From Windows 95 you've had the `Open With' option. Windows 2000 (and maybe WinME) improves on this with a menu that expands and shows a list of available apps exactly as you describe. RTFM, people!
Btw, you're not alone. Scott Rosenberg wrote a completely stupid article on exactly this topic for Salon once. You can probably find the/. thread this resulted in.
Sun hides nothing when it bundles software and gives credit where it is due. They do this with Apache, Perl, Java, X Windows, and the Berkeley UNIX compatibility tools, for example. The user is never forced to use these tools, but they certainly may choose to.
Actually Perl, Apache, X.. can all be bundled with Windows if MS wishes. The reason they don't bundle it is that they have a strong not-invented-here and don't-leave-our-walled-garden mentality (proof: look up WMIC. oh the pain of reinventing - badly!)
The point is, with this sort of attitude, you run the risk of being called an arrogant prick, but a judge shouldn't even consider it. What's tragic about the MS antitrust case is that the shady OEM deals, the dual-boot prohibition (BeOS suffered because of this), the arm-twisting -- are all subsumed into a weird argument about how Netscape was wronged because Microsoft bundled an effing browser with the OS.
There was this good Register story a while ago where a Sun director talked about customers' expectations from a *software* vendor. The word `sedimentation' was mentioned. And that's precisely the problem: from MS to Redhat to Sun, everyone bundles, is forced to, or goes out of business because that's what the customer wants.
But the people (or their backstage paymasters) focus on buzzwords like `bundling' and push for stupid remedies like ``releasing windows' source'' and all. Yeah right. Like that's gonna happen. The thing to do would have been fine MS (heavily -- they sure can afford it, with 36bn(!) in cash -- for restrictive OEM licenses, cause a world of hurt to their bottom line, and move on.
But for MS' many (whiny) competitors, legal eagles are now substituting for credible tech competition and decent business plans. And so the lawsuit has become a hem-the-giant-in game, even as these very same whinerscontinuehaemorrhaging money. These losers don't deserve any sympathy at all.
Actually, yes, the idea sucked from a perf perspective, but if you remember how many Windows 3.1 crashes were caused by buggy video drivers, the NT 3.1 team was probably scared shitless that the same would happen to their baby.
They solved that problem through a driver certification program for NT4.. by the time NT SP3 came out, most graphic card vendors had gotten their act together, IIRC.
In Windows 2000 (and Win98?) of course, the display drivers follow the Windows Driver Model, where the bulk of the work is done by a stock system-provided routine, and the hardware vendor has to supply a VXD that plugs into this. Writing WDM video drivers is _supposed_ to be easier in theory since one has less work to do.
It's isn't just the kernel actually... it's the entire OS infrastructure that GNOME or KDE build a desktop on, that's kind of shaky compared to OSX or XP as a personal desktop OS.
> It's rather unfair to blame Linus for not > programming your favourite feature
Sorry, I wasn't aware of video acceleration work being done at the kernel level. But then, accelerated video is not my favorite feature -- I could care less, I interact with my Unix boxen mostly through SSH sessions -- it is just that the there doesn't seem like there are too many kernel hackers for whom a usable desktop is a priority. Again, there's nothing wrong with that.
I agree. Abrash rocks. I'm not much into graphics, but his Zen of Code Optimization was a big influence on me.
>Do you know what NT version Abrash was brought in for?
afaik, the first version. Before the 3.1 release. Incidentally, NT 3.1 was supposed to slow at graphics anyway* -- NT caught on to an extent in the CAD world only after NT4 came out.
*In v3.1/3.51, video drivers executed in userland like normal programs, so the implentor was under a huge handicap as against (say) Win95: on NT 3.1 each call the video driver made to the system would go through involve a costly (in terms of time) ring transition.
In NT4 they took the the video drivers out of userland (ring 3 on intel) and put it in with the rest of the privileged system at ring 0.
Windows 2000's interface is *very* similar to Windows 98's, so I am not sure how you say "Win2000 with million of Control panels sucks". Actually I find Windows 2000's UI (some nice touches like a persistent `Open With...' menu weren't there in Windows 98) quite productive -- especially once I have disabled Web View and installed cygwin.
But yes: XP... the fastest way to improve XP's interface is to move back to the Windows2000-style UI (which is there for backward compatibility). Incidentally, XP does not only have sucky UI -- even the graphics are no great shakes -- check out this critique.
I agree, ncftp is probably one of the most *productive* ftp clients out there. Probably the only UI crib one can make about it is: they should've used a readline-or-similar library for autocomplete. The one they use now is too goofy for words.
The kernel and underlying OS frequently don't offer the features you'd need to make a UI competitive with OS X or Windows XP [...] I don't mean to criticize, just to suggest that we need a few people with dual expertise, or better communication between projects.
The Windows NT team had an analogous issue: their video code was hog-slow until they brought Michael Abrash in to speed things up. What the kernel project perhaps needs is a person who's actually *interested* in a designed-from-bottom-up GUI. But given Linus' focus on 80 character terminals (not a bad thing either, imho) this is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Microsoft staffers spent a long time hand carving this imposing statue of BillG at the entrance to WinHEC. Based on Native American folklore from the Northwest apparently it wards off government lawyers.:)
Considering that these computers don't use a real keyboard (because of concerns of vandalism/theft and maintenance), it's not surprising that the kids use paintbrush. It's one of the things that can be effectively used without a keyboard.
There is a *lot* of imbalance in Indian development (Pol.Sci and sociology freaks will have a field day here). The figure you quoted -- 22k... Most urban households will make more than that in a month. In the larger metropolises (Bombay, Delhi) many will easily make 2x that. And even if they are a tiny fraction of India's total population, they are a large number simply because the size of the total population!
Would anybody have a source for that $450 a year figure btw? The CIA Factbook lists India's per capita GDP (PPP) at $2200 (for the year 2000).
A CD from Sony/Virgin/BMG etc in India costs between $8 and $12, more for double-CD packs/rare CDs/etc. They sell well, too, among the upper middle income group (which is huuge in India, thanks to a 1e9+ population. A lot of middle and lower income groups still prefer cassettes, though, which are between $1.x and $2.x. Still, Rs 100 for 10 songss ($2.x) doesn't sound too bad. But I'm really afraid their selection will suck... too much Top 40 and Pop trash. Let's see, am off to check it out.
I use vim for all my editing and email, but if the clippy and auto-correct are all the objections you have against Word, then why don't you turn them off? Word has a bajillion options you know, and turning off the clippy is as easy as right clicking it, choosing options, going to the options tab of the dialog that pops up, and unchecking 'Don't use Office Assistant'. Autocorrect/autocomplete can similarly be turned off.
Re:How to make this work.
on
e-Denounce
·
· Score: 2
>Cut 'n paste isn't quirky at all! >is it shift-insert or Ctrl-V or right-click >and hit paste today?
All standard winapps (i.e., everything except the Netscape 6.0 address bar) accept C-c, C-v, C-x, S-Ins, C-Ins, S-Del, as well as a menu you can use with the mouse.
>And printers aren't difficult to configure >once you know how to work with printcap
This is something a lot of users won't stand for, I'm afraid.
> Hardware difficult to configure? Pray tell > me how!
[Redhat 7.1] On a new Dell at work, everything worked like magic out of the box. On a handbuilt home box with an el cheapo ISA Yamaha 16 bit sound card, it was a round of kernel compiling before sound worked. And MIDI still doesn't work:( (Tips appreciated).
>out that old SCSI card that's perfect for your >CD burner since the last drivers were for win98
As far as I have seen, if a device gets popular enough, Microsoft will put it on the Windows CD so that the driver is available even if the hardware maker goes under. Of course, if the hardware maker goes under and it's not a common device, you *are* scrvwed.
>X supports more fonts than windows probably >ever will
Three important ones -- Type 1, TrueType and OpenType -- are supported on Windows as well. Don't think windows can display PS fonts onscreen though. Can Linux show OpenType fonts?
>I hear all the time they are going to raise the >maximum amount of fonts with every distribution.
As for better fonts, XP ships with a couple more Latin fonts I believe (Franklin Gothic?). But -- it ships with quite a number of fonts for Indian scripts and some others I couldn't recognize and was too lazy to look up (and i'm pretty sure I wasn't using a South Asia edition), so definitely there's some improvement in that department.
Also, there's an increase in the number of ms supplied windows fonts that support large numbers of scripts -- arial in windows is a good example, you can use it for almost any script. Code 2000 is still better though.
Re:How to make this work.
on
e-Denounce
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I don't use Linux because it's free in either sense of the word. I use it because it's better than Windows.
Good stand to take. Which is why I always have a Linux box lying around which I can SSH to and develop on.
On the other hand, because I don't have much spare time, and because most Linux desktop apps are very, very immature*, I do not use Linux on my (primary) desktop. I suspect Windows 2000 (or Windows XP Home for home users) and OS/X is a far better choice for most users as a desktop OS -- they are rock solid (for desktop standards) and have a more polished, integrated feel to them.
*Exceptions: Mozilla, OpenOffice, maybe XMMS and the Gimp. For Joe Public this *may* be enough, but there are lots of people who need more. But poor font support, quirky cut and paste, printers/hardware that are difficult to configure... all these make Linux a poor desktop choice.
From the article:
"[Monitoring] changed the employee behavior. Their productivity went up," she said. "They were a little bit more careful with their communication. It will be the same with IM."
Yeah, it changed it all right. Now they're back to office flirting and gossip via good ol' F2F, the water cooler, and little pieces of paper.
What's next? X10 cameras in the workplace?:-)
Say, all the productivity benefits of 'computerization' couldn't have been due to the freedom people using them found to work at their own pace, could it? It's unthinkable that a guy is *more* productive for next two hours after a 2 minute IM conversation with his girlfriend, I guess. Nah, let's watch over every damn move they make. Make 'em think before they pick their own nose. That'll improve productivity, all right!
Props to all BOFHs. You have a long and prosperous future ahead of you.
I've set up a Jabber box (an early 1.x release) and played about with it, and it was a *very* good experience. Everything worked as advertised. On the other hand, setting up Jabber with SSL was a confusing process without too much documentation and I eventually gave up. Since SSL is a must for `serious' Jabber use, has there been some progress made on making secure Jabber installations easy to achieve?
The spot, a continuation of the company's campaign, features CEO Ted Waitt and a bovine companion driving into the sunset singing a cover version of Gordon Lightfoot's "Sundown" by hip-hop artist Elwood.
As Waitt and the cow trade verses, messages appear on the screen that read, "Like this song? Download it for free on gateway.com...or load it on an MP3 player. Gateway supports your right to enjoy digital music legally."
Emphasis mine. Way to go, Gateway! Just what we need -- a few more high profile companies to echo this particular line. First Apple, then Gateway. Maybe if the moneybags at IBM and Intel stepped into the game, this war could be considered won. But (sigh!) they're too busy planning copy-protected processors and hard disks to actually think of the consumer:-(.
... and now Hailstorm a complete failure! Today's either feel-good day or/. has decided to transform itself into a old-style communist^[dw open source propaganda newspaper!:-)
Slashdot Mirror
... to hear the Linux source being read out over radio.
At least this ensures that poor security gets bad press, and forces vendors insecure vendors to clean up their act.
I find that IRC helps.
From Windows 95 you've had the `Open With' option. Windows 2000 (and maybe WinME) improves on this with a menu that expands and shows a list of available apps exactly as you describe. RTFM, people!
/. thread this resulted in.
Btw, you're not alone. Scott Rosenberg wrote a completely stupid article on exactly this topic for Salon once. You can probably find the
Actually Perl, Apache, X
The point is, with this sort of attitude, you run the risk of being called an arrogant prick, but a judge shouldn't even consider it. What's tragic about the MS antitrust case is that the shady OEM deals, the dual-boot prohibition (BeOS suffered because of this), the arm-twisting -- are all subsumed into a weird argument about how Netscape was wronged because Microsoft bundled an effing browser with the OS.
Not a bad idea. I get a lot of good links from /. -- saves time from scrunging through apache.org and developerWorks.
Some more:
- An afterslash like interface (basically Slashdot Digest)
- NNTP gateway (old request of many folk, I think)
Also, a twist on something I proposed on IRC -- a @slashdot.com redirecor address for subscribers (since CmdrTaco is attached to his email address).
There was this good Register story a while ago where a Sun director talked about customers' expectations from a *software* vendor. The word `sedimentation' was mentioned. And that's precisely the problem: from MS to Redhat to Sun, everyone bundles, is forced to, or goes out of business because that's what the customer wants.
But the people (or their backstage paymasters) focus on buzzwords like `bundling' and push for stupid remedies like ``releasing windows' source'' and all. Yeah right. Like that's gonna happen. The thing to do would have been fine MS (heavily -- they sure can afford it, with 36bn(!) in cash -- for restrictive OEM licenses, cause a world of hurt to their bottom line, and move on.
But for MS' many (whiny) competitors, legal eagles are now substituting for credible tech competition and decent business plans. And so the lawsuit has become a hem-the-giant-in game, even as these very same whiners continue haemorrhaging money. These losers don't deserve any sympathy at all.
>what on earth were they thinking?
Actually, yes, the idea sucked from a perf perspective, but if you remember how many Windows 3.1 crashes were caused by buggy video drivers, the NT 3.1 team was probably scared shitless that the same would happen to their baby.
They solved that problem through a driver certification program for NT4.. by the time NT SP3 came out, most graphic card vendors had gotten their act together, IIRC.
In Windows 2000 (and Win98?) of course, the display drivers follow the Windows Driver Model, where the bulk of the work is done by a stock system-provided routine, and the hardware vendor has to supply a VXD that plugs into this. Writing WDM video drivers is _supposed_ to be easier in theory since one has less work to do.
It's isn't just the kernel actually... it's the entire OS infrastructure that GNOME or KDE build a desktop on, that's kind of shaky compared to OSX or XP as a personal desktop OS.
> It's rather unfair to blame Linus for not
> programming your favourite feature
Sorry, I wasn't aware of video acceleration work being done at the kernel level. But then, accelerated video is not my favorite feature -- I could care less, I interact with my Unix boxen mostly through SSH sessions -- it is just that the there doesn't seem like there are too many kernel hackers for whom a usable desktop is a priority. Again, there's nothing wrong with that.
I agree. Abrash rocks. I'm not much into graphics, but his Zen of Code Optimization was a big influence on me.
>Do you know what NT version Abrash was brought in for?
afaik, the first version. Before the 3.1 release. Incidentally, NT 3.1 was supposed to slow at graphics anyway* -- NT caught on to an extent in the CAD world only after NT4 came out.
*In v3.1/3.51, video drivers executed in userland like normal programs, so the implentor was under a huge handicap as against (say) Win95: on NT 3.1 each call the video driver made to the system would go through involve a costly (in terms of time) ring transition.
In NT4 they took the the video drivers out of userland (ring 3 on intel) and put it in with the rest of the privileged system at ring 0.
Windows 2000's interface is *very* similar to Windows 98's, so I am not sure how you say "Win2000 with million of Control panels sucks". Actually I find Windows 2000's UI (some nice touches like a persistent `Open With...' menu weren't there in Windows 98) quite productive -- especially once I have disabled Web View and installed cygwin.
... the fastest way to improve XP's interface is to move back to the Windows2000-style UI (which is there for backward compatibility). Incidentally, XP does not only have sucky UI -- even the graphics are no great shakes -- check out this critique.
But yes: XP
I agree, ncftp is probably one of the most *productive* ftp clients out there. Probably the only UI crib one can make about it is: they should've used a readline-or-similar library for autocomplete. The one they use now is too goofy for words.
Microsoft staffers spent a long time hand carving this imposing statue of BillG at the entrance to WinHEC. Based on Native American folklore from the Northwest apparently it wards off government lawyers. :)
Considering that these computers don't use a real keyboard (because of concerns of vandalism/theft and maintenance), it's not surprising that the kids use paintbrush. It's one of the things that can be effectively used without a keyboard.
There is a *lot* of imbalance in Indian development (Pol.Sci and sociology freaks will have a field day here). The figure you quoted -- 22k ... Most urban households will make more than that in a month. In the larger metropolises (Bombay, Delhi) many will easily make 2x that. And even if they are a tiny fraction of India's total population, they are a large number simply because the size of the total population!
Would anybody have a source for that $450 a year figure btw? The CIA Factbook lists India's per capita GDP (PPP) at $2200 (for the year 2000).
A CD from Sony/Virgin/BMG etc in India costs between $8 and $12, more for double-CD packs/rare CDs/etc. They sell well, too, among the upper middle income group (which is huuge in India, thanks to a 1e9+ population. A lot of middle and lower income groups still prefer cassettes, though, which are between $1.x and $2.x. Still, Rs 100 for 10 songss ($2.x) doesn't sound too bad. But I'm really afraid their selection will suck ... too much Top 40 and Pop trash. Let's see, am off to check it out.
Note: One dollar ~ Rs 49.
>and the damn clippy won't go away.
I use vim for all my editing and email, but if the clippy and auto-correct are all the objections you have against Word, then why don't you turn them off? Word has a bajillion options you know, and turning off the clippy is as easy as right clicking it, choosing options, going to the options tab of the dialog that pops up, and unchecking 'Don't use Office Assistant'. Autocorrect/autocomplete can similarly be turned off.
>Cut 'n paste isn't quirky at all!
:( (Tips appreciated).
>is it shift-insert or Ctrl-V or right-click
>and hit paste today?
All standard winapps (i.e., everything except the Netscape 6.0 address bar) accept C-c, C-v, C-x, S-Ins, C-Ins, S-Del, as well as a menu you can use with the mouse.
>And printers aren't difficult to configure
>once you know how to work with printcap
This is something a lot of users won't stand for, I'm afraid.
> Hardware difficult to configure? Pray tell
> me how!
[Redhat 7.1] On a new Dell at work, everything worked like magic out of the box. On a handbuilt home box with an el cheapo ISA Yamaha 16 bit sound card, it was a round of kernel compiling before sound worked. And MIDI still doesn't work
>out that old SCSI card that's perfect for your
>CD burner since the last drivers were for win98
As far as I have seen, if a device gets popular enough, Microsoft will put it on the Windows CD so that the driver is available even if the hardware maker goes under. Of course, if the hardware maker goes under and it's not a common device, you *are* scrvwed.
>X supports more fonts than windows probably
>ever will
Three important ones -- Type 1, TrueType and OpenType -- are supported on Windows as well. Don't think windows can display PS fonts onscreen though. Can Linux show OpenType fonts?
>I hear all the time they are going to raise the
>maximum amount of fonts with every distribution.
As for better fonts, XP ships with a couple more Latin fonts I believe (Franklin Gothic?). But -- it ships with quite a number of fonts for Indian scripts and some others I couldn't recognize and was too lazy to look up (and i'm pretty sure I wasn't using a South Asia edition), so definitely there's some improvement in that department.
Also, there's an increase in the number of ms supplied windows fonts that support large numbers of scripts -- arial in windows is a good example, you can use it for almost any script. Code 2000 is still better though.
Delete this, it doesn't have too many posts.
On the other hand, because I don't have much spare time, and because most Linux desktop apps are very, very immature*, I do not use Linux on my (primary) desktop. I suspect Windows 2000 (or Windows XP Home for home users) and OS/X is a far better choice for most users as a desktop OS -- they are rock solid (for desktop standards) and have a more polished, integrated feel to them.
*Exceptions: Mozilla, OpenOffice, maybe XMMS and the Gimp. For Joe Public this *may* be enough, but there are lots of people who need more. But poor font support, quirky cut and paste, printers/hardware that are difficult to configure... all these make Linux a poor desktop choice.
What's next? X10 cameras in the workplace? :-)
Say, all the productivity benefits of 'computerization' couldn't have been due to the freedom people using them found to work at their own pace, could it? It's unthinkable that a guy is *more* productive for next two hours after a 2 minute IM conversation with his girlfriend, I guess. Nah, let's watch over every damn move they make. Make 'em think before they pick their own nose. That'll improve productivity, all right!
Props to all BOFHs. You have a long and prosperous future ahead of you.
I've set up a Jabber box (an early 1.x release) and played about with it, and it was a *very* good experience. Everything worked as advertised. On the other hand, setting up Jabber with SSL was a confusing process without too much documentation and I eventually gave up. Since SSL is a must for `serious' Jabber use, has there been some progress made on making secure Jabber installations easy to achieve?
Emphasis mine. Way to go, Gateway! Just what we need -- a few more high profile companies to echo this particular line. First Apple, then Gateway. Maybe if the moneybags at IBM and Intel stepped into the game, this war could be considered won. But (sigh!) they're too busy planning copy-protected processors and hard disks to actually think of the consumer
... and now Hailstorm a complete failure! Today's either feel-good day or /. has decided to transform itself into a old-style communist^[dw open source propaganda newspaper! :-)