No amount of computer power means that there is not enough matter in the known universe to build a computer that can solve the problem fast enough
This is absolute bullshit. Computers are becoming faster, sometimes without using more matter. They are just becoming smaller.
You should say "No amount of computer power means that there is not enough matter in the known universe to build a computer (With the current technologies) that can solve the problem fast enough"
Standards should never dictate human user interfaces. Instead, human users should have a choice of the interface they prefer Agreed. The problem today with X is that every developper seems to implements the stuff he likes (less and less so, but still a little). So the end result is a horrible patchwork of all programmer's preferences. The end-user doesn's choose the way it prefers, but rather learns to live with the various ways each developers prefers.
But if there is not one, you're certainly welcome to grab an existing window manager implementation (most of them are open source, free (as in beer), free (as in speech), and free (as a bird), allowing you to hack the source to make it behave as you prefer, and share your accomplishments with your friends and enemies). There are several problems with that approach: 1. Users shouldn's have to implement their ways. If an acceptable way doesn't exist for a large userbase, the system dies. And not the opposite, as this arguments seems to infer. Users are not going to rewrite the system, even if they could. 2. The window manager doesn't do it all. If the app uses Ctrl-C for a specific purpose (think xterm for example) then writing a window manager that catch that key will just render xterms unusable. 3. Point 2 makes your "simple" migration much more difficult, as you now have to rewrite every single application to work the way you want it. Hmmm. No wonder it's never happened.
There is a clearly defined standard on freedesktop.org, not everyone follows it though. You are right. There are plenty of standards, each one created by a separate organization (freedesktop, motif, etc...). The problem is that we need an authority to set the standard. Because multiple standards is not much better than no standard.
The reality is that not prescribing default policy for anything was a really dumb idea. Agreed. And now we have to live with all these apps that were developped before freedesktop.org, and most of them are here to stay. Sure, the real broad ones will be adapted... Have you tried to launch XGhost on a recent distro? Still looks as bad as the first version. This is what I'm talking about. For sure Moz and OpenOffice are nicely written, but that's just two apps!
Still, that doesn't mean it's too late to prescribe that default policy now, and the freedesktop project seems to be doing that, with clear definitions for window managers, clipboards, mime types, app menu's, desktop icons, and so on... And I'm happy they're doing it. The questions are: 1. Will everyone follow. They are no authority, so if any party decide they're not going to follow it, we're back at our main problem. 2. Who will port those gazillion apps that we do use, but have been developped before? Answer: No one. Because of general laziness, sure, but also because some of them aren't even open source!
So while we are going in the right direction (hopefully), there is still a lot of baggage that comes with the system.
There is no such thing as "X Windows" Ah. How do you call that thing that gets launched when you type "startx" then? I think we just have a terminoloogy problem right here.
X has a primary and secondary copy/paste buffer There are PRIMARY, SECONDARY, CLIPBOARD. Actually, apps can ask for any clipboard by providing their own names. Too much liberty in the implementation and a lack of a properly defined standard is the main problem.
the only real caveat being that apps can use different key combos to control the primary buffer They can do that with any system. The problem of X being that no clear standard has been imposed/recommended and hence, followed.
I haven't used an app in years that used anything other than control+c/v for the primary buffer So you don't use xterms at all then. I still do.
Copy and paste using highlight and middle-click works in every X application
Hmmm. Not true. Just not true. There are plenty of clipboards on X-Windows, only the apps that use "PRIMARY" act that way, not the other. Java apps for example use the clipboard "CLIPBOARD", and middle click does nothing. There are plenty of other apps that works that way, I am just too lazy to look them up.
The fact that copy/paste is buggy or sluggish under X-Windows has a simple reason: There are tons of SDKs for X-Windows, almost all of them using a separate clipboard implementation/mechanism.
Saying that you deal with a technical problem by getting used to it, is saying that technology will fail to address the problem. As you say, "Linux is different" (almost true, since it has almost nothing to do with Linux, but rather with X-Windows). I would rather say:
X-Windows clipboard management sucks. If you want to use Linux on the desktop, you'll have to get used to it.
The lack of a decent standard allow everyone to do everything. And they do. And we are left with a huge app base for X, with very high UI fragmentation. Hence, what you learn to do with one app is different with another one.
Well, I agree with the fact that saving the pages to the HDD can take a little while. But:
a. If your machine is busy paging (swapping), then you owe to yourself some more memory. IE is just one of the apps that will be slow. Everything will be slow. b. Saving of cached pages is asynchronous (at least in IE and Moz). Further more, all HDD WRITE operations are asynchronous on a decent OS (When they're small enough, which should be the case of html pages caching). That means that your browsing experience will not be slowed down by that.
Trust me, you can say IE is slow for a lot of reasons (Bad JS architecture, lots of memory used,...) but just not for that one.
it doesn't waste time caching much of the web page to disk
Well, I don't have a Mac, but if it is the HDD access that slows down your browsing experience, then you have to either: 1. Buy more RAM; 2. Buy a faster HDD; 3. As a last resort, buy a PC.
Honestly, once the browsers are started (On windows, talking about IE, Netscape, Moz and Opera), the HDD access is not an issue anymore.
What you are saying is like saying that your HDD is slower than your internet connection. Scary.
Dude, the entire point of having that reside in an XML file is that your interface to edit yout program is not going to be a text editor. It'll be a nice treeview program-oriented of some sort, but the hell with text editors!!!! We're writing programs, not poetry!
There will be military-industrial-congressional complex for as long as there will be wars. There will be wars for as long as there will be stupid people willing to kill others for stupid reasons. There will be stupid people as long as there will be people. Hence, military-industrial-congressional complex will always be around.
Well, yes, then you must be new here. Because you are under the assumption that the Slashdot community takes itself more seriously than it does. The average slashdot poster doesn't care if a chairman will ever consider his post. They just post for the fun of it and that's all.
And how much time was left on the auction? You know that ebay is an auction website and that the final price of an auction can be considered only at the end, right?
Re:DRM doesn't happen at the codec level
on
XVID 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
That's well and good but for WinZip and WinAmp.
Who needs WinZip now that WinXP reads that format naticely?
Who needs WinAmp now that media player plays MP3 and has some support for playlists? Not even talking about WinAmp 3+... This soft is just insane...
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is now time to fork once again OpenBSD. I'd suggest the new name to be OpenApacheBSD.
Cheers.
You forgot the link: JBOSS.
If Bill Gates weren't so poor, he could fix that
You are just an ass. What could Bill do when you reach your physical memory? Blue Screen? Kill the faulty app? Start paging?
Well, it looks like they chose the best of all three options...
If your eye can't notice the difference between 30 and 40
Mine can. Where did you hear such a stupidity?
No amount of computer power means that there is not enough matter in the known universe to build a computer that can solve the problem fast enough
This is absolute bullshit. Computers are becoming faster, sometimes without using more matter. They are just becoming smaller.
You should say "No amount of computer power means that there is not enough matter in the known universe to build a computer (With the current technologies) that can solve the problem fast enough"
If you are not having profits from your work, your rights are not being violated.
I'd say it that way:
If you are not having profits from your work, your rights may not have been violated.
Or simply TWNETOFABOFDIARA. The Worst Name Ever Tought Of For A Bunch Of F**g Drives In A Raid Array.
It's geeky to want to have redundancy and retain data?
No, but that's not what RAID-0 is all about. I think you must be confusing the different RAID standards. RAID-1 is redundancy, RAID-0 is speed.
Well, tell me then a solution to a very simple problem I have:
how can I view/print a PS (postscript) file on your modern distro?
Standards should never dictate human user interfaces. Instead, human users should have a choice of the interface they prefer
Agreed. The problem today with X is that every developper seems to implements the stuff he likes (less and less so, but still a little). So the end result is a horrible patchwork of all programmer's preferences. The end-user doesn's choose the way it prefers, but rather learns to live with the various ways each developers prefers.
But if there is not one, you're certainly welcome to grab an existing window manager implementation (most of them are open source, free (as in beer), free (as in speech), and free (as a bird), allowing you to hack the source to make it behave as you prefer, and share your accomplishments with your friends and enemies).
There are several problems with that approach:
1. Users shouldn's have to implement their ways. If an acceptable way doesn't exist for a large userbase, the system dies. And not the opposite, as this arguments seems to infer. Users are not going to rewrite the system, even if they could.
2. The window manager doesn't do it all. If the app uses Ctrl-C for a specific purpose (think xterm for example) then writing a window manager that catch that key will just render xterms unusable.
3. Point 2 makes your "simple" migration much more difficult, as you now have to rewrite every single application to work the way you want it. Hmmm. No wonder it's never happened.
There is a clearly defined standard on freedesktop.org, not everyone follows it though.
You are right. There are plenty of standards, each one created by a separate organization (freedesktop, motif, etc...). The problem is that we need an authority to set the standard. Because multiple standards is not much better than no standard.
The reality is that not prescribing default policy for anything was a really dumb idea.
Agreed. And now we have to live with all these apps that were developped before freedesktop.org, and most of them are here to stay. Sure, the real broad ones will be adapted... Have you tried to launch XGhost on a recent distro? Still looks as bad as the first version. This is what I'm talking about. For sure Moz and OpenOffice are nicely written, but that's just two apps!
Still, that doesn't mean it's too late to prescribe that default policy now, and the freedesktop project seems to be doing that, with clear definitions for window managers, clipboards, mime types, app menu's, desktop icons, and so on...
And I'm happy they're doing it. The questions are:
1. Will everyone follow. They are no authority, so if any party decide they're not going to follow it, we're back at our main problem.
2. Who will port those gazillion apps that we do use, but have been developped before? Answer: No one. Because of general laziness, sure, but also because some of them aren't even open source!
So while we are going in the right direction (hopefully), there is still a lot of baggage that comes with the system.
There is no such thing as "X Windows"
Ah. How do you call that thing that gets launched when you type "startx" then? I think we just have a terminoloogy problem right here.
X has a primary and secondary copy/paste buffer
There are PRIMARY, SECONDARY, CLIPBOARD. Actually, apps can ask for any clipboard by providing their own names. Too much liberty in the implementation and a lack of a properly defined standard is the main problem.
the only real caveat being that apps can use different key combos to control the primary buffer
They can do that with any system. The problem of X being that no clear standard has been imposed/recommended and hence, followed.
I haven't used an app in years that used anything other than control+c/v for the primary buffer
So you don't use xterms at all then. I still do.
Copy and paste using highlight and middle-click works in every X application
Hmmm. Not true. Just not true. There are plenty of clipboards on X-Windows, only the apps that use "PRIMARY" act that way, not the other. Java apps for example use the clipboard "CLIPBOARD", and middle click does nothing. There are plenty of other apps that works that way, I am just too lazy to look them up.
The fact that copy/paste is buggy or sluggish under X-Windows has a simple reason: There are tons of SDKs for X-Windows, almost all of them using a separate clipboard implementation/mechanism.
Saying that you deal with a technical problem by getting used to it, is saying that technology will fail to address the problem. As you say, "Linux is different" (almost true, since it has almost nothing to do with Linux, but rather with X-Windows). I would rather say:
X-Windows clipboard management sucks. If you want to use Linux on the desktop, you'll have to get used to it.
The lack of a decent standard allow everyone to do everything. And they do. And we are left with a huge app base for X, with very high UI fragmentation. Hence, what you learn to do with one app is different with another one.
Annoying, but that's the way X is.
I'd go into the details of idle read/writes and current hard drive speeds burdening internet browsers
Don't want to start a flame here, but I fail to see how a [slow|sluggish|choose yours] async operation can slow down your browsing experience.
Well, I agree with the fact that saving the pages to the HDD can take a little while. But:
...) but just not for that one.
a. If your machine is busy paging (swapping), then you owe to yourself some more memory. IE is just one of the apps that will be slow. Everything will be slow.
b. Saving of cached pages is asynchronous (at least in IE and Moz). Further more, all HDD WRITE operations are asynchronous on a decent OS (When they're small enough, which should be the case of html pages caching). That means that your browsing experience will not be slowed down by that.
Trust me, you can say IE is slow for a lot of reasons (Bad JS architecture, lots of memory used,
it doesn't waste time caching much of the web page to disk
Well, I don't have a Mac, but if it is the HDD access that slows down your browsing experience, then you have to either:
1. Buy more RAM;
2. Buy a faster HDD;
3. As a last resort, buy a PC.
Honestly, once the browsers are started (On windows, talking about IE, Netscape, Moz and Opera), the HDD access is not an issue anymore.
What you are saying is like saying that your HDD is slower than your internet connection. Scary.
Dude, the entire point of having that reside in an XML file is that your interface to edit yout program is not going to be a text editor. It'll be a nice treeview program-oriented of some sort, but the hell with text editors!!!! We're writing programs, not poetry!
It looks to me that they were not delivering spam mails. Otherwise their obligation to deliver everything would have been fulfilled.
Hence, a difficulty for the end users to mark themselves the false positives....
There will be military-industrial-congressional complex for as long as there will be wars. There will be wars for as long as there will be stupid people willing to kill others for stupid reasons. There will be stupid people as long as there will be people. Hence, military-industrial-congressional complex will always be around.
.02
My
Well, yes, then you must be new here. Because you are under the assumption that the Slashdot community takes itself more seriously than it does. The average slashdot poster doesn't care if a chairman will ever consider his post. They just post for the fun of it and that's all.
Now if you don't like it, please move on.
And how much time was left on the auction? You know that ebay is an auction website and that the final price of an auction can be considered only at the end, right?
That's well and good but for WinZip and WinAmp.
Who needs WinZip now that WinXP reads that format naticely?
Who needs WinAmp now that media player plays MP3 and has some support for playlists? Not even talking about WinAmp 3+... This soft is just insane...
Don't try to stick the bread and the butter in HTML, for god's sake!!! HTML is crippled enough, thank you very much!
What we need is wide support for MathML, not a freakin' new batchload of useless tags for 98.7587% of the users/publishers.
Given that :
1. Longhorn is to be released sometime around 2009-2010
2. The average of these resources double every 18 month
We can deduce that these requirements will be the average config at that time.