Neither of those two got me anywhere. I expect things have changed, but it's still relative.
To make your CS course worthwhile and strictly usable in your future career you should actively seek sponsorship in a software company and take a split year working for that company during your course.
CS courses could be better by ensuring that the University administration actively assists students to find sponsorship and provide options for taking a year out during the course.
Any time you see something advertise that it has a web interface, you know that you're about to be confronted with something that lacks all the power of the command line AND lacks all the ease of use of a conventional gui application. These things make my ears steam.
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
Any time you see something advertise that it has a web interface, you know that you're about to be confronted with something that lacks all the power of the command line AND lacks all the ease of use of a conventional gui application. These things make my ears steam.
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
You can't change the way an app's buttons, scrollbars, or widgets look or work.
True, not by changing the Window Manager, but by changing your Libraries you can change the way an app's buttons & widgets look or work.
You can't change the fonts that the app uses.
Generally this is customisable through app-defaults, and for user space ~/.Xdefaults
Unix GUI apps barely *have* a look-and-feel, and what look-and-feel there is, is determined more by the application and kit it links to than the window manager you choose.
I kind of meant to say this, It's a feature, not a bug.
I have too often had too re-install a killed system, because it could no longer, for one reason or another, reach the complicated state of the GUI.
Having the fallback of console mode is a UNIX strength and let's not forget it!
The article in question doesn't address any of the strength's of UNIX GUIs, it just ponders the unaddressed feature possibilities of the standard tools (tar and rm are examples). These arn't core UNIX issues, and also, with a bit of Tcl could quite easily be implemented.
The strength's of the UNIX GUI (I'm talking about X here) are:
Client/Server philosophy, allowing X clients to run on one architecture and X servers to display those clients on a completely different architecture. (e.g. You can run X applications on a Cray and display them on x86 or even embedded Architecture. You can even display Cray applications on an iPaq (bloody hell!!!)
and
Placing the "look and feel" into user space. Be it desktop environment any user can change the L&F by simply choosing a different Window Manager at start-up. kdm has a lovely way of doing this.
You obviously consider a blind person as someone who is totally unsighted. In actual fact most blind people are partially sighted and, in the UK, are able to obtain grants for thinks such as larger than normal screens, or "magnifier software".
You don't need to modify the website for this.
"Bigger version for the partially sighted: Click Here"
Your website does not define the media which will be used to define it. Your website will just send down the Internet pipe what it is requested for.
The accessibility concerns are fully dependent on the equipment used to communicate and receive the information at the users end and this is not within your power nor should it be your concern.
Did you write this website manually...??? You could do with a content management system...
Even in the best of times, selling something that's available for free is at best a weak business model.
Well that depends. Businesses will pay for Expertise in Linux. I think "Linux Consultancies" and "Linux Support Companies" can be a pretty attractive business model. Although "Linux" is free - it doesn't mean that you can't sell "Added Value".
Well, it certainly a lot lighter than Gnome or KDE.
Has anyone ever seen a GUI based ".twmrc" creator? I have spent years writing ".twmrc" files and have been constantly editing them every time I've installed a new system or application on a system. It's the kind of thing where I think - why don't I just keep a good one on a floppy... I never seem to get round to it.
An annoying thing is that in it's default state there isn't a way to start an xterm. This can be quite daunting for newbies. The default colors are pretty god damn awful too.
Still - I've tried KDE, then I tried Gnome, but now I'm back with twm. Neat, nice and lovely.
Isn't any non-profit organisation prepared to supply the source code for free able to do this under the current license?
Just let the kernel evolve. If it's under Linus's control or otherwise, the kernel is sure to evolve as long as there is a substantial user-base prepared to take advantage of it's features and demand more.
Slashdot Mirror
Ug... We learned Pascal and Fortran77...
Neither of those two got me anywhere. I expect things have changed, but it's still relative.
To make your CS course worthwhile and strictly usable in your future career you should actively seek sponsorship in a software company and take a split year working for that company during your course.
CS courses could be better by ensuring that the University administration actively assists students to find sponsorship and provide options for taking a year out during the course.
Just my petty thoughts...
can you imagine a Beowulf of these things, radio interference or what?
You could just number the songs you share 1.mp3, 2.mp3, 3.mp3 and so on.
:-)
To get an Index of what 1, 2 & 3 are you have to offer a copyrighted song to that user who shares those files.
Both parties can then generate trust.
It would be really interesting to see an article on game-theory specifically looking at strategies for peer-to-peer music Exchange.
Prisoners Dilmma...
Any time you see something advertise that it has a web interface, you know that you're about to be confronted with something that lacks all the power of the command line AND lacks all the ease of use of a conventional gui application. These things make my ears steam.
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
Any time you see something advertise that it has a web interface, you know that you're about to be confronted with something that lacks all the power of the command line AND lacks all the ease of use of a conventional gui application. These things make my ears steam.
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
errr... I do not imply that KDE nor Gnome were Window managers.... where did you get that from???
Hmmm... two posts have said this, perhaps I can't read my own post...
*confused*
I never said they were.
You can't change the way an app's buttons, scrollbars, or widgets look or work.
True, not by changing the Window Manager, but by changing your Libraries you can change the way an app's buttons & widgets look or work.
You can't change the fonts that the app uses.
Generally this is customisable through app-defaults, and for user space ~/.Xdefaults
Unix GUI apps barely *have* a look-and-feel, and what look-and-feel there is, is determined more by the application and kit it links to than the window manager you choose.
I kind of meant to say this, It's a feature, not a bug.
Actually I'm glad they dropped the pre-95 stuff...
there's a quite a few posts I made from 91-94 that I would like never to be read again!
Seriously - I am.
Somehow Google embodies the Internet as it was and somehow continues to thrive.
viva Google!!
And that is the reason I post at 2 and you post at 1 or less. Heh... just another AC.
and that is the reason I post at 2 and you post at 1 or less.
Say UNIX didn't have a command line.
Ala MacOS or Ala NT.
I have too often had too re-install a killed system, because it could no longer, for one reason or another, reach the complicated state of the GUI.
Having the fallback of console mode is a UNIX strength and let's not forget it!
The article in question doesn't address any of the strength's of UNIX GUIs, it just ponders the unaddressed feature possibilities of the standard tools (tar and rm are examples). These arn't core UNIX issues, and also, with a bit of Tcl could quite easily be implemented.
The strength's of the UNIX GUI (I'm talking about X here) are:
Client/Server philosophy, allowing X clients to run on one architecture and X servers to display those clients on a completely different architecture. (e.g. You can run X applications on a Cray and display them on x86 or even embedded Architecture. You can even display Cray applications on an iPaq (bloody hell!!!)
and
Placing the "look and feel" into user space. Be it desktop environment any user can change the L&F by simply choosing a different Window Manager at start-up. kdm has a lovely way of doing this.
Hmmm... so the astronauts have to put up with the awful airline cut versions of the films.
sponsor a kid in Ghana, kill a kid in Colombia...
:)
assuming your cofee is colombian
You obviously consider a blind person as someone who is totally unsighted. In actual fact most blind people are partially sighted and, in the UK, are able to obtain grants for thinks such as larger than normal screens, or "magnifier software".
You don't need to modify the website for this.
"Bigger version for the partially sighted: Click Here"
"Louder version for the deaf: Click Here"
You do not have to change your website at all.
Your website does not define the media which will be used to define it. Your website will just send down the Internet pipe what it is requested for.
The accessibility concerns are fully dependent on the equipment used to communicate and receive the information at the users end and this is not within your power nor should it be your concern.
Did you write this website manually...??? You could do with a content management system...
hmmm... there is no way to transfer karma.
Even in the best of times, selling something that's available for free is at best a weak business model.
Well that depends. Businesses will pay for Expertise in Linux. I think "Linux Consultancies" and "Linux Support Companies" can be a pretty attractive business model. Although "Linux" is free - it doesn't mean that you can't sell "Added Value".
hmmm... this isn't an example of that as Linuxcare don't produce a Linux distribution.
It's interesting how they renamed it from Tom's Window Manager to Tab Window Manager.
I always thought of it as Tom's Window Manager, but couldn't for the life of me figure out who Tom was.
Well, it certainly a lot lighter than Gnome or KDE.
Has anyone ever seen a GUI based ".twmrc" creator? I have spent years writing ".twmrc" files and have been constantly editing them every time I've installed a new system or application on a system. It's the kind of thing where I think - why don't I just keep a good one on a floppy... I never seem to get round to it.
An annoying thing is that in it's default state there isn't a way to start an xterm. This can be quite daunting for newbies. The default colors are pretty god damn awful too.
Still - I've tried KDE, then I tried Gnome, but now I'm back with twm. Neat, nice and lovely.
oooppps...
:-)
Almsot as stupid as those patents
let's not redirect that to file
I type the command:
ls -lR > file | grep string
Can I patent this? Is it my intellectual property?, or does it already belong to someone else?
Seriously though. I cannot believe how stupid some of these patents are.
Isn't any non-profit organisation prepared to supply the source code for free able to do this under the current license?
Just let the kernel evolve. If it's under Linus's control or otherwise, the kernel is sure to evolve as long as there is a substantial user-base prepared to take advantage of it's features and demand more.