Everything I've heard about the system indicated that the kernel was going to be a custom-modified version of Mach 3.0 . If there's anything at all from FreeBSD in the OS, it's no doubt in userland Unix utilities, which are hardly a significant part of this OS.
WRT the dock, Apple at least seems committed to the dock, and to it being a hybrid of Windows' task mangler and the NeXTStep dock. That's just a fundimental misdesign -- the very act of having them together will create confusion.
MS Office may be interesting to you now, but it's naive to think that it'll still be big a few years from now.
If there were a filtering proxy service you could use that would recolor the images, and a lens you could hold in front of the computer monitor to see the corrected color, you could avoid any color-based stuff like this:)
NeXTStep isn't FreeBSD, and never was. As to if OSX Consumer will actually offer the *power* of a unix system, that's something I'll wait to see. It seems likely to me that Apple will hide Terminal.app from people:( It seems to me that the way they're handling the dock is a bad sign for the OSX interface -- I'd rather have had them just adopt NeXTStep almost as-is...
MS Office just isn't interesting. It'll be a casualty of the revolution soon anyhow.
I think we should be considerably more skeptical of fantastic claims than you are -- how do you even know that the technology is feasable? WRT storage type differences being a hinderance to computer science, that's complete bs. Computer performance debatably, but not computer science.
Spending months in college or in the field learning about storage differences? What are you on? It's simple stuff...
Why does Internet Explorer run all the time?
on
Mattel Spyware
·
· Score: 1
Who the heck needs a web browser running all the time on windows?
That'll never happen. It'll be impossible to enforce, and many sites are quite general purpose (e.g. geocities). How would someone stick not-for-children content on geocities?
It seems to me that we don't really need anything more than what we have.... for example, why would we need.banc? Any bank is much more likely to get a.com than a.banc, especially b/c they couldn't say.banc without people misspelling it in their browser window..
The right way to resolve the conflict is to insist that *EVERYTHING* be open source. Selling support contracts or other services is ok, but creating 'commercial playgrounds' for software is just bad.
The problem with coy is that it often does not consider the line as a barrier between parts of the haiku that mean something. That is, each line in a good haiku should ideally be a valid sentence, or failing that, each line in an ok haiku should at least be a seperate clause.
Well, it's more to type, but I believe that the original replier was irritated that this would break unix filesystem expectations... That is probably a legitimate point, but some OS's like NeXTStep used symlinks so they could (sort of) have both. OTOH, it is pretty ugly what they did.
WRT config files, well, naturally apps should just look in ~/.appname(rc?) That is, look in the user's home directory for a dotfile. The app choses the particular name for the dotfile (sometimes dot-directory for apps with many config things, like netscape), and that's usually mentioned in the manpage of the app. Global config stuff, if there is any, probably belongs in/etc
Why do you want MDI? Actually having seperate windows is (almost) always what you really want -- multiple workspace windowmanagers are almost everywhere in X, making MDI a big loss. Additionally, the subwindows are almost certain to be managed differently than the window manager (or native GUI) does it, creating irritating inconsistencies. There's a reason MDI isn't well supported. It's mostly dead.
It's very possible for companies to do good things that don't directly support them. Certainly, there may or may not be other motives (e.g. gaining mindshare, or similar), but presenting things as if companies are only capable of evil or neutral acts is highly inaccurate.
It is not at all improbable that with proper training one may control parts of one's body that normally is not under active control. This does not require any kind of trancendental view of how the universe works. If you could show me an advanced meditation master levitating, or something similarly amazing, then we really would have some 'proof of the pudding'
There *has* to be another side, no? Personally, I encourage everyone I know to ignore intellectual property laws of all sorts. Data and ideas cannot be owned -- they lack scarcity. 'Pirating' is not theft because nothing is *taken*. Post it everywhere! Encourage your friends to ignore 'Intellectual Property'. IP is inherently invalid, and it seems the DCMA is just taking us closer to the inevitable conclusion of a pointless concept.
But the story, or rather the world doesn't stop there. Just as the Trans-rational goes beyond the rational, the trans-trans-rational goes beyond the trans-rational. It is also a level of knowledge and it cannot be grasped by irrationality.
Really, just because there's terminology and people working on something doesn't mean that there's anything to it. A "pre-trans" error would be accepting the "pre-trans" framework at all.
The christian bible is no different from books of greek mythology, the Qu'ran, the Bahagavad Gita, any of the Sutras, the Upanishads, Dianetics, the Torah, etc. Old texts full of stories about fanciful notions that people have managed to form cults around. Many of them make bizarre factual claims about angels, centaurs, spirits, avatars, and other imaginary beings that *surprise* are no longer around now that we have the ability to disprove them. In our age of science, we fortunately can nip religions/cults that make magical claims that pertain to modern times in the bud. Hundreds of 'psychics', 'magicians', and other mystics have been shown to be the frauds that they are. Deal with the facts, and toss aside your outmoded belief systems, deities, and other such cruft.
And there are a lot of other points you could bring up, like the ugly security model X has, or a number of other things. But the point that I'm trying to make is that while X certainly has its failures, it also has achieved a number of really useful things that other living windowing systems lack. Network display, flexibility (things like ssh's X redirection magic and such being possible testify to this), proper segmentation (so different window managers, graphical logins, etc are possible), possibility of X Terminals, etc. Someone replacing X has pretty high expectations to satisfy.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything I've heard about the system indicated
that the kernel was going to be a custom-modified
version of Mach 3.0 . If there's anything at all
from FreeBSD in the OS, it's no doubt in userland
Unix utilities, which are hardly a significant
part of this OS.
WRT the dock, Apple at least seems committed to
the dock, and to it being a hybrid of Windows'
task mangler and the NeXTStep dock. That's just
a fundimental misdesign -- the very act of having
them together will create confusion.
MS Office may be interesting to you now, but it's
naive to think that it'll still be big a few years
from now.
If there were a filtering proxy service you :)
could use that would recolor the images,
and a lens you could hold in front of the computer
monitor to see the corrected color, you could
avoid any color-based stuff like this
NeXTStep isn't FreeBSD, and never was. :(
As to if OSX Consumer will actually offer the
*power* of a unix system, that's something I'll
wait to see. It seems likely to me that Apple will
hide Terminal.app from people
It seems to me that the way they're handling
the dock is a bad sign for the OSX interface --
I'd rather have had them just adopt NeXTStep
almost as-is...
MS Office just isn't interesting. It'll be a
casualty of the revolution soon anyhow.
Didn't sun promise us the source to staroffice?
I think it's actually a WINE limitation, but don't
quote me on that.
On my laptop, I'd happily have it run at half the
speed (or less) it does now if I got double the
battery life.
I think we should be considerably more skeptical
of fantastic claims than you are -- how do you
even know that the technology is feasable?
WRT storage type differences being a hinderance
to computer science, that's complete bs. Computer
performance debatably, but not computer science.
Spending months in college or in the field
learning about storage differences? What are you
on? It's simple stuff...
Who the heck needs a web browser running all
the time on windows?
That'll never happen. It'll be impossible to
enforce, and many sites are quite general
purpose (e.g. geocities). How would someone
stick not-for-children content on geocities?
It seems to me that we don't really need anything .banc? Any bank is much more likely to .com than a .banc, especially b/c they .banc without people misspelling it
more than what we have.... for example, why would
we need
get a
couldn't say
in their browser window..
The right way to resolve the conflict is to
insist that *EVERYTHING* be open source.
Selling support contracts or other services
is ok, but creating 'commercial playgrounds'
for software is just bad.
The problem with coy is that it often does
not consider the line as a barrier between
parts of the haiku that mean something. That is,
each line in a good haiku should ideally be a
valid sentence, or failing that, each line in an
ok haiku should at least be a seperate clause.
Well, it's more to type, but I believe that the
/etc
original replier was irritated that this would
break unix filesystem expectations... That is
probably a legitimate point, but some OS's like
NeXTStep used symlinks so they could (sort of)
have both. OTOH, it is pretty ugly what they
did.
WRT config files, well, naturally apps should
just look in ~/.appname(rc?)
That is, look in the user's home directory for
a dotfile. The app choses the particular name for
the dotfile (sometimes dot-directory for apps with
many config things, like netscape), and that's
usually mentioned in the manpage of the app.
Global config stuff, if there is any, probably
belongs in
Why do you want MDI?
Actually having seperate windows is (almost)
always what you really want -- multiple
workspace windowmanagers are almost everywhere
in X, making MDI a big loss. Additionally,
the subwindows are almost certain to be managed
differently than the window manager (or native
GUI) does it, creating irritating inconsistencies.
There's a reason MDI isn't well supported. It's
mostly dead.
Does it work under BOCHS?
It's very possible for companies to do good things
that don't directly support them. Certainly, there
may or may not be other motives (e.g. gaining
mindshare, or similar), but presenting things as
if companies are only capable of evil or neutral
acts is highly inaccurate.
It is not at all improbable that with proper
training one may control parts of one's body that
normally is not under active control. This does
not require any kind of trancendental view of how
the universe works. If you could show me an
advanced meditation master levitating, or
something similarly amazing, then we really would
have some 'proof of the pudding'
There *has* to be another side, no? Personally, I
encourage everyone I know to ignore intellectual
property laws of all sorts. Data and ideas cannot
be owned -- they lack scarcity. 'Pirating' is
not theft because nothing is *taken*. Post it
everywhere! Encourage your friends to ignore
'Intellectual Property'. IP is inherently invalid,
and it seems the DCMA is just taking us closer to
the inevitable conclusion of a pointless concept.
But the story, or rather the world doesn't stop
there. Just as the Trans-rational goes beyond
the rational, the trans-trans-rational goes
beyond the trans-rational. It is also a level of
knowledge and it cannot be grasped by irrationality.
Really, just because there's terminology and
people working on something doesn't mean that
there's anything to it. A "pre-trans" error
would be accepting the "pre-trans" framework
at all.
The christian bible is no different from books
of greek mythology, the Qu'ran, the Bahagavad
Gita, any of the Sutras, the Upanishads,
Dianetics, the Torah, etc.
Old texts full of stories about fanciful notions
that people have managed to form cults around.
Many of them make bizarre factual claims about
angels, centaurs, spirits, avatars, and other
imaginary beings that *surprise* are no longer
around now that we have the ability to disprove
them. In our age of science, we fortunately can
nip religions/cults that make magical claims that
pertain to modern times in the bud. Hundreds of
'psychics', 'magicians', and other mystics have
been shown to be the frauds that they are. Deal
with the facts, and toss aside your outmoded
belief systems, deities, and other such cruft.
So I guess multitasking is stupid?
What are you talking about?
I was under the impression that the MP3 encoding
algorithm was patented as barrier, not the license
of their encoder..
What does it mean to say 'it rewrites it' aside from trying to look clever?
And there are a lot of other points you could
bring up, like the ugly security model X has,
or a number of other things. But the point that
I'm trying to make is that while X certainly
has its failures, it also has achieved a number
of really useful things that other living
windowing systems lack. Network display,
flexibility (things like ssh's X redirection magic
and such being possible testify to this),
proper segmentation (so different window managers,
graphical logins, etc are possible), possibility
of X Terminals, etc. Someone replacing X has
pretty high expectations to satisfy.