS (JavaScript) files too.
HowTo turn-off scripting holes in outlook/IE.
Sorry but this does not stop the ILUVYOU virus. What you suggest disables scripts in HTML formatted email and that does stop viruses like Bubbleboy for example. It DOES NOT stop scripts sent as email attachments (ala ILUVYOU, Melissa etc) BIG DIFFERENCE. Many people seem to be having trouble understanding this. Scripts in HTML email are run by the IE script engine and are controlled by the settings in Internet Options. These are the kind of scripts that can run in the preview pane automatically. Email attachment scripts are run by the Windows Scripting Host and are run outside of Outlook (or any other emailer) and have to be run by the user. The way to fix this problem is to either remove the WSH or change the default association for VBS and JS script files.
WIN 98 SOURCE CODE REVEALED:
/*
TOP SECRET Microsoft(c) Code
Project: Chicago(tm)
Projected release-date: Summer 1998
*/
#include "win31.h"
#include "win95.h"
#include "evenmore.h"
#include "oldstuff.h"
#include "billrulz.h"
#define INSTALL = HARD
char make_prog_look_big[1600000];
void main()
{
while(!CRASHED)
{
display_copyright_message();
display_bill_rules_message();
do_nothing_loop();
if (first_time_installation)
{
make_50_megabyte_swapfile();
do_nothing_loop();
totally_screw_up_HPFS_file_system();
search_and_destroy_the_rest_of_OS/2();
hang_system();
}
write_something(anything);
display_copyright_message();
do_nothing_loop();
do_some_stuff();
if (still_not_crashed)
{
display_copyright_message();
do_nothing_loop();
basically_run_windows_3.1();
do_nothing_loop();
do_nothing_loop();
do_nothing_loop();
}
}
if (detect_cache())
disable_cache();
if (fast_cpu())
{
set_wait_states(lots);
set_mouse(speed, very_slow);
set_mouse(action, jumpy);
set_mouse(reaction, sometimes);
}
/* printf("Welcome to Windows 3.11"); */
/* printf("Welcome to Windows 95"); */
printf("Welcome to Windows 98");
if (system_ok())
{
bsod(random_err());
crash(to_dos_prompt);
}
else
system_memory = open("a:\swp0001.swp", O_CREATE);
while(something)
{
sleep(5);
get_user_input();
sleep(5);
act_on_user_input();
sleep(5);
}
create_general_protection_fault();
}
(Thanks to the 4 Guys from Rolla)