So Americans should have to accept smaller cars, because, why exactly?
Because they pollute less. Because they take less space, reducing the severity of traffic-jams.
We don't have the European knack for legislating what people can do.
There is no legislation in Europe which mandates people to buy small cars. People just realized that they do not need over 2 tons of metal around to move their ass around the city. and they realized that in small cars are much more convenient than humungous cars. We do have taxation on gasoline that makes small cars more attractive though.
If you'd read my comments in the past you've probably heard me lamenting the fact that nobody will build the type of car I want -- a small compact 100% electric vehicle. But nowhere in those comments will you see me suggesting that the government should step in and prohibit people from buying SUVs.
Where exactly have I said that sales of SUV's should be prohibited? They are not prohibited in Europe either. The difference between USA and Europe seems to be that the government is actively pushing people to buy SUV's, by excluding them from fual-consumption and emission-regulations.
Why is it that everyone living in Europe insists on telling Americans how to live?
In this particular case: because Americans are wasting resources that
a) should not be wasted because it's a finite resource b) they are harming the globe with their wasteful lifestyle c) they could manage just fine without wasting those resources
If Americans were wasting their own resources and they only harmed themselves, I wouldn't complain. But they are wasting resources which is shared with others, and they are harming others while doing so. That is why I (and many others) complain.
And this isn't a case of "telling Americans how to live". This was a question of cutting down emissions. EU was willing to do it, USA was not. No-one was telling USA how they should cut their emissions, only that they should cut their emissions.
You don't seem to grasp the distances involved and the (lack of) population density in the rural areas of the United States.
I grasp them just fine. What you don't seem to grasp is that most Americans don't live in rural areas. Finland's population-density is even lower than USA's is, and yet we seem to manage just fine.
And that example is nothing compared to the low population and distances in the American west.
Every single American lives in the "west"? I don't think so.
Why is it that everybody gets all offended when they perceive the United States to be forcing our way of life on other cultures but they turn around and try to do the same thing to us?
I don't give a flying fuck how Americans live as such. What I do care is that what they are doing to the globe. And I do get annoyed when they waste finite resources and harm the globe while doing so. If you had a next-door neighour that liked to burn old car-tires in his backyard, and the smoke spread to your yard, would you complain? If you did, wouldn't you be telling him "how he should live"? Same thing here: USA is wasting finite resources and they are harming others while doing so. They also absolutely refuse to do anything about it. And when other complain about it, you start to whine?
Many people perceive USA as being very selfish on this issue, and with good reason.
Ati, Nvidia, S3, Trident, Via, Intel, and most of the other major chipset vendors have downloadable drivers for almost everything on Windows Update, these automatically install if you let the driver wizard do so. Maybe you're using a piece of very new and/or obscure hardware. If so, how is that the fault of Windows?
It's a NVIDIA GeForce 7900, so it's not obscure. And the point is that after the installation of the OS is done, the system is not usable, I have to download additional drivers. The original poster complained that after he had installed Ubuntu, he had to install drivers for his vid-card. Well, after I have installed Windows, I have to install drivers for my vid-card. What's the difference? And, at least in my case, the drivers were installed in Linux for my vid-card. It used the free drivers that shipped with X.org by default. If I wanted the binary-drivers, I had to install them separately. But I did have fully working desktop with high resolution and millions of colors, whereas W2K was stuck at VGA.
And if you don't think this isn't a problem on Linux, think again. I've found only ONE recent distribution that will install on my home PC
And I have seen computers where Windows would not install. So what's yout point? Linux sucks because on your particular machine only Gentoo seems to work?
So now "bundling" is a GOOD thing? Microsoft gets slammed either way.
Well, MS COULD bundle software that was not made by them. Red Hat is not hell-bent on bundling only "made by Red Hat"-software. In fact, they will happily bundle third-party software. But, you are right in a way. Microsoft is a monopoly, and that means limitations to the things they can ship with Windows. Monopoly has it's advantages, and it's disadvantages. This is one of the disadvantages. Tough.
And, again: you are missing the point. The question was: "what does modern Linux do better than W2K does?". Default functionality and installed apps is one of those advantages Linux has. It's completely irrelevant why Linux is better. the only thing that matters is that it is better.
Or is this something like out of Monty Python? "Besides hardware-support, functionality, performance, user interface, installed applications and stability, how exactly is modern Linux better than Windows 2000?". "It's free?". "Oh free... SHUT UP!"
Apparently, according to you, Windows should include drivers for products that don't exist yet. Unless you can name me a Linux distribution released in 1999 that had SATA support.
You are missing the point. The original poster asked things that modern Linux-distro does better than W2K does. Like it or not, hardware-support is one of those things. He didn't ask us to compare W2K to contemporary Linux. He asked us to compare W2K to MODERN Linux.
And yes, W2K could accept CD's besides floppies. But for some weird reason it insists on floppies. CD's are out of the question. Would it been really that hard to support driver-CD's besides floppies?
France is big on nuclear (although Finland is building more nuclear power as well). Norway is big on hydroelectric. Danes are ramping up their wind-generators. USA seems to generate their energy with mostly coal, and that's just about the worst possible way of generating energy.
I've seen SUVs on the road in Europe.
So what? Does your observations somehow dispute what I said? While there are some SUV's in Europe, they are nowhere near as popular as they are in USA. And if you have been in Europe, you have propably seen those subcompacts (Smart, Peugeot C1, C2, C3, VW Polo, Renault Clio etc.) which are practically unheard of in USA. And then we have the question of engines. While Europeans seems to do just fine with around 2-liter engines or even smaller, Americans seems to absolutely need some 3-liter V6 even in regular family-cars. And those large engines consume more fuel and pollute more. And then we have the ultra-efficient diesel-cars in Europe, which are very rare in USA.
In the United States billions of dollars have been spent upgrading existing plants to reduce harmful emissions. Nobody ever gives us any credit for this though.
That's because while European steel-mills seriously upgraded their plants, Americans left theirs to rot. And when American companies found out that they can't compete with those modern mills, they went crying to the government.
I'm tired of hearing about that.
Too bad, it's still true though.
Europe's urban character makes this feasible.
Are you saying that there are no cities in USA? Why is it that everyone living in LA insist on driving to the city, instead of taking the bus?
77% of Americans live in cities. That percentage is higher than in France (76%), Norway (75%), Switzerland (67%) and Italy (67%). With 77% of people living in urban areas, you seriously claim that mass-transit would not work in USA? It works wonderfully well in Finland, and only 59%& of Finns live in cities. Of course you can't have mass-transit system in every small village, but it would work just fine in cities.
The United States is a lot more suburban and rural.
And Europe is not? Most people in Europe do not live in downtown, they live in suburbs. Hell, I live 40+ kilometers from Helsinki in a suburb, and I commute every day to work. I know people who live 200km from Helsinki, and they commute every day to Helsinki.
It's not a question of "it wouldn't work here!". It's a question of "I don't wanna do it!".
Not defending windows in any way and perhaps this is just a tangetial question , but why not just stick with the PS/2 keyboard? Is what port a keyboard plugs into really that important to you? They're just keyboards for chrissake.
Well, that keyboard is used in both Mac Mini and my tower-PC. The Mac does not have PS2-ports, only USB. And since the Mini has so few USB-ports in it, the fact that the Apple Keyboard has a built-in USB-hub was an added bonus. And I wanted a small-footprint keyboard, and Apple Keyboard was pretty small. And it's convenient to use with the Mini, because it has built-in button for volume and ejecting optical media.
So while USB-connectivity was a requirement (for the Mini), there were other factors besides the connection-type that tilted the favour towards the Apple Keyboard.
That the users owe the developers and you can't demand a bug fix is the point
The users don't "officially" owe the developers anything. But it's customary to say "thank you", when you receive something for free. But many people feel that they don't owe even that simple thank you. In fact, they feel that just because they use the software, the developers owe them something.
As to "demanding bug-fixes"... Can you demand bug-fixes from Microsoft? Apple? Oracle? Even though you paid for their software? No? Then what makes you think that you CAN demand bug-fixes when it comes to free software? Besides, you have the source. If you have the skills or know someone who does, you can fix it yourself.
Their's no support, so you can't hold anyone responsible if your decision to use this software creates a problem.
And if you check the EULA that accompanies Windows or any other peice of proprietary software, you would see that they too tell the user that "if this software screws your computer, we are not responsible".
If a run into a problem 4 months in on my own expensive business venture and my software isn't fixed right away, I'm screwed, and if it's open source, I can't demand it be fixed, and therefor businesses have a lot of trouble being interested in unsuported open source.
There are plenty of places that are more than willing to provide support for the software. But that doesn't mean that the developers are required to satisfy your whims. If you want official support, go talk to Red Hat (for example).
Well, since the discussion was about X, it's safe to assume that we are indeed talking about how things look. Of course there's more to OS X than Aqua. But there's more to Linux (and KDE in this case) than the way it looks. But since the discussion was about the GUI, the point that KDE can be made to look like OS X is valid.
I use both Linux and OS X at home. And while I can understand why many think OS X is the best thing since sliced bread, I don't think it's THAT great. There are many things in Linux (and KDE) that I prefer over their OS X counterparts.
Want an example? I dropped an Ubuntu 5.10 CD into my athlon workstation which has a Geforce3 card in it, and a 17" Viewsonic monitor. When it finished installing, X came up, but at a resolution and frequency rate the monitor didn't support, so I could barely read the screen. I got that fixed, then discovered OpenGL wasn't hardware accelerated, so I installed the nvidia driver package.
I installed Windows a while ago. After the installation was finished, I noticed that the resolution was something like 640x480 with 256 colors! Drivers for the vid-card weren't installed at all, so there was ZERO hope for 3D-acceleration. Sound-card wasn't installed either. I had drivers for the NIC on CD (luckily), so I could install it offline so I could afterwards hunt for drivers online. I also had to sloinstall AGP-drivers, chipset-drivers and the like. All that was handled automatically in Linux.
Ask yourself this: what does Linux do better today compared with in 2000, almost 6 years ago? I'm not talking about crap like antialiased text- I mean things that actually MATTER to users...
Well, I can have fully-functioning (with drivers and apps installed) Linux-installation in about 30 minutes, whereas with Windows I need to hunt for drivers and apps, because the post-install system is 100% un-usable. The system also ships with lots of great software, whereas Windows does not (so Linux can be used for actual work right after the installation, whereas Windows cannot). latest hardware is supported out-of-the-box, whereas W2K does not (I need to feed it driver-FLOPPIES during installation so it will work with my SATA-drive. Since I don't have floppy-drive anymore, that might cause me problems in the future).
I also have great network-integration in my Linux-desktop, something Windows sorely lacks. Remote-admin-capabilites are great on Linux, less so on Windows.
I happen to use the Apple Keyboard as my keyboard. In Linux, I plugged it in while the system was running, and it worked right away. In Windows, I plugged it in, and it didn't work. It wanted to install drivers for it. fair enough, I asked it to get the drivers from the net, and install them, which it did. It then rebooted the machine. But I then noticed that the keyboard didn't work yet, so I had to fetch my old PS/2-keyboard so I could log on. It then installed more drivers, and rebooted the machine. But it still wouldn't work, and it installed some more drivers. After three reboots, it finally started to work.
In Linux, the installation took about 5 seconds. On Windows, closer to 10 minutes.
But the story doesn't stop there! Few weeks later I moved the computer to different location, and I had to unplug everything. AS I plugged things back in, I noticed that the keyboard didn't work in W2K. So I had to fetch my old keyboard from the storage (a separate building), so I could log in to the machine. W2K then proceeded to reinstall the drivers (with reboots and all), even though the keyboard was already installed once! Apparently Windows got confused because the keyboard was on different USB-port! Needless to say, Linux "just worked".
Why does he (The Register-guy) think that he's entitled to jack-shit? Seriously? So he uses free software. Does that mean that he can then make demands to the developers? "You gave me this software for free, and I DEMAND that you fix these bugs in your shitty software!". I might understand that line of thinking if he paid for the software. I might understand it if he was forced to use it. But he didn't pay for it, nor is he forced to use it. If it sucks so bad, he could always use something else or fix it himself. But saying something like "hey assholes! Write some drivers so I can use my hardware!" is not very constructive.
It is OK to file bug-reports. It is OK to make suggestions. It is OK to submit patches. It is NOT OK to moan and make demands. Many people just seem to think that by merely using the software, they are somehow entitled to make demands. In reality, they are not entitled to anything. The developers don't owe them anything. In fact, the users owe to the developers! The developers give them great software for free, and some people think that it's the DEVELOPERS who are in debt to the users?!?! Am I in Bizarro-world?
Hell, I even blogged about this just now (not actually related to this story, but another discussion I had just a while ago).
Because obviously, following a treaty designed to economically punish the United States for a few years would have solved all of this.
How was it "designed to economically punish the USA"? By requiring USA to cut down emissions? Guess what Einstein? It required EU (among others) to cut their emissions as well! In fact, the requirements were higher for EU than for USA! And there's few things to consider:
a) In Europe, power is generated relatively cleanly (nuclear etc.). Not so in USA b) Cars in Europe are relatively environmentally-friendly, when compared to cars in USA c) Industry in Europe (steel among others) had already spent lots of money modernizing their plants, making the more environmentally friendly. d) People actually use mass-transportation in Europe, not so in USA.
What does all that mean? It means that USA could easily reach the requirements of the treaty by doing the stuff EU already did. EU could not, they would have to find other ways to cut their emissions, since all the easy things have already been done (not so in the USA).
Even simpler: EU worked hard to cut down emissions. Then they were told to cut their emissions by 9% (IIRC) more. USA did jack-shit to cut down their emissions, and then they were told to cut their emissions by 8% (again, IIRC). So it would be relatively easy for USA to cut their emissions, while it would be considerably harder for EU.
There's a difference between "dumbing down" and "improving usability". Improving usability can mean that the not-so-often used features and options are moved out of sight so that the features and options that ARE more often used, are highlighted and more accessible. The features and options would still be there, they just wouldn't be prominently displayed (and drawing users attention). If the UI displays all the possible options and features all the time, the relevant information is buried underneath the clutter. But if the trivial things are moved elsewhere, the important things get the limelight.
KDE has always been featureful and configurable. And I don't think the developers are willing to drop that legacy. What they ARE interested in, is to make the system make sense, and be gorgerous and usable by default.
Re:What I didn't see
on
KDE 3.5 Released
·
· Score: 4, Informative
What I didn't see was much change in KDE's horrible default settings.
KDE4 is what you need. Not only are there some serious usability-improvements, polishing, cleaning and other improvements in the pipeline (yes, seriously. Lots of KDE-devels seem to be fed up with the clutter), there seems to be some really low-level changes thought of as well.
Good things come to those who wait, and KDE4 will deliver lots of goodies. KDE3.5 is "just" an extension of KDE3.
..."I wish I had a Kryptonite cross, because then you could keep both Dracula AND Superman away.".
He also said "You know what would make a good story? Something about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea.". So if Superman had a diarrhea (You could say a SUPER-diarrhea!)... We clearly need Jack Handy to redo the script of Superman V!
Well, kde isn't exactly loved here in finland either
There are plenty of KDE-users in Finland. Or are you in a position to speak for all 5 million Finns? No? That's what I thought. So please: don't try to pass your personal opinions as facts that cover an entire country.
I guess the dislike has got to have something to do with the bloated clunkiness of kde that most people dislike.
Examples please? Do you have any hard facts to back up your claim ("KDE is bloated!")? To what are you comparing it to? If you are comparing it to GNOME (KDE's closest altnernative. No, Fluxbox or the like is not comparable) you would notice that there are many places where KDE is actually leaner.
It's possible to ask probing questions and expose weaknesses in an interviewee's position without constantly interrupting the interviewe
Well, if the interviewer asks a simple yes/no question, and the person being interviewed gives a lenghty "answer" that doesn't answer the question at all, what can you expect? the Howard/Paxman-interview is a good example of this. Yes, Paxman interrupted Howard onnumerous occasions. But which is worse: Interrupting a politician spouting BS, or knowingly spouting pure BS to the public? Apparently your idea of an "interview" is the one where the interviewer just nods agreeingly and says "yes Mr. Rumsfeld, thank you for your time".
I believe that most politicians are dishonest (as in that they do not tell us everything, or they downright lie) by their very nature. And I see no problems in asking them tough questions. And I see exactly ZERO problems in holding them accountable for the BS they spout.
Ah, the good ol' "other people have it even worse, why would you like your situation to be any better?", never ages uh?
The "sweatshops" pay A LOT better than local companies do. I have heard that western companies pay salaries that are about triple that of what the local companies pay. To us, their salary might be crappy. But for them it humungous. We couldn't live with their salaries, but they can.
There was a case in Finland where the local Seaman's Union demanded that ships owned by Estonian companies, sailing under Estionian flag employing Estonians must pay salaries equal to Finnish seaman's salaries ("logic" being that the Estonians could undercut the Finns because their salaries are so much lower). The Estonians pointed out that if they did that, the Estonian seaman would have similar salary as the prime-minister of Estonia has. As you see, simly increasing the salaries simply does not work.
You can't just say that "We need to pay them even more! We need to increase their salaries by order of magnitude at least!". That simply doesn't work. Their salaries are improving all the time, and their standards of living are improving as well. But you can't demands that their standards of living and salaries are brought to western levels overnight. Why? Because their only competetive advantage when compared to others is cheap labor. If we were to dramatically increase their salaries, that advantage would disappear, and no western companies would invest there anymore. We would then get
a) mass-unemployment b) piss-poor salaries from the local companies a + b = Poverty and poor standard of living
But I guess you could then pat yourself in the back becase we wouldn't be "exploiting" them anymore? I wpould guess that the people living in those poor countries would also have few things to say to you, but they wouldn't be thanking you.
In time their salaries will increase so much that their competetive advantage of cheap labor diminishes. But by that time they can compate with higher education, improved infrastructure and the like. Along with somewhat cheaper labor. But building that education-system and infrastructure takes time. If we were to drastically improve their salaries overnight, they would lose their competetive advantage without having any other advantages (education, infrastructure etc.) taking it's place. In short: we would be ruining them.
You keep on talking about "bad" salaries. To them (you know, the actual workers?) the salary is not bad at all. In fact, it is A LOT of money! To us their salary might not be that much. But then again, things cost a lot more here than they do there. And compared to the typical salaries there, the western companies pay VERY WELL. So why aren't you whining about the local companies?
I for one won't stop buying products just because another company owned by the same parent did evil.
It's not "another company", it a division of Sony, like SCEA is. Like it or not, they ARE linked and they both answer to same people.
Do you consider Platform Products and Services Division, Business Division amd Entertainment and Devices Division to be separate companies, or are they merely parts of Microsoft? No? Then why do you consider Sony Music to be a separate company, when it's in fact merely a part of Sony?
Fact is that Sony did something wrong, and they deserve to be punished.
First of all, it's not a different company, it's merely a division of a corporation. Second, managers in SCEA propably can't influence Sony Music. But if SCEA starts to suffer because of stupid things Sony Music did, you can be sure that Sony management would take action. And harming the entire company is a lot more effective than merely harming one of it's divisions. If Sony loses 10 million at SCEA and 10 million at Sony Music, they will take action sooner than if they merely lost 10 million at Sony Music.
Too bad for the hard working people at SCEA. Or even Sony Music who had nothing to do with this. But you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs. When a company does something wrong, I hold that company responsible. No, they can't hide behind divisions and subdivisions. And Sony COULD fix this situation. What they need to do is (IMO)
a) Fire the managers responsible for this b) Fire the head of Sony music c) Management of Sony needs to profoundly apologize (I kinda like the way they do it in Japan, where they bow down deep and beg for forgiveness) d) Full refund to the people who bought infected discs + extra compensation for the trouble the discs caused to them. I would say something like $50-70 total would be suitable (and that's cutting it low, considering the danger this caused) e) Cease all business-activities with f4i
That would do it. It really is up to Sony. And something of that magnitude needs to be done at the highest level (you need to be pretty high up to fire a head of division). If Sony chooses not to do it... Well, they then deserve to be punished, and we are right back at square one.
..and you'll be the first one standing in line for a PS3 no doubt. Admit it.
I'm not really a console-gamer, but I have been thinking about getting the Nintendo Revolution. Neither PS3 or 360 appeal to me. They seem to be the exact same thing PS2 and Xbox were, only with more power under the hood.
Ok, I have friends who work at SCEA. You want to punish them?
No, I want to punish their employer, Sony.
The idea to use f4i DRM wasn't theirs [fuck they don't even work for Sony Music].
And the peons at Sony Music weren't the ones responsible for this fiasco, but they are still going to be harmed. And guess what? That's the only way these companies will ever learn! If we let them get away with it, next time it's going to be twice as bad. I'm drawing the line here.
So by your logic we should punish everyone by association.
I want to punish the ones responsible for this fiasco. And the company responsible for this is called Sony. You might say that it was their music division who did this, but it's still the same fucking company. All the money Sony Music earns goes to Sony. And all the money Sony earns can be used to help Sony Music. And I want Sony to suffer, period. They have acted dishonestly and in bad faith.
Yes, there are thousands of decent people working for Sony. And it's too bad if they happen to suffer because of this. But maybe they should seriously re-consider their future-employer. If you work for scumbags, don't be surprised if you get shit on.
But don't just punish one group because another did something else.
I'm not. I mean, I'm not punishing Nintendo for something Sony did. I'm punishing a company called Sony Corporation for the actions of Sony. Like I said, it might be a different division, but it's part of Sony. It's 100% owned subsidiary of Sony. It even has their name!
Really, this in not rocket-science!
And really, you should actually talk with sony folk. They may be under the same parent company but when you get down to the day-to-day work SCEA and Sony Music are different groups with different products and different goals.
And they all answer to the same people in the end, the Sony board of directors. Maybe when they notice that the fiasco their music-division created is harming their other businesses as well, they will think twice before doing something like this again. You need to hit them, and hit them hard so that they will really notice. I for one have decided that I'm not going to take this shit anymore.
Sony is simply reaping what it sows. Hiding behind different divisions doesn't change that. Hell, people are boycotting some companies because they happened to receive bad service from them (even from just one person!), why is this one bit different?
Hopefully PS3 flops because of this. Maybe then the head of PS3-division gives the head of Sony Music a call, and tells him to go fuck himself. After that he's going to call the CEO of Sony and tell him to get rid of the execs at Sony Music. Maybe then they will learn something
However, once they do, being able to select objects without launching them is an important general behaviour.
I haven't had any problems in selecting icons without launching them, even when using single-click.
Only if you have the assumption that hyperlinks (or quicklaunch icons) == desktop icons. They don't. They look different. They're in a different place. They (typically) abstract different things (a shortcut - "pointer" - vs the actual object.
You are right. But users don't care. They are "opening folders" and "opening websites" and "opening apps". And they do that by double-clicking. To them that is the way you open them, they don't really see any difference between quick-launch icons, links and icons.
The problem with your reasoning is that you are using hyperlinks and quicklaunch icons as the rule, when they are the exception. The rule is that icons represent objects that need to be double clicked to open, the *exceptions* are elements like quicklaunch buttons and hyperlinks.
But these day hyperlinks are NOT the exception. People propably use links more than they use objects in filemanager and desktop. And in both cases, the user "opens" the object, but for some reason it's done differently in websites and in the desktop. And to the user, that gets very confusing.
You didn't really address my point at all. You said that punishing SCEA does not make sense, because Sony Music is a different division. I beg to differ, they are both part of the same corporation.
You might care about PS3's DRM. Apperently Sony is trying to figure out a way to prevent used games from being played on it. And they are apparently working on preventing you from playing your games on any other system than your own (so you can't take your game to a friends place and play there). SCEA is just as scummy, greedy and paranoid as Sony Music is.
I didn't read further than that first line. You don't sabotage your "valued customers" computers. You don't assume that your "valued customer" are pirates. You don't try to limit the legally mandated rights of your "valued customers" through moronic EULA's. if you REALLY valued your customers, you would treat them with respect, instead of pouring this shit on them!
Go fuck yourself, Sony. You're going to have to A LOT more groveling and ass-kissing than that!
Sony Music and SCEA are part of the same corporation. And if one division of that corporation does stupid things, the whole of Sony should be punished. Why? Meybe next time Sony will think twice about letting theis Music-division do stupid things. Maybe Sony kicks the morons that are running the Music-division out.
Just because they happen to be different divisions of the same corporation is irrelevant. We need to hit Sony where it hurts: their bottom line. maybe then they learn their lesson.
Aren't corporations considered to be people in legal sense? So if I install rootkits on thousands of computers and end up in jail, shouldn't similar punishment face Sony as well? And since Sony is considered a person, we should put Sony in jail as well.
But how do you put a corporation in to prison, even though that are considered to be a person? We could revoke their rights as a corporation (so they couldn't sell or produce their goods. Just like prisoners lose many right regural citizens enjoy). We could also confiscate their property (prisoners don't usually have much personal belongings when they are in jail).
Seriously: why isn't this being done? If corporations are "people", then shouldn't they be handled as people, with similar punishments?
It wasn't changed because "it's the Windows way", it was changed because it makes more sense.
But it doesn't make any sense. Windows uses double-click. And just about every single day I see people double-clicking icons on the desktop. And they also double-click the quick-launch-buttons. And they also double-click links in websites.
Having the GUI use single-click by default merely enforces a consistent behavior across the system. Everything on the desktop would use single-click. But if you use double-click (like Windows and OS X do), then you would have some things using double-click (icons on the desktop and filemanager) while others use single-click (links on websites, quick-launch-buttons). And it gets very confusing for users.
Slashdot Mirror
Because they pollute less. Because they take less space, reducing the severity of traffic-jams.
There is no legislation in Europe which mandates people to buy small cars. People just realized that they do not need over 2 tons of metal around to move their ass around the city. and they realized that in small cars are much more convenient than humungous cars. We do have taxation on gasoline that makes small cars more attractive though.
Where exactly have I said that sales of SUV's should be prohibited? They are not prohibited in Europe either. The difference between USA and Europe seems to be that the government is actively pushing people to buy SUV's, by excluding them from fual-consumption and emission-regulations.
In this particular case: because Americans are wasting resources that
a) should not be wasted because it's a finite resource
b) they are harming the globe with their wasteful lifestyle
c) they could manage just fine without wasting those resources
If Americans were wasting their own resources and they only harmed themselves, I wouldn't complain. But they are wasting resources which is shared with others, and they are harming others while doing so. That is why I (and many others) complain.
And this isn't a case of "telling Americans how to live". This was a question of cutting down emissions. EU was willing to do it, USA was not. No-one was telling USA how they should cut their emissions, only that they should cut their emissions.
I grasp them just fine. What you don't seem to grasp is that most Americans don't live in rural areas. Finland's population-density is even lower than USA's is, and yet we seem to manage just fine.
Every single American lives in the "west"? I don't think so.
I don't give a flying fuck how Americans live as such. What I do care is that what they are doing to the globe. And I do get annoyed when they waste finite resources and harm the globe while doing so. If you had a next-door neighour that liked to burn old car-tires in his backyard, and the smoke spread to your yard, would you complain? If you did, wouldn't you be telling him "how he should live"? Same thing here: USA is wasting finite resources and they are harming others while doing so. They also absolutely refuse to do anything about it. And when other complain about it, you start to whine?
Many people perceive USA as being very selfish on this issue, and with good reason.
NVIDIA
It's a NVIDIA GeForce 7900, so it's not obscure. And the point is that after the installation of the OS is done, the system is not usable, I have to download additional drivers. The original poster complained that after he had installed Ubuntu, he had to install drivers for his vid-card. Well, after I have installed Windows, I have to install drivers for my vid-card. What's the difference? And, at least in my case, the drivers were installed in Linux for my vid-card. It used the free drivers that shipped with X.org by default. If I wanted the binary-drivers, I had to install them separately. But I did have fully working desktop with high resolution and millions of colors, whereas W2K was stuck at VGA.
And I have seen computers where Windows would not install. So what's yout point? Linux sucks because on your particular machine only Gentoo seems to work?
Well, MS COULD bundle software that was not made by them. Red Hat is not hell-bent on bundling only "made by Red Hat"-software. In fact, they will happily bundle third-party software. But, you are right in a way. Microsoft is a monopoly, and that means limitations to the things they can ship with Windows. Monopoly has it's advantages, and it's disadvantages. This is one of the disadvantages. Tough.
And, again: you are missing the point. The question was: "what does modern Linux do better than W2K does?". Default functionality and installed apps is one of those advantages Linux has. It's completely irrelevant why Linux is better. the only thing that matters is that it is better.
Or is this something like out of Monty Python? "Besides hardware-support, functionality, performance, user interface, installed applications and stability, how exactly is modern Linux better than Windows 2000?". "It's free?". "Oh free... SHUT UP!"
You are missing the point. The original poster asked things that modern Linux-distro does better than W2K does. Like it or not, hardware-support is one of those things. He didn't ask us to compare W2K to contemporary Linux. He asked us to compare W2K to MODERN Linux.
And yes, W2K could accept CD's besides floppies. But for some weird reason it insists on floppies. CD's are out of the question. Would it been really that hard to support driver-CD's besides floppies?
France is big on nuclear (although Finland is building more nuclear power as well). Norway is big on hydroelectric. Danes are ramping up their wind-generators. USA seems to generate their energy with mostly coal, and that's just about the worst possible way of generating energy.
So what? Does your observations somehow dispute what I said? While there are some SUV's in Europe, they are nowhere near as popular as they are in USA. And if you have been in Europe, you have propably seen those subcompacts (Smart, Peugeot C1, C2, C3, VW Polo, Renault Clio etc.) which are practically unheard of in USA. And then we have the question of engines. While Europeans seems to do just fine with around 2-liter engines or even smaller, Americans seems to absolutely need some 3-liter V6 even in regular family-cars. And those large engines consume more fuel and pollute more. And then we have the ultra-efficient diesel-cars in Europe, which are very rare in USA.
That's because while European steel-mills seriously upgraded their plants, Americans left theirs to rot. And when American companies found out that they can't compete with those modern mills, they went crying to the government.
Too bad, it's still true though.
Are you saying that there are no cities in USA? Why is it that everyone living in LA insist on driving to the city, instead of taking the bus?
77% of Americans live in cities. That percentage is higher than in France (76%), Norway (75%), Switzerland (67%) and Italy (67%). With 77% of people living in urban areas, you seriously claim that mass-transit would not work in USA? It works wonderfully well in Finland, and only 59%& of Finns live in cities. Of course you can't have mass-transit system in every small village, but it would work just fine in cities.
And Europe is not? Most people in Europe do not live in downtown, they live in suburbs. Hell, I live 40+ kilometers from Helsinki in a suburb, and I commute every day to work. I know people who live 200km from Helsinki, and they commute every day to Helsinki.
It's not a question of "it wouldn't work here!". It's a question of "I don't wanna do it!".
Well, that keyboard is used in both Mac Mini and my tower-PC. The Mac does not have PS2-ports, only USB. And since the Mini has so few USB-ports in it, the fact that the Apple Keyboard has a built-in USB-hub was an added bonus. And I wanted a small-footprint keyboard, and Apple Keyboard was pretty small. And it's convenient to use with the Mini, because it has built-in button for volume and ejecting optical media.
So while USB-connectivity was a requirement (for the Mini), there were other factors besides the connection-type that tilted the favour towards the Apple Keyboard.
The users don't "officially" owe the developers anything. But it's customary to say "thank you", when you receive something for free. But many people feel that they don't owe even that simple thank you. In fact, they feel that just because they use the software, the developers owe them something.
As to "demanding bug-fixes"... Can you demand bug-fixes from Microsoft? Apple? Oracle? Even though you paid for their software? No? Then what makes you think that you CAN demand bug-fixes when it comes to free software? Besides, you have the source. If you have the skills or know someone who does, you can fix it yourself.
And if you check the EULA that accompanies Windows or any other peice of proprietary software, you would see that they too tell the user that "if this software screws your computer, we are not responsible".
There are plenty of places that are more than willing to provide support for the software. But that doesn't mean that the developers are required to satisfy your whims. If you want official support, go talk to Red Hat (for example).
Well, since the discussion was about X, it's safe to assume that we are indeed talking about how things look. Of course there's more to OS X than Aqua. But there's more to Linux (and KDE in this case) than the way it looks. But since the discussion was about the GUI, the point that KDE can be made to look like OS X is valid.
I use both Linux and OS X at home. And while I can understand why many think OS X is the best thing since sliced bread, I don't think it's THAT great. There are many things in Linux (and KDE) that I prefer over their OS X counterparts.
I installed Windows a while ago. After the installation was finished, I noticed that the resolution was something like 640x480 with 256 colors! Drivers for the vid-card weren't installed at all, so there was ZERO hope for 3D-acceleration. Sound-card wasn't installed either. I had drivers for the NIC on CD (luckily), so I could install it offline so I could afterwards hunt for drivers online. I also had to sloinstall AGP-drivers, chipset-drivers and the like. All that was handled automatically in Linux.
Well, I can have fully-functioning (with drivers and apps installed) Linux-installation in about 30 minutes, whereas with Windows I need to hunt for drivers and apps, because the post-install system is 100% un-usable. The system also ships with lots of great software, whereas Windows does not (so Linux can be used for actual work right after the installation, whereas Windows cannot). latest hardware is supported out-of-the-box, whereas W2K does not (I need to feed it driver-FLOPPIES during installation so it will work with my SATA-drive. Since I don't have floppy-drive anymore, that might cause me problems in the future).
I also have great network-integration in my Linux-desktop, something Windows sorely lacks. Remote-admin-capabilites are great on Linux, less so on Windows.
I happen to use the Apple Keyboard as my keyboard. In Linux, I plugged it in while the system was running, and it worked right away. In Windows, I plugged it in, and it didn't work. It wanted to install drivers for it. fair enough, I asked it to get the drivers from the net, and install them, which it did. It then rebooted the machine. But I then noticed that the keyboard didn't work yet, so I had to fetch my old PS/2-keyboard so I could log on. It then installed more drivers, and rebooted the machine. But it still wouldn't work, and it installed some more drivers. After three reboots, it finally started to work.
In Linux, the installation took about 5 seconds. On Windows, closer to 10 minutes.
But the story doesn't stop there! Few weeks later I moved the computer to different location, and I had to unplug everything. AS I plugged things back in, I noticed that the keyboard didn't work in W2K. So I had to fetch my old keyboard from the storage (a separate building), so I could log in to the machine. W2K then proceeded to reinstall the drivers (with reboots and all), even though the keyboard was already installed once! Apparently Windows got confused because the keyboard was on different USB-port! Needless to say, Linux "just worked".
Why does he (The Register-guy) think that he's entitled to jack-shit? Seriously? So he uses free software. Does that mean that he can then make demands to the developers? "You gave me this software for free, and I DEMAND that you fix these bugs in your shitty software!". I might understand that line of thinking if he paid for the software. I might understand it if he was forced to use it. But he didn't pay for it, nor is he forced to use it. If it sucks so bad, he could always use something else or fix it himself. But saying something like "hey assholes! Write some drivers so I can use my hardware!" is not very constructive.
It is OK to file bug-reports. It is OK to make suggestions. It is OK to submit patches. It is NOT OK to moan and make demands. Many people just seem to think that by merely using the software, they are somehow entitled to make demands. In reality, they are not entitled to anything. The developers don't owe them anything. In fact, the users owe to the developers! The developers give them great software for free, and some people think that it's the DEVELOPERS who are in debt to the users?!?! Am I in Bizarro-world?
Hell, I even blogged about this just now (not actually related to this story, but another discussion I had just a while ago).
How was it "designed to economically punish the USA"? By requiring USA to cut down emissions? Guess what Einstein? It required EU (among others) to cut their emissions as well! In fact, the requirements were higher for EU than for USA! And there's few things to consider:
a) In Europe, power is generated relatively cleanly (nuclear etc.). Not so in USA
b) Cars in Europe are relatively environmentally-friendly, when compared to cars in USA
c) Industry in Europe (steel among others) had already spent lots of money modernizing their plants, making the more environmentally friendly.
d) People actually use mass-transportation in Europe, not so in USA.
What does all that mean? It means that USA could easily reach the requirements of the treaty by doing the stuff EU already did. EU could not, they would have to find other ways to cut their emissions, since all the easy things have already been done (not so in the USA).
Even simpler: EU worked hard to cut down emissions. Then they were told to cut their emissions by 9% (IIRC) more. USA did jack-shit to cut down their emissions, and then they were told to cut their emissions by 8% (again, IIRC). So it would be relatively easy for USA to cut their emissions, while it would be considerably harder for EU.
"Punishing the USA" my ass!
There's a difference between "dumbing down" and "improving usability". Improving usability can mean that the not-so-often used features and options are moved out of sight so that the features and options that ARE more often used, are highlighted and more accessible. The features and options would still be there, they just wouldn't be prominently displayed (and drawing users attention). If the UI displays all the possible options and features all the time, the relevant information is buried underneath the clutter. But if the trivial things are moved elsewhere, the important things get the limelight.
KDE has always been featureful and configurable. And I don't think the developers are willing to drop that legacy. What they ARE interested in, is to make the system make sense, and be gorgerous and usable by default.
KDE4 is what you need. Not only are there some serious usability-improvements, polishing, cleaning and other improvements in the pipeline (yes, seriously. Lots of KDE-devels seem to be fed up with the clutter), there seems to be some really low-level changes thought of as well.
Good things come to those who wait, and KDE4 will deliver lots of goodies. KDE3.5 is "just" an extension of KDE3.
..."I wish I had a Kryptonite cross, because then you could keep both Dracula AND Superman away.".
He also said "You know what would make a good story? Something about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea.". So if Superman had a diarrhea (You could say a SUPER-diarrhea!)... We clearly need Jack Handy to redo the script of Superman V!
There are plenty of KDE-users in Finland. Or are you in a position to speak for all 5 million Finns? No? That's what I thought. So please: don't try to pass your personal opinions as facts that cover an entire country.
Examples please? Do you have any hard facts to back up your claim ("KDE is bloated!")? To what are you comparing it to? If you are comparing it to GNOME (KDE's closest altnernative. No, Fluxbox or the like is not comparable) you would notice that there are many places where KDE is actually leaner.
Well, if the interviewer asks a simple yes/no question, and the person being interviewed gives a lenghty "answer" that doesn't answer the question at all, what can you expect? the Howard/Paxman-interview is a good example of this. Yes, Paxman interrupted Howard onnumerous occasions. But which is worse: Interrupting a politician spouting BS, or knowingly spouting pure BS to the public? Apparently your idea of an "interview" is the one where the interviewer just nods agreeingly and says "yes Mr. Rumsfeld, thank you for your time".
I believe that most politicians are dishonest (as in that they do not tell us everything, or they downright lie) by their very nature. And I see no problems in asking them tough questions. And I see exactly ZERO problems in holding them accountable for the BS they spout.
The "sweatshops" pay A LOT better than local companies do. I have heard that western companies pay salaries that are about triple that of what the local companies pay. To us, their salary might be crappy. But for them it humungous. We couldn't live with their salaries, but they can.
There was a case in Finland where the local Seaman's Union demanded that ships owned by Estonian companies, sailing under Estionian flag employing Estonians must pay salaries equal to Finnish seaman's salaries ("logic" being that the Estonians could undercut the Finns because their salaries are so much lower). The Estonians pointed out that if they did that, the Estonian seaman would have similar salary as the prime-minister of Estonia has. As you see, simly increasing the salaries simply does not work.
You can't just say that "We need to pay them even more! We need to increase their salaries by order of magnitude at least!". That simply doesn't work. Their salaries are improving all the time, and their standards of living are improving as well. But you can't demands that their standards of living and salaries are brought to western levels overnight. Why? Because their only competetive advantage when compared to others is cheap labor. If we were to dramatically increase their salaries, that advantage would disappear, and no western companies would invest there anymore. We would then get
a) mass-unemployment
b) piss-poor salaries from the local companies
a + b = Poverty and poor standard of living
But I guess you could then pat yourself in the back becase we wouldn't be "exploiting" them anymore? I wpould guess that the people living in those poor countries would also have few things to say to you, but they wouldn't be thanking you.
In time their salaries will increase so much that their competetive advantage of cheap labor diminishes. But by that time they can compate with higher education, improved infrastructure and the like. Along with somewhat cheaper labor. But building that education-system and infrastructure takes time. If we were to drastically improve their salaries overnight, they would lose their competetive advantage without having any other advantages (education, infrastructure etc.) taking it's place. In short: we would be ruining them.
You keep on talking about "bad" salaries. To them (you know, the actual workers?) the salary is not bad at all. In fact, it is A LOT of money! To us their salary might not be that much. But then again, things cost a lot more here than they do there. And compared to the typical salaries there, the western companies pay VERY WELL. So why aren't you whining about the local companies?
It's not "another company", it a division of Sony, like SCEA is. Like it or not, they ARE linked and they both answer to same people.
Do you consider Platform Products and Services Division, Business Division amd Entertainment and Devices Division to be separate companies, or are they merely parts of Microsoft? No? Then why do you consider Sony Music to be a separate company, when it's in fact merely a part of Sony?
Fact is that Sony did something wrong, and they deserve to be punished.
First of all, it's not a different company, it's merely a division of a corporation. Second, managers in SCEA propably can't influence Sony Music. But if SCEA starts to suffer because of stupid things Sony Music did, you can be sure that Sony management would take action. And harming the entire company is a lot more effective than merely harming one of it's divisions. If Sony loses 10 million at SCEA and 10 million at Sony Music, they will take action sooner than if they merely lost 10 million at Sony Music.
Too bad for the hard working people at SCEA. Or even Sony Music who had nothing to do with this. But you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs. When a company does something wrong, I hold that company responsible. No, they can't hide behind divisions and subdivisions. And Sony COULD fix this situation. What they need to do is (IMO)
a) Fire the managers responsible for this
b) Fire the head of Sony music
c) Management of Sony needs to profoundly apologize (I kinda like the way they do it in Japan, where they bow down deep and beg for forgiveness)
d) Full refund to the people who bought infected discs + extra compensation for the trouble the discs caused to them. I would say something like $50-70 total would be suitable (and that's cutting it low, considering the danger this caused)
e) Cease all business-activities with f4i
That would do it. It really is up to Sony. And something of that magnitude needs to be done at the highest level (you need to be pretty high up to fire a head of division). If Sony chooses not to do it... Well, they then deserve to be punished, and we are right back at square one.
I'm not really a console-gamer, but I have been thinking about getting the Nintendo Revolution. Neither PS3 or 360 appeal to me. They seem to be the exact same thing PS2 and Xbox were, only with more power under the hood.
No, I want to punish their employer, Sony.
And the peons at Sony Music weren't the ones responsible for this fiasco, but they are still going to be harmed. And guess what? That's the only way these companies will ever learn! If we let them get away with it, next time it's going to be twice as bad. I'm drawing the line here.
I want to punish the ones responsible for this fiasco. And the company responsible for this is called Sony. You might say that it was their music division who did this, but it's still the same fucking company. All the money Sony Music earns goes to Sony. And all the money Sony earns can be used to help Sony Music. And I want Sony to suffer, period. They have acted dishonestly and in bad faith.
Yes, there are thousands of decent people working for Sony. And it's too bad if they happen to suffer because of this. But maybe they should seriously re-consider their future-employer. If you work for scumbags, don't be surprised if you get shit on.
I'm not. I mean, I'm not punishing Nintendo for something Sony did. I'm punishing a company called Sony Corporation for the actions of Sony. Like I said, it might be a different division, but it's part of Sony. It's 100% owned subsidiary of Sony. It even has their name!
Really, this in not rocket-science!
And they all answer to the same people in the end, the Sony board of directors. Maybe when they notice that the fiasco their music-division created is harming their other businesses as well, they will think twice before doing something like this again. You need to hit them, and hit them hard so that they will really notice. I for one have decided that I'm not going to take this shit anymore.
Sony is simply reaping what it sows. Hiding behind different divisions doesn't change that. Hell, people are boycotting some companies because they happened to receive bad service from them (even from just one person!), why is this one bit different?
Hopefully PS3 flops because of this. Maybe then the head of PS3-division gives the head of Sony Music a call, and tells him to go fuck himself. After that he's going to call the CEO of Sony and tell him to get rid of the execs at Sony Music. Maybe then they will learn something
I haven't had any problems in selecting icons without launching them, even when using single-click.
You are right. But users don't care. They are "opening folders" and "opening websites" and "opening apps". And they do that by double-clicking. To them that is the way you open them, they don't really see any difference between quick-launch icons, links and icons.
But these day hyperlinks are NOT the exception. People propably use links more than they use objects in filemanager and desktop. And in both cases, the user "opens" the object, but for some reason it's done differently in websites and in the desktop. And to the user, that gets very confusing.
You didn't really address my point at all. You said that punishing SCEA does not make sense, because Sony Music is a different division. I beg to differ, they are both part of the same corporation.
You might care about PS3's DRM. Apperently Sony is trying to figure out a way to prevent used games from being played on it. And they are apparently working on preventing you from playing your games on any other system than your own (so you can't take your game to a friends place and play there). SCEA is just as scummy, greedy and paranoid as Sony Music is.
I didn't read further than that first line. You don't sabotage your "valued customers" computers. You don't assume that your "valued customer" are pirates. You don't try to limit the legally mandated rights of your "valued customers" through moronic EULA's. if you REALLY valued your customers, you would treat them with respect, instead of pouring this shit on them!
Go fuck yourself, Sony. You're going to have to A LOT more groveling and ass-kissing than that!
Sony Music and SCEA are part of the same corporation. And if one division of that corporation does stupid things, the whole of Sony should be punished. Why? Meybe next time Sony will think twice about letting theis Music-division do stupid things. Maybe Sony kicks the morons that are running the Music-division out.
Just because they happen to be different divisions of the same corporation is irrelevant. We need to hit Sony where it hurts: their bottom line. maybe then they learn their lesson.
And besides, PS3 is also encumbered by DRM.
Aren't corporations considered to be people in legal sense? So if I install rootkits on thousands of computers and end up in jail, shouldn't similar punishment face Sony as well? And since Sony is considered a person, we should put Sony in jail as well.
But how do you put a corporation in to prison, even though that are considered to be a person? We could revoke their rights as a corporation (so they couldn't sell or produce their goods. Just like prisoners lose many right regural citizens enjoy). We could also confiscate their property (prisoners don't usually have much personal belongings when they are in jail).
Seriously: why isn't this being done? If corporations are "people", then shouldn't they be handled as people, with similar punishments?
But it doesn't make any sense. Windows uses double-click. And just about every single day I see people double-clicking icons on the desktop. And they also double-click the quick-launch-buttons. And they also double-click links in websites.
Having the GUI use single-click by default merely enforces a consistent behavior across the system. Everything on the desktop would use single-click. But if you use double-click (like Windows and OS X do), then you would have some things using double-click (icons on the desktop and filemanager) while others use single-click (links on websites, quick-launch-buttons). And it gets very confusing for users.