If you feel you're being "lied to" after reading my posts above, and / or doing a search for "KDE" on slashdot, then I don't know what else to say.
Like 'em both, use 'em both, wish both projects great success, will continue to post on either as I see fit and all the other/. authors have the same prerogative. I'm not anti-either, I'm pro-both.
If you find the balance of posting here to indicate an "anti-KDE" bias, then submit some exciting stories to do with KDE to the submissions bin. I'd be happy to post them.
"I accept that this is an anti-KDE site and continue to read it anyway (not so often nowadays but I still visit regularly), it's your web site and you can cover whatever stories you like.
However I take offense at being lied to. Do you really think I'm so stupid that I can't see the favoritism?"
Hold on - you must be joking, right?!
Please re-read my post above. a) I can't speak for the other authors, like I said, but I can assure you that any bias you percieve is only on the part of indivual posters, certainly not some sort of policy or directive from Rob. b) why in the world would I want to be anti-KDE? There are licensing issues that are well-known but which frankly I am not swayed by. Since KDE is my primary desktop, perhaps I've simply let me pro-KDE bias distort my morals or something.
But if you're trolling... well, OK, I'd rather respond than not in this case:) I *like* KDE, am not against it in favor of Gnome. Or vice versa, though. Slashdot has a bunch of authors, each of whom is free to feel, and post, otherwise.
Why spread hostility? Each of the desktops has its own advantages, and we'll continue to post news about them both.
isolation wrote: "Why is/. so Gnome enthused? I mean dont get me wrong I like gnome alot but KDE has alot more going for it in terms of applications and install base so what gives? I mean I know the whole QPL shit was a problem for most of the Zealots but gnome is still really damn buggy and a fresking resource Hog, Hell compare to kde 1.9 I just dont see why slash has the bias it has."
Since I posted this story, I guess I can offer at least a small bit of explanation, but can't speak for the other slashdot authors.
I use KDE most of the time, on a AMD K6 233 running Mandrake, and I recently installed RedHat 6.2 on a pentium 90 machine as well, with its default Gnome desktop.
I like KDE a lot -- Koffice is exciting to me (hey, I have a boring life), the KDE work is well integrated and thought out. Since I've never been all that much of a Windows users, I'm fairly neutral about / unmoved by KDE's similarity to the Win95/98 interface, though I've seen a lot of friends impressed by it.
Gnome 1.2, though, I admit I am excited by, just like I'm excited by Eazel. No accounting for taste, of course, but I think the aesthetics of Gnome outpace the Windows desktop by a good stretch, and the internationalization / userfriendliness that's gone into it is incredible. When I see what the installation shots look like, I know it is something that even computerphobic pals of mine would be happier with than Windows' install screen, sort of like Linux Mandrake's install is nicer than putting on Windows (in my experience).
And as leaders of both projects have been saying, while you may only be *running* one of these environments at a time, applications written for both can be used, so long as you have all the right libraries in place. (Please correct me if that is in error.)
My bias is toward improved interfaces, whatever they're called. A search for KDE on slashdot does pull up quite a few things -- "KDE 2.0" got 4 relevant stories on that as well, including the release of 1.90 -- and the sponsorship of new developers for KWord was mentioned in the recent Slashback. We're ("I'm" =)) definitely not trying to give KDE short shrift -- that would definitely not be in my interest, since I use it daily! It's just that Gnome has had a flurry of neat developments lately, and the release of 1.2 is probably the biggest one since October gnome, as far as releases go.
Sorry to rant so long. But really -- I use both, I'm happy to see both KDE and Gnome making giant strides, and glad that helixcode seems like a good focal point for those who complain that the various desktops available are too difuse in management / release info (a common complaint for people to whom freshmeat is still what the butcher hands over the counter).
While Wine is great / gets greater for all the old applications that folks would like to use, the best tribute the the *other* projects in the free software world is that not everyone awaits it anxiously.
True, the WordPerfect suite uses it, but for the most part... who needs it!?:) (A semi-serious question, as in, "What specific apps do you want Wine to run?")
Imagine the future with:
(The distro of your choice, plus:) - KDE 2.0 - KDE is already quite nice - Eazel - looks insanely promising - Gnome 2.0 - even 1.2 is jawdroppingly slick
There are plenty of competent solitaire games for Linux already;)
On the other hand, unless Adobe or Quark get on the ball, Wine may still be the fastest way to use a full-fledged DTP program under Linux. Has anyone had success with that?
but I like the industrial look of this. Reminds me of the SKB cases I've owned -- rugged as all-get-out, unpretentious, functional. I sold the one that held my old amplifier, but bought another to hold two of my pistols. For a portable computer which requires slot expandability (which seems reasonable for a gaming system), this seems like a cool solution. If I only wanted a tough portable, slots aside, I think I'd go for a Panasonic toughbook - mmmmm.
Of course, I'm not often featured in better homes and gardens... =)
the way freshmeat (and other software sites) are set up, they're often better as places to nab software from when you already know what you're looking for (netscape 4.7375a) than as a place for interesting news about platforms you don't run yourself.
And when you say "stories like this get posted, but useful ones get dropped"... which useful ones are you thinking about? I've heard lots of people complain about the disparity in available apps under Linux running on PPC (and Alpha) hardware vs. Linux on Intel. Could be useful to them.
How many sentences do you complete when you speak on the phone? Some, probably, but perhaps fewer than you realize.
Imagine that this was someone you admired speaking and you were a friendly audience member; if anything he sounded sort of tired rather than on any kind of stimulant.
actually, I did tend to remove 3rd repetitions of words (like when he said "very very very" for emphasis) and if Lars started a sentence, then retracted and re-started it, I respected that. However, his answers were unstudied and genuine -- what would you have liked me to do? If you think I was trying to be spiteful by preserving his words, please believe me when I deny it. In fact, I thought he was quite articulate in his vocabulary and argument -- I felt it would it would have been phony for me to promise him "unvarnished" and then try to clean everything up. Added to which, I basically side with Lars on the particular issue here, especially after hearing him talk about it.
Of course people don't talk the way they would write -- that's the point!:)
The one to thank for getting the interview is actually emmett;) I got the fun job of talking with Lars, and the less fun one of transcribing his words.
Didn't mean to be snappy in my response before -- most of our interviews, as you say, *are* by email. We were hoping this one could be as well, but it worked out otherwise. The advantage of it is that I don't think we would have gotten answers as comprehensive or unstudied by email, and also with email we really wouldn't know whether the answers had been vetted or approved the way we can in talking to the guy.
All he knew beforehand was the *number* of questions, not their content.
I thought it said "Internet Ready Hemos For Sale."
However, that's even better when read into the sentence "Hmm...I always figured a good drill, several hundred feet of cable and I had an Internet-ready hemos *grin*."
oh well. We'll still have to wait for ready-made hemoses, or hemosen, or hemae, or... Jeffs. Little talking figures, maybe, with USB ports to download catchphrases and shipping with a (GPL) patch to enable support for the device in the 2.4 kernel.
I think the distinction he draws is between live performances (which they do encourage everyone to "bootleg the fuck out of") and studio-released songs.
That difference is arbitrary, but its one which makes sense given points he makes, which is that the artist should be allowed to decide how their music is used. So they can give permission or deny permission for someone else to record based on whatever criteria they choose.
Studio recordings can also be distinguished from live performance technically: you can get a great live recording of a concert, but it's different (value neutral -- could be worse or better depending on your mindset) from a studio recording. Metallica, like many bands, is famous for being meticulous in capturing the sound they want on an album. They record the same track many times, hire expensive studio engineers, rent and buy fantastically expensive recording and playback equipment... you don't have to agree with their aesthetics (I don't generally listen to metallica voluntarily;) ) but there's something to be said for the independent artistic worth of a master recording which has been edited / tweaked by its creators.
he answered off-the-cuff. Would you prefer prepared statements?!
Lars speaks better English than most Americans I have met, and has a greater vocabulary to boot.
Though they might have gotten roasted for it here on slashdot, Metallica was under no obligation to agree to an interview. They did agree, and they did eventually deliver on the promise.
"Enlish" isn't a word. Would you like people to moderate you down for spelling? : ) I'd never survive with that rule!
Well, besides the complications of serving many thousands of simultaneous connections (which I can't comment on really -- all things are possible, after all), it's faster to read than to listen.
The recording is not great quality; analog cassette recording through a radio shack linda trip special, of a phone call is really not easy listening material;) The nature of model recorder I have is also that my voice is thunderously loud, while Lars is much lower. Not stereo, so it can't just be level adjusted that way.
Besides, my voice is not radio friendly except to the extreme tone deaf, or maybe the tone dead.
Actually, for a phone conversation, he really spoke quite well.
I didn't leave in the "you knows" etc to make Lars look bad -- quite the contrary, I wanted to capture his words accurately. I did in fact cut out stutters and instantly-rephrased sentences in a few spots. But the words are his; I'm glad that he wasn't uncomfortable and put on the spot to speak formally. Off the cuff, off the cuff.
You'd be surprized how different they are when you read a transcript:)
When you speak to another person, there are all sorts of cues which don't necessarily translate well; pauses and emphasis can help make something sensible that might read oddly in a letter.
dbirchall wrote, in re. to this newfangled memory stuff:
"If it works, and can be used as a replacement for DRAM and Flash, I can't think of anything to stop them from making SmartMedia and CompactFlash cards with OUM technology inside them. And if it stores more data in the same space, that'd be a pretty nice feature for digital cameras, too. Keep the interface pinout and form factor and all that the same, just replace the storage innards."
You said it!
I like smart media's shape and size; besides that, my Leica Digilux uses it, so for better for worse I am stuck with it at present for happy reasons. (the digilux, same as Fuji model, what, D-700?, is really nice).
I don't like the sony memory sticks, CF is still much bulkier even though the capacity goes much higher, I don't want to trust a floppy drive like on the mavicas and certain others... darn it, SM is really nice:)
if this stuff can raise its capacity, I am all for it.
TummyX wrote: "IE blandly acceptable? EXCUSE ME? How so? IE is superb, has superb standards support, is the fastest web browser out there, and is completely componentized."
Well, actually on the systems I've used it on (Win 95 and 98, not 2000 yet) the scrolling was clunkier than it is under Netscape on Linux -- sort of a lagtime that turned me off. And as I said, since I don't have an MS OS around to play with it under, I am looking at browsers that actually run on the computers I use. But yes, I found IE OK, nothing more or less, in my occasions to use it. Not that it's not fine, but as you go on to say...
"It's people like you who've never really had to do much advanced HTML or XML, and sit there and go, hey netscape can render and so can IE...i'd rather use Netscape cause it's not microsoft."
Thanks for the needless vitriol, ok?! Sheesh:) If you can get MS IE running under RH6.2, Mandrake 6.1 or 7.0, or Debian then I'd be much more willing to explore its finer capabilities. My experience with IE has mostly been expedient, not exploratory. Right now, I'm very happy that Mozilla has (IMO) surpassed NS, at least till NS catches up with the codebase it spawned...
This reminds me of certification in the field of medicine (I'm not, neither do I play on TV) -- I don't mind and in fact appreciate that the American Medical Association sets certain standards (basically, conventional Western medicine -- the kind that *I'm* most comfortable with), but on the other hand, they shouldn't be the only ones to decide the proper course and scope of medicine. I'd like medical licensure to be totally private and at the discretion of what could be many different and divergent organizations, each of which reflect the scientific and moral beliefs of their founders / adherents. But that's another story, only a kernel...
An interesting thing to me about the RHCE program is that for it to be worth much, it must (as Matt says it successfully does) distance itself from the idea that only Red Hat's Linux is Linux.
While someone could also (copyright quibbles aside) start an alternative certification program to the MSCE, it'd be hard to imagine that it could ever be as well accepted or prestigious, simply because only one vendor controls the spec. "If you're going to ask someone, you ask that guy over there, he buil the thing.":)
On the other hand, while Red Hat may be a big name and has grabbed attention / brand recognition, would anyone frown on a "Mandrake Certified" engineer, or someone who's "SuSE Qualified"? (Or whatever... these are examples only, and maybe a completely 3rd party would be a better example.) It would be cool if the most major players, or at least any also interested in providing this kind of base-level officaldom would work (did I dream this or is it happening) with groups like the Linux Standards Base to determine a minimum set which would be acceptable to all of them.
After all, the same kind of flexibility which makes so many distributions of Linux possible and worthwhile would also be good in the realm of certification -- the more robust the market the more worthwhile such things will be. And (this is backhanded logic maybe but it's my only weapon) perhaps a diversity of all-equally valid certification programs will reduce the percieved need for / dominance of both any particular one and in fact such certifications in general. If they're going to exist (they do, and they will), they should at least be seen as "a feather in your cap" rather than the whole suit and shoes.
Since the common perception seems to be that such certs are basically formalities for those willing to obtain them, wouldn't want interviews with otherwise qualified job candidates, say, to hit a hiccup when the interviewer says "Hmm. I see you're not Red Hat certified. I guess you can leave your resume with the desk and we'll be in touch... "
ok, a ramble. But the more administratively / philisophically spread out and the less offically important such certs are, the better in my view.
Dr Skwid wrote: "Well Tim, one of the wonderful things about IE, apart from it works well as an HTML browser is the power you have in it as a program shell in an Intranet environment. [...] IE is more than an HTML renderer and Mozilla et al is never going to get a foot in the door in such an environment. Would I be correct in assuming you've not done much corporate programming?"
Absolutely correct on that last:) Thanks for pointing this capability out.
I know that Mozilla doesn't have ActiveX support as you point out, but it is / can be used as the front end for some applications... please tell me if I'm speaking nonsense, but for a) a remotely hosted application with an interface written in plain old html so that all browsers could read it or b) a locally-run application written in Java, couldn't any browser that supported Java serve?
And from what I read, Mozilla is more than an HTML renderer, too, isn't it? I thought one of the chief points about Mozilla was extensive componentization... The/. article on the last develpr's conference mentioned "XMLterm -- an Xterm-like interface written using the Mozilla component libraries" and quoted a developer.. " it's not just a browser, it's a set of tools. During the group discussion, one developer even said 'I'd like to see Mozilla come out and not have any browser with it.'
Again, thanks for mentioning something I hadn't considered.
Jikes wrote: "Crashes are becoming significantly more difficult to find... it is now more pleasant to use than NS4 for me... less UI niggles... FASTER. Good. Goodbye netscape 4... FUCK IT.... Mozilla is going to be so radically more modifiable and fluid and extensible and NICE... oh wait, it already IS."
Yup. The pages load a wee bit slower than under NS for me, but they actually scroll more smoothly once there. Nicer UI (in my view) as well.
I'd been shy about Mozilla for a while when it kept fouling up forms or leaving artifacts all over the screen, and I skipped M15 completely, but I got brave again (over dialup no less) and my 2-nights-ago build finally works with the slashdot backend;)
"Goodbye NS4, we hardly loved ye..."
You said it. Hard to believe the Mozilla project is only 2 years and change out of the gate. Compare that to the ueber-funded IE and the difference is pretty amazing.
I know many people like IE, but until they release a version for Linux I can't make all that great a comparison:) Still, from using it on borrowed computers, while IE seems blandly acceptable, I don't remember anything about it which makes me hanker for That Redmond Feeling. What am I missing?
Slashdot Mirror
If you feel you're being "lied to" after reading my posts above, and / or doing a search for "KDE" on slashdot, then I don't know what else to say.
/. authors have the same prerogative. I'm not anti-either, I'm pro-both.
Like 'em both, use 'em both, wish both projects great success, will continue to post on either as I see fit and all the other
If you find the balance of posting here to indicate an "anti-KDE" bias, then submit some exciting stories to do with KDE to the submissions bin. I'd be happy to post them.
I exit this conversation at this point --
timothy
Please re-read my post above. a) I can't speak for the other authors, like I said, but I can assure you that any bias you percieve is only on the part of indivual posters, certainly not some sort of policy or directive from Rob. b) why in the world would I want to be anti-KDE? There are licensing issues that are well-known but which frankly I am not swayed by. Since KDE is my primary desktop, perhaps I've simply let me pro-KDE bias distort my morals or something.
But if you're trolling ... well, OK, I'd rather respond than not in this case :) I *like* KDE, am not against it in favor of Gnome. Or vice versa, though. Slashdot has a bunch of authors, each of whom is free to feel, and post, otherwise.
Why spread hostility? Each of the desktops has its own advantages, and we'll continue to post news about them both.
Where is the lie?
Honestly confused, timothy
isolation wrote: "Why is /. so Gnome enthused? I mean dont get me wrong I like gnome alot but KDE has alot more going for it in terms of applications and install base so what gives? I mean I know the whole QPL shit was a problem for most of the Zealots but gnome is still really damn buggy and a fresking resource Hog, Hell compare to kde 1.9 I just dont see why slash has the bias it has."
:)
Since I posted this story, I guess I can offer at least a small bit of explanation, but can't speak for the other slashdot authors.
I use KDE most of the time, on a AMD K6 233 running Mandrake, and I recently installed RedHat 6.2 on a pentium 90 machine as well, with its default Gnome desktop.
I like KDE a lot -- Koffice is exciting to me (hey, I have a boring life), the KDE work is well integrated and thought out. Since I've never been all that much of a Windows users, I'm fairly neutral about / unmoved by KDE's similarity to the Win95/98 interface, though I've seen a lot of friends impressed by it.
Gnome 1.2, though, I admit I am excited by, just like I'm excited by Eazel. No accounting for taste, of course, but I think the aesthetics of Gnome outpace the Windows desktop by a good stretch, and the internationalization / userfriendliness that's gone into it is incredible. When I see what the installation shots look like, I know it is something that even computerphobic pals of mine would be happier with than Windows' install screen, sort of like Linux Mandrake's install is nicer than putting on Windows (in my experience).
And as leaders of both projects have been saying, while you may only be *running* one of these environments at a time, applications written for both can be used, so long as you have all the right libraries in place. (Please correct me if that is in error.)
My bias is toward improved interfaces, whatever they're called. A search for KDE on slashdot does pull up quite a few things -- "KDE 2.0" got 4 relevant stories on that as well, including the release of 1.90 -- and the sponsorship of new developers for KWord was mentioned in the recent Slashback. We're ("I'm" =)) definitely not trying to give KDE short shrift -- that would definitely not be in my interest, since I use it daily! It's just that Gnome has had a flurry of neat developments lately, and the release of 1.2 is probably the biggest one since October gnome, as far as releases go.
Sorry to rant so long. But really -- I use both, I'm happy to see both KDE and Gnome making giant strides, and glad that helixcode seems like a good focal point for those who complain that the various desktops available are too difuse in management / release info (a common complaint for people to whom freshmeat is still what the butcher hands over the counter).
That's all
timothy
While Wine is great / gets greater for all the old applications that folks would like to use, the best tribute the the *other* projects in the free software world is that not everyone awaits it anxiously.
... who needs it!? :) (A semi-serious question, as in, "What specific apps do you want Wine to run?")
True, the WordPerfect suite uses it, but for the most part
Imagine the future with:
(The distro of your choice, plus:)
- KDE 2.0 - KDE is already quite nice
- Eazel - looks insanely promising
- Gnome 2.0 - even 1.2 is jawdroppingly slick
There are plenty of competent solitaire games for Linux already;)
On the other hand, unless Adobe or Quark get on the ball, Wine may still be the fastest way to use a full-fledged DTP program under Linux. Has anyone had success with that?
timothy
but I like the industrial look of this. Reminds me of the SKB cases I've owned -- rugged as all-get-out, unpretentious, functional. I sold the one that held my old amplifier, but bought another to hold two of my pistols. For a portable computer which requires slot expandability (which seems reasonable for a gaming system), this seems like a cool solution. If I only wanted a tough portable, slots aside, I think I'd go for a Panasonic toughbook - mmmmm.
... =)
Of course, I'm not often featured in better homes and gardens
timothy
the way freshmeat (and other software sites) are set up, they're often better as places to nab software from when you already know what you're looking for (netscape 4.7375a) than as a place for interesting news about platforms you don't run yourself.
... which useful ones are you thinking about? I've heard lots of people complain about the disparity in available apps under Linux running on PPC (and Alpha) hardware vs. Linux on Intel. Could be useful to them.
And when you say "stories like this get posted, but useful ones get dropped"
timothy
as I told him I would when I spoke with him.
:)
Hopefully he'll get a chance to post a few comments as well
timothy
How many sentences do you complete when you speak on the phone? Some, probably, but perhaps fewer than you realize.
Imagine that this was someone you admired speaking and you were a friendly audience member; if anything he sounded sort of tired rather than on any kind of stimulant.
timothy
Where?
:)
actually, I did tend to remove 3rd repetitions of words (like when he said "very very very" for emphasis) and if Lars started a sentence, then retracted and re-started it, I respected that. However, his answers were unstudied and genuine -- what would you have liked me to do? If you think I was trying to be spiteful by preserving his words, please believe me when I deny it. In fact, I thought he was quite articulate in his vocabulary and argument -- I felt it would it would have been phony for me to promise him "unvarnished" and then try to clean everything up. Added to which, I basically side with Lars on the particular issue here, especially after hearing him talk about it.
Of course people don't talk the way they would write -- that's the point!
Sincerely,
timothy
The one to thank for getting the interview is actually emmett;) I got the fun job of talking with Lars, and the less fun one of transcribing his words.
Didn't mean to be snappy in my response before -- most of our interviews, as you say, *are* by email. We were hoping this one could be as well, but it worked out otherwise. The advantage of it is that I don't think we would have gotten answers as comprehensive or unstudied by email, and also with email we really wouldn't know whether the answers had been vetted or approved the way we can in talking to the guy.
All he knew beforehand was the *number* of questions, not their content.
timothy
I thought it said "Internet Ready Hemos For Sale."
... Jeffs. Little talking figures, maybe, with USB ports to download catchphrases and shipping with a (GPL) patch to enable support for the device in the 2.4 kernel.
However, that's even better when read into the sentence "Hmm...I always figured a good drill, several hundred feet of cable and I had an Internet-ready hemos *grin*."
oh well. We'll still have to wait for ready-made hemoses, or hemosen, or hemae, or
timothy
I think the distinction he draws is between live performances (which they do encourage everyone to "bootleg the fuck out of") and studio-released songs.
... you don't have to agree with their aesthetics (I don't generally listen to metallica voluntarily ;) ) but there's something to be said for the independent artistic worth of a master recording which has been edited / tweaked by its creators.
That difference is arbitrary, but its one which makes sense given points he makes, which is that the artist should be allowed to decide how their music is used. So they can give permission or deny permission for someone else to record based on whatever criteria they choose.
Studio recordings can also be distinguished from live performance technically: you can get a great live recording of a concert, but it's different (value neutral -- could be worse or better depending on your mindset) from a studio recording. Metallica, like many bands, is famous for being meticulous in capturing the sound they want on an album. They record the same track many times, hire expensive studio engineers, rent and buy fantastically expensive recording and playback equipment
just a thought,
timothy
he answered off-the-cuff. Would you prefer prepared statements?!
Lars speaks better English than most Americans I have met, and has a greater vocabulary to boot.
Though they might have gotten roasted for it here on slashdot, Metallica was under no obligation to agree to an interview. They did agree, and they did eventually deliver on the promise.
"Enlish" isn't a word. Would you like people to moderate you down for spelling? : ) I'd never survive with that rule!
timothy
Well, besides the complications of serving many thousands of simultaneous connections (which I can't comment on really -- all things are possible, after all), it's faster to read than to listen.
The recording is not great quality; analog cassette recording through a radio shack linda trip special, of a phone call is really not easy listening material;) The nature of model recorder I have is also that my voice is thunderously loud, while Lars is much lower. Not stereo, so it can't just be level adjusted that way.
Besides, my voice is not radio friendly except to the extreme tone deaf, or maybe the tone dead.
timothy
Actually, for a phone conversation, he really spoke quite well.
I didn't leave in the "you knows" etc to make Lars look bad -- quite the contrary, I wanted to capture his words accurately. I did in fact cut out stutters and instantly-rephrased sentences in a few spots. But the words are his; I'm glad that he wasn't uncomfortable and put on the spot to speak formally. Off the cuff, off the cuff.
timothy
You'd be surprized how different they are when you read a transcript :)
When you speak to another person, there are all sorts of cues which don't necessarily translate well; pauses and emphasis can help make something sensible that might read oddly in a letter.
timothy
your wish, my command.
Good point.
timothy
dbirchall wrote, in re. to this newfangled memory stuff:
... darn it, SM is really nice:)
"If it works, and can be used as a replacement for DRAM and Flash, I can't think of anything to stop them from making SmartMedia and CompactFlash cards with OUM technology inside them. And if it stores more data in the same space, that'd be a pretty nice feature for digital cameras, too. Keep the interface pinout and form factor and all that the same, just replace the storage innards."
You said it!
I like smart media's shape and size; besides that, my Leica Digilux uses it, so for better for worse I am stuck with it at present for happy reasons. (the digilux, same as Fuji model, what, D-700?, is really nice).
I don't like the sony memory sticks, CF is still much bulkier even though the capacity goes much higher, I don't want to trust a floppy drive like on the mavicas and certain others
if this stuff can raise its capacity, I am all for it.
timothy
TummyX wrote: "IE blandly acceptable? EXCUSE ME? How so? IE is superb, has superb standards support, is the fastest web browser out there, and is completely componentized."
...
:) If you can get MS IE running under RH6.2, Mandrake 6.1 or 7.0, or Debian then I'd be much more willing to explore its finer capabilities. My experience with IE has mostly been expedient, not exploratory. Right now, I'm very happy that Mozilla has (IMO) surpassed NS, at least till NS catches up with the codebase it spawned ...
Well, actually on the systems I've used it on (Win 95 and 98, not 2000 yet) the scrolling was clunkier than it is under Netscape on Linux -- sort of a lagtime that turned me off. And as I said, since I don't have an MS OS around to play with it under, I am looking at browsers that actually run on the computers I use. But yes, I found IE OK, nothing more or less, in my occasions to use it. Not that it's not fine, but as you go on to say
"It's people like you who've never really had to do much advanced HTML or XML, and sit there and go, hey netscape can render and so can IE...i'd rather use Netscape cause it's not microsoft."
Thanks for the needless vitriol, ok?! Sheesh
Cheers,
timothy
This reminds me of certification in the field of medicine (I'm not, neither do I play on TV) -- I don't mind and in fact appreciate that the American Medical Association sets certain standards (basically, conventional Western medicine -- the kind that *I'm* most comfortable with), but on the other hand, they shouldn't be the only ones to decide the proper course and scope of medicine. I'd like medical licensure to be totally private and at the discretion of what could be many different and divergent organizations, each of which reflect the scientific and moral beliefs of their founders / adherents. But that's another story, only a kernel ...
:)
... these are examples only, and maybe a completely 3rd party would be a better example.) It would be cool if the most major players, or at least any also interested in providing this kind of base-level officaldom would work (did I dream this or is it happening) with groups like the Linux Standards Base to determine a minimum set which would be acceptable to all of them.
... "
An interesting thing to me about the RHCE program is that for it to be worth much, it must (as Matt says it successfully does) distance itself from the idea that only Red Hat's Linux is Linux.
While someone could also (copyright quibbles aside) start an alternative certification program to the MSCE, it'd be hard to imagine that it could ever be as well accepted or prestigious, simply because only one vendor controls the spec. "If you're going to ask someone, you ask that guy over there, he buil the thing."
On the other hand, while Red Hat may be a big name and has grabbed attention / brand recognition, would anyone frown on a "Mandrake Certified" engineer, or someone who's "SuSE Qualified"? (Or whatever
After all, the same kind of flexibility which makes so many distributions of Linux possible and worthwhile would also be good in the realm of certification -- the more robust the market the more worthwhile such things will be. And (this is backhanded logic maybe but it's my only weapon) perhaps a diversity of all-equally valid certification programs will reduce the percieved need for / dominance of both any particular one and in fact such certifications in general. If they're going to exist (they do, and they will), they should at least be seen as "a feather in your cap" rather than the whole suit and shoes.
Since the common perception seems to be that such certs are basically formalities for those willing to obtain them, wouldn't want interviews with otherwise qualified job candidates, say, to hit a hiccup when the interviewer says "Hmm. I see you're not Red Hat certified. I guess you can leave your resume with the desk and we'll be in touch
ok, a ramble. But the more administratively / philisophically spread out and the less offically important such certs are, the better in my view.
timothy
Dr Skwid wrote: "Well Tim, one of the wonderful things about IE, apart from it works well as an HTML browser is the power you have in it as a program shell in an Intranet environment. [...] IE is more than an HTML renderer and Mozilla et al is never going to get a foot in the door in such an environment. Would I be correct in assuming you've not done much corporate programming?"
:) Thanks for pointing this capability out.
... please tell me if I'm speaking nonsense, but for a) a remotely hosted application with an interface written in plain old html so that all browsers could read it or b) a locally-run application written in Java, couldn't any browser that supported Java serve?
... The /. article on the last develpr's conference mentioned "XMLterm -- an Xterm-like interface written using the Mozilla component libraries" and quoted a developer .. " it's not just a browser, it's a set of tools. During the group discussion, one developer even said 'I'd like to see Mozilla come out and not have any browser with it.'
Absolutely correct on that last
I know that Mozilla doesn't have ActiveX support as you point out, but it is / can be used as the front end for some applications
And from what I read, Mozilla is more than an HTML renderer, too, isn't it? I thought one of the chief points about Mozilla was extensive componentization
Again, thanks for mentioning something I hadn't considered.
timothy
It works! It works! I scoff at Netscape's puniness as Mozilla happily provides me the spectrum fading to black (and the other colors ...)
Nice!
timothy
Looks like that what's happened -- unlike yours, somehow my 2-nights-ago Mozilla build read it fine, and like yours, so did my Netscape.
Fixed it now, thanks for the pointer.
timothy
Yup. The pages load a wee bit slower than under NS for me, but they actually scroll more smoothly once there. Nicer UI (in my view) as well.
I'd been shy about Mozilla for a while when it kept fouling up forms or leaving artifacts all over the screen, and I skipped M15 completely, but I got brave again (over dialup no less) and my 2-nights-ago build finally works with the slashdot backend;)
"Goodbye NS4, we hardly loved ye
You said it. Hard to believe the Mozilla project is only 2 years and change out of the gate. Compare that to the ueber-funded IE and the difference is pretty amazing.
I know many people like IE, but until they release a version for Linux I can't make all that great a comparison:) Still, from using it on borrowed computers, while IE seems blandly acceptable, I don't remember anything about it which makes me hanker for That Redmond Feeling. What am I missing?
Next stop, Konqueror
timothy
The link works for me both in Netscape and Mozilla ... am I doing something funny?
timothy