I wonder how my ADB trackball works on my blue and white G3 400...
No future with that piece of crap iMac mouse!!
on
Motorola G4 Chip News
·
· Score: 1
Have you tried it? It takes a bit to get used to, but it's a great design. The problem people have is you don't hold it like a normal mouse, in your palm. Instead, you grab it with your fingertips. The reason they did this, and you'll see if you try it, is that you don't bend your wrist anymore to move the mouse around. It's much easier on carpal tunnel.
OS X server has been out what, 3 weeks? Before that, Apple didn't have a server platform. Apple also has an extremely busy site. Switching OS's on a site that get's that many hits is no trivial matter.
Yeah, I used a Mac SE30 in high school. That was a long time ago... Back when I had my Commodore.
Let's face it, MacOS does a lot of things right. Yes, it needs protected memory and multi-tasking, things that are available with OSX Server now, or consumer shortly. But as for the interface, sorry but it blows linux away. Way more consistant than any desktop, I'm guaranteed that I can drag anything onto anything else with desired results. Cut and paste between apps always works. It's visually appealing. Give me an xterm with OSX and I'll be very happy.
Why do I get the strange feeling that if they decided to do it, the anti-Microsoft sentiment, and the bashing over not a true Open Source (tm) liscense would change their minds?
April Fools jokes are totally out of control.
on
Thought Recognition
·
· Score: 1
I enjoy these jokes, it's funny. There is an option under preferences to exlude things from the It's a joke, Laugh category, which will keep the humor from getting through.
I recently switched to gnome. I like the looks a lot, especially the metal java look and feel, very slick. But it's missing some core functionality. Like the article said, the desktops don't work very well. Namely, you can't do like in kde and send a window to another desktop. And, you can't see what apps are running on other desktops. Plus, and maybe I just haven't figured it out yet, but I have been unable to get a window to gain focus unless I click on the title bar of frame. Sometimes all that is visible is a piece of the inside, and I can't click to get focus. While I'm at it, the only way to make shortcut desktops appears to be making a symbolic link and dragging it onto the desktop. Also no trash can like KDE has, it's delete or nothing. And balsa looks great, but I don't really believe anyone has got it to compile yet.
Don't get me wrong, I like gnome, but I have to agree that this should not have been the 1.0 release. I think they felt a bit of pressure by the kde folks and pushed it a bit before it's time.
That may be tought though. Doing a window manager in java would be insane, if it's even possible. You might be able to do it with swing, hell it even has desktop classes built in. But with AWT you need native window managers to draw gui's. I think swing has some reliance on native components as well, with top level containers (frames, panels, etc). Plus I think a Java WM would be a bit slow at the present time.
But it is an awesome graphical development platform. The OO setup of swing is great, makes it easy to simply extend the classes to create your own look, or even functionality. It's almost fun! Definately up there with NeXTStep for a development environment:) Now if they could just get the performance up there...
No...I'm actually a bit of an anti-institutionalist. I mentioned church because I see the GNU camp as a religion. They say it's wrong to not make your software free. They say you're wrong if you disagree. They've got all the answers and any other thoughts are wrong. Just like the church. I myself am a free software advocate, but for different reasons. I'm growing less and less fond of GNU because of the whole speal about evil proprietary software.
Btw, if you're really willing to get locked in to Oracle software because it adds some value, that's your business. If you wanted to sell yourself into slavery because you'd have a guaranteed roof over your head, or it was the most convenient way to get rid of your debts, that's your business too.
There's a really big difference here. With slavery, you are giving up all of your freedom with no way to get out. With commercial software, you are giving up your freedom to modify and distribute the program, and at any time you are free to switch to another product. Comparing the two is comical.
And I don't use Oracle, I never have. I use MySQL. Why? I use it because it's worth more to me. The fact that it's cheaper than Oracle, has source code, and it does what I need makes it of more value. If oracle did something that I needed, I would switch. After all, what good is software if it doesn't do what you need it to? Should I really use an inferior product just because it's open source? Maybe some will, but I've got things to get done, and don't have time to sit around and write an open source clone of what I need.
Ah, you're not interested in Free Software, you're interested in a free ride.
Glad you know me so well... I actually love free software, because to me it makes the product more valuable. I can do more with it, I have more control to fix bugs, add features, etc. Economics, plain and simple. What I object to is people telling me it is somehow wrong to have proprietary software. It is not wrong in the least. It may lead to inferior software, longer development times, whatever. But I have the freedom to choose if I wish to do that, and if I do, there's nothing wrong about it. Where is the morality here? I never learned in church that proprietary software was wrong. It's code people, not a religion.
All that stuff about how free software is good, I completely agree. Yes, it reduces development time, increases product quality, and so on. This is very good, and it is the exact reason I like open source software. But that all has to do with economics. But then in the first line, you mention how it is wrong. Wrong how? Why is proprietary software "wrong"? I believe that it decreases software quality, and it decreases the value of the product, but that's straight capitalism for you. I don't know where this whole wrong thing comes from.
There's that word moral again. Please explain to me why free software has ANYTHING to do with morality. I agree with all this person said. Software is meant to be useful. The point of our economic system is that we use the things, and thus promote them, that give us the most value. I like open source software because since I have the source, it is more valuable to me. That doesn't mean it's WRONG in any way to use proprietary software. I don't remember the eleventh commandment, thou shald share thy source code. Please leave the morality out of it, it has nothing to do with software. It is no more wrong to not give out source code than it is to not give out recipes to food you serve in a restaurant, blueprints to cars you make, etc...
I agree with the third point, the first part confuses me. I agree with this, but I don't see how it pertains to the GPL. The GPL has made it illegal to burn itself by not allowing the liscense to be changed. This is what I find ironic, they are limiting our freedom in order to protect it. That's fine with me, but it doesn't fly when you try to make an argument about how all software should be truly "free".
Typical O'Reilly anti-GNU stuff. Anyone else getting tired of them?
No... That article made a lot of sense. I've never understood the issue of freedom with software, and I think that whole morality issue of free software is what scares a lot of people, including myself. I don't care about freedom in software. I like open source software becuase I can do more with it, it's more useful to me.
Freedom? What is freedom? To me, it's being able to do anything you want without consequences. Free Software should not have a license. I can't do whatever I want with GPL software, namely change the license or encorperate it with non GPL software I have created. To me, that is not freedom. Besides, I think there are a lot more important areas in society where we should focus on freedom and morality than software. Who cares? It's just code.
OSX is not targeted at the desktop market (notice how there's been NO word about the blue box which runs all current mac apps?), nor is it aimed at the technical server market. Apple isn't stupid, they know if they tried to throw OSX Server against something like Linux, Solaris, NT Server, whatever, it would fail. It is targeted at their core markets - education and desktop publishing. And it will sell there. We just ordered several new G3's with OS X to run public mac labs, because with the new netboot capabilites, it it unbelieably efficient and capable for running a network. It's not competing with linux, although I think it has the balls to.
400 Mhz G3 tower... Running OS8.5 now, it is so damn fast it's not even funny. I'm getting a trial copy of OSX Server, never tried a mac Linux yet, I'm a bit worried about not being able to run bianary stuff ( StarOffice, Word Perfect, other things I need...)
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder how my ADB trackball works on my blue and white G3 400...
Have you tried it? It takes a bit to get used to, but it's a great design. The problem people have is you don't hold it like a normal mouse, in your palm. Instead, you grab it with your fingertips. The reason they did this, and you'll see if you try it, is that you don't bend your wrist anymore to move the mouse around. It's much easier on carpal tunnel.
But they still support ADB. And most people will probably prefer to use the older style mouse and keyboard anyway :)
Whenever the file manager looses focus on my system, it freezes up. This makes me angry...
OS X server has been out what, 3 weeks? Before that, Apple didn't have a server platform. Apple also has an extremely busy site. Switching OS's on a site that get's that many hits is no trivial matter.
That's not new... My magnepans are flat panels, had them for years. In fact, they've been making planar speakers for something like 30 years.
Yeah, I used a Mac SE30 in high school. That was a long time ago... Back when I had my Commodore.
Let's face it, MacOS does a lot of things right. Yes, it needs protected memory and multi-tasking, things that are available with OSX Server now, or consumer shortly. But as for the interface, sorry but it blows linux away. Way more consistant than any desktop, I'm guaranteed that I can drag anything onto anything else with desired results. Cut and paste between apps always works. It's visually appealing. Give me an xterm with OSX and I'll be very happy.
Why do I get the strange feeling that if they decided to do it, the anti-Microsoft sentiment, and the bashing over not a true Open Source (tm) liscense would change their minds?
Okay
I enjoy these jokes, it's funny. There is an option under preferences to exlude things from the It's a joke, Laugh category, which will keep the humor from getting through.
Got a copy, sans fancy images http://socrates.mps.ohio- state.edu/~ccunning/seattle.html
I use the Blackdown jvm daily. It's not as fast as c code, but it's not bad at all. I use a java text editor quite a bit, performance is fine.
I recently switched to gnome. I like the looks a lot, especially the metal java look and feel, very slick. But it's missing some core functionality. Like the article said, the desktops don't work very well. Namely, you can't do like in kde and send a window to another desktop. And, you can't see what apps are running on other desktops. Plus, and maybe I just haven't figured it out yet, but I have been unable to get a window to gain focus unless I click on the title bar of frame. Sometimes all that is visible is a piece of the inside, and I can't click to get focus. While I'm at it, the only way to make shortcut desktops appears to be making a symbolic link and dragging it onto the desktop. Also no trash can like KDE has, it's delete or nothing. And balsa looks great, but I don't really believe anyone has got it to compile yet.
Don't get me wrong, I like gnome, but I have to agree that this should not have been the 1.0 release. I think they felt a bit of pressure by the kde folks and pushed it a bit before it's time.
That may be tought though. Doing a window manager in java would be insane, if it's even possible. You might be able to do it with swing, hell it even has desktop classes built in. But with AWT you need native window managers to draw gui's. I think swing has some reliance on native components as well, with top level containers (frames, panels, etc). Plus I think a Java WM would be a bit slow at the present time.
But it is an awesome graphical development platform. The OO setup of swing is great, makes it easy to simply extend the classes to create your own look, or even functionality. It's almost fun! Definately up there with NeXTStep for a development environment:) Now if they could just get the performance up there...
No...I'm actually a bit of an anti-institutionalist. I mentioned church because I see the GNU camp as a religion. They say it's wrong to not make your software free. They say you're wrong if you disagree. They've got all the answers and any other thoughts are wrong. Just like the church. I myself am a free software advocate, but for different reasons. I'm growing less and less fond of GNU because of the whole speal about evil proprietary software.
But at least they don't force you to work for them and then shoot you when you try to switch.
There's a really big difference here. With slavery, you are giving up all of your freedom with no way to get out. With commercial software, you are giving up your freedom to modify and distribute the program, and at any time you are free to switch to another product. Comparing the two is comical.
And I don't use Oracle, I never have. I use MySQL. Why? I use it because it's worth more to me. The fact that it's cheaper than Oracle, has source code, and it does what I need makes it of more value. If oracle did something that I needed, I would switch. After all, what good is software if it doesn't do what you need it to? Should I really use an inferior product just because it's open source? Maybe some will, but I've got things to get done, and don't have time to sit around and write an open source clone of what I need.
Glad you know me so well... I actually love free software, because to me it makes the product more valuable. I can do more with it, I have more control to fix bugs, add features, etc. Economics, plain and simple. What I object to is people telling me it is somehow wrong to have proprietary software. It is not wrong in the least. It may lead to inferior software, longer development times, whatever. But I have the freedom to choose if I wish to do that, and if I do, there's nothing wrong about it. Where is the morality here? I never learned in church that proprietary software was wrong. It's code people, not a religion.
All that stuff about how free software is good, I completely agree. Yes, it reduces development time, increases product quality, and so on. This is very good, and it is the exact reason I like open source software. But that all has to do with economics. But then in the first line, you mention how it is wrong. Wrong how? Why is proprietary software "wrong"? I believe that it decreases software quality, and it decreases the value of the product, but that's straight capitalism for you. I don't know where this whole wrong thing comes from.
There's that word moral again. Please explain to me why free software has ANYTHING to do with morality. I agree with all this person said. Software is meant to be useful. The point of our economic system is that we use the things, and thus promote them, that give us the most value. I like open source software because since I have the source, it is more valuable to me. That doesn't mean it's WRONG in any way to use proprietary software. I don't remember the eleventh commandment, thou shald share thy source code. Please leave the morality out of it, it has nothing to do with software. It is no more wrong to not give out source code than it is to not give out recipes to food you serve in a restaurant, blueprints to cars you make, etc...
I'd go see it, but I have a rule not to watch movies that have Keanu Reeves, Leonardo DiCaprio, or Kevin Costner in them...
I agree with the third point, the first part confuses me. I agree with this, but I don't see how it pertains to the GPL. The GPL has made it illegal to burn itself by not allowing the liscense to be changed. This is what I find ironic, they are limiting our freedom in order to protect it. That's fine with me, but it doesn't fly when you try to make an argument about how all software should be truly "free".
No... That article made a lot of sense. I've never understood the issue of freedom with software, and I think that whole morality issue of free software is what scares a lot of people, including myself. I don't care about freedom in software. I like open source software becuase I can do more with it, it's more useful to me.
Freedom? What is freedom? To me, it's being able to do anything you want without consequences. Free Software should not have a license. I can't do whatever I want with GPL software, namely change the license or encorperate it with non GPL software I have created. To me, that is not freedom. Besides, I think there are a lot more important areas in society where we should focus on freedom and morality than software. Who cares? It's just code.
OSX is not targeted at the desktop market (notice how there's been NO word about the blue box which runs all current mac apps?), nor is it aimed at the technical server market. Apple isn't stupid, they know if they tried to throw OSX Server against something like Linux, Solaris, NT Server, whatever, it would fail. It is targeted at their core markets - education and desktop publishing. And it will sell there. We just ordered several new G3's with OS X to run public mac labs, because with the new netboot capabilites, it it unbelieably efficient and capable for running a network. It's not competing with linux, although I think it has the balls to.
400 Mhz G3 tower... Running OS8.5 now, it is so damn fast it's not even funny. I'm getting a trial copy of OSX Server, never tried a mac Linux yet, I'm a bit worried about not being able to run bianary stuff ( StarOffice, Word Perfect, other things I need...)