My one big issue with the film (SPOILER?)
on
Minority Report
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
***POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD***
(i don't give much away about what happens, but rather, what doesn't)
Maybe the original short story covers this, but I was miffed that this particular hole in the story was left untouched:
Why do they have to convict people of these crimes they haven't commited? (or whatever they call it when they arrest you for pre-crime) Why not intercept the criminal before the crime is commited, hold the suspect for like 72 hours, possibly giving them some kind of counseling, and then release them? If they never commited a crime, they can't really be guilty of it, so no harm, no foul. In the movie, they say that premeditated murder is almost extinguished, because no one is dumb enough to try it anymore. This would still be the case under my idea, and you could even consider imprisoning those who are repeat "offenders". But it would keep people from commiting crimes of passion, and allow them to continue their lives.
Thoughts, anyone?
Re:Gnome 2 is terrible to configure
on
GNOME 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Note: nearly all of my responses to you will be directly influenced by this document. I personally consider it a must read for anyone interested in Free/OSS desktops.
Additionally, I really dislike what has happened with gnome 2 in configurability. Making intelligent defaults is all fine and good, but when you can't get it how you want, frustration ensues.
Understandable. As it says in the above link, if you feel that the behavior of a particular program is frustrating, file a bug either suggesting a change to the behavior, or, if it really really must be, requesting a preference to change the behavior. Either way, have a logical arguement ready, though - please be aware that "But I've always done it this way!" probably won't fly. If something is broken, but familiar, it's still broken. Sometimes it's really worth the small pain of learning to change your user habits. Of course, other times, the developers are wrong, and need your help in straigtening it out!:-)
Another example is that in metacity, clicking anywhere on a window raises it.
Read the Metacity README file! This is one of Metacity's precious few user options. If you really want a GUI instead of using GConf to change this stuff, check out Metacity Setup - it's a seperate project from Metacity proper, but it's becoming quite nice!
(incidently, sloppy focus really is total crack, as Havoc also says in the README, but he's letting it slide anyhow *because* of the fact that it's so very useful. The "weight" of the preference is justified in this case. Again, the README is highly informative on this subject.)
Additionally, at least for now, sawfish doesn't even have the infrastructure to bind keys to switching to workspaces in a 2d sense (I can move left or right, but not up or down)
See the release notes: http://www.gnome.org/start/2.0/errors.html#id28297 18
My vote still lies in configurability, and my hope is I don't have to turn to enlightenment to get it.
Well, if you can put up with E's serious bloat, stability, and consistency issues, (that I've always had with E - maybe it's different for you) in exchange for maniacal control over your WM, be my guest. My guess is you'll probably go back to Gnome or KDE after only a few days.;-)
(My apologies to E users and developers, but my experiences with it have been *terrible*...)
So use Metacity for your window manager and Scalable Gorilla for Nautilus. The former can use just XML files for describing a theme in a vector format, and the latter uses SVG for all icons, etc, so it scales up and down flawlessly. As for GTK, there are plenty of fine themes that scale well.
I do agree, though, that I should NOT have to learn how to hack this stuff just to learn to theme. I hope to god someone makes Metacity and GTK theming programs, or we'll never get the same quality themes as Windowblinds, etc.
I'd do it myself, but my codefoo is nonexistant.;-)
This question will always be a matter of personal preference, and the ultimate answer is, "Install them both and see which one you like best!"
But you've heard that already, and it's not what you were looking for.;-)
What you really wanted was Gnome's advantages over KDE. For me, it comes down to a few things...
1) Seems speedier on my 400mhz workstation. This is subjective, but I think it's pretty apparent. YMMV! On faster machines, this is less of an issue, but I don't have a faster machine, so it is a big deal to me.:-)
2) Application "consistency": I personally find Galeon, Evo, and Gnumeric superior to Konquoror, KMail, and Koffice's spreadsheet, so having those former apps match my desktop is nice. While you can run Gnome/GTK apps in KDE, and vice-versa, having your themes between your desktop and Galeon, Evolution, Gnumeric, etc, is really cool.
3) This is the real kicker for me: Gnome 2 is, IMHO, much easier to configure and work with, and is far more intuitive. One of the Gnome 2 philosophies is that things should "just work", and use intelligent default settings wherever possible, instead of offering "6 equally broken ways to do it, and let[ing] the user pick one."* This means that while Gnome is still configurable, you don't have to wade through a nearly endless sea of preference options just to find that one button you were looking for. *cough*Kontrol center*cough*;-) The tradeoff is that you might not like the default that's been picked, but I've really found that I haven't missed anything so far. There are a few features I'd like to see (re)added, like the system tray, but that's coming very soon in a future release.
There's a big difference in clock speed, yes, but an 850mhz Duron is going to perform more like a 950mhz-1ghz Celeron, so it's not an entirely unfair comparison in that respect. (see this comparison for benchmarks comparing the duron 1200 to the celeron 1300 - yeah, an 850 Duron won't outperform a 1.3 celeron, but it's not exactly a landslide in the Celeron's direction either)
The real difference hardware-wise between these two is the hard drive. The Windows computer - 40g to the Lindows box's 10g - this matters a lot more than a few Mhz, IMHO!
Still, for many end users, the 10g is fine, and the extra $$$ they save is a big deal to them.
Isn't Evolution a Linux-based open-source e-mail program? And doesn't it have the same general look-and-feel of the Windows desktop?
No, it has the same look and feel of Outlook, an office application for the Windows desktop.
In case you require clarification, this is what a Windows desktop looks like. (note: this is a "random" screenshot - the contents are are not implied to be ironic, it's just the first one I got off of Google.;)
One is a desktop environment, and the other is part of an office suite. It's not the same thing.
Like my thread with Reality Master 101, the author isn't making direct factual errors, but is unintentionally misleading and confusing, especially to outsiders to the industry.
I know what Lindows is about, but if an outsider were reading the phrase:
"High on the list of headaches is incompatibilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word. Small software makers like Lindows are trying to help desktop users bridge that divide,"
what are they going to think?
The author talks about "incompatabilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word" - what's the incompatability? It's between Word, and... things that AREN'T Word. So he's referring to other office suites here. Then, carrying with this implication of other office suites, he says that Lindows is trying to "bridge that divide." Yes, "emulation"* does technically fit into his description, but he certainly doesn't lead the reader in that direction. He's very vague, so to the outsider, I believe it would appear that Lindows is doing some kind of file type conversion (something usually done by competing office suites), not allowing for MS Office to run "natively"* which is what they're really doing.
* yeah, yeah, I know it's not REALLY emulation, it's a seperate Win32 implementation, and the Office binaries aren't running truly natively, but cut me some slack - they're good enough for the terms of this discussion.
Also, if he wants to talk about options open to people who need Office compatability, you'd think he could bother to mention CodeWeavers, whose CrossOver Office app allows Linux users to run Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc, all flawlessly in Linux - not down the road, or maybe later, like Lindows, but NOW. CO-Office is no small potatoes project, and I find it hard to believe he could have missed it in a serious search for Office options in Linux. CodeWeavers is certainly more viable than Lindows in this respect.
As I said, I'm not implying any malice on his part towards Linux, and I certainly don't think my criticisms count as "flaming" the author, but I still think he was very unclear (and in other parts just plain incorrect) about his descriptions of the options open to desktop Linux users.
Re:read the article
on
Is Linux Dead?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Too bad the author of the article can't get his facts straight.
According to him, Evolution is a desktop environment and he implies that Lindows is in the office suite business. I'm not implying any malice here, but the guy really needs to do a bit more research before opening his yap.
But yeah, it's definitely not the intentional troll that the/. summary makes it out to be.
Interestingly enough, though, he does allude to (albeit unintentionally) Linux's REAL "innovation" for desktop computers: price. Where else but WalMart can you now find a computer for a mere $299??!? This is a clear demonstration of why Linux desktops, should they continue to improve usability-wise, and gain more end-user software (and they will) will soon become a major market. Quite simply, they're just cheaper, making them more available. I'd argue that 99% of users DON'T CARE about "Tablet PC's" and all that crap. They want a regular PC for the web, email, and a little light "office" work, maybe play a few games, and balance their checkbook, and they want it all for *cheap*. Linux desktops aren't quite there on the feature front, but it'll always cost less than any version of Windows.
We have seen this with this *AA's and Taco posting about some new cool DVD that is out.
Yeah, TACO is posting about it, not Michael, who's the one who typically posts about the latest adventures of the **AA's. Why should the editors be held to ideological consistency between each other?
And since when does realism mean "screw your ideals"? I don't HONESTLY think that Blizzard will personally miss my money. I'm not doing it for the actual economic benefit, I'm doing it because I think it's wrong to support them. If others agree, and they lose money because of it, great. If not, at least I'll have done what I believe is the Right Thing.
Except it's usually Michael who post about the **AA's and Taco that drools over stupid new Disney DVDs.
Why should the editors have to be ideologically consistant between each other?
So yeah, Michael can be very "Chicken Little" sometimes (the sky is falling!), and Taco's a fucking whore for Disney, and in turn the **AA's, but they doesn't mean they have to agree between the two of them.:)
Oh, and you have some kind of statistical evidence to back this up or something? Or are you just projecting your own blow-hard nature onto everyone else here?
Sure, the number of people willing to avoid a particular product based on ideology is certainly the minority, but not the miniscule fraction you suggest.
So I'll quit being "naive" if you'll stop being "a dick".
things really can work well when everybody tries to get along.
But companies HATE "getting along". I mean, wouldn't that resemble.... COMMUNISM?!? All this hippie friendly getting along and working together crap is for pansy bleeding heart liberals! If we, the corporations of America, aren't constantly at each others throats, while the consumers get screwed in the process, then we haven't done our jobs as Good Upstanding Capitalists(TM)!
ok, troll mode off. (no offense to you, i just had to get that out)
seriously, the "business" point of view on "getting along" means having to share the wealth, and if there's one thing that's considered as unilaterally, unabashedly evil in the USA, it's stating that you don't have to take an attitude of "fight to horde everything you possibly can for yourself, community and humanity be damned!" in order to be successful.
Why the dig? Because crap like DRM is what typically happens when big corps. get together under an "open" standard for a particular technology - they get together to figure out how to "leverage" (read: screw) customers into a particular standard that then becomes impossible to escape. Naturally, this isn't always the case, but doesn't it ever-increasingly feel like it?
It was a cheap shot, but remember, this IS slashdot.;)
I'd say she's doing better than that. Judge KK seems to be bending over backwards for MS in some situations, but standing strong when they pull some screwy crap like this motion to dismiss. Much as I thought Judge Jackson never actually said anything untrue or particularly biased (but I guess I'm biased, so who knows;) I'm glad that when Microsoft FINALLY gets their Official Spanking from the court, we won't have to put up with as much whining from MS and the "pro-business" crowd (note the quotes) about how the judge was biased, the trial was unfair, etc.
Do you have any links to back this up? Every watermarking scheme I've ever seen discussed was pretty easily defeated. I'd be curious to see how this "more foolproof" watermarking works...
Slashdot Mirror
***POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD***
(i don't give much away about what happens, but rather, what doesn't)
Maybe the original short story covers this, but I was miffed that this particular hole in the story was left untouched:
Why do they have to convict people of these crimes they haven't commited? (or whatever they call it when they arrest you for pre-crime) Why not intercept the criminal before the crime is commited, hold the suspect for like 72 hours, possibly giving them some kind of counseling, and then release them? If they never commited a crime, they can't really be guilty of it, so no harm, no foul. In the movie, they say that premeditated murder is almost extinguished, because no one is dumb enough to try it anymore. This would still be the case under my idea, and you could even consider imprisoning those who are repeat "offenders". But it would keep people from commiting crimes of passion, and allow them to continue their lives.
Thoughts, anyone?
Note: nearly all of my responses to you will be directly influenced by this document. I personally consider it a must read for anyone interested in Free/OSS desktops.
:-)
7 18
;-)
Additionally, I really dislike what has happened with gnome 2 in configurability. Making intelligent defaults is all fine and good, but when you can't get it how you want, frustration ensues.
Understandable. As it says in the above link, if you feel that the behavior of a particular program is frustrating, file a bug either suggesting a change to the behavior, or, if it really really must be, requesting a preference to change the behavior. Either way, have a logical arguement ready, though - please be aware that "But I've always done it this way!" probably won't fly. If something is broken, but familiar, it's still broken. Sometimes it's really worth the small pain of learning to change your user habits. Of course, other times, the developers are wrong, and need your help in straigtening it out!
Another example is that in metacity, clicking anywhere on a window raises it.
Read the Metacity README file! This is one of Metacity's precious few user options. If you really want a GUI instead of using GConf to change this stuff, check out Metacity Setup - it's a seperate project from Metacity proper, but it's becoming quite nice!
(incidently, sloppy focus really is total crack, as Havoc also says in the README, but he's letting it slide anyhow *because* of the fact that it's so very useful. The "weight" of the preference is justified in this case. Again, the README is highly informative on this subject.)
Additionally, at least for now, sawfish doesn't even have the infrastructure to bind keys to switching to workspaces in a 2d sense (I can move left or right, but not up or down)
See the release notes: http://www.gnome.org/start/2.0/errors.html#id2829
My vote still lies in configurability, and my hope is I don't have to turn to enlightenment to get it.
Well, if you can put up with E's serious bloat, stability, and consistency issues, (that I've always had with E - maybe it's different for you) in exchange for maniacal control over your WM, be my guest. My guess is you'll probably go back to Gnome or KDE after only a few days.
(My apologies to E users and developers, but my experiences with it have been *terrible*...)
So use Metacity for your window manager and Scalable Gorilla for Nautilus. The former can use just XML files for describing a theme in a vector format, and the latter uses SVG for all icons, etc, so it scales up and down flawlessly. As for GTK, there are plenty of fine themes that scale well.
;-)
I do agree, though, that I should NOT have to learn how to hack this stuff just to learn to theme. I hope to god someone makes Metacity and GTK theming programs, or we'll never get the same quality themes as Windowblinds, etc.
I'd do it myself, but my codefoo is nonexistant.
Show me the link to a $299 Windows box on Walmart.com, and you get a cookie.
This question will always be a matter of personal preference, and the ultimate answer is, "Install them both and see which one you like best!"
;-)
:-)
;-) The tradeoff is that you might not like the default that's been picked, but I've really found that I haven't missed anything so far. There are a few features I'd like to see (re)added, like the system tray, but that's coming very soon in a future release.
But you've heard that already, and it's not what you were looking for.
What you really wanted was Gnome's advantages over KDE. For me, it comes down to a few things...
1) Seems speedier on my 400mhz workstation. This is subjective, but I think it's pretty apparent. YMMV! On faster machines, this is less of an issue, but I don't have a faster machine, so it is a big deal to me.
2) Application "consistency": I personally find Galeon, Evo, and Gnumeric superior to Konquoror, KMail, and Koffice's spreadsheet, so having those former apps match my desktop is nice. While you can run Gnome/GTK apps in KDE, and vice-versa, having your themes between your desktop and Galeon, Evolution, Gnumeric, etc, is really cool.
3) This is the real kicker for me: Gnome 2 is, IMHO, much easier to configure and work with, and is far more intuitive. One of the Gnome 2 philosophies is that things should "just work", and use intelligent default settings wherever possible, instead of offering "6 equally broken ways to do it, and let[ing] the user pick one."* This means that while Gnome is still configurable, you don't have to wade through a nearly endless sea of preference options just to find that one button you were looking for. *cough*Kontrol center*cough*
* thanks to Havoc Pennington for the great quote.
Once again, though, the only way to decide is to try for yourself.
Happy GNOMEing!
There's a big difference in clock speed, yes, but an 850mhz Duron is going to perform more like a 950mhz-1ghz Celeron, so it's not an entirely unfair comparison in that respect. (see this comparison for benchmarks comparing the duron 1200 to the celeron 1300 - yeah, an 850 Duron won't outperform a 1.3 celeron, but it's not exactly a landslide in the Celeron's direction either)
The real difference hardware-wise between these two is the hard drive. The Windows computer - 40g to the Lindows box's 10g - this matters a lot more than a few Mhz, IMHO!
Still, for many end users, the 10g is fine, and the extra $$$ they save is a big deal to them.
Isn't Evolution a Linux-based open-source e-mail program? And doesn't it have the same general look-and-feel of the Windows desktop?
;)
No, it has the same look and feel of Outlook, an office application for the Windows desktop.
In case you require clarification, this is what a Windows desktop looks like. (note: this is a "random" screenshot - the contents are are not implied to be ironic, it's just the first one I got off of Google.
This is what Evolution looks like.
One is a desktop environment, and the other is part of an office suite. It's not the same thing.
Like my thread with Reality Master 101, the author isn't making direct factual errors, but is unintentionally misleading and confusing, especially to outsiders to the industry.
I know what Lindows is about, but if an outsider were reading the phrase:
"High on the list of headaches is incompatibilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word. Small software makers like Lindows are trying to help desktop users bridge that divide,"
what are they going to think?
The author talks about "incompatabilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word" - what's the incompatability? It's between Word, and... things that AREN'T Word. So he's referring to other office suites here. Then, carrying with this implication of other office suites, he says that Lindows is trying to "bridge that divide." Yes, "emulation"* does technically fit into his description, but he certainly doesn't lead the reader in that direction. He's very vague, so to the outsider, I believe it would appear that Lindows is doing some kind of file type conversion (something usually done by competing office suites), not allowing for MS Office to run "natively"* which is what they're really doing.
* yeah, yeah, I know it's not REALLY emulation, it's a seperate Win32 implementation, and the Office binaries aren't running truly natively, but cut me some slack - they're good enough for the terms of this discussion.
Also, if he wants to talk about options open to people who need Office compatability, you'd think he could bother to mention CodeWeavers, whose CrossOver Office app allows Linux users to run Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc, all flawlessly in Linux - not down the road, or maybe later, like Lindows, but NOW. CO-Office is no small potatoes project, and I find it hard to believe he could have missed it in a serious search for Office options in Linux. CodeWeavers is certainly more viable than Lindows in this respect.
As I said, I'm not implying any malice on his part towards Linux, and I certainly don't think my criticisms count as "flaming" the author, but I still think he was very unclear (and in other parts just plain incorrect) about his descriptions of the options open to desktop Linux users.
eh? Which Walmart.com are YOU looking at?
The cheapest Lindows PC is listed at $299.
The cheapest Windows PC is listed at $498.
"Exact same prices"? Are you trolling or just under-caffeinated today?
At any rate there a few things Linux is not good at:
AOLIM
Uh.... AOL has a NATIVE Linux client for AIM!
Too bad the author of the article can't get his facts straight.
/. summary makes it out to be.
According to him, Evolution is a desktop environment and he implies that Lindows is in the office suite business. I'm not implying any malice here, but the guy really needs to do a bit more research before opening his yap.
But yeah, it's definitely not the intentional troll that the
Interestingly enough, though, he does allude to (albeit unintentionally) Linux's REAL "innovation" for desktop computers: price. Where else but WalMart can you now find a computer for a mere $299??!? This is a clear demonstration of why Linux desktops, should they continue to improve usability-wise, and gain more end-user software (and they will) will soon become a major market. Quite simply, they're just cheaper, making them more available. I'd argue that 99% of users DON'T CARE about "Tablet PC's" and all that crap. They want a regular PC for the web, email, and a little light "office" work, maybe play a few games, and balance their checkbook, and they want it all for *cheap*. Linux desktops aren't quite there on the feature front, but it'll always cost less than any version of Windows.
right, which is why we'd barely manage 85% =)
well, we could probably manage with something like:
;)
Agree or disagree:
Free beer is good
Nazis are bad
(insert platitude here)
But yeah, I was aiming for an intentionally high number with 85%
We have seen this with this *AA's and Taco posting about some new cool DVD that is out.
Yeah, TACO is posting about it, not Michael, who's the one who typically posts about the latest adventures of the **AA's. Why should the editors be held to ideological consistency between each other?
And since when does realism mean "screw your ideals"? I don't HONESTLY think that Blizzard will personally miss my money. I'm not doing it for the actual economic benefit, I'm doing it because I think it's wrong to support them. If others agree, and they lose money because of it, great. If not, at least I'll have done what I believe is the Right Thing.
Except it's usually Michael who post about the **AA's and Taco that drools over stupid new Disney DVDs.
:)
Why should the editors have to be ideologically consistant between each other?
So yeah, Michael can be very "Chicken Little" sometimes (the sky is falling!), and Taco's a fucking whore for Disney, and in turn the **AA's, but they doesn't mean they have to agree between the two of them.
Oh, and you have some kind of statistical evidence to back this up or something? Or are you just projecting your own blow-hard nature onto everyone else here?
Sure, the number of people willing to avoid a particular product based on ideology is certainly the minority, but not the miniscule fraction you suggest.
So I'll quit being "naive" if you'll stop being "a dick".
First, Michael didn't disparage the game - I don't think anyone would refute that Blizzard makes good games.
Second, and more importantly, maybe YOU don't take boycotts seriously, but many others do.
Thridly, who's the "we" in slashdot? As if you could EVER get 100% of readers (hell, even 85%) to agree on anything?
Note the part where I said "as much whining".
Of course the whining will happen, but if it'd been Jackson assiging punishment, we'd never hear the end of it.
well yeah, which is why I called it a "spanking" not a punishment... : /
things really can work well when everybody tries to get along.
But companies HATE "getting along". I mean, wouldn't that resemble.... COMMUNISM?!? All this hippie friendly getting along and working together crap is for pansy bleeding heart liberals! If we, the corporations of America, aren't constantly at each others throats, while the consumers get screwed in the process, then we haven't done our jobs as Good Upstanding Capitalists(TM)!
ok, troll mode off. (no offense to you, i just had to get that out)
seriously, the "business" point of view on "getting along" means having to share the wealth, and if there's one thing that's considered as unilaterally, unabashedly evil in the USA, it's stating that you don't have to take an attitude of "fight to horde everything you possibly can for yourself, community and humanity be damned!" in order to be successful.
Why the dig? Because crap like DRM is what typically happens when big corps. get together under an "open" standard for a particular technology - they get together to figure out how to "leverage" (read: screw) customers into a particular standard that then becomes impossible to escape. Naturally, this isn't always the case, but doesn't it ever-increasingly feel like it?
;)
It was a cheap shot, but remember, this IS slashdot.
I'd say she's doing better than that. Judge KK seems to be bending over backwards for MS in some situations, but standing strong when they pull some screwy crap like this motion to dismiss. Much as I thought Judge Jackson never actually said anything untrue or particularly biased (but I guess I'm biased, so who knows ;) I'm glad that when Microsoft FINALLY gets their Official Spanking from the court, we won't have to put up with as much whining from MS and the "pro-business" crowd (note the quotes) about how the judge was biased, the trial was unfair, etc.
Do you have any links to back this up? Every watermarking scheme I've ever seen discussed was pretty easily defeated. I'd be curious to see how this "more foolproof" watermarking works...
heh, I disagree. "Golden-Ear-Worthy" Ogg encoding can be had with this switch:
:)
-q7
that's it.
Ogg CAN do all sorts of max and min bitrates, CBR, etc, but it *defaults* to the best quality modes, as it should be.
That said, while I prefer Ogg, a "--r3mix" lame-encoded MP3 would be sufficient. I guess I can't have everything.
a buck a CD?
just how thin a margin do you think the artists can take man? At that price, you might as well steal it, ya cheapskate!