Science journals have long fought this, because their profit model is strongest when they own copyright and are the exclusive publishers of a paper. Peer review and scientific principles don't mesh well with peer review though, and many academes have either "published" their papers on their own websites or found other ways to try to work around the journals.
Ridding peer review and science of copyright would be a great improvement.
I don't think those SIQ fixes actually fixed it (although they helped - the later fixpaks reasonably lessened the problem).
Note that "kill -9" itself is not foolproof - under most Unices it's not hard for a program to get caught in the kernel, leaving kill helpless to really end it (although this is much more rare as it requires one of the syscalls to be wedgable).
The binary converter software was never a big thing (that was hosted on Netlabs?) - yes it was nifty but it usually stumbled when trying to convert applications of any size. I don't think your analysis of OS/2's failure is very on - it really comes down to IBM not being good at handling customers (or customer products) directly. They've only slowly gotten better since.
"A better DOS than DOS, a better Windows than Windows, a better Linux than Linux!"
Re:An updated Workplace Shell would be great
on
Is OS/2 Coming Back?
·
· Score: 1
Most of the instability I saw in the system were because the EAs were easily trashed by a system crash (which often happened because of the SIQ misdesign), not because of bad SOM-related code. Extending the system through SOM interfaces was pretty cool, in my experience, and wasn't risky.
On ugly, the system wasn't particularly pretty in the 2.x incarnation, but our standards were pretty low back then anyhow. By 4.x it looked pretty nice (or at least I was used to it). Cutting and pasting wasn't complicated - it was pretty much the same as in those other OSs you mention. Maybe you didn't like the tabbed notebooks; many of us didn't mind. I think it was prettier than Win95 and had a better interface.
I think you need to brush up on your history, and maybe use a less "book" definition of OS - there were several competitors even in the PC market. Also, there's a bit of apples-to-oranges comparison with the "per platform" qualifier, as there was more platform diversity back then.
"What is necessary" is a complex question - bare-bones necessary for function? Necessary for performance?
Also, we're talking more about the API/X11 versus client code distinction than the kernel-land versus userland distinction (although this being multimedia, there is some bleed-over)
Most of the time, people who want a nice multimedia-friendly API who don't want to really wade into ugly ground will use SDL.
Re:An updated Workplace Shell would be great
on
Is OS/2 Coming Back?
·
· Score: 1
What happens when that standard desktop sucks? What happens when people feel discouraged and skip out on experimentation because the standard already exists?
Have you used CDE? Do you think CDE would've aged gracefully into something as nice as we have now had the companies involved kept at it?
Re:An updated Workplace Shell would be great
on
Is OS/2 Coming Back?
·
· Score: 1
It can be, sure, as part of continual experimentation and cross-pollination.
Re:An updated Workplace Shell would be great
on
Is OS/2 Coming Back?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I'd be wary of suggesting that we ever will or should have an official desktop. Some competition and cross-pollination helps us share interface ideas that work after having separate communities really find out what doesn't. Those of us who actually used OS/2 generally also find the very idea of "IBM will save us" to be ridiculous. IBM long neglected, ignored, and occasionally kicked the OS/2 community. They're not really the poster child for sanity. We liked the product, but were very wary of big blue itself.
Also, as a general hint to other people, whenever somebody says "let's face it", it's a good clue that they're being a douche. It's an empty, self-congratulatory phrase.
Object Desktop was quite popular - their launchpad replacement was much prettier and more capable than the original. I have no idea how well-recieved the Windows port was, but many of the people on the old IRC channel used OD (and you see it in screenshots just about as much as you'll see the vanilla desktop).
I would be delighted to switch my window manager back to the Workplace Shell (well, provided that there were keyboard shortcuts). I would not be so delighted to again deal with the SIQ lockups (but I imagine a port of WPS to X11 wouldn't have that problem, except to the extent that its own components might themselves use their own queue). I also would worry about EA corruption, which was always a concern with OS/2 as the collection of cruft in EAs kept growing and often a little mistake led one to need to repair them (or reinstall the system).
Anyhow, point is if I could just have the interface back, with some light Unix sensibilities injected, I'd be happy to switch from WindowMaker back to WPS. (Actually, having Stardock's Object Desktop as part of that would be a huge plus).
Not shocked, but bothered. I would like to see the influence of lobbyists sharply curtailed, as a general part of reform in how elections are run. I'll grumble at anyone, regardless of party, when my grumbling might help.
That said, the healthcare bill is not actually private, and as far as I can tell any favours in it are not blatant.
If your beliefs separate you from knowledge, then you lack knowledge. Their polls are about measuring knowledge. Removing it because some beliefs keep people intellectually backwards is a shame.
If it is, so what? In your scenario, the RIAA would go to the police using their lawyers instead.
While legal recourse is possibly necessary at some point, having contact information for IPs accessible without a lawyer helps keep the net running smoothly. It's not worth giving that up in the name of privacy.
Not good enough. I don't want to bother the cops when I can bother the ISP, or the people hosting that ISP, and upwards. Besides, not everyone is in the US.
Privacy is less important here than the potential for menace and the ability of people to kvetch directly at troublemakers.
This is a great example of harmful competition in market systems. Apprenticeships of various kinds are traditional and important, but when they fail to pay at least a living wage (be it medical or tech internships), they're unhealthy for society and often unhealthy for those involved. People who would enter such fields are at a huge disadvantage should they refuse to shoulder more debt to reach a nicely employable state, while the status quo is quite nice for those who don't need to pay a living wage.
The role of the state is to serve the public good, and one way it should exercise that role is to act as a tool for collective bargaining with other entities (states, companies, etc). We should decide that as a society we won't do business (revoke charters, disallow employment, effectively negotiating an end to their ability to work in our country) with companies that have such practices, and force a shift in how business is done.
Slashdot Mirror
Science journals have long fought this, because their profit model is strongest when they own copyright and are the exclusive publishers of a paper. Peer review and scientific principles don't mesh well with peer review though, and many academes have either "published" their papers on their own websites or found other ways to try to work around the journals.
Ridding peer review and science of copyright would be a great improvement.
That phrasing made a relatively dull topic seem awkward enough that reading it could neuter a rabbit. It's a good thing rabbits can't read.
The website requires flash. His app presumably did not.
There are multiple publishers for books. When you have a platform with high costs to switch, censorship becomes a serious problem.
Notes was a Lotus product.
I don't think those SIQ fixes actually fixed it (although they helped - the later fixpaks reasonably lessened the problem).
Note that "kill -9" itself is not foolproof - under most Unices it's not hard for a program to get caught in the kernel, leaving kill helpless to really end it (although this is much more rare as it requires one of the syscalls to be wedgable).
The binary converter software was never a big thing (that was hosted on Netlabs?) - yes it was nifty but it usually stumbled when trying to convert applications of any size. I don't think your analysis of OS/2's failure is very on - it really comes down to IBM not being good at handling customers (or customer products) directly. They've only slowly gotten better since.
You work for IBM's PSP sales department, don't you? :P
Let's give that strategy a slogan!
"A better DOS than DOS, a better Windows than Windows, a better Linux than Linux!"
Most of the instability I saw in the system were because the EAs were easily trashed by a system crash (which often happened because of the SIQ misdesign), not because of bad SOM-related code. Extending the system through SOM interfaces was pretty cool, in my experience, and wasn't risky.
On ugly, the system wasn't particularly pretty in the 2.x incarnation, but our standards were pretty low back then anyhow. By 4.x it looked pretty nice (or at least I was used to it). Cutting and pasting wasn't complicated - it was pretty much the same as in those other OSs you mention. Maybe you didn't like the tabbed notebooks; many of us didn't mind. I think it was prettier than Win95 and had a better interface.
I think you need to brush up on your history, and maybe use a less "book" definition of OS - there were several competitors even in the PC market. Also, there's a bit of apples-to-oranges comparison with the "per platform" qualifier, as there was more platform diversity back then.
"What is necessary" is a complex question - bare-bones necessary for function? Necessary for performance?
Also, we're talking more about the API/X11 versus client code distinction than the kernel-land versus userland distinction (although this being multimedia, there is some bleed-over)
Most of the time, people who want a nice multimedia-friendly API who don't want to really wade into ugly ground will use SDL.
What happens when that standard desktop sucks? What happens when people feel discouraged and skip out on experimentation because the standard already exists?
Have you used CDE? Do you think CDE would've aged gracefully into something as nice as we have now had the companies involved kept at it?
It can be, sure, as part of continual experimentation and cross-pollination.
I'd be wary of suggesting that we ever will or should have an official desktop. Some competition and cross-pollination helps us share interface ideas that work after having separate communities really find out what doesn't. Those of us who actually used OS/2 generally also find the very idea of "IBM will save us" to be ridiculous. IBM long neglected, ignored, and occasionally kicked the OS/2 community. They're not really the poster child for sanity. We liked the product, but were very wary of big blue itself.
Also, as a general hint to other people, whenever somebody says "let's face it", it's a good clue that they're being a douche. It's an empty, self-congratulatory phrase.
Object Desktop was quite popular - their launchpad replacement was much prettier and more capable than the original. I have no idea how well-recieved the Windows port was, but many of the people on the old IRC channel used OD (and you see it in screenshots just about as much as you'll see the vanilla desktop).
I would be delighted to switch my window manager back to the Workplace Shell (well, provided that there were keyboard shortcuts). I would not be so delighted to again deal with the SIQ lockups (but I imagine a port of WPS to X11 wouldn't have that problem, except to the extent that its own components might themselves use their own queue). I also would worry about EA corruption, which was always a concern with OS/2 as the collection of cruft in EAs kept growing and often a little mistake led one to need to repair them (or reinstall the system).
Anyhow, point is if I could just have the interface back, with some light Unix sensibilities injected, I'd be happy to switch from WindowMaker back to WPS. (Actually, having Stardock's Object Desktop as part of that would be a huge plus).
We'll have tools that will hide the adverts, and do our best to make them widespread.
Not shocked, but bothered. I would like to see the influence of lobbyists sharply curtailed, as a general part of reform in how elections are run. I'll grumble at anyone, regardless of party, when my grumbling might help.
That said, the healthcare bill is not actually private, and as far as I can tell any favours in it are not blatant.
If your beliefs separate you from knowledge, then you lack knowledge. Their polls are about measuring knowledge. Removing it because some beliefs keep people intellectually backwards is a shame.
If it is, so what? In your scenario, the RIAA would go to the police using their lawyers instead.
While legal recourse is possibly necessary at some point, having contact information for IPs accessible without a lawyer helps keep the net running smoothly. It's not worth giving that up in the name of privacy.
Not good enough. I don't want to bother the cops when I can bother the ISP, or the people hosting that ISP, and upwards. Besides, not everyone is in the US.
Privacy is less important here than the potential for menace and the ability of people to kvetch directly at troublemakers.
Ignoring made-up stuff by nutjobs seems a legitimate role for news organisations.
This is a great example of harmful competition in market systems. Apprenticeships of various kinds are traditional and important, but when they fail to pay at least a living wage (be it medical or tech internships), they're unhealthy for society and often unhealthy for those involved. People who would enter such fields are at a huge disadvantage should they refuse to shoulder more debt to reach a nicely employable state, while the status quo is quite nice for those who don't need to pay a living wage.
The role of the state is to serve the public good, and one way it should exercise that role is to act as a tool for collective bargaining with other entities (states, companies, etc). We should decide that as a society we won't do business (revoke charters, disallow employment, effectively negotiating an end to their ability to work in our country) with companies that have such practices, and force a shift in how business is done.
NYC is a good start. I'd like to see that number pushed as close to 100% for personal transportation as possible, in cities.
I would like this to be the case - supporting it from the general taxbase makes a lot of sense for cities.