thereby making Telnet the last (by my count) internet-related application that does NOT have a built-in popup blocker.
There's still IE 3.x,4.x,5.x,6.0 and Netscape 1.0-4.8. Given that probably 5% of Internet users are running XP and will upgrade, I don't think it will have much impact for a while.
I believe he meant free-as-in-beer, in comparison to Lindows' subscription Click-N-Run and rumors of a for-pay Xandros service. Also, Libranet is compatible with standard Debian, so that set of free-as-in-freedom repositories is available as well.
You could have taken 5 seconds and looked it up yourself. Yes, Crossover does support Access, although only Access 2000 and they say it's not 100% flawless (but then again, neither is Access on Windows).
Well, Xandros includes (among other things) Crossover Office, a commercial package. Presumably they don't have the rights to let people make and distribute copies of a commercial package they don't own.
He never says anything of the sort. He even paraphrases the Libranet EULA as saying, "Hey, this stuff is GPL, except for what isn't. Look at the individual packages to find out which is which. Don't blame us if it blows up your system. Do whatever you want with this stuff, just don't get us in trouble over it." Oviously, he knows there's non-GPL stuff in there.
The "needlessly long" parts are intended to give a full impression of the distro. He makes it obvious that, while those distros fit his personal needs best, Xandros has strong points and would be the best choice for some users.
all GNOME's icons look very dark and cartoonish... KDE's are bright and vivid and easy to distinguish
This is subjective, but I disagree. GNOME's icon's aren't dark, although they are somewhat cartoonish (not that that's a bad thing). They're all colorful, and quite easy to distinguish (for me). KDE's icons are all the same bright blue. Even if they don't hurt your eyes (as they do mine), I don't see how you can claim that it's easier to distinguish a bunch of similarly-colored icons than a bunch of unique icons.
No more hassles of "I got this great movie I want to show you, do you have the SPANKME Codec?" -- just burn a Knoppix CD set up to play the movie on boot.
Already been done. Also, Morphix can fufill most of your other requests, although it's not point-and-click customizable quite yet.
The statement "We know of no way to show that x causes no psychological harm to y." It's true for all values of x and y. We can't show that eating apples doesn't cause psychological harm. That doesn't mean it does.
The point of/. is to provide news. Discussion is secondary. For those of us running Windows 98 who didn't know it would be phased out, this is useful information (far more so than, say, SCO story #694).
We don't let women do things like crew submarines or fly combat jets in battle.
The reason there is that we prefer not to have all our jets crashing once every 28 days.
Re:Nudity harms children
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Morally, they do not yet possess emotional complexity of the kind required to handle sex. Practically, they are unable to handle the consequences of being pregnant by twelve.
While you're right that pregnant 12-year-olds are bad, the sight of nudity (or even sexual behavior) doesn't seem to result in more underage pregnancies. Look at the pregnancy numbers for Europe vs. the (much more prudish) USA. The societies that expose their kids to more information about sex appear to have lower teen pregnancies rates.
touching a child in any sexual manner is wrong morally, ethically, lawfully, religiously
Why do you think that? That's a moral fashion currently in place, which you believe because you were taught that way. There's no real rational argument that can be made for not touching kids (so long as the kid isn't harmed), and the ancient Greeks (among others) would think it was fine.
That said, I agree with you, because I was brought up the same way. I'm not a pedophile and I have little sympathy for them, but quite possibly in a few hundred years adult-child sexual encountours will be considered normal.
Yeah, but it's easier if the icons are distinctive (so you can identify what you want at a glance) and intuitive (so that they're easy to memorize). My point was that, IMHO, GNOME's icons beat KDE's in those regards.
There are some aspects of a toolkit that cannot be changed by a theme (look at bluecurve-gtk1 vs. bluecurve-gtk2 vs. bluecurve-qt, they all look slightly different). It's quite valid to think that one toolkit inherently looks better, regardless of the actual theme used.
Well, I wrote a rss aggregator, andit sure is nice to be able to embed a web browser so you can follow the blogs links without necessarily opening a separate window.
The argument against that is that is that then the user starts browsing the web in your app, and then they want to open a new tab, or change a setting, or something that can only be done in a real web browser. It's easier (IMHO), if you just have one tool for each task.
That said, there are some good uses for components, such as an etext reader, or an Evolution/Kontact-style PIM. I just think that they're used gratuitously in many cases. Look at all the windows apps that embed IE - everything from KaZaA to Winamp, and it's useless in all of those places.
Not many, really. A few apps (abiword, gnumeric, and a few others IIRC) can export themselves as bonobo components, and can embed bonobo components (although that's not well-supported or widely used). Theoretically, Konqueror could use a KPartsBonobo bridge to embed Abiword and Gnumeric. Nautilus could do the same to embed KOffice, KHTML, or even the Konqueror filebrowser. Really, though, I've never seen much point in embedding everything in the filemanager, aside from "it's cool that we can do it". Bonobo and KParts seem much more useful from a developer's perspective than a user's perspective.
For another- most users never change some defaults, and the default Gnome icons are UGLY. Dark and uninspired.
<rant>
Funny, I'd say the reverse. GNOME icons are colorful, tasteful, and usable. KDE's default icons are so gaudy, garish, and poorly thought out (IMHO) that it's much harder to easily identify them.
Look at the average panel, for example (see this picture). Konsole has a monitor with a seashell - clever, but useless and confusing when you're looking for a terminal emulator. The control center has this weird gear thingy with an indistinct background - are those supposed to be micro-sized widgets? "Home" looks like a doghouse. Konqueror has this sort of half-spiky circle that's supposed to look like a globe, but doesn't. The hard disc icon on the desktop has worms growing out of it. And I have no clue what that smiley thing is supposed to be - it says nothing about it app it represents.
None of those icons makes it easy to find the program at a glance. When you think "control center", do you look for a purple-green-blue gear? Does "web browser" conjure up images of a spiky sphere? What I like about GNOME's icons is that a) they're not all blue, so you can tell them apart, and b) they seem much more intuitive, because they actually bear some resemblance to the thing they represent. </rant>
While I agree that GTK generally looks better, this theme is intended for KDE users who want GNOME apps to integrate well into their desktop. GNOME users such as yourself are not the targeted audience here.
Slashdot Mirror
Right here.
There's still IE 3.x,4.x,5.x,6.0 and Netscape 1.0-4.8. Given that probably 5% of Internet users are running XP and will upgrade, I don't think it will have much impact for a while.
No, it's not. Albums on iTunes are (with a few rare exceptions) $10. 95% of in-store albums cost quite a bit more than that.
I believe he meant free-as-in-beer, in comparison to Lindows' subscription Click-N-Run and rumors of a for-pay Xandros service. Also, Libranet is compatible with standard Debian, so that set of free-as-in-freedom repositories is available as well.
You could have taken 5 seconds and looked it up yourself. Yes, Crossover does support Access, although only Access 2000 and they say it's not 100% flawless (but then again, neither is Access on Windows).
Well, Xandros includes (among other things) Crossover Office, a commercial package. Presumably they don't have the rights to let people make and distribute copies of a commercial package they don't own.
He never says anything of the sort. He even paraphrases the Libranet EULA as saying, "Hey, this stuff is GPL, except for what isn't. Look at the individual packages to find out which is which. Don't blame us if it blows up your system. Do whatever you want with this stuff, just don't get us in trouble over it." Oviously, he knows there's non-GPL stuff in there.
The "needlessly long" parts are intended to give a full impression of the distro. He makes it obvious that, while those distros fit his personal needs best, Xandros has strong points and would be the best choice for some users.
This is subjective, but I disagree. GNOME's icon's aren't dark, although they are somewhat cartoonish (not that that's a bad thing). They're all colorful, and quite easy to distinguish (for me). KDE's icons are all the same bright blue. Even if they don't hurt your eyes (as they do mine), I don't see how you can claim that it's easier to distinguish a bunch of similarly-colored icons than a bunch of unique icons.
Maybe because he's posting many dozens of images on a single page on a slashdotted server?
Norton Ghost, possibly?
Already been done. Also, Morphix can fufill most of your other requests, although it's not point-and-click customizable quite yet.
The statement "We know of no way to show that x causes no psychological harm to y." It's true for all values of x and y. We can't show that eating apples doesn't cause psychological harm. That doesn't mean it does.
The point of /. is to provide news. Discussion is secondary. For those of us running Windows 98 who didn't know it would be phased out, this is useful information (far more so than, say, SCO story #694).
The reason there is that we prefer not to have all our jets crashing once every 28 days.
While you're right that pregnant 12-year-olds are bad, the sight of nudity (or even sexual behavior) doesn't seem to result in more underage pregnancies. Look at the pregnancy numbers for Europe vs. the (much more prudish) USA. The societies that expose their kids to more information about sex appear to have lower teen pregnancies rates.
Why do you think that? That's a moral fashion currently in place, which you believe because you were taught that way. There's no real rational argument that can be made for not touching kids (so long as the kid isn't harmed), and the ancient Greeks (among others) would think it was fine.
That said, I agree with you, because I was brought up the same way. I'm not a pedophile and I have little sympathy for them, but quite possibly in a few hundred years adult-child sexual encountours will be considered normal.
Yeah, but it's easier if the icons are distinctive (so you can identify what you want at a glance) and intuitive (so that they're easy to memorize). My point was that, IMHO, GNOME's icons beat KDE's in those regards.
There are some aspects of a toolkit that cannot be changed by a theme (look at bluecurve-gtk1 vs. bluecurve-gtk2 vs. bluecurve-qt, they all look slightly different). It's quite valid to think that one toolkit inherently looks better, regardless of the actual theme used.
The argument against that is that is that then the user starts browsing the web in your app, and then they want to open a new tab, or change a setting, or something that can only be done in a real web browser. It's easier (IMHO), if you just have one tool for each task.
That said, there are some good uses for components, such as an etext reader, or an Evolution/Kontact-style PIM. I just think that they're used gratuitously in many cases. Look at all the windows apps that embed IE - everything from KaZaA to Winamp, and it's useless in all of those places.
Not many, really. A few apps (abiword, gnumeric, and a few others IIRC) can export themselves as bonobo components, and can embed bonobo components (although that's not well-supported or widely used). Theoretically, Konqueror could use a KPartsBonobo bridge to embed Abiword and Gnumeric. Nautilus could do the same to embed KOffice, KHTML, or even the Konqueror filebrowser. Really, though, I've never seen much point in embedding everything in the filemanager, aside from "it's cool that we can do it". Bonobo and KParts seem much more useful from a developer's perspective than a user's perspective.
<rant> Funny, I'd say the reverse. GNOME icons are colorful, tasteful, and usable. KDE's default icons are so gaudy, garish, and poorly thought out (IMHO) that it's much harder to easily identify them.
Look at the average panel, for example (see this picture). Konsole has a monitor with a seashell - clever, but useless and confusing when you're looking for a terminal emulator. The control center has this weird gear thingy with an indistinct background - are those supposed to be micro-sized widgets? "Home" looks like a doghouse. Konqueror has this sort of half-spiky circle that's supposed to look like a globe, but doesn't. The hard disc icon on the desktop has worms growing out of it. And I have no clue what that smiley thing is supposed to be - it says nothing about it app it represents.
None of those icons makes it easy to find the program at a glance. When you think "control center", do you look for a purple-green-blue gear? Does "web browser" conjure up images of a spiky sphere? What I like about GNOME's icons is that a) they're not all blue, so you can tell them apart, and b) they seem much more intuitive, because they actually bear some resemblance to the thing they represent. </rant>
While I agree that GTK generally looks better, this theme is intended for KDE users who want GNOME apps to integrate well into their desktop. GNOME users such as yourself are not the targeted audience here.
No. Bonobo is still in use (a major part of Evolution especially), although it's not quite as in-your-face about it as KParts.
One-sentence paragraphs and run-on sentences don't violate any rules, they're just bad style. This is Slashdot. Bad style is quite appropriate here.