Windoze programmers that I know tell me that productivity is abysmally low because they spend a lot of time writing conditional code to cope with the unique bugs and stupid API variations in every Windoze variant, together with system calls that don't actually work as documented, on the rare occasions that they are documented.
Well now, that's very interesting. Abysmal, is it? These "Windoze programmers" that "you know", what exactly do they do in "Windoze", mmmm?
Did I tell you that I know these Leenucks programmers that that tell me their productivity is abysmal because of unique bugs and stupid widget variations, blah blah. And it's true, you know. I said so.
"Windoze". How cute. It makes you sound utterly retarded though, never mind your slightly apocryphal stories about "programmers you know".
vilest piece of closed-source trash ever written
Isn't it indeed. The dregs of Bashdork never cease to amaze me.
Really? That's funny. I have this thing, you know, a software firewall? It intercepts every single network call (heck, it will even plug the loopback if you tell it to) and it works fine, 100% of the time. If it can pop up a dialog asking me if I want ApplicationX to contact a given domain (or IP address) I figure it could also throttle the connection. Any connection.
I'm pretty sure the people who wrote Tiny Personal Firewall didn't have access to the Windows source code.
So enlighten me again - what does this have to do with Windows being a "closed proprietary OS" again?
And BTW, this is something already built into XP, as you can tell from the many comments in this article.
I've worked for a state agency that moved from MS Word to OpenOffice and I've worked for a fortune 500 company where OpenOffice was mandatory. The move to MS Word ruined year's worth of publications which had never had a problem but then had to be reformatted every time OpenOffice changed versions, printers or computers. The people who had to edit, maintain and print those things hated OpenOffice with a passion. The fortune 500 company had given up on OpenOffice as an archival format four years ago, but still inflicted it on everyone as an editor. I used two versions of it and can say that OpenOffice was worse than the one before it. I can also say that it is the worst word processor I'd ever used.
I hereby claim that my version is more true than yours.
Remember folks, you read it on the internet, so it must be true.
Fuck you asshole. You don't get a pass by calling people who disagree with you zealots. Even though I would rather be called a OSS Zealot then a corporate astro turfing shill sycophant like you any day.
So to summarize - It's perfectly acceptable for me to call you a shill astroturfing fanboy when I don't agree with what you are saying or I generally feel like it; just don't call me a zealot for it.
Yes I do, actually. Maybe it's tunnel vision - the same way "you guys" apparently think Microsoft is the only company in the planet that charges money for software.
Read my post again dumbass. I'm not even saying that it's good or bad for this thing to be beholden to a "standard" or an interpretation of what's "free" or "open" or what's at stake if that's not the case - it's the fact that you have five different ones to pick from, all slightly different and all claiming to be the The One True Way (TM) to open nirvana.
That's nice. However, what you and your friends think about Microsoft is one thing - what the world at large thinks about you when you claim that some standard or license or patent isn't compatible with your five slightly different interpretations of the words "open" and "free" is another.
I know this is yet-another-example-of-MS-is-teh-evil and all that, but this
Compatability with the Open Source Definition, the Free Software Definition, the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and the GPL/LGPL licenses is already in question.
Is just ridiculous. How many things must something be "compatible" (whatever that means in each context) with before it can be considered "good" considering most of you can't make up your minds about them to begin with?
If you guys spent less time arguing who has the better license or "teh freest stuff" or fighting in GNOME vs. KDE and is it GNU/Linux or GNU/Not flamewars and more time building software that is easy to use and doesn't require an IQ of 160 to configure (end user testing would also be good) you'd be giving Microsoft a run for their money by now.
Yeah, the problem of course is I can make that same argument about just about anything that doesn't come with Windows. Besides, Opera has had MDI browsing for ages. How about I make the argument that Firefox is a piece of crap because it doesn't have that? A matter of preference.
So you have to download "stuff" to get what you want? Wow, what else is new today? Windows doesn't come with anything, not even a decent text editor. It's not a Linux distro.
If your primary concern is tabbed browsing, that's fine. You have choices. Just don't get all puffy when someone points out that everything else you used as an argument to "prove" that IE is a piece of crap happens to be bogus.
Is it time to pay more attention to end-users?(who aren't geeks)
No, just keep writing software like you always have, with astoundingly complicated UIs, impossibly obscure configuration options (when it's not just a damn text file buried under/etc or ~/) and completely non-standard behavior that throws people who've used other GUIs off to hell.
Yeah, the software is "cool" because it has that neat bayesian algorithm that was harrrd to implement in Malbolge and it's "free", so that must make it better. Anyone who complains can either a) Go to hell b) Write their own version; c) Submit a patch; d) Ask for their money back; or b) STFU.
Keep copying Apple and Microsoft and everyone else instead of coming up with your own UI designs (badly, too), while snickering at said companies on Slashdot and IRC.
That's fine. Just don't yell at me when I question your claims that your app is "ready for the desktop" and is "better" than what the "evil proprietary" companies can come up with.
Re:Outsourcing
on
IT Myths
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Well, it depends on the situation I suppose. I've seen projects that were outsourced and everyone let go, only to be re-hired later (as contractors, at half the rate) to bring it under control and the outsourcing company let go.
Ultimately I guess outsourcing is about as much hit and miss as not, but with the slight difference that you probably have much more control when the project is not half a world away.
When I was in college studying clinical biochemistry we didn't have no damn dolls or virtual veins. Heck, we didn't even have Vacutainer(TM) draws. We had a standard syringe with a big ass needle and a few hundred hapless students who have to give blood as per school regulations (this is not the US obviously).
After the first 20 or so victims you eventually figured out how to avoid leaving that nasty black welt on the inside of their arms (which incidentally also gave the impression they were doing drugs). Do a few hundred or so (myself and 6 other fifth semester students had to process about 2,000 people, including admin aides and misc school workers) and you get pretty good at it. You also develop this uncanny skill at tying the rubber pressure band around people's arms so quickly that they're being pricked faster than they can yell "HOLY CRAP THAT HURTS"
The hardest part was drawing from overweight female students. No veins visible anywhere in the arm. Sometimes we had to draw from a leg or hand vein or weird shit like that. Still, it was fun (hey, I wasn't the one being punctured) and it beat termodynamics lab for sure. We eventually wrapped it up in a couple of weeks and got some school t-shirts for our troubles.
Oh, and here's the obligatory old fart "we had to walk barefoot in the snow uphill (both ways) at 5:00 AM every day to get to school and we liked it" and all that.
Somehow I fail to see how 1% vs. 2-3% is "misleading". Perhaps they should have used the term "Insignificant" instead of a percentage, but I suppose that's not very PC.
In other words, you went zealot on their ass because you thought that the numbers were actually important in any meaningful way (they would be if they showed any significant Leenucks or OS X gains, which are improbable anyway) and given the impending IPO they decided to pull them instead of facing yet another stupid "OMFG teh GOOGLE is teh BADD!!1!" storm from people who think they're "too powerful".
Unless you have proof that they were going to pull those numbers to begin with and the timing of your "request for clarification" was a coincidence, I'd like to offer my most sincere thanks. Irrelevant as it may have been, it's another part of Google that needs to be sanitized because some fringe group of people can't deal with reality. I mean, god forbid Microsoft or some other evil corporation had asked Google to "clarify" something and it ended up being pulled.
One of these days Google will die the death of a thousand stupid complaints and we'll all have to go back to effin' Altavista. Thanks to you, the braindead California legislature and everyone else.
Hope you sleep well tonight, you hard-hitting "journalist".
Thanks, but that doesn't help me because it doesn't work with all icons (like Tiny Personal Firewall), behaves inconsistently and is more pain than not. Besides, I also run OLK on Windows 2000, which doesn't have this XP feature.
Outlook should have a way to disable the stupid icon.
Re:It's not just the shady companies
on
The Spyware Inferno
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That piece of unadulterated excrement QTask was bad in version 5 because it could not be turned off. If you removed it from the "Run" key in the registry the player would set it every time it loaded. So, the solution was to go into the directory where the exe resided and rename it to something like "-qttask.exe" or whatever. Presto.
In version 6 you can right-click on the icon and set a preference to not have it load every time the machine starts up.
I just wish the stupid Outlook 2003 icon could be killed as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Well now, that's very interesting. Abysmal, is it? These "Windoze programmers" that "you know", what exactly do they do in "Windoze", mmmm?
Did I tell you that I know these Leenucks programmers that that tell me their productivity is abysmal because of unique bugs and stupid widget variations, blah blah. And it's true, you know. I said so.
"Windoze". How cute. It makes you sound utterly retarded though, never mind your slightly apocryphal stories about "programmers you know".
vilest piece of closed-source trash ever written
Isn't it indeed. The dregs of Bashdork never cease to amaze me.
I'm pretty sure the people who wrote Tiny Personal Firewall didn't have access to the Windows source code.
So enlighten me again - what does this have to do with Windows being a "closed proprietary OS" again?
And BTW, this is something already built into XP, as you can tell from the many comments in this article.
Ah, so I was right. Figures.
Or were you referring to something else?
Well of course.
I hereby claim that my version is more true than yours.
Remember folks, you read it on the internet, so it must be true.
So to summarize - It's perfectly acceptable for me to call you a shill astroturfing fanboy when I don't agree with what you are saying or I generally feel like it; just don't call me a zealot for it.
All hail the penguin-humping retard zealot logic.
Ah, Bashdork. Gotta love it.
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Flamebait (-1).
It is currently scored Flamebait (0).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Insightful (+1).
It is currently scored Insightful (1).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Insightful (+1).
It is currently scored Insightful (2).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Troll (-1).
It is currently scored Insightful (1).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Insightful (+1).
It is currently scored Insightful (2).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Flamebait (-1).
It is currently scored Insightful (1).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Insightful (+1).
It is currently scored Insightful (2).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Troll (-1).
It is currently scored Insightful (1).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Overrated (-1).
It is currently scored Flamebait (0).
------
Jeez, posted to MS Releases License For Sender-ID, has been moderated Flamebait (-1).
It is currently scored Flamebait (-1).
Perhaps it's rubbing off, mmmm?
The two of you? Huh? Are the voices in your head bothering you again maxpubic?
Read my post again dumbass. I'm not even saying that it's good or bad for this thing to be beholden to a "standard" or an interpretation of what's "free" or "open" or what's at stake if that's not the case - it's the fact that you have five different ones to pick from, all slightly different and all claiming to be the The One True Way (TM) to open nirvana.
Simplified for our trolling friend here
Thanks. And fuck you, too.
Awww, look - maxpubic. After all this time, he's back and more retarded than ever.
That's nice. However, what you and your friends think about Microsoft is one thing - what the world at large thinks about you when you claim that some standard or license or patent isn't compatible with your five slightly different interpretations of the words "open" and "free" is another.
Compatability with the Open Source Definition, the Free Software Definition, the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and the GPL/LGPL licenses is already in question.
Is just ridiculous. How many things must something be "compatible" (whatever that means in each context) with before it can be considered "good" considering most of you can't make up your minds about them to begin with?
If you guys spent less time arguing who has the better license or "teh freest stuff" or fighting in GNOME vs. KDE and is it GNU/Linux or GNU/Not flamewars and more time building software that is easy to use and doesn't require an IQ of 160 to configure (end user testing would also be good) you'd be giving Microsoft a run for their money by now.
Yeah, the problem of course is I can make that same argument about just about anything that doesn't come with Windows. Besides, Opera has had MDI browsing for ages. How about I make the argument that Firefox is a piece of crap because it doesn't have that? A matter of preference.
So you have to download "stuff" to get what you want? Wow, what else is new today? Windows doesn't come with anything, not even a decent text editor. It's not a Linux distro.
If your primary concern is tabbed browsing, that's fine. You have choices. Just don't get all puffy when someone points out that everything else you used as an argument to "prove" that IE is a piece of crap happens to be bogus.
Overrated, a matter of taste and preference, and in any case there are products that are IE-based that will give you that.
I hate the way IE handles downloads (seperate windows).
I guess you missed the Mozilla download manager then. And WTF is wrong with that? I usually want to do something with the thing I'm downloading.
I hate that when IE crases (every browser crashes), when I try to kill it, it'll take the taskbar with and all other file explorer with it.
Bullshit, IE crashing never takes down the shell. That's FUD.
I hate the way scrolling is handled. ("smooth scrolling" = parkinson like movement)
Turn it off.
Backspace = back in history is ANNOYING.
There are dozens of behaviors in Mozilla that I think are annoying. I just don't use them.
Writing a non url in the url bar goes to MSN.
Haven't seen that in ages. Probably because I turned it off.
And the list goes on...
Hasn't started would be my opinion.
No, just keep writing software like you always have, with astoundingly complicated UIs, impossibly obscure configuration options (when it's not just a damn text file buried under /etc or ~/) and completely non-standard behavior that throws people who've used other GUIs off to hell.
Yeah, the software is "cool" because it has that neat bayesian algorithm that was harrrd to implement in Malbolge and it's "free", so that must make it better. Anyone who complains can either a) Go to hell b) Write their own version; c) Submit a patch; d) Ask for their money back; or b) STFU.
Keep copying Apple and Microsoft and everyone else instead of coming up with your own UI designs (badly, too), while snickering at said companies on Slashdot and IRC.
That's fine. Just don't yell at me when I question your claims that your app is "ready for the desktop" and is "better" than what the "evil proprietary" companies can come up with.
Ultimately I guess outsourcing is about as much hit and miss as not, but with the slight difference that you probably have much more control when the project is not half a world away.
After the first 20 or so victims you eventually figured out how to avoid leaving that nasty black welt on the inside of their arms (which incidentally also gave the impression they were doing drugs). Do a few hundred or so (myself and 6 other fifth semester students had to process about 2,000 people, including admin aides and misc school workers) and you get pretty good at it. You also develop this uncanny skill at tying the rubber pressure band around people's arms so quickly that they're being pricked faster than they can yell "HOLY CRAP THAT HURTS"
The hardest part was drawing from overweight female students. No veins visible anywhere in the arm. Sometimes we had to draw from a leg or hand vein or weird shit like that. Still, it was fun (hey, I wasn't the one being punctured) and it beat termodynamics lab for sure. We eventually wrapped it up in a couple of weeks and got some school t-shirts for our troubles.
Oh, and here's the obligatory old fart "we had to walk barefoot in the snow uphill (both ways) at 5:00 AM every day to get to school and we liked it" and all that.
It's all about having someone to blame for the demise of "teh interweb".
Somehow I fail to see how 1% vs. 2-3% is "misleading". Perhaps they should have used the term "Insignificant" instead of a percentage, but I suppose that's not very PC.
Unless you have proof that they were going to pull those numbers to begin with and the timing of your "request for clarification" was a coincidence, I'd like to offer my most sincere thanks. Irrelevant as it may have been, it's another part of Google that needs to be sanitized because some fringe group of people can't deal with reality. I mean, god forbid Microsoft or some other evil corporation had asked Google to "clarify" something and it ended up being pulled.
One of these days Google will die the death of a thousand stupid complaints and we'll all have to go back to effin' Altavista. Thanks to you, the braindead California legislature and everyone else.
Hope you sleep well tonight, you hard-hitting "journalist".
Outlook should have a way to disable the stupid icon.
In version 6 you can right-click on the icon and set a preference to not have it load every time the machine starts up.
I just wish the stupid Outlook 2003 icon could be killed as well.
Really? And how exactly did you measure this?