It aint much different in the rest of occident, ill tell you that.
Media strategy and corporatocracy are global. Voluntary stupidity and belief in impossible dreams, is global.
You are not an American. America is not a place in the world. The world was made America and Americans, want it or not, are as fucked as the rest of us. Thanks to them, BTW, which is kinda funny.
So, welcome to the world, americans. I for one, have always loved you.
I thought it pictures quite well the fact that Chrome will have a huge way to go against firefox if they cannot take some of firefoxes most popular extensions features and offer them in chrome.
I wanna be able to firebug, addblock and a host of other stuff that, if not available in chrome while most of google works fine with ff, then its useless to me.
The real trouble will be spelled out next year, when google decides that this or that feature of their cloud will be chrome only.
We will be damning google for ages after that. But mark my words:
Although mozdevs have had this problem thrown at them for quite a long time, it seems its not viewed @ mofo as an important one.
Its indispensable for corporate adoption that we have a way (even not a simple one, just a documented way) to do massive update to thunderbird/firefox's configs.
1) I went a bit overboard in the post you reply to.
2) My examples of alternative interfaces to accomplish the same thing as the taskbar, were not thought out.
However, they arent thought out because, my dear friend, that wasnt the point.
Consider the new app switching thingie of compiz. Consider the task switching applets and stuff in kde4.
Same concept for switching applications, not necesarily a windows style taskbar (and, by the way, the taskbar evolved -was poached by microsoft- from the dockbar idea, but it isnt "a taskbar" in the sense we see now).
You see, from my point of view, you are still thinking inside your little box. You strike me as an individual that is uncapable of thinking of new (better or worse, no matter) ways to accomplish what we do today.
How in hell would we advance at anything if people like you ruled the way?
I think the answer is in Microsoft Vista: no innovation at all, folowers of the ideas of others.
Why? Because, i sense, many children like you are set in a mindframe where: thats the way its done. And want to build from there.
I understand that the wheel does not need reinvention, but you should understand that the taskbar is NOT THE WHEEL and that computer UIS still have a huge way to go, both hardware and software wise.
There are thousends of examples in the web of nice UI research. There is that old video of some japaneese team showing a 3d spacial desktop where you can, with pen gestures, organize your files.
Other concepts will arise as hardware and hardware human interfaces change, such as you can see when the PC market is being slowly substituted by the smartphones-to-come (all modeled after the iphone, by the way).
You are ofended and somehow right in feeling that way. I appologize for whatever ethical failing you may percieve in my previous post. This, however, does not mean you are right, only that i failed in conveying what I meant:
YES, THERE PROBABLY ARE MANY WAYS TO DO THE SAME THING AS THE TASKBAR AND THE FACT THAT YOU OR I CANT THINK OF ONE OFFHAND HARDLY CONSTITUTES ANY KIND OF PROOF OF THE CONTRARY.
What... is it impossible to add to a search interface have it show running applications in a quickly accessible by a click or keyboard combination? What if I search and put into it "writer" and it shows me options for launching a new one and the list of running apps whose process responds to that keyword in one way or another, with a different iconography and a contextual menu to kill, sleep or do stuff like "new window" from there.
Would it be impossible to have only widgets, including one that could replace the taskbar's functions? KDE4 can give you a sort-of taskbar as a plasmoid, for example.
I mean, precisely this sort of never-out-of-the-box thinking is what has redmond running for their money, both from people that actually dedicate themselves to real innovation (Apple, for instance), and from collaborative efforts like KDE4 and many other experimental desktops (enlightenment, for example).
Did you EVER see the NexT interface, my dear microsoft shill? Care to find me the taskbar in that one? Sure, there is the dock, but its multifunctional and does a host of other stuff.
GASP! Imagine a computer without a taskbar!! Oh the humanity!
Because for the current debacle, there is no other thing that will stop the declining employment rate GLOBALLY (this is not a crisis OF the US: sure, it started there, but it is a global crisis).
Yes, we can wait to see what the economy does all by itself and it will certaintly, in time, recover and justly make poor out of the rich that do nothing and so forth...
The problem is, by the time that happens, you could have most citizens in occident crying to oust all their governments.
Keynes or no keynes, the government (in all our countries) has money and the inevitable responsability (self preservation instinct, actually), to salvage as many voters as possible.
Why do people cling to economic theories like they were religions?
Its just that we are discussing this particular angle, not that any of us (certaintly not me: my mother has a masters degree in Political Science!), think that women are either strippers or waitresses.
Having said this, cut the average slashdotter some slack: for most of us, the only women we will ever fantasize about are waitresses and strippers.
However, that has never worked at apple. What has worked at apple is Jobs.
Of course, they SHOULD be able to find a charismatic developer insufflated in a jihad to change the computing and entretainment lifestyle of the world, the question is:
Aint that Jobs's Job?
He should go out and find his mesianical replacement so that the company can move forward without making investors nervous.
Okay, my friend BagOCrap, here it is slowly explained:
a) Most strippers make more money than most waitresses
b) Not all woman CAN become strippers, but some (id say most) surely can.
c) For those that can, when the option is presented to them, they tend to choose being a waitress.
Why?
Because, even if working at a strip club is not illegal (necessarily), most women that could become strippers, decide its not a good career to have when compared to waiting tables... even if the pay is WAY, WAY better than in waiting tables.
It so follows that this women do not, at all, take the best-profit decision and thus, are economically irrational.
This train of thought is not all that bad, but it does suffer from this flaw: it is shortsighted in that it does not take into account oportunity costs. Most women, perhaps, want to have kids and they might view stripping as a somehow incompatible endeavor with their PTA meetings or taking care of their kids (actual or in the future).
Even if you make good money by stripping, most gated suburbian communities aint gonna take your career choice lightly and will probably signal both you and your family as undesirables.
Wait... now how in the hell is it possible for an enterprise to survive if it doesn't earn its actors any kind of profit?
This reminds me of the Freakonomics book's chapter on crack dealing. It states that most crack dealers would actually be making more money doing something else, but they still do it because (if i remember correctly) its what their neighborhood does.
Now how does that map to electronic thievery, i have no idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, but even if we take that as truth, it hardly constitutes an argument against what smith wrote.
"The Book", is considered one of the most important writings on economy ever written.
Well...
It aint much different in the rest of occident, ill tell you that.
Media strategy and corporatocracy are global. Voluntary stupidity and belief in impossible dreams, is global.
You are not an American. America is not a place in the world. The world was made America and Americans, want it or not, are as fucked as the rest of us. Thanks to them, BTW, which is kinda funny.
So, welcome to the world, americans. I for one, have always loved you.
It doesnt spend that much on chrome, I warrant that.
Not true.
FF3.0 fixes all memory leaks.
70 billion.... HOHO
Just with all this rescue packages things, i get confused.
70 million a year is what I meant.
Inertia plays in favor of ff
Specialization plays in favor of ff.
70 billion cash plays in favor of ff.
When they are good and ready, theyll do it and it will rock.
I read it differently.
I thought it pictures quite well the fact that Chrome will have a huge way to go against firefox if they cannot take some of firefoxes most popular extensions features and offer them in chrome.
I wanna be able to firebug, addblock and a host of other stuff that, if not available in chrome while most of google works fine with ff, then its useless to me.
The real trouble will be spelled out next year, when google decides that this or that feature of their cloud will be chrome only.
We will be damning google for ages after that. But mark my words:
I foresaw it in my noodles.
Okay, lets rephrase it: there is no SCO owned IP in Linux.
There.
Happy?
Boy do i miss my modpoints.
Absolutely right!
Although mozdevs have had this problem thrown at them for quite a long time, it seems its not viewed @ mofo as an important one.
Its indispensable for corporate adoption that we have a way (even not a simple one, just a documented way) to do massive update to thunderbird/firefox's configs.
So does cyrus-imap, which is standard or installable in all linux/unix distributions
OKay. I admit two things:
1) I went a bit overboard in the post you reply to.
2) My examples of alternative interfaces to accomplish the same thing as the taskbar, were not thought out.
However, they arent thought out because, my dear friend, that wasnt the point.
Consider the new app switching thingie of compiz. Consider the task switching applets and stuff in kde4.
Same concept for switching applications, not necesarily a windows style taskbar (and, by the way, the taskbar evolved -was poached by microsoft- from the dockbar idea, but it isnt "a taskbar" in the sense we see now).
You see, from my point of view, you are still thinking inside your little box. You strike me as an individual that is uncapable of thinking of new (better or worse, no matter) ways to accomplish what we do today.
How in hell would we advance at anything if people like you ruled the way?
I think the answer is in Microsoft Vista: no innovation at all, folowers of the ideas of others.
Why? Because, i sense, many children like you are set in a mindframe where: thats the way its done. And want to build from there.
I understand that the wheel does not need reinvention, but you should understand that the taskbar is NOT THE WHEEL and that computer UIS still have a huge way to go, both hardware and software wise.
There are thousends of examples in the web of nice UI research. There is that old video of some japaneese team showing a 3d spacial desktop where you can, with pen gestures, organize your files.
Other concepts will arise as hardware and hardware human interfaces change, such as you can see when the PC market is being slowly substituted by the smartphones-to-come (all modeled after the iphone, by the way).
You are ofended and somehow right in feeling that way. I appologize for whatever ethical failing you may percieve in my previous post. This, however, does not mean you are right, only that i failed in conveying what I meant:
YES, THERE PROBABLY ARE MANY WAYS TO DO THE SAME THING AS THE TASKBAR AND THE FACT THAT YOU OR I CANT THINK OF ONE OFFHAND HARDLY CONSTITUTES ANY KIND OF PROOF OF THE CONTRARY.
What... is it impossible to add to a search interface have it show running applications in a quickly accessible by a click or keyboard combination? What if I search and put into it "writer" and it shows me options for launching a new one and the list of running apps whose process responds to that keyword in one way or another, with a different iconography and a contextual menu to kill, sleep or do stuff like "new window" from there.
Would it be impossible to have only widgets, including one that could replace the taskbar's functions? KDE4 can give you a sort-of taskbar as a plasmoid, for example.
I mean, precisely this sort of never-out-of-the-box thinking is what has redmond running for their money, both from people that actually dedicate themselves to real innovation (Apple, for instance), and from collaborative efforts like KDE4 and many other experimental desktops (enlightenment, for example).
Did you EVER see the NexT interface, my dear microsoft shill? Care to find me the taskbar in that one? Sure, there is the dock, but its multifunctional and does a host of other stuff.
GASP! Imagine a computer without a taskbar!! Oh the humanity!
For your reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j02b8Fuz73A
Worry not: slashdot internal moderators SUCK BEYOND BELEIF
When their "improvement" is the damned taskbar...
I mean, damn: cant they see that taskbars are going the way of the dodo or turning into widgets and quickly being made obsolete by desktop searching?
Of course, when you see the previous one, its to be expected that, for them, its a big thing.
Man...
Because for the current debacle, there is no other thing that will stop the declining employment rate GLOBALLY (this is not a crisis OF the US: sure, it started there, but it is a global crisis).
Yes, we can wait to see what the economy does all by itself and it will certaintly, in time, recover and justly make poor out of the rich that do nothing and so forth...
The problem is, by the time that happens, you could have most citizens in occident crying to oust all their governments.
Keynes or no keynes, the government (in all our countries) has money and the inevitable responsability (self preservation instinct, actually), to salvage as many voters as possible.
Why do people cling to economic theories like they were religions?
And some of them are really good! :)
Its just that we are discussing this particular angle, not that any of us (certaintly not me: my mother has a masters degree in Political Science!), think that women are either strippers or waitresses.
Having said this, cut the average slashdotter some slack: for most of us, the only women we will ever fantasize about are waitresses and strippers.
Exactly what I meant when I wrote that it is a shortsighted vision of the problem.
However, that has never worked at apple. What has worked at apple is Jobs.
Of course, they SHOULD be able to find a charismatic developer insufflated in a jihad to change the computing and entretainment lifestyle of the world, the question is:
Aint that Jobs's Job?
He should go out and find his mesianical replacement so that the company can move forward without making investors nervous.
Okay, my friend BagOCrap, here it is slowly explained:
a) Most strippers make more money than most waitresses
b) Not all woman CAN become strippers, but some (id say most) surely can.
c) For those that can, when the option is presented to them, they tend to choose being a waitress.
Why?
Because, even if working at a strip club is not illegal (necessarily), most women that could become strippers, decide its not a good career to have when compared to waiting tables... even if the pay is WAY, WAY better than in waiting tables.
It so follows that this women do not, at all, take the best-profit decision and thus, are economically irrational.
This train of thought is not all that bad, but it does suffer from this flaw: it is shortsighted in that it does not take into account oportunity costs. Most women, perhaps, want to have kids and they might view stripping as a somehow incompatible endeavor with their PTA meetings or taking care of their kids (actual or in the future).
Even if you make good money by stripping, most gated suburbian communities aint gonna take your career choice lightly and will probably signal both you and your family as undesirables.
This is sad, but peer pressure takes its toll.
And that is because of the prohibition.
You speak truth, master PCM2.
Wait... now how in the hell is it possible for an enterprise to survive if it doesn't earn its actors any kind of profit?
This reminds me of the Freakonomics book's chapter on crack dealing. It states that most crack dealers would actually be making more money doing something else, but they still do it because (if i remember correctly) its what their neighborhood does.
Now how does that map to electronic thievery, i have no idea.
"always the same"
Man, what a good password.
Nonsense!
The Kudos Bar is clearly a precious gift for philosopher kings!
I hate you.
Why didnt I get invited to THAT party!