Lucas might learn from the mistakes of Episode I? You mean, you expect Lucas actually might try writing a screenplay that wasn't obviously a product of an opium-induced stupor?
The only lesson certain to be learned from Episode I is that no self-respecting adult will waste time going to the theater to see Episode II.
This article is a pure opinion piece. No studies are cited, just the opinion of a tired journalist who needed to meet a deadline. He didn't even bother to describe what gives the PDA its value.
The people who get the most value out of the PDA's are those who find a bulky paper calendar/phone book/memo pad (e.g. a daytimer) too cumbersome and inefficient to make a useful addition to their daily life and work.
I suppose one might try putting a daytimer in one's pocket (though I'd like to see the pants that support a pocket of that magnitude). I also suppose one could technically do a global search for a word or name in a daytimer, but most people can't afford the 10-20 minutes it takes to complete this task (which I have seen attempted; it's not pretty).
Go study Chinese. Learn to read and write hanzi. Report back again on whether you think Mandarin is a good universal language.
Of course, difficulties of not using a phonetic-based writing system aside, Mandarin is a simpler, more syntactically neat language than any European or Indo-European language. Your suggestion is not as off-the-wall as it might seem.
Well, (in case anyone is still reading this discussion) the reason FVWM gets no airplay on/. is simply that FVWM just doesn't interest Rob Malda. Back in March (I think) when FVWM 2 emerged from what seemed like the longest beta in history, I submitted a post to/. about it. It didn't get posted. When I emailed Mr. Malda asking why, he had this to say:
"I don't post software announcements unless I'm moved by the force to do so. Enlightenment and GNOME are things that I use so I mention them. FVWM2 just doesn't float my boat.
We have freshmeat.net for that stuff."
I suppose that position is understandable. FVWM may be the most stable window manager for all UNIX-type platforms, but even I must admit it is not as feature laden and gee-whiz looking as Window Maker or Enlightenment.
Realistically, most people on slashdot don't consider stability the highest priority in their software. This is as it should be in the open source world. People should try out the bleeding edge stuff. Sure, when you're on the bleeding edge you bleed a little, but that's how the snags are discovered and fixed.
Therefore, FVWM doesn't get much (if any) airplay on/., where the news is about those who challenge the established leaders. And let's face it, FVWM is the established leader in window managers.
Apparently it is easier than I would have thought to forget the Java still exists and that most big software companies are moving increasingly toward providing essential clients for Java instead of a specific platform.
Do I need to remind everyone that there is a JVM for Linux?
Furthermore, even without Java, just as is the Free Software Foundation Linux is 100% self-sustaining (as it was before everyone started to "buy in" to Linux).
Mr Katz implies that artists are people who don't "sell out" by providing what the masses demand, prefering instead to pursue at any cost a vision which, in order to validate its artistic integrity, must challenge established values and beliefs. Indeed, by this standard Lucas is not an artist.
On the other hand, any sane artist would love to make a living by selling his product. If Pepsi came to a painter and said, "please let us promote your paintings... we'll pay big bucks," it would be stupid to refuse, not true to some unquantifiable artistic spirit.
Mr. Katz, on the other hand, has "sold out" in that he takes a "controversial position" in order to get attention. He aims to be a center of attention, not a provider of information or useful perspective.
Congratulations, Mr. Katz. You got your attention. All poor Mr. Lucas got was satisfaction of knowing he made a lot of people happy. And a lot of money.
Hmmm... a few comments: "...if everyone invested their time into one unified project, we'd have one helluva..."
I am reminded of the Chicago Tribune article which suggested that people should stop wasting their time on Linux and instead spend their energy on making Windows NT better. This approach is silly. "Survival of the fittest" is a model which has served the software community (both commercial and free) and especially the consumer extremely well.
"We're moving forward w/providing documentation, but we're moving backwards as well."
Ahem...While it is indeed possible to create a grammatically correct sentence which is completely devoid of meaning, it is traditional to at include some specifics to lend verisimilitude to such vacuous statements. For example, the great American President George Bush spoke not simply of "light"; that would have been meaningless. Instead, he was specific: "I can see a thousand points of light.";-)
I hope "we" stay in school; the documentation repositories can only gain by "our" learning how to write a bit more carefully... and by "our" discovery that (if we use Linux) a neat little program called 'ispell' can help "us" spell big words more conventionally.:-) (This might have come in handy for: "Their intentions are definately[sic] good - but it's not acheiving[sic] the desired goal.")
These are all reliable sources of ergonomics information:
Univ. of California, Berkeley's Ergonomics Program: http://www.me.berkeley.edu/ergo
The typing injury FAQ http://www.tifaq.com
General ergonomic environment tips provided by Old Dominion University's Department of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences: http://www.ocean.odu.edu/ug/ergonomics.html
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society: http://www.hfes.org
First, a summary: To learn about Unix, I suggest a look at the UNIX98 standard, available at http://www.opengroup.org/regproducts/xxm0.htm
To learn about the history of microcomputers and their operating systems, I suggest a look at: http://web.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist.htm
Now, my response to the post:
Hmmm...(looking at my car)... pneumatic tires, internal combustion engine... it seems to me these are pretty old inventions. These may not be precisely "1920's" technologies, but certainly much older than I am.
I must admit I am amazed by the assertion that automobiles are "easy to redesign from scratch and most manufacturers do so every few years." I further admit I am amazed by the implication that automobile development is not "saddled with backwards compatibility concerns."
This is simply untrue. The reason automobiles can be and are frequently redesigned is that most of the core technologies in existing products are refined and reused versions of existing technologies which have not been fundamentally altered. (This, by the way, creates a multitude of backward compatibility concerns.) While it is true that this process of refinement and reuse makes the development cycle of an automobile quite efficient, it is also true that this does not constitute "redesign from scratch."
Perhaps we should consider the words of Alexander Pope, whose ideas have not become obsolete with age:
"A little learning is a dang'rous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again. Fir'd at first sight with what the Muse imparts, In fearless youth we tempt the heights of arts, While from the bounded level of our mind, Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind, But more advanc'd, behold with strange surprise New, distant scenes of endless science rise! So pleas'd at first, the tow'ring Alps we try, Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky; Th' eternal snows appear already past, And the first clouds and mountains seem the last; But those attain'd, we tremble to survey The growing labours of the lengthen'd way, Th' increasing prospect tires our wand'ring eyes, Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!"
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, not even Microsoft applications fail to improve over two years.
AIX's WebSM is the reason D.H. Brown rated AIX the best commercial Unix.
Much has changed.
Considering Cringely attitude, it's not surpising he wasn't asked to write the screenplay.
Lucas might learn from the mistakes of Episode I? You mean, you expect Lucas actually might try writing a screenplay that wasn't obviously a product of an opium-induced stupor?
The only lesson certain to be learned from Episode I is that no self-respecting adult will waste time going to the theater to see Episode II.
This article is a pure opinion piece. No studies are cited, just the opinion of a tired journalist who needed to meet a deadline. He didn't even bother to describe what gives the PDA its value.
The people who get the most value out of the PDA's are those who find a bulky paper calendar/phone book/memo pad (e.g. a daytimer) too cumbersome and inefficient to make a useful addition to their daily life and work.
I suppose one might try putting a daytimer in one's pocket (though I'd like to see the pants that support a pocket of that magnitude). I also suppose one could technically do a global search for a word or name in a daytimer, but most people can't afford the 10-20 minutes it takes to complete this task (which I have seen attempted; it's not pretty).
Go study Chinese. Learn to read and write hanzi. Report back again on whether you think Mandarin is a good universal language.
Of course, difficulties of not using a phonetic-based writing system aside, Mandarin is a simpler, more syntactically neat language than any European or Indo-European language. Your suggestion is not as off-the-wall as it might seem.
I can't believe people are complaining because 3dfx is enforcing its license contracts.
How would those people feel if some big corporation violated the terms of the GPL for its own profit?
The reason the rules work is that everyone is bound by them.
I suppose that position is understandable. FVWM may be the most stable window manager for all UNIX-type platforms, but even I must admit it is not as feature laden and gee-whiz looking as Window Maker or Enlightenment.
Realistically, most people on slashdot don't consider stability the highest priority in their software. This is as it should be in the open source world. People should try out the bleeding edge stuff. Sure, when you're on the bleeding edge you bleed a little, but that's how the snags are discovered and fixed.
Therefore, FVWM doesn't get much (if any) airplay on
Apparently it is easier than I would have thought to forget the Java still exists and that most big software companies are moving increasingly toward providing essential clients for Java instead of a specific platform.
Do I need to remind everyone that there is a JVM for Linux?
Furthermore, even without Java, just as is the Free Software Foundation Linux is 100% self-sustaining (as it was before everyone started to "buy in" to Linux).
Mr Katz implies that artists are people who don't "sell out" by providing what the masses demand, prefering instead to pursue at any cost a vision which, in order to validate its artistic integrity, must challenge established values and beliefs. Indeed, by this standard Lucas is not an artist.
On the other hand, any sane artist would love to make a living by selling his product. If Pepsi came to a painter and said, "please let us promote your paintings... we'll pay big bucks," it would be stupid to refuse, not true to some unquantifiable artistic spirit.
Mr. Katz, on the other hand, has "sold out" in that he takes a "controversial position" in order to get attention. He aims to be a center of attention, not a provider of information or useful perspective.
Congratulations, Mr. Katz. You got your attention. All poor Mr. Lucas got was satisfaction of knowing he made a lot of people happy. And a lot of money.
I suppose, though, it wouldn't hurt to mention the alternatives specifically. ;-)
The only alternative window system of whose development I am aware is Berlin. Check out the Berlin Consortium home page
Are there any others?
Hmmm... a few comments:
;-)
:-)
"...if everyone invested their time into one unified project, we'd have one helluva..."
I am reminded of the Chicago Tribune article which suggested that people should stop wasting their time on Linux and instead spend their energy on making Windows NT better. This approach is silly. "Survival of the fittest" is a model which has served the software community (both commercial and free) and especially the consumer extremely well.
"We're moving forward w/providing documentation, but we're moving backwards as well."
Ahem...While it is indeed possible to create a grammatically correct sentence which is completely devoid of meaning, it is traditional to at include some specifics to lend verisimilitude to such vacuous statements. For example, the great American President George Bush spoke not simply of "light"; that would have been meaningless. Instead, he was specific: "I can see a thousand points of light."
I hope "we" stay in school; the documentation repositories can only gain by "our" learning how to write a bit more carefully... and by "our" discovery that (if we use Linux) a neat little program called 'ispell' can help "us" spell big words more conventionally.
(This might have come in handy for: "Their intentions are definately[sic] good - but it's not acheiving[sic] the desired goal.")
These are all reliable sources of ergonomics information:
Univ. of California, Berkeley's Ergonomics Program:
http://www.me.berkeley.edu/ergo
The typing injury FAQ
http://www.tifaq.com
General ergonomic environment tips provided by Old Dominion University's Department of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences:
http://www.ocean.odu.edu/ug/ergonomics.html
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society:
http://www.hfes.org
Cumulative Trauma Disorder News site:
http://ctdnews.com
First, a summary:
To learn about Unix, I suggest a look at the UNIX98 standard, available at http://www.opengroup.org/regproducts/xxm0.htm
To learn about the history of microcomputers and their operating systems, I suggest a look at:
http://web.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist.htm
Now, my response to the post:
Hmmm...(looking at my car)... pneumatic tires, internal combustion engine... it seems to me these are pretty old inventions. These may not be precisely "1920's" technologies, but certainly much older than I am.
I must admit I am amazed by the assertion that automobiles are "easy to redesign from scratch and most manufacturers do so every few years." I further admit I am amazed by the implication that automobile development is not "saddled with backwards compatibility concerns."
This is simply untrue. The reason automobiles can be and are frequently redesigned is that most of the core technologies in existing products are refined and reused versions of existing technologies which have not been fundamentally altered. (This, by the way, creates a multitude of backward compatibility concerns.) While it is true that this process of refinement and reuse makes the development cycle of an automobile quite efficient, it is also true that this does not constitute "redesign from scratch."
Perhaps we should consider the words of Alexander Pope, whose ideas have not become obsolete with age:
"A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
Fir'd at first sight with what the Muse imparts,
In fearless youth we tempt the heights of arts,
While from the bounded level of our mind,
Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind,
But more advanc'd, behold with strange surprise
New, distant scenes of endless science rise!
So pleas'd at first, the tow'ring Alps we try,
Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky;
Th' eternal snows appear already past,
And the first clouds and mountains seem the last;
But those attain'd, we tremble to survey
The growing labours of the lengthen'd way,
Th' increasing prospect tires our wand'ring eyes,
Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!"