'Firefox is a good browser, but does anyone know how to turn off those little pop-over messages, such as the "you don't have this plugin installed, click here to download it". I do not need flash or java, and I don't want the message.'
Just delete the npnul{whatever}.[so|dll] plugin from the plugins directory.
There is a clipboard just like the Windows clipboard, Ctrl-C to copy, Ctrl-V to paste. Works completely independantly of the method you're talking about.
You can completely ignore the Unix copy by selection method and just use the windows-style one if you prefer.
It's far too flexible having both to want to lose either method. I often use the two methods simultaneously.
Just forget you ever learnt about the unix way of doing it and live in ignorant bliss. You can safely ignore its existance.
Theists always say this and it is complete and utter tripe. It's in the basic definition: atheism. It's not a belief in 0 gods, it is a lack of belief in gods. Theists have a great difficulty in understanding the difference.
You can't accept that people don't have this belief, so try and make the lack of it a belief in itself which is absurd.
You don't need a belief system to not believe in something. Otherwise you'd need a special religion for each non-existant thing, i.e. the non-tooth fairy believers religion, the non-santa claus believers religion.
Just because lots of theists find it difficult to wrap their heads around the concept of not needing to believe in anything, they find a need to fit everything into a neat little belief box. As though they're embarrassed about having a belief system while an atheist doesn't.
Yes, but when I last tried it, the code it generated was very brittle and easily broken, i.e. because it tries to mimic the form designer in Visual Studio it was positioning all page elements (form fields etc.) using absolute positioning. Every element: every label and form field. Which means a user with a larger font (for accessibility reasons) or a piece of slightly longer than expected text would make the layout look like crap. It also tries to target the page to a browser, rather than letting you target standards.
And pray tell, how many popular high traffic sites use counters from thecounter.com and how does that compare to the nummber of one page geocities sites with a picture of someone's favourite moggy?
I will when you can get an ebook that is virtually indistinguishable from it's paper cousin, with electronic ink which rewrites the pages based on which book you are currently reading.
With about 200-250 pages, a comfortable reading width, and a cover customised to whatever book you're reading at the time (or for a more respectable one if you're reading something trashy).
It should fit as many chapters in as it can, then start again at the beginning once you've run out of pages (for those 1000 page opuses).
Most important of all, it should look and feel like paper but be relatively indestructable (and waterproof).
What about my freedom to move changes from a future release of the code, back into my current version?
Can do that with BSD code as well.
That was my very point, you can do this if you're using the original BSD app, but not if you're using a closed source fork of the original. So you've immediately lost one of the freedoms the GPL talks about.
I have nothing against the BSD license, but it does annoy me when advocates rant about the GPL being less free while ignoring this freedom that the GPL guarantees.
> The fact that you know your code will not end up > closed down in a closed source product (at least > legally) is not:
What about my freedom as a user to get hold of the code of any application I'm using to make changes to it? No matter how far downstream it is of the original code release.
What about my freedom to move changes from a future release of the code, back into my current version? e.g. backporting features.
Can I backport features from a future release using code from a GPL based license? Do I have that same freedom with code with a BSD base?
You're missing out all the extra registers. That alone would give a speed boost.
> People used to say "man Atari Jaguar is 64-bit. It > should destroy Playstation since it's only > 32-bit". That makes no difference. Dreamcast was > 128-bit and X-box is 32-bit. Guess which ones > faster.
That's because people were idiots. The Dreamcast wasn't 128-bit, the Jaguar wasn't 64-bit. It was just marketing.
Why would a newbie be using an apt-get string. In Mandrake to install Abiword, which is your example, you go to the "install software" menu item and browse to:
Office
and it's listed underneath with a description of the application and what it does when you click on the name.
No google searching involved, and hundreds of categorized applications available to install.
> I'm relatively technical, and back in the > University days I fiddled with Linux a good deal, > but still find it mostly a mystery. I remember > spending an entire afternoon reading on mount, and > the various formats, so that I can get my CD-ROM > to work. Funnily, I can hardly remember any of it > now.
Have you fiddled with Linux since University? If not that may explain your issues. Things like automounting of CDs have been common for a long time now.
That's the difference, Linux does give you a choice. The programs are all on the installation disks yet you have a choice of whether or not you install them, you can also quite happily remove them afterwards.
> **note anymore, yeah vb used to miss alot of > things like true inheritance... that is all gone > in.net
VB is also gone in.Net, it is no way the same animal it was before. You can't just pick up a VB6 program and run it under.Net, porting VB6 apps to.Net isn't even a recommended process.
It's just allowing you to use a VB-like syntax instead of the C style syntax that comes with C#. VB died with Visual Studio 6.
"I run a handful of Linux and a handful of Windows boxes, and you know what? I find myself re-installing Linux alot more often than I do Windows... and you know why? Because I don't know Linux well, so I'm constantly doing something wrong."
That's obvious, you should never need to reinstall, even if you've done something wrong. It's easy enough to fix unless you've done something like "rm -rf/" as root.
oops, forgot to preview... but then it was mean't to be "plain old text".
((You can put all the applications in the world you want on Linux and it will still suck the sweat off rhinocerious testicles as a desktop system because the GUI is still very primitive. Sure, you have have a lot of flash with Gnome and KDE, but they still lack the detail of Windows, OS X or the old Mac OS. ))
Sorry but that's meaningless rubbish. 5 years ago it was primitive, it certainly isn't now. As someone who uses XP every single day, I much prefer the linux desktop and can't see how you could possibly call it primitive. One big productivity plus is multiple desktops, something I use constantly under linux but which is barely usable under XP.
(( Linux HAS come a long way with Plug and Play,
but it still has a long way to go. ))
True, but that doesn't make it primitive. And switch on & go is a lot more common, without the old windows driver disk dance.
I can also unplug my USB broadband modem from Linux without a blue screen of death. Something I can't say about Windows XP (and that's after using the tray icon so XP claims it's safe to remove the device).
(( When Linux can handle a USB memory card reader with ease, multiple types of digital cameras, desktop integration of CD and DVD burning ))
400+ digital cameras are supported, and most of the ones that aren't will still mount as a usable bulk storage device.
It's not the fault of Linux that so many device manufacturers have a closed mentality. And it is unfair to use that against Linux, an operating system that is so open and inclusive that hardware manufacturers could easily support it. It is competing with a monopoly after all.
I find these sleight of hand arguments more than a little annoying, and disapparaging to a movement that has provided a huge amount of quality software, making it available and accessible to everyone. Constant nit-picking about issues that are not the fault of those doing all the work to develop the software. You can install Linux on most machines without problems, a lot of the hardware is supported now. But you'll still get the old arguments: Linux isn't ready because it doesn't support piece of hardware X. Despite the fact it fully supports the equivalent hardware Y.
A lot of hardware is designed and drivers written for a monopoly operating system. So get over it. You can't expect to pick up any piece of hardware and use it on any operating system other than that monopoly one and expect it to work right out of the box. That isn't the fault of the non-monopoly operating system though, you just need to check what is supported before you buy it. Because the existence of said monopoly makes it impossible to do otherwise.
Sorry but that's meaningless rubbish. 5 years ago it was primitive, it certainly isn't now. As someone who uses XP every single day, I much prefer the linux desktop and can't see how you could possibly call it primitive. One big productivity plus is multiple desktops, something I use constantly under linux but which is barely usable under XP.
>
True, but that doesn't make it primitive. And switch on & go is a lot more common, without the old windows driver disk dance.
I can also unplug my USB broadband modem from Linux without a blue screen of death. Something I can't say about Windows XP (and that's after using the tray icon so XP claims it's safe to remove the device).
>
400+ digital cameras are supported, and most of the ones that aren't will still mount as a usable bulk storage device.
It's not the fault of Linux that so many device manufacturers have a closed mentality. And it is unfair to use that against Linux, an operating system that is so open and inclusive that hardware manufacturers could easily support it. It is competing with a monopoly after all.
I find these sleight of hand arguments more than a little annoying, and disapparaging to a movement that has provided a huge amount of quality software, making it available and accessible to everyone. Constant nit-picking about issues that are not the fault of those doing all the work to develop the software. You can install Linux on most machines without problems, a lot of the hardware is supported now. But you'll still get the old arguments: Linux isn't ready because it doesn't support piece of hardware X. Despite the fact it fully supports the equivalent hardware Y.
A lot of hardware is designed and drivers written for a monopoly operating system. So get over it. You can't expect to pick up any piece of hardware and use it on any operating system other than that monopoly one and expect it to work right out of the box. That isn't the fault of the non-monopoly operating system though, you just need to check what is supported before you buy it. Because the existence of said monopoly makes it impossible to do otherwise.
> There is not objective standard for what makes an > interface intuitive or easy to use. As someone > once said "the only intuitive interface is the > nipple."
They wouldn't have said that if they'd seen how long a newborn can take to figure out that interface. Once they've got it, it's fine, but it does have a learning curve.
"The same reason documentation is lagging in FOSS, its not "cool". Everyone wants to be in on the latest desktop environment / compiler / kernel because it gets the publicity. A screen reader will not give you the cool factor that submitting a patch for the kernel would."
Sorry, but that's absolute rubbish: http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gap/ http://leb.net/blinux/
I can't believe the uninformed postings in this thread. Just because you're not aware of it doesn't mean it isn't happening. You can use a screenreader within Linux right now, try Gnopernicus within Gnome. A lot of accessibility work is taking place and access to this technology is all free.
Slashdot Mirror
'Firefox is a good browser, but does anyone know how to turn off those little pop-over messages, such as the "you don't have this plugin installed, click here to download it". I do not need flash or java, and I don't want the message.'
Just delete the npnul{whatever}.[so|dll] plugin from the plugins directory.
There is a clipboard just like the Windows clipboard, Ctrl-C to copy, Ctrl-V to paste. Works completely independantly of the method you're talking about.
You can completely ignore the Unix copy by selection method and just use the windows-style one if you prefer.
It's far too flexible having both to want to lose either method. I often use the two methods simultaneously.
Just forget you ever learnt about the unix way of doing it and live in ignorant bliss. You can safely ignore its existance.
Theists always say this and it is complete and utter tripe. It's in the basic definition: atheism. It's not a belief in 0 gods, it is a lack of belief in gods. Theists have a great difficulty in understanding the difference.
You can't accept that people don't have this belief, so try and make the lack of it a belief in itself which is absurd.
You don't need a belief system to not believe in something. Otherwise you'd need a special religion for each non-existant thing, i.e. the non-tooth fairy believers religion, the non-santa claus believers religion.
Just because lots of theists find it difficult to wrap their heads around the concept of not needing to believe in anything, they find a need to fit everything into a neat little belief box. As though they're embarrassed about having a belief system while an atheist doesn't.
Yes, but when I last tried it, the code it generated was very brittle and easily broken, i.e. because it tries to mimic the form designer in Visual Studio it was positioning all page elements (form fields etc.) using absolute positioning. Every element: every label and form field. Which means a user with a larger font (for accessibility reasons) or a piece of slightly longer than expected text would make the layout look like crap. It also tries to target the page to a browser, rather than letting you target standards.
And pray tell, how many popular high traffic sites use counters from thecounter.com and how does that compare to the nummber of one page geocities sites with a picture of someone's favourite moggy?
It's the same in Mozilla and Firefox, at least in Linux, and also works for a URL selected in another application.
I will when you can get an ebook that is virtually indistinguishable from it's paper cousin, with electronic ink which rewrites the pages based on which book you are currently reading.
With about 200-250 pages, a comfortable reading width, and a cover customised to whatever book you're reading at the time (or for a more respectable one if you're reading something trashy).
It should fit as many chapters in as it can, then start again at the beginning once you've run out of pages (for those 1000 page opuses).
Most important of all, it should look and feel like paper but be relatively indestructable (and waterproof).
If they were like that I'd definitely buy one.
That was my very point, you can do this if you're using the original BSD app, but not if you're using a closed source fork of the original.
So you've immediately lost one of the freedoms the GPL talks about.
I have nothing against the BSD license, but it does annoy me when advocates rant about the GPL being less free while ignoring this freedom that the GPL guarantees.
> The fact that you know your code will not end up
> closed down in a closed source product (at least
> legally) is not:
What about my freedom as a user to get hold of the code of any application I'm using to make changes to it? No matter how far downstream it is of the original code release.
What about my freedom to move changes from a future release of the code, back into my current version? e.g. backporting features.
Can I backport features from a future release using code from a GPL based license? Do I have that same freedom with code with a BSD base?
You're missing out all the extra registers. That alone would give a speed boost.
> People used to say "man Atari Jaguar is 64-bit. It
> should destroy Playstation since it's only
> 32-bit". That makes no difference. Dreamcast was
> 128-bit and X-box is 32-bit. Guess which ones
> faster.
That's because people were idiots. The Dreamcast wasn't 128-bit, the Jaguar wasn't 64-bit. It was just marketing.
Why would a newbie be using an apt-get string. In Mandrake to install Abiword, which is your example, you go to the "install software" menu item and browse to:
Office
and it's listed underneath with a description of the application and what it does when you click on the name.
No google searching involved, and hundreds of categorized applications available to install.
> I'm relatively technical, and back in the
> University days I fiddled with Linux a good deal,
> but still find it mostly a mystery. I remember
> spending an entire afternoon reading on mount, and
> the various formats, so that I can get my CD-ROM
> to work. Funnily, I can hardly remember any of it
> now.
Have you fiddled with Linux since University? If not that may explain your issues. Things like automounting of CDs have been common for a long time now.
That's the difference, Linux does give you a choice. The programs are all on the installation disks yet you have a choice of whether or not you install them, you can also quite happily remove them afterwards.
> **note anymore, yeah vb used to miss alot of .net
.Net, it is no way the same animal it was before. You can't just pick up a VB6 program and run it under .Net, porting VB6 apps to .Net isn't even a recommended process.
> things like true inheritance... that is all gone
> in
VB is also gone in
It's just allowing you to use a VB-like syntax instead of the C style syntax that comes with C#. VB died with Visual Studio 6.
"I run a handful of Linux and a handful of Windows boxes, and you know what? I find myself re-installing Linux alot more often than I do Windows... and you know why? Because I don't know Linux well, so I'm constantly doing something wrong."
/" as root.
That's obvious, you should never need to reinstall, even if you've done something wrong. It's easy enough to fix unless you've done something like "rm -rf
That's one of the very reasons Apache has fewer problems than IIS. You only need to run what you need. It doesn't take the kitchen sink approach.
oops, forgot to preview... but then it was mean't to be "plain old text".
((You can put all the applications in the world you want on Linux and it will still suck the sweat off rhinocerious testicles as a desktop system because the GUI is still very primitive. Sure, you have have a lot of flash with Gnome and KDE, but they still lack the detail of Windows, OS X or the old Mac OS. ))
Sorry but that's meaningless rubbish. 5 years ago it was primitive, it certainly isn't now. As someone who uses XP every single day, I much prefer the linux desktop and can't see how you could possibly call it primitive. One big productivity plus is multiple desktops, something I use constantly under linux but which is barely usable under XP.
(( Linux HAS come a long way with Plug and Play,
but it still has a long way to go. ))
True, but that doesn't make it primitive. And switch on & go is a lot more common, without the old windows driver disk dance.
I can also unplug my USB broadband modem from Linux without a blue screen of death. Something I can't say about Windows XP (and that's after using the tray icon so XP claims it's safe to remove the device).
(( When Linux can handle a USB memory card reader with ease, multiple types of digital cameras, desktop integration of CD and DVD burning ))
400+ digital cameras are supported, and most of the ones that aren't will still mount as a usable bulk storage device.
It's not the fault of Linux that so many device manufacturers have a closed mentality. And it is unfair to use that against Linux, an operating system that is so open and inclusive that hardware manufacturers could easily support it. It is competing with a monopoly after all.
I find these sleight of hand arguments more than a little annoying, and disapparaging to a movement that has provided a huge amount of quality software, making it available and accessible to everyone. Constant nit-picking about issues that are not the fault of those doing all the work to develop the software. You can install Linux on most machines without problems, a lot of the hardware is supported now. But you'll still get the old arguments: Linux isn't ready because it doesn't support piece of hardware X. Despite the fact it fully supports the equivalent hardware Y.
A lot of hardware is designed and drivers written for a monopoly operating system. So get over it. You can't expect to pick up any piece of hardware and use it on any operating system other than that monopoly one and expect it to work right out of the box. That isn't the fault of the non-monopoly operating system though, you just need to check what is supported before you buy it. Because the existence of said monopoly makes it impossible to do otherwise.
>
Sorry but that's meaningless rubbish. 5 years ago it was primitive, it certainly isn't now. As someone who uses XP every single day, I much prefer the linux desktop and can't see how you could possibly call it primitive. One big productivity plus is multiple desktops, something I use constantly under linux but which is barely usable under XP.
>
True, but that doesn't make it primitive. And switch on & go is a lot more common, without the old windows driver disk dance.
I can also unplug my USB broadband modem from Linux without a blue screen of death. Something I can't say about Windows XP (and that's after using the tray icon so XP claims it's safe to remove the device).
>
400+ digital cameras are supported, and most of the ones that aren't will still mount as a usable bulk storage device.
It's not the fault of Linux that so many device manufacturers have a closed mentality. And it is unfair to use that against Linux, an operating system that is so open and inclusive that hardware manufacturers could easily support it. It is competing with a monopoly after all.
I find these sleight of hand arguments more than a little annoying, and disapparaging to a movement that has provided a huge amount of quality software, making it available and accessible to everyone. Constant nit-picking about issues that are not the fault of those doing all the work to develop the software. You can install Linux on most machines without problems, a lot of the hardware is supported now. But you'll still get the old arguments: Linux isn't ready because it doesn't support piece of hardware X. Despite the fact it fully supports the equivalent hardware Y.
A lot of hardware is designed and drivers written for a monopoly operating system. So get over it. You can't expect to pick up any piece of hardware and use it on any operating system other than that monopoly one and expect it to work right out of the box. That isn't the fault of the non-monopoly operating system though, you just need to check what is supported before you buy it. Because the existence of said monopoly makes it impossible to do otherwise.
> There is not objective standard for what makes an
> interface intuitive or easy to use. As someone
> once said "the only intuitive interface is the
> nipple."
They wouldn't have said that if they'd seen how long a newborn can take to figure out that interface. Once they've got it, it's fine, but it does have a learning curve.
There's the Muine music player.
> I'd like to hear how IE is "outdated".
It hasn't been updated since 2001, still doesn't have support for a lot of CSS2. No tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, etc.
It's the Netscape 4 of CSS2 site design, you're always having to work around it's inadequacies.
> Coz no matter what site you go to it just works...
Less and less so, and quite a few don't look as good as they do in other browsers.
> Where is my logic flawed here?
You're forgetting that a lot of the ice is above the water. So when it melts the resultant water flows into the sea.
Mandrake's distribution was and is doing fine, it was the previous management's branching out to do e-learning that pushed them to that brink.
"The same reason documentation is lagging in FOSS, its not "cool". Everyone wants to be in on the latest desktop environment / compiler / kernel because it gets the publicity. A screen reader will not give you the cool factor that submitting a patch for the kernel would."
/
Sorry, but that's absolute rubbish:
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gap
http://leb.net/blinux/
I can't believe the uninformed postings in this thread. Just because you're not aware of it doesn't mean it isn't happening. You can use a screenreader within Linux right now, try Gnopernicus within Gnome. A lot of accessibility work is taking place and access to this technology is all free.
"If Linux were widely adopted on the desktop you'd expect it to at least be able to unzip/tar files by double-clicking them."
It already can, but I've got mine set for a single click. Try Nautilus/File Roller.