NT really DID make a navy cruiser dead in the water for 3 hours. Some will say it was human error. But the "human error" consisted of entered "0" into a data field. That should be handled gracefully. Some will say it was an application error--the app should have handled the "0". Again, true, but a crashing app should not take down the operating system. NT was at fault and there is no getting around it. --
I should have specified:
on
Free For All
·
· Score: 1
Software technologies. I don't know enough about graphics to be able to say boo about bitmaps but your other two are moot. --
"The front and back doors in your analogy should be for different, unconnected buildings."
No, all freedoms are interconnected in at least two ways. First, as other point out, issues like encryption protect human rights through the use of software. Second, as pointed out in my original post, what's the point of freedom from military juntas without having freedom from state-issued decrees? And what's the point of having freedom from state-issued decrees without having freedom of the press? And what's the use of having freedom of the press without free speech? Etc. --
'So by caring more about real freedom issues rather than the "freedom" of a piece of software I become part of the Big Evil?'
No, by advocating that we stop working for freedom at every level you are part of the Big Evil.
Let's say you, I and 8 other/.ers were in a house. The house is attacked by MS employees! They start beating on (or even pouring through) the front door. You are advocating a defense of "everyone to the front door"--but that leaves the back door unguarded. *I* am advocating a "man every station" approach that leaves our flanks protected. My method also means slightly less defense at the site of the (current) attack but which is worse: being outnumbered 3 to 1 at the front door or 1 to 0 at the back? --
"By sticking to basic conventions for all apps, it makes GNOME or KDE more user friendly to all computer users and makes Linux look better and better."
More user-friendly? Yes, if your only criteria is ease of learning. Look better? Yes, but that's irrelevant. I don't buy the hammer that has a shapely handle, I buy one that works well.
As for scripting: Find a programmer. Ask that programmer these questions: Is it feasible for ALL applications to use one single scripting API? If it is feasible, would you want to use it? Sure, "Save As" is probably quite similar across apps. But how would you implement "rotate scene" needed for Blender in an API designed for AbiWord? --
Software is just software
on
Men of Zeal
·
· Score: 4
And tabloids are just tabloids
And newspapers are just newspapers
And state-issued decrees are state-issued decreens
And military juntas are just military juntas
Freedom starts at home. Unless you are making your tiny piece of the world free you are part of the problem. --
Spoken like a true blinkered pragmatist
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 2
"There's a real need to...get on with improving the code..."
If it weren't for people like RMS and his "psuedo-communistic" ideas there would be no code to improve. It's licenses like the GPL that ensure that code freed remains free. --
GNOME vs KDE Episode 18: Pointlessness
on
KDE Strikes Back
·
· Score: 5
I'm getting pretty sick of the GNOME vs KDE flamewars. But before you mod me up as +47 Insightful because I'm spouting the party line of "we should all just get along" read what I have to say: Both GNOME and KDE have got it wrong.
From a economic perspective: You can't win in the marketplace by being "just as good as" the existing Goliath. What features specific to GNOME or KDE are offered that surpass what you can do in Windows?
From a usability perspective: Why is there all this harping about a "consistent UI"? Check my sig for a soundbite on this, but then come back for an explanation. Sure, it makes sense for a word processor and a spreadsheet to have "File" menus with "Save, Save As, New, Close, etc" all in the same place. But does it make sense for all apps? Think about it this way: My car has a certain UI. My telephone also has a UI. They have absolutely nothing in common but I can use them both very effectively. What if LifeKDE sprang into being and created a phone with a steering wheel? Would I be better off?
How does this apply to computers? Because a computer isn't just one tool. It is a generalized tool simulator. Every "application" is a tool. If two applications serve radically different purposes, I would expect them to have radically different UIs. For instance, people often mention that Blender has a difficult to learn UI--irrelevant! The purpose of a UI is not to be easy to learn. The purpose of a UI is to afford access to a tool. (if the UI is difficult to remember that is a different issue--internal consistency is a valid goal) To go back to the Blender example, people often go on to say that once they learned the UI quirks it turned out to be very powerful. Exactly!
What does this have to do with KDE/GNOME? I think each of these projects has a certain amount of validity. For instance a lot of apps need to have file selection dialog boxes. That should probably be a system service. But "standardization" beyond that level is, IMHO, a very big mistake.
So what do I recommend? I recommend two projects:
1) The Common GUI Services Project for things like file selection dialog boxes.
2) The Advanced UI Research Project to do research on what kinds of UI elements work best with what kind of tool and then making that research available to the tool makers. --
If it weren't for the fact that I don't recognize the scenery, I would have said these were from Mario Karts 64. Don't get me wrong, I love Mario Karts 64. But what's new about this? --
Above all do NOT allow this to happen: Techies/consultants that are advising the rollout tell management "switch to Win2k". Management tells other departments "switch to Win2k". Other deptartments tell management "we can't". Management tells techies "they won't". Techies tell management "force them".
You've got to get ahold of the techies yourself--don't let management be the conduit for technical decisions. You still have to explain the issues to management so that they can mandate the discussion take place--but when the discussion happens managements only role should be as arbiter.
--
Microsoft doesn't understand where their power comes from--and that works in our favor.
Why is MS popular? "Compatibility". And when MS creates new technologies, what's the best word to describe the usual result? "Incompatible". So please, MS, dump a lot of money into creating a new chip and software to run on it--it only hastens your demise. --
If you are transparent, light passes through you with no effect. If you are invisible people just can't see you. All transparent people are invisible, but not all invisible people are transparent. For instance, if I don my camo-wear and hid under some leaves I'm (theoretically) invisible. But I'm not transparent.
How does this apply in this case? One example: Make my entire body except my retinas transparent. Who's going to notice a couple of dime-sized disks floating in the air, especially if the background is patterned? --
And notice how none of these reasons are nonprofit-specific. ASPs are here to stay--some people will buy anything. But they are a hot item only insofar as they are toast. By that I mean ASPs are the early-00's version of the mid-90's "push technology": getting loads of attention for no known reason. --
So I should switch from proprietary to open in order to save money on one-time costs...and then have another company host those apps for an on-going cost? Yeah, that makes sense.
It would be a lot smarter to just switch to Free Software but continue adminning it yourself. No change in operating expense (actually probably a decrease since Linux has fewer maintainence problems than Win95) and a big decrease in capital expense. --
...E? Did it just fall off the face of the earth? Last I heard whatshisname left RedHat in a huff and moved to California. Does GNOME still use E? Does anyone? --
I love these books, but only if used properly: as an introduction to the basics. There has been several times that I need to take a plunge into something I've never done before (buying a house comes to mind). The for Dummies book provides a good foundation--clear and simple definitions of terms, stripped down and to-the-point examples, etc. Essentially I use the books as a way of learning the language of a particular topic so I can ask further questions in the areas I need help on. --
I see a lot of bemoaning about the "revolution is over" and "goodbye MP3". This has no effect on MP3 the file format and only affects MP3.com the website. If their name was "Music.com" would we be crying out "now I can't listen to music anymore"? No.
I have never once downloaded anything from MP3.com or used any of their services but I have many MP3 files (mostly ripped from my own CDs but some obtained from Napster and the like). --
I'm all for diversity. I'm all for competition. BUT.
Wouldn't it save a LOT of effort and time if the Galeon and K-Meleon people could get together and create a non-session-manager-specific Gecko-based browser as a base that ANYONE could use? They could also provide a version linked against their respective bloat^H^H^H^H^H libraries for people that like that sort of thing. --
You can't use sign language for the same reason you can't use spoken language--computers can't yet decode a simple sentence.
However, you could use some restricted set of sign symbols with a very restricted "grammar". This would be analogous to saying "open program", "close window", "reboot" etc to your computer instead of saying "I want to calculate my gas mileage and then check my email". The advantage in using gesture instead of speech would be that the physical motion *may* be easier to detect than the speech units.
Of course, since we are now talking about an arbitrary set of physical motions that are intended to convey instructions to the computer we are right back to "virtual keyboards" or something very like it... --
Slashdot Mirror
NT really DID make a navy cruiser dead in the water for 3 hours. Some will say it was human error. But the "human error" consisted of entered "0" into a data field. That should be handled gracefully. Some will say it was an application error--the app should have handled the "0". Again, true, but a crashing app should not take down the operating system. NT was at fault and there is no getting around it.
--
Software technologies. I don't know enough about graphics to be able to say boo about bitmaps but your other two are moot.
--
Name me three long-lasting technologies that DIDN'T start as an open project.
--
"The front and back doors in your analogy should be for different, unconnected buildings."
No, all freedoms are interconnected in at least two ways. First, as other point out, issues like encryption protect human rights through the use of software. Second, as pointed out in my original post, what's the point of freedom from military juntas without having freedom from state-issued decrees? And what's the point of having freedom from state-issued decrees without having freedom of the press? And what's the use of having freedom of the press without free speech? Etc.
--
'So by caring more about real freedom issues rather than the "freedom" of a piece of software I become part of the Big Evil?'
/.ers were in a house. The house is attacked by MS employees! They start beating on (or even pouring through) the front door. You are advocating a defense of "everyone to the front door"--but that leaves the back door unguarded. *I* am advocating a "man every station" approach that leaves our flanks protected. My method also means slightly less defense at the site of the (current) attack but which is worse: being outnumbered 3 to 1 at the front door or 1 to 0 at the back?
No, by advocating that we stop working for freedom at every level you are part of the Big Evil.
Let's say you, I and 8 other
--
And how are journalists going to make money if speech is free!
--
...for MY conclusion.
"By sticking to basic conventions for all apps, it makes GNOME or KDE more user friendly to all computer users and makes Linux look better and better."
More user-friendly? Yes, if your only criteria is ease of learning. Look better? Yes, but that's irrelevant. I don't buy the hammer that has a shapely handle, I buy one that works well.
As for scripting: Find a programmer. Ask that programmer these questions: Is it feasible for ALL applications to use one single scripting API? If it is feasible, would you want to use it? Sure, "Save As" is probably quite similar across apps. But how would you implement "rotate scene" needed for Blender in an API designed for AbiWord?
--
And tabloids are just tabloids
And newspapers are just newspapers
And state-issued decrees are state-issued decreens
And military juntas are just military juntas
Freedom starts at home. Unless you are making your tiny piece of the world free you are part of the problem.
--
"There's a real need to...get on with improving the code..."
If it weren't for people like RMS and his "psuedo-communistic" ideas there would be no code to improve. It's licenses like the GPL that ensure that code freed remains free.
--
I'm getting pretty sick of the GNOME vs KDE flamewars. But before you mod me up as +47 Insightful because I'm spouting the party line of "we should all just get along" read what I have to say: Both GNOME and KDE have got it wrong.
From a economic perspective: You can't win in the marketplace by being "just as good as" the existing Goliath. What features specific to GNOME or KDE are offered that surpass what you can do in Windows?
From a usability perspective: Why is there all this harping about a "consistent UI"? Check my sig for a soundbite on this, but then come back for an explanation. Sure, it makes sense for a word processor and a spreadsheet to have "File" menus with "Save, Save As, New, Close, etc" all in the same place. But does it make sense for all apps? Think about it this way: My car has a certain UI. My telephone also has a UI. They have absolutely nothing in common but I can use them both very effectively. What if LifeKDE sprang into being and created a phone with a steering wheel? Would I be better off?
How does this apply to computers? Because a computer isn't just one tool. It is a generalized tool simulator. Every "application" is a tool. If two applications serve radically different purposes, I would expect them to have radically different UIs. For instance, people often mention that Blender has a difficult to learn UI--irrelevant! The purpose of a UI is not to be easy to learn. The purpose of a UI is to afford access to a tool. (if the UI is difficult to remember that is a different issue--internal consistency is a valid goal) To go back to the Blender example, people often go on to say that once they learned the UI quirks it turned out to be very powerful. Exactly!
What does this have to do with KDE/GNOME? I think each of these projects has a certain amount of validity. For instance a lot of apps need to have file selection dialog boxes. That should probably be a system service. But "standardization" beyond that level is, IMHO, a very big mistake.
So what do I recommend? I recommend two projects:
1) The Common GUI Services Project for things like file selection dialog boxes.
2) The Advanced UI Research Project to do research on what kinds of UI elements work best with what kind of tool and then making that research available to the tool makers.
--
If it weren't for the fact that I don't recognize the scenery, I would have said these were from Mario Karts 64. Don't get me wrong, I love Mario Karts 64. But what's new about this?
--
I swear we have more stories about The End of Iridium than we have about The End of The Internet.
--
Above all do NOT allow this to happen: Techies/consultants that are advising the rollout tell management "switch to Win2k". Management tells other departments "switch to Win2k". Other deptartments tell management "we can't". Management tells techies "they won't". Techies tell management "force them".
You've got to get ahold of the techies yourself--don't let management be the conduit for technical decisions. You still have to explain the issues to management so that they can mandate the discussion take place--but when the discussion happens managements only role should be as arbiter.
--
Microsoft doesn't understand where their power comes from--and that works in our favor.
Why is MS popular? "Compatibility". And when MS creates new technologies, what's the best word to describe the usual result? "Incompatible". So please, MS, dump a lot of money into creating a new chip and software to run on it--it only hastens your demise.
--
If you are transparent, light passes through you with no effect. If you are invisible people just can't see you. All transparent people are invisible, but not all invisible people are transparent. For instance, if I don my camo-wear and hid under some leaves I'm (theoretically) invisible. But I'm not transparent.
How does this apply in this case? One example: Make my entire body except my retinas transparent. Who's going to notice a couple of dime-sized disks floating in the air, especially if the background is patterned?
--
And notice how none of these reasons are nonprofit-specific. ASPs are here to stay--some people will buy anything. But they are a hot item only insofar as they are toast. By that I mean ASPs are the early-00's version of the mid-90's "push technology": getting loads of attention for no known reason.
--
So I should switch from proprietary to open in order to save money on one-time costs...and then have another company host those apps for an on-going cost? Yeah, that makes sense.
It would be a lot smarter to just switch to Free Software but continue adminning it yourself. No change in operating expense (actually probably a decrease since Linux has fewer maintainence problems than Win95) and a big decrease in capital expense.
--
...E? Did it just fall off the face of the earth? Last I heard whatshisname left RedHat in a huff and moved to California. Does GNOME still use E? Does anyone?
--
I love these books, but only if used properly: as an introduction to the basics. There has been several times that I need to take a plunge into something I've never done before (buying a house comes to mind). The for Dummies book provides a good foundation--clear and simple definitions of terms, stripped down and to-the-point examples, etc. Essentially I use the books as a way of learning the language of a particular topic so I can ask further questions in the areas I need help on.
--
I see a lot of bemoaning about the "revolution is over" and "goodbye MP3". This has no effect on MP3 the file format and only affects MP3.com the website. If their name was "Music.com" would we be crying out "now I can't listen to music anymore"? No.
I have never once downloaded anything from MP3.com or used any of their services but I have many MP3 files (mostly ripped from my own CDs but some obtained from Napster and the like).
--
I'm all for diversity. I'm all for competition. BUT.
Wouldn't it save a LOT of effort and time if the Galeon and K-Meleon people could get together and create a non-session-manager-specific Gecko-based browser as a base that ANYONE could use? They could also provide a version linked against their respective bloat^H^H^H^H^H libraries for people that like that sort of thing.
--
Karma is frozen in the upward direction only.
I can understand that. But why does it go down when I meta-moderate. Not "when I am meta-moderated" but "when *I* meta-moderate".
--
On-Line Uranium Auctions
Online uranium? How does the radioactivity get to me? Via email?
--
You can't use sign language for the same reason you can't use spoken language--computers can't yet decode a simple sentence.
However, you could use some restricted set of sign symbols with a very restricted "grammar". This would be analogous to saying "open program", "close window", "reboot" etc to your computer instead of saying "I want to calculate my gas mileage and then check my email". The advantage in using gesture instead of speech would be that the physical motion *may* be easier to detect than the speech units.
Of course, since we are now talking about an arbitrary set of physical motions that are intended to convey instructions to the computer we are right back to "virtual keyboards" or something very like it...
--
...the iFell MouseMan...
I'll get one of these when I can also buy the iCan'tGetUp Keyboards and imHavingTroubleBreathing Joystick.
--