That's why nothing in Mac OS X requires the use of either a control-click or a second-mouse-button click. Some highly specialized applications like Shake and Maya do, but they're hardly common.
Exactly. You *can* right (or control) click to save an image, for instance. But you can also just drag it right off the document.
This three button/no button mouse argument is such a worn-out troll. OS X supports whatever you want: plug and play. Most Mac users are used to a single-button mouse, and that's all you need. But if Windows mouse behavior is what you prefer, just plug in your favorite Logitec or Kensington. Works fine. Sons of Redmond, rejoice!
About This Particular Mac had a review not long ago of MacMice's The Mouse, which seems like the sort of thing a Mac partisan might go for if he or she wants a traditional-looking mouse that also had two buttons and a scroll wheel. Looks like it just rolled off a Cupertino production line.
THEY STILL REFUSE TO JOIN US IN THE 21st CENTURY AND MAKE A MULTI-BUTTON MOUSE.
Idiots! What could they be thinking?
Most (though not all) Mac users have two hands, and are sufficiently coordinated to find the Control button on their keyboards. Most Mac users are accustomed to operating this manner, much as you are accustomed to typing in all caps when you think your opinion is more valid than someone else's.
If you can afford a Mac, you can probably afford a three-button mouse -- if you want one. That's not saying much, though, since a decent IR USB mousie can be had at any Wal-Mart for twenty bucks.
I decided to give Apple's mouse a try when I bought my last Mac. I really like the way it feels, and have gotten used to control-clicking when necessary. The big payoff is that I have FAR less trouble with carpal tunnel syndrome than before. It's not just that I'm performing a new clicking motion -- it's a simpler movement that doesn't place stress all along one set of ligaments. Cool.
So I have a spare three-button mouse for any impoverished Mac user sufficently outraged by Apple's stock unit. If it will make your Macintosh experience a bit less harrowing, drop me a note and I'll send it along. It's the least I can do.
They believe Google has gained financially at their expense...
I can't wait to see how these folks' lawyers quantify losses at Google's hands, or how Google's registered trademark causes confusion with the customers of the word "googol."
I think we should all be careful about repeating the "fact" that Microsoft is a past donor to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution. I've yet to find a primary reference to this relationship, which seems to exist primarily in the Open Source press. Of course, if anyone has a better reference, such as a financial statement...
But we really don't need a Microsoft link to demonstrate the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's grotesque ideological bias. While the think-tank positions itself as an independent, libertarian research group designed to "study, promote, and extend the principles of classical liberalism: political equality, civil liberty, and economic freedom," they function, more often than not, as a shill for Big Business and the far political right.
AdTI is a fellow-traveler of neoconservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and shadowy groups like the "Defenders of Property Rights," with whom they are aligned as part of an anti-Clean Air Act hit squad ironically misnamed the Cooler Heads Coalition. These are the folks who have been grinding out the industrialist propaganda which has allowed the Bush Administration to roll back environmental laws a couple of decades.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute can always be counted upon for a convenient white paper discounting the risks of tobacco smoking or in favor of vastly expensive weapons programs of dubious utility.
It's tough to source the funding of private institutes, but the folks at Media Transparency have taken a stab at AdTI. Big sugar daddies include the Bradley Foundation, which gives away millions each year to attack social programs and support the privatization of government services. There's also the John M. Olin Foundation, which has lavishly funded a host of robber baron nonprofits over the years.
So it's no surprise that the Alexis de Tocqueville Institiute -- which seems to exist to provide a moral compass for the richest and most powerful interests in the West -- should be seen to carry water for anti-Open Source reactionaries. What's bad for big business must be bad for the nation. Linux must be discredited before it causes more distress for the market planners at Microsoft.
The only freedom being defended by groups like AdTI is the feedom to buy what the Establishment is selling. And at a price they decide.
MT is a good product. These folks develop for a living. They're under no more obligation to provide free services than we are to purchase their commercial software.
The "fix" is to stay with what you have if you don't like the new pricing schedule.
Money is dear to me, but I'll probably pony up. The enhancements seem worth the price tag. But if I decide differently, there are plenty of other blog engines out there.
Comparing Six Apart to Microsoft is grossly unfair. These folks care about their work and have always provided excellent service. Power to 'em.
For whatever it's worth, I nominate the parent as the best post (so far) of 2004.
From Slashdot's 1876 archives:
"Alexander Graham Bell's fancy new 'telephone' is destined to be remembered as the biggest bust in recent memory. It lacks telegraph support -- what's up with that? And the price! Just goes to show you Bell's customers will pay for whatever pretty-looking crap he puts out. Carrier pigeons do exactly the same thing as this new-fangled telephone for dollars less. Bell's labs can't be long for this world... "
Every program ever written runs on any computer regardless of architecture or operating system.
The entirely lame resolution of "Independence Day" always made me crazy: feeding a virus to the aliens' mainframe. So we're surpised when they attack us, but we sure know their OS...
Most annoying recent movie moment: Neo, putting on his best Superman impression, snags Trinity moments before she splatters at the base of some huge skyscraper. He's apparently going pretty darn near the speed of sound, intersects her at a 90 degree angle, and never touches the brakes.
There would have been a big pink splash. But I guess that might have made that third Matrix movie a bit difficult. Which probably would have been a good thing, in retrospect.
Nope: amateur radio is prohibited for broadcast by international treaty. We must abide. But I'd certainly support a new service -- even one carved from, say, the almost-never-used 1.25 meter band.
Depends where the receiver is, huh? And I sure hope your "small little" transmitter ain't radiating on any frequency other than which you intend.
It will, of course: all transmitters do. But you'll have a properly designed harmonic radiation filter, right? And your cabinet will be shielded so that 50kw Country station doesn't mix with your IPA and cause spurious products out of whatever POS final stage you've cobbled together, right? And you've looked at your signal in a spectrum analyser to be sure you're not screwing with your neighbor's Linksys wireless router and the CATV booster amplifier down the street, right?
My advocacy for additional local signals goes back to Docket 80-90 (in support of which I was a petitioner). Being a bit of a Leftist freak, I think we should squeeze spectrum to allow a large number of low-power, local services.
The intereference issues raised in association with LPFM are of an entirely different stripe than this homebrew movement. All LPFM transmitters are type-accepted and their channel allocations are assigned. Just building whatever the hell you want and squatting wherever you feel would be enormously destructive to numerous broadcast services (including data, public safety, cellular, and aeronautical radio).
That's not necessarily true. First, CC programmers have FAR more autonomy than a PD at Cox or Cumulus or your average mom-and-pop, owner-on-the-grounds station. Second, talent rules. If you're good, you stay. As of last week, less than 20% of CC's daily airshifts are tracked (and about a third of those shifts are produced by local talent).
In my building, we have about 30% fewer programming people than when I came to the market five years ago. Virtually all these positions were eliminated by normal attrition. Radio isn't the only business that has downsized over the years. The same things is happening in virtually every sector: automotive, retail, finance -- you name it. CC isn't unique when it comes to managing payroll. Wanna get blown out during an acquisition? Get bought by Cumulus.
You're right about one thing: we are working harder than a few years back. Absolutely. Our ratings position is also better than before CC came in. Go figure.
Being an organization of thousands of people, CC ain't perfect. But if I had a kid crazy enough to enter the business, I'd recommend they go straight to Clear Channel.
There are some GREAT companies out there, but CC is better than many to its employees. Again, this is the personal opinion of a garden-variety CC Programmer in a medium Southern market.
I work for a major broadcast corporation, but hope this will be taken on its own merits and as my personal opinion.
I like the idea of "hobbyist" broadcasting. The more voices, the merrier. Power to the people. There's no downside -- in theory.
The idea, though, of turning anyone with a soldering iron and microphone loose on our already crowded broadcast bands sounds like a disaster, though. Homebrew transmitters will be filthy, interefering with services inside and outside the broadcast spectrum.
The FCC has the legitimate purpose of regulating public airwaves for just this reason. Radio anarchy will reduce the usefulness of *all* broadcasting and many other services. Wanna surf wi-fi? Better hope your neighbor ain't running a dirty transmitter in your apartment complex.
I wish the Commission would consider laying aside a MHz or so for hobbyist broadcasters. But they should require type-accepted transmitters and dictate minimum technical standards of operation. None of this would be expensive or an undue burden upon those who would like to air out the First Amendment.
There's also the question of broadcast obscenity and indecency. If such broadcasts are illegal for licensed stations, the same should apply to hobbyists.
Aren't you glad you starting paying for downloaded music?
Yeah, actually. It means I can legally purchase music per-cut, rather than spending money on tracks I don't want. It's fun and convenient. I'm filling the holes in my library, and I don't worry about a Dear John from the RIAA.
That doesn't mean I like the idea of a rate hike. But pricing is a separate issue from the bigger question of whether or not labels and artists have the right to expect payment for their work.
I'd possibly pay $1.25 a cut, but it would likely cut down on the number of transactions I make. I buy few albums through iTunes. $16.99 is too much, given that one might find a new CD cheaper than that price. Better to shop around and be able to rip a superior copy if I want the whole album.
It would be great if Apple begins to offer iTunes downloads in their new lossless codec. Would make me feel better about a price increase.
I don't support the illegal exchange of copyrighted material (and I think the... uh... theoretical case you describe fits this description). By the way, if you wanna beat "the man," buy music from unsigned artists.
But you're right. Private networks can be used in this way. "Trusted computing" exists when you have a network of trusted users.
I mean, really...do people think about their own viewpoints before expressing them?
Yeah, actually. I was addressing larger issues than just stealing mp3s and illegally duplicated movies: "trusted network" computing, propietary bios, and so on.
> We are getting closer and closer to the day when NOTHING will work on any electronic device without a conglomerate corporation's device allowing it to go through.
I don't think that's true. We're getting closer to the day when the only content we can manipulate is that generated by ourselves or those with whom we cooperate.
You know, I seem to remember John Nesbitt writing way-back-when that the information age would necessitate the re-emergence of the guild. Basically, a guild would be a trusted network of friends with whom we share work, files, and so on. I doubt Nesbitt could have imagined P2P when he wrote this -- it must have been back in the early Nineties -- but maybe we're getting closer to the idea of private "virtual internets."
We'll find ways to communicate freely, ladies and gents.
Damn -- you mean I don't get something for (almost) nothing? Where's my free ride? I have a RIGHT to an artist's songwriting and performance. I have a RIGHT to the uncompensated labor of all the studio technicians, managers, and support people who brought a given CD to market. You clearly don't understand the internet.
I've used Yellow Dog Linux. It's a great choice for older iBooks, but of no use at all if you're someone who needs commercialware like Adobe CS or Corel.
In any case, YDL 3 is long overdue for an update. It still ships with old versions of KDE and Gnome, and the 2.6 kernel seems nowhere in sight. Looks like Terrasoft is really absorbed in their new Linux for the IBM 970 chip.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. You *can* right (or control) click to save an image, for instance. But you can also just drag it right off the document.
This three button/no button mouse argument is such a worn-out troll. OS X supports whatever you want: plug and play. Most Mac users are used to a single-button mouse, and that's all you need. But if Windows mouse behavior is what you prefer, just plug in your favorite Logitec or Kensington. Works fine. Sons of Redmond, rejoice!
About This Particular Mac had a review not long ago of MacMice's The Mouse, which seems like the sort of thing a Mac partisan might go for if he or she wants a traditional-looking mouse that also had two buttons and a scroll wheel. Looks like it just rolled off a Cupertino production line.
Ah, glad you bought your own mouse. Wasn't that easy? But I had your back ...
Idiots! What could they be thinking?
Most (though not all) Mac users have two hands, and are sufficiently coordinated to find the Control button on their keyboards. Most Mac users are accustomed to operating this manner, much as you are accustomed to typing in all caps when you think your opinion is more valid than someone else's.
If you can afford a Mac, you can probably afford a three-button mouse -- if you want one. That's not saying much, though, since a decent IR USB mousie can be had at any Wal-Mart for twenty bucks.
I decided to give Apple's mouse a try when I bought my last Mac. I really like the way it feels, and have gotten used to control-clicking when necessary. The big payoff is that I have FAR less trouble with carpal tunnel syndrome than before. It's not just that I'm performing a new clicking motion -- it's a simpler movement that doesn't place stress all along one set of ligaments. Cool.
So I have a spare three-button mouse for any impoverished Mac user sufficently outraged by Apple's stock unit. If it will make your Macintosh experience a bit less harrowing, drop me a note and I'll send it along. It's the least I can do.
I can't wait to see how these folks' lawyers quantify losses at Google's hands, or how Google's registered trademark causes confusion with the customers of the word "googol."
...that fixes ALL of Windows XP's vulterabilities, present and future. It's made by SUSE.
But we really don't need a Microsoft link to demonstrate the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's grotesque ideological bias. While the think-tank positions itself as an independent, libertarian research group designed to "study, promote, and extend the principles of classical liberalism: political equality, civil liberty, and economic freedom," they function, more often than not, as a shill for Big Business and the far political right.
AdTI is a fellow-traveler of neoconservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and shadowy groups like the "Defenders of Property Rights," with whom they are aligned as part of an anti-Clean Air Act hit squad ironically misnamed the Cooler Heads Coalition. These are the folks who have been grinding out the industrialist propaganda which has allowed the Bush Administration to roll back environmental laws a couple of decades.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute can always be counted upon for a convenient white paper discounting the risks of tobacco smoking or in favor of vastly expensive weapons programs of dubious utility.
It's tough to source the funding of private institutes, but the folks at Media Transparency have taken a stab at AdTI. Big sugar daddies include the Bradley Foundation, which gives away millions each year to attack social programs and support the privatization of government services. There's also the John M. Olin Foundation, which has lavishly funded a host of robber baron nonprofits over the years.
So it's no surprise that the Alexis de Tocqueville Institiute -- which seems to exist to provide a moral compass for the richest and most powerful interests in the West -- should be seen to carry water for anti-Open Source reactionaries. What's bad for big business must be bad for the nation. Linux must be discredited before it causes more distress for the market planners at Microsoft.
The only freedom being defended by groups like AdTI is the feedom to buy what the Establishment is selling. And at a price they decide.
And on the Mac, you want to read your PDFs with Apple's built-in Preview, which is a ton faster than Adobe's OS X Reader.
...a B-B-B-Beowulf cluster of those P-P-P-Powerbooks!
In a not-so-surprising move, SCO has claimed *this* code, too.
I wonder why this was modded down? It precisely answers a relevant question.
I was not able to get SUSE into 3D on any chipset or card. But that was 8.x and 9.0. Hope the support improves.
The "fix" is to stay with what you have if you don't like the new pricing schedule.
Money is dear to me, but I'll probably pony up. The enhancements seem worth the price tag. But if I decide differently, there are plenty of other blog engines out there.
Comparing Six Apart to Microsoft is grossly unfair. These folks care about their work and have always provided excellent service. Power to 'em.
My MT weblog: PaperFrog.com.
I know some folks that download public betas of popular songs all the time. Perfectly understandable mistake. ;-)
From Slashdot's 1876 archives:
"Alexander Graham Bell's fancy new 'telephone' is destined to be remembered as the biggest bust in recent memory. It lacks telegraph support -- what's up with that? And the price! Just goes to show you Bell's customers will pay for whatever pretty-looking crap he puts out. Carrier pigeons do exactly the same thing as this new-fangled telephone for dollars less. Bell's labs can't be long for this world ... "
The entirely lame resolution of "Independence Day" always made me crazy: feeding a virus to the aliens' mainframe. So we're surpised when they attack us, but we sure know their OS...
Most annoying recent movie moment: Neo, putting on his best Superman impression, snags Trinity moments before she splatters at the base of some huge skyscraper. He's apparently going pretty darn near the speed of sound, intersects her at a 90 degree angle, and never touches the brakes.
There would have been a big pink splash. But I guess that might have made that third Matrix movie a bit difficult. Which probably would have been a good thing, in retrospect.
Nope: amateur radio is prohibited for broadcast by international treaty. We must abide. But I'd certainly support a new service -- even one carved from, say, the almost-never-used 1.25 meter band.
It will, of course: all transmitters do. But you'll have a properly designed harmonic radiation filter, right? And your cabinet will be shielded so that 50kw Country station doesn't mix with your IPA and cause spurious products out of whatever POS final stage you've cobbled together, right? And you've looked at your signal in a spectrum analyser to be sure you're not screwing with your neighbor's Linksys wireless router and the CATV booster amplifier down the street, right?
Yeah, right.
The intereference issues raised in association with LPFM are of an entirely different stripe than this homebrew movement. All LPFM transmitters are type-accepted and their channel allocations are assigned. Just building whatever the hell you want and squatting wherever you feel would be enormously destructive to numerous broadcast services (including data, public safety, cellular, and aeronautical radio).
In my building, we have about 30% fewer programming people than when I came to the market five years ago. Virtually all these positions were eliminated by normal attrition. Radio isn't the only business that has downsized over the years. The same things is happening in virtually every sector: automotive, retail, finance -- you name it. CC isn't unique when it comes to managing payroll. Wanna get blown out during an acquisition? Get bought by Cumulus.
You're right about one thing: we are working harder than a few years back. Absolutely. Our ratings position is also better than before CC came in. Go figure.
Being an organization of thousands of people, CC ain't perfect. But if I had a kid crazy enough to enter the business, I'd recommend they go straight to Clear Channel.
There are some GREAT companies out there, but CC is better than many to its employees. Again, this is the personal opinion of a garden-variety CC Programmer in a medium Southern market.
I like the idea of "hobbyist" broadcasting. The more voices, the merrier. Power to the people. There's no downside -- in theory.
The idea, though, of turning anyone with a soldering iron and microphone loose on our already crowded broadcast bands sounds like a disaster, though. Homebrew transmitters will be filthy, interefering with services inside and outside the broadcast spectrum.
The FCC has the legitimate purpose of regulating public airwaves for just this reason. Radio anarchy will reduce the usefulness of *all* broadcasting and many other services. Wanna surf wi-fi? Better hope your neighbor ain't running a dirty transmitter in your apartment complex.
I wish the Commission would consider laying aside a MHz or so for hobbyist broadcasters. But they should require type-accepted transmitters and dictate minimum technical standards of operation. None of this would be expensive or an undue burden upon those who would like to air out the First Amendment.
There's also the question of broadcast obscenity and indecency. If such broadcasts are illegal for licensed stations, the same should apply to hobbyists.
Yeah, actually. It means I can legally purchase music per-cut, rather than spending money on tracks I don't want. It's fun and convenient. I'm filling the holes in my library, and I don't worry about a Dear John from the RIAA.
That doesn't mean I like the idea of a rate hike. But pricing is a separate issue from the bigger question of whether or not labels and artists have the right to expect payment for their work.
I'd possibly pay $1.25 a cut, but it would likely cut down on the number of transactions I make. I buy few albums through iTunes. $16.99 is too much, given that one might find a new CD cheaper than that price. Better to shop around and be able to rip a superior copy if I want the whole album.
It would be great if Apple begins to offer iTunes downloads in their new lossless codec. Would make me feel better about a price increase.
But you're right. Private networks can be used in this way. "Trusted computing" exists when you have a network of trusted users.
Yeah, actually. I was addressing larger issues than just stealing mp3s and illegally duplicated movies: "trusted network" computing, propietary bios, and so on.
Do you actually read posts before you reply? ;-)
I don't think that's true. We're getting closer to the day when the only content we can manipulate is that generated by ourselves or those with whom we cooperate.
You know, I seem to remember John Nesbitt writing way-back-when that the information age would necessitate the re-emergence of the guild. Basically, a guild would be a trusted network of friends with whom we share work, files, and so on. I doubt Nesbitt could have imagined P2P when he wrote this -- it must have been back in the early Nineties -- but maybe we're getting closer to the idea of private "virtual internets."
We'll find ways to communicate freely, ladies and gents.
Damn -- you mean I don't get something for (almost) nothing? Where's my free ride? I have a RIGHT to an artist's songwriting and performance. I have a RIGHT to the uncompensated labor of all the studio technicians, managers, and support people who brought a given CD to market. You clearly don't understand the internet.
In any case, YDL 3 is long overdue for an update. It still ships with old versions of KDE and Gnome, and the 2.6 kernel seems nowhere in sight. Looks like Terrasoft is really absorbed in their new Linux for the IBM 970 chip.