I think the point is manufacturing quality. Apple's products are a step above what you get in the PC world.
Last time I checked, Apple has it's share of quality-problems. Apple just recalled loads of iBooks and PowerBooks due to faulty batteries. Before that we have had iBooks with faulty logic-boards, overheating 12" PowerBooks, faulty latches on PowerBooks, Windtunnel G4 PowerMacs etc. etc. If Apple's quality is so high, why do Mac-users recommend NOT buying first-revision hardware?
When you buy a Mac, you don't have to ask yourself, "is this going to work reliably?"
Lots of people are asking that question when they buy Apple-hardware. No, I'm not saying that their quality sucks. I'm saying that they are not the be-all end-all when it comes to quality.
Life is like a mop. Sometimes life gets full of dirt and crud and hairballs and things and you gotta clean it out. You gotta stick it in here and rinse it off and start all over again. And sometimes life sticks to the floor so much that a mop, a mop, it's not good enough. You gotta get down there with like a toothbrush, you know, and you gotta really scrub 'cause you gotta get it off. But if that doesn't work, you can't give up. You gotta stand right up. You gotta run to a window and say, "These floors are dirty as hell, and I'm not gonna take it any more!"
Re:So, you programmers ready to give up your jobs?
on
McVoy Strikes Back
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
All in all, there are very few people (or companies) in the world making money from software, closed or otherwise. But there's HUMUNGOUS number of people and companies who earn money from USING software! Free software (both in speech and price) lower the cost of software. While it might reduce the amount of money software-companies make (although there are lots of people and companies earning money from free software), it will save alot of money for the people/companies who USE software.
Hell those companies that save money from free software could (and many do) hire a developer or two to customize/improve the software for their needs. And they would still save money.
I mean honestly, the OSS community has not treated him with any respect, despite the fact that he's a good friend of Linus
So, he should be treated with respect just because he's a friend of Linus? Regardless of the fact that he acted like a whining and annoying brat during the whole BK-debacle? His behavior was downright moronic, and he kept changing the license under wich BK was released. then he pulled the BK-license for OSDL, because one independent contractor of OSDL happened to Telnet in to the BK-server.
If Linus sees something in him, then perhaps there's more to the guy than the "money grubbing asshole" everyone here makes him out to be?
Linus and McVoy might be friends personally. But that does not mean that McVoy should earn respect because of his professional activities. Just because he's friends with Linus does not mean that he's a great guy. This whole debacle has shown that he is in fact a grade-A asshole.
Maybe, just maybe, he's an innovator who is looking to make a living off of innovating? You know, put food on the table for his kids?
He started to whine when others tried to "reverse-engineer" his precious BK. Well, too bad for him that reverse-engineering is allowed. Looking at his comments, it seems to me that he wanted BK to have similar protection a patent would give him. Of course he couldn't say that he supports software-patents, so he started bitching and moaning and being a real jerk hen people didn't like his constant license-changes and *shock and horror* tried to reverse-engineer BK.
Well, Sony will have vast number of games already available for the console when it launches. MS will have some games for their console when it launches. By the time PS3 launches, 360 wont have anywhere near the amount of games as PS3 will have available.
As to your points:
1. We do not know the prices of 360 or PS3, so how can you say 360 will be cheaper? 2. True. 3. So? GameCube was the cheapest of the XBox-era consoles. It didn't do that well, now did it?
Guess what : Apple Mac OS X is actually replacing GNU/Linux in some area now:
And Linux is replacing Apple somewhere else. So what's your point? OS X replaced Linux in some university? Run for the hills! The world is coming to an end!
Well I do not think that the KHTML developers are lazy or incompetent but I do wish they would merge in the Apple improvements as soon as they can.
They would love to do that. But it's very difficult since all they get is an occasional code-bomb (read: huge blob of code) with no access to their bug-database (so they can't check what "this fixes bug number 43665" means), no revision-history (so they do not know why some changes were made and how the code evolved), several references to internal OS X API's (which can't be used in KDE) and no real communication between Webcore-folks and KHTML-folks. KHTML-folks tried to work with Apple, they were willing to sign NDA's, they gave Apple-folks CVS-accounts etc. etc., but Apple wasn't really interested.
Nokia is not known for its intuition in the market.
Which is why they are by far the biggest player in the mobile-phone business: By providing products no-one wants to use.
Remember the NGage?
Ah yes, since Nokia has a product that flopped, their all non-phone products are doomed to fail as well?
Remember the Communicator? It was released years (in 1996 IIRC) before any other PDA-Phones, and it was a phenomenal success. it was the shape of things to come and they were years ahead of everyone else.
if the screen is too small on this device, people won't use it for making long notes or sketches.
If the screen is too big, the device gets so big that people wont carry it around.
I wish somehow that Apple would make a device like this. I think they would "get it right"
No matter what the fanboys try to tell you, they don't always "get it right". Remember the Cube? Great machine, true, but WAY overpriced.
No it isn't. WebCore is LGPL'ed, like KHTML's license requires, but Safari is not.
they are getting a load of crap for not making it easy to fold their patches into KHTML.
Yes and no. KDE-folks did not complain about Apple. They specificly mentioned that Apple is following the license and their actions are legal. What the KDE-devs complained about was the USERS who whined how KHTML-developers are "lazy" and "incompetent", since they are so slow at merging the Apple-improvements. KHTML-guys just said that since Apple does not work with KDE-developers, and they purposefully make merging of their patches as difficult as possible, it takes long time to merge those improvements.
FYI: just because the company is American, the product might be made somewhere else. Intel fabs their CPU's in Israel and Ireland, and they are assembled as sellable CPU's in Costa Rica and Malaysia. I believe IBM does fab their CPU's in USA (in Fishkill, NY) though.
What about the OS? Microsoft is American company, but they have operations all around the world. And the product is not tangible thing that has to be made in a factory, so how can you determine the nationlity of the product?
Of course, the Motherboard is also made somewhere else (propably Taiwan), the chips are made in Taiwan, China or some other place. Maybe some minimium-wage American prole slaps those components together, but it's not Made in USA by any stretch of the imagination. Slap in the display (Made in Taiwan) and mouse (made in China) and you have a definintely un-american product.
Lets see: Trade Federation Droid Control ship versus Imperial Star Destroyer: I'll take the Star Destroyer. Maybe I'm biased because I have the lego
Why not compare them to the ships used by the Republic in 1-3? I mean, Star Destroyers are clear successors to those ships. I think the Republic vessels in 1-3 looked good, while still looking like older design when compared to the Imperial Star Destroyers.
Is it me, or is the Death Star shown at the end of Episode III way too complete?
No. As others have said, it was propably several years after the other events in ep. III. The uniforms were different and the ships were different. It was clear to me that several years had progressed between Anakin becoming Vader, and between Vader and Palpatine looking at the skeleton of the Death Star.
Yeah, and there was SOUND, even though they were in space! there is no sound in space, so what's up with that?!
Seriously, why is it OK to have sound in space, but having things "blowing backwards" in space is a big no-no? Is it because it would look stupid without sound? Well, it looked cooler when the droids blew backwards off the spaceship. What's the difference?
That is highly subjective. What are you looking out of a filemanager?
Ability to work on remote files for example. With Konqueror, I can work on files on some remote computer over SSH for example. Not only that, I can seamlessly surf the web, encode mp3's/ogg's/etc., view files etc. etc. all with one app.
Does Konqueror support spring loaded folders?
Yes it does.
Have you tried the the column view?
Yes. Didn't care that much for it.
They are colour coded. Red means stop/close yellow means minimize and green mean maximize/go.
Let's hear it for the color-blind! Having clear symbols on them would be alot better. In KDE the buttons have clear symbols on them, and they buttons are highlighted as you hover over them. "close" is highlighted in red. Couldn't be clearer.
The maximize button is used for resizing the window to show all of the contents.
If I want the window to be some arbitary size, I can do it myself just fine. If I want to maximise (in my book: maximise = make the window as large as possible) the window, I want it to be maximised.
How would you click select files to move or delete?
Ctrl-Click for example.
There are several in at sourceforge including Virtue and Desktop Manager.
So in other words, OS X does not have that feature, some third-party app provides it? So how exactly does that show the superiority of OS X? If you need third-party apps to cover for the shortcomings in OS X, I fail to see how that show the "superiority" of OS X. If anything, it highlights the shortcomings of OS X.
Sorry? Are you talking about finder windows? Show View options (CMD-J) has a "this window only/all windows" option group.
I'm talking about the feature in KDE, where I can tell each and every window to open in certain way. I can instruct windows belonging to some specific app to open in some specific location (including different desktops), in specific size, minimized/maximized/shaded etc. etc.
How is that intuitive to anyone other than a Firefox user?
How is Safari's way of working intuitive to anyone other than Safari-users?
Think about it for a moment. How does the uninitiated user know which tab they are closing?
They are closing the selected tab. It's not really rocket-science.
What if I only want to close every other tab?
Select those tabs and close them as you go.
Your whole post misses the point entirely. People tried to make the claim that OS X is the superior UI. I disagreed. And now you waste your time telling me how my problems with OS X aren't really problems at all. Well, they are for me. OS X does not work like I want my UI to work. So I fail to see how OS X is "superior". It might be the best choice for many users, but that doesn't mean that it's "superior". We all have different tastes and styles of working, and OS X does not fit mine.
OS X is a fine OS, no question about it. But it's not the be-all-end-all OS. Claiming that it's UI is best for everyone is downright ignorant. And the fact that OS X-users really try to make that claim really shows that the RDF is working. It might be the best for them. It might be the best for some Linux/Windows-users. But that does not mean that it's universally best for everyone. Such preferences are a subjective matter, and they differ from person to person.
The bottom line is, for all around ease and style OSX's GUI is superior.
I'm sorry, but that is an subjective opinion. I do not care that much for OS X's style (Aqua?). And I find KDE easier to use. I prefer the way KDE looks like.
But KDE is fraut with glitches
Perhaps, but so is OS X. Sometimes Safari simply stops opening links in new tabs. Sometimes Dock stops displaying the "swoosh"-animation, sometimes Expose doesn't work anymore (I have mapped them to extra-buttons on my mouse). Mail on Tiger violates Apple's own HIG-guidelines etc. etc.
As for sitting down and using it out of the box, OSX is just more stylish than Windows and more robust than KDE. I sincerely hope Linux can enjoy the same level of usability one day.
I enjoy that usability right now in KDE. Note: I'm not claiming that just because I find KDE superior, means that it will be superior for everyone else as well. But lots and lots of Mac-users make the claim that OS X is "superior" all the time! And the fact is that such preferences are a matter of personal taste! I do not care that much for OS X. I find KDE to be better. So what does that prove? That KDE is better? That I'm an idiot since I can't see the inherint superiority of OS X? No. It simply means that we all have different needs and tastes.
I can see why many think OS X is the best thing since sliced bread. But I'm not that enthusiastic about it.
No, I'm not talking about Windows. What makes you think that I did? I don't care much for Windows either. I do have Mac Mini with OS X on it. And while it's clearly superior to Windows, I don't find it all that compelling. Sure, it has eye-candy, but I don't care that much for it. I prefer KDE. Of course, I don't claim that KDE is the best UI for everyone, but it is the best UI for me. And for me, that's all that matters. Saying "OS X is the best UI there is!", is wrong thing to do, because that kind of things are subjective. What's "best" for someone, might not be "best" for someone else.
After using OS X for few months, I can see several bad things in it:
- Finder is rather primitive filemanager when compared to Konqueror - The Dock is horrible. It doesn't even use screen-corners properly (thus violating Fitt's law). And it tries to act as a tool to launch apps, and manage running apps in the same time. It ends up being confusing. - Buttons to minimize/maximise/close windows are terrible. They have no symbols in them (unless you hover over them with a mouse) and they are too small. - And when I click "maximise", I want the windows to REALLY maximise, not to adjust it's size to some arbitary size. - I find it rather confusing that closing the window does not close the app. I fail to see the added benefit of having Safari-window close (for example), but the app keeps on running in the background. When I re-launch the Safari-window, it starts from the beginning, so what's the point of keeping the app running? - Why do I have to double-click the icons in order to open them? - Where are virtual desktops? - No window-specific-settings? - I don't like how Safari handles tabs. Each tab has a close-button of it's own. That means if I want to close bunch of tabs, I have to move the mouse around, instead of keeping the mouse still and just clicking the mouse-button.
And no, don't bother listing reasons why OS X is superior. Like I said: it might be the best GUI there is FOR YOU. That does not mean it's the best GUI FOR ME. Your reasons for preferring OS X are not my reasons. And while I say that KDE is the best GUI for me, I don't try to claim that it would be best GUI for you. We each have different tastes and needs. Your are different from mine.
they seem to be right on time for christmas 2006-schedule. When is Xbox360 going to be available? They have missed the 2004 christmas-sales! For shame!
How exactly? I mean, neither of those look like an iPod. Or do you think that they do, since they are both white (PS3 comes in other colors as well), and iPod is white as well? So, all new products that happen to be white, are iPod knock-offs?
when you read the post that started it all, you'll see there's lots of not-so-subtle hints about resentment towards Apple.
I think that resentment is justified. Apple got lots of code from KDE, code that would have taken alot of time and money for them to develop otherwise. And while Apple abides by the license, they have made the conscious decision to make it hard for KDE. I can understand why KDE-developers resentment towards Apple.
What I find interesting and sad, is the Apple's offer to KDE about using WebCore in KDE instead of KHTML. Apple gave KDE the cold shoulder for a long time ("So long, and thanks for all the code!"), taking advantage of improvements made by KDE-folks, while doing the bare minimium in return. And now people praise Apple for their offer of using WebCore in KDE. People think that Apple is somehow "saving" KDE, when the fact is that KDE would not need "saving" if Apple had played ball all along.
I'm more than happy to see people use Gtk+ in non-free software
And Qt is widely used in non-free software, so I fail to see the point. It merely encourages people to write GPL'ed software, and that is a good thing in my book.
Starting with Qt4, it will be GPL'ed in Windows as well, so it will encourage people to write ree software for Windows as well. Again: a good thing, IMO. But you CAN still ue it for commercial apps if you so desire. But you have to pay for Qt one way or the other: either through source or money. And I have no problems with that. Source benefits the community as a whole, whereas money gets funneled in to developement of Qt, and that too benefits the community.
The KHTML guys are really shooting themselves in the foot with this. They certainly aren't encouraging companies to participate with open source projects. The only thing they're doing is reinforcing an existing conception about open source developers -- that they're a pain to work with.
The KDE-developers commented about the USERS who whine when Safari-patches don't get merged in to KHTML. They never whined about Apple as such. They even mentioned that Apple is abiding with the license.
How exactly are they "pain to work with"? Apple got a kick-ass HTML-code from them, with NO questions asked, no price being asked and with zero red tape! How exactly does that mean they are "pain to work with"? If anything, this incident shows that COMPANIES are "pain to work with". KDE-developers REALLY wanted to work with Apple, but Apple wasn't interested!
Nowhere in any of the linked material does it mention that the beef is actually with users. If so, you should be complaining about the shitty journalism, not me who happens to be responding to it.
Considering that this thing has been discussed quite a bit recently, I would have guessed that by now everyone who is interested on this would have read the ORIGINAL messages that sparked this whole thing? I mean this message
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I checked, Apple has it's share of quality-problems. Apple just recalled loads of iBooks and PowerBooks due to faulty batteries. Before that we have had iBooks with faulty logic-boards, overheating 12" PowerBooks, faulty latches on PowerBooks, Windtunnel G4 PowerMacs etc. etc. If Apple's quality is so high, why do Mac-users recommend NOT buying first-revision hardware?
Lots of people are asking that question when they buy Apple-hardware. No, I'm not saying that their quality sucks. I'm saying that they are not the be-all end-all when it comes to quality.
Life is like a mop. Sometimes life gets full of dirt and crud and hairballs and things and you gotta clean it out. You gotta stick it in here and rinse it off and start all over again. And sometimes life sticks to the floor so much that a mop, a mop, it's not good enough. You gotta get down there with like a toothbrush, you know, and you gotta really scrub 'cause you gotta get it off. But if that doesn't work, you can't give up. You gotta stand right up. You gotta run to a window and say, "These floors are dirty as hell, and I'm not gonna take it any more!"
All in all, there are very few people (or companies) in the world making money from software, closed or otherwise. But there's HUMUNGOUS number of people and companies who earn money from USING software! Free software (both in speech and price) lower the cost of software. While it might reduce the amount of money software-companies make (although there are lots of people and companies earning money from free software), it will save alot of money for the people/companies who USE software.
Hell those companies that save money from free software could (and many do) hire a developer or two to customize/improve the software for their needs. And they would still save money.
So, he should be treated with respect just because he's a friend of Linus? Regardless of the fact that he acted like a whining and annoying brat during the whole BK-debacle? His behavior was downright moronic, and he kept changing the license under wich BK was released. then he pulled the BK-license for OSDL, because one independent contractor of OSDL happened to Telnet in to the BK-server.
Linus and McVoy might be friends personally. But that does not mean that McVoy should earn respect because of his professional activities. Just because he's friends with Linus does not mean that he's a great guy. This whole debacle has shown that he is in fact a grade-A asshole.
He started to whine when others tried to "reverse-engineer" his precious BK. Well, too bad for him that reverse-engineering is allowed. Looking at his comments, it seems to me that he wanted BK to have similar protection a patent would give him. Of course he couldn't say that he supports software-patents, so he started bitching and moaning and being a real jerk hen people didn't like his constant license-changes and *shock and horror* tried to reverse-engineer BK.
...When they said that McVoy really is an asshole.
That reminds me of this
Well, Sony will have vast number of games already available for the console when it launches. MS will have some games for their console when it launches. By the time PS3 launches, 360 wont have anywhere near the amount of games as PS3 will have available.
As to your points:
1. We do not know the prices of 360 or PS3, so how can you say 360 will be cheaper?
2. True.
3. So? GameCube was the cheapest of the XBox-era consoles. It didn't do that well, now did it?
And Linux is replacing Apple somewhere else. So what's your point? OS X replaced Linux in some university? Run for the hills! The world is coming to an end!
They would love to do that. But it's very difficult since all they get is an occasional code-bomb (read: huge blob of code) with no access to their bug-database (so they can't check what "this fixes bug number 43665" means), no revision-history (so they do not know why some changes were made and how the code evolved), several references to internal OS X API's (which can't be used in KDE) and no real communication between Webcore-folks and KHTML-folks. KHTML-folks tried to work with Apple, they were willing to sign NDA's, they gave Apple-folks CVS-accounts etc. etc., but Apple wasn't really interested.
Which is why they are by far the biggest player in the mobile-phone business: By providing products no-one wants to use.
Ah yes, since Nokia has a product that flopped, their all non-phone products are doomed to fail as well?
Remember the Communicator? It was released years (in 1996 IIRC) before any other PDA-Phones, and it was a phenomenal success. it was the shape of things to come and they were years ahead of everyone else.
If the screen is too big, the device gets so big that people wont carry it around.
No matter what the fanboys try to tell you, they don't always "get it right". Remember the Cube? Great machine, true, but WAY overpriced.
No it isn't. WebCore is LGPL'ed, like KHTML's license requires, but Safari is not.
Yes and no. KDE-folks did not complain about Apple. They specificly mentioned that Apple is following the license and their actions are legal. What the KDE-devs complained about was the USERS who whined how KHTML-developers are "lazy" and "incompetent", since they are so slow at merging the Apple-improvements. KHTML-guys just said that since Apple does not work with KDE-developers, and they purposefully make merging of their patches as difficult as possible, it takes long time to merge those improvements.
FYI: just because the company is American, the product might be made somewhere else. Intel fabs their CPU's in Israel and Ireland, and they are assembled as sellable CPU's in Costa Rica and Malaysia. I believe IBM does fab their CPU's in USA (in Fishkill, NY) though.
What about the OS? Microsoft is American company, but they have operations all around the world. And the product is not tangible thing that has to be made in a factory, so how can you determine the nationlity of the product?
Of course, the Motherboard is also made somewhere else (propably Taiwan), the chips are made in Taiwan, China or some other place. Maybe some minimium-wage American prole slaps those components together, but it's not Made in USA by any stretch of the imagination. Slap in the display (Made in Taiwan) and mouse (made in China) and you have a definintely un-american product.
Why not compare them to the ships used by the Republic in 1-3? I mean, Star Destroyers are clear successors to those ships. I think the Republic vessels in 1-3 looked good, while still looking like older design when compared to the Imperial Star Destroyers.
No. As others have said, it was propably several years after the other events in ep. III. The uniforms were different and the ships were different. It was clear to me that several years had progressed between Anakin becoming Vader, and between Vader and Palpatine looking at the skeleton of the Death Star.
Yeah, and there was SOUND, even though they were in space! there is no sound in space, so what's up with that?!
Seriously, why is it OK to have sound in space, but having things "blowing backwards" in space is a big no-no? Is it because it would look stupid without sound? Well, it looked cooler when the droids blew backwards off the spaceship. What's the difference?
Ability to work on remote files for example. With Konqueror, I can work on files on some remote computer over SSH for example. Not only that, I can seamlessly surf the web, encode mp3's/ogg's/etc., view files etc. etc. all with one app.
Yes it does.
Yes. Didn't care that much for it.
Let's hear it for the color-blind! Having clear symbols on them would be alot better. In KDE the buttons have clear symbols on them, and they buttons are highlighted as you hover over them. "close" is highlighted in red. Couldn't be clearer.
If I want the window to be some arbitary size, I can do it myself just fine. If I want to maximise (in my book: maximise = make the window as large as possible) the window, I want it to be maximised.
Ctrl-Click for example.
So in other words, OS X does not have that feature, some third-party app provides it? So how exactly does that show the superiority of OS X? If you need third-party apps to cover for the shortcomings in OS X, I fail to see how that show the "superiority" of OS X. If anything, it highlights the shortcomings of OS X.
I'm talking about the feature in KDE, where I can tell each and every window to open in certain way. I can instruct windows belonging to some specific app to open in some specific location (including different desktops), in specific size, minimized/maximized/shaded etc. etc.
How is Safari's way of working intuitive to anyone other than Safari-users?
They are closing the selected tab. It's not really rocket-science.
Select those tabs and close them as you go.
Your whole post misses the point entirely. People tried to make the claim that OS X is the superior UI. I disagreed. And now you waste your time telling me how my problems with OS X aren't really problems at all. Well, they are for me. OS X does not work like I want my UI to work. So I fail to see how OS X is "superior". It might be the best choice for many users, but that doesn't mean that it's "superior". We all have different tastes and styles of working, and OS X does not fit mine.
OS X is a fine OS, no question about it. But it's not the be-all-end-all OS. Claiming that it's UI is best for everyone is downright ignorant. And the fact that OS X-users really try to make that claim really shows that the RDF is working. It might be the best for them. It might be the best for some Linux/Windows-users. But that does not mean that it's universally best for everyone. Such preferences are a subjective matter, and they differ from person to person.
I'm sorry, but that is an subjective opinion. I do not care that much for OS X's style (Aqua?). And I find KDE easier to use. I prefer the way KDE looks like.
Perhaps, but so is OS X. Sometimes Safari simply stops opening links in new tabs. Sometimes Dock stops displaying the "swoosh"-animation, sometimes Expose doesn't work anymore (I have mapped them to extra-buttons on my mouse). Mail on Tiger violates Apple's own HIG-guidelines etc. etc.
I enjoy that usability right now in KDE. Note: I'm not claiming that just because I find KDE superior, means that it will be superior for everyone else as well. But lots and lots of Mac-users make the claim that OS X is "superior" all the time! And the fact is that such preferences are a matter of personal taste! I do not care that much for OS X. I find KDE to be better. So what does that prove? That KDE is better? That I'm an idiot since I can't see the inherint superiority of OS X? No. It simply means that we all have different needs and tastes.
I can see why many think OS X is the best thing since sliced bread. But I'm not that enthusiastic about it.
No, I'm not talking about Windows. What makes you think that I did? I don't care much for Windows either. I do have Mac Mini with OS X on it. And while it's clearly superior to Windows, I don't find it all that compelling. Sure, it has eye-candy, but I don't care that much for it. I prefer KDE. Of course, I don't claim that KDE is the best UI for everyone, but it is the best UI for me. And for me, that's all that matters. Saying "OS X is the best UI there is!", is wrong thing to do, because that kind of things are subjective. What's "best" for someone, might not be "best" for someone else.
After using OS X for few months, I can see several bad things in it:
- Finder is rather primitive filemanager when compared to Konqueror
- The Dock is horrible. It doesn't even use screen-corners properly (thus violating Fitt's law). And it tries to act as a tool to launch apps, and manage running apps in the same time. It ends up being confusing.
- Buttons to minimize/maximise/close windows are terrible. They have no symbols in them (unless you hover over them with a mouse) and they are too small.
- And when I click "maximise", I want the windows to REALLY maximise, not to adjust it's size to some arbitary size.
- I find it rather confusing that closing the window does not close the app. I fail to see the added benefit of having Safari-window close (for example), but the app keeps on running in the background. When I re-launch the Safari-window, it starts from the beginning, so what's the point of keeping the app running?
- Why do I have to double-click the icons in order to open them?
- Where are virtual desktops?
- No window-specific-settings?
- I don't like how Safari handles tabs. Each tab has a close-button of it's own. That means if I want to close bunch of tabs, I have to move the mouse around, instead of keeping the mouse still and just clicking the mouse-button.
And no, don't bother listing reasons why OS X is superior. Like I said: it might be the best GUI there is FOR YOU. That does not mean it's the best GUI FOR ME. Your reasons for preferring OS X are not my reasons. And while I say that KDE is the best GUI for me, I don't try to claim that it would be best GUI for you. We each have different tastes and needs. Your are different from mine.
they seem to be right on time for christmas 2006-schedule. When is Xbox360 going to be available? They have missed the 2004 christmas-sales! For shame!
How exactly? I mean, neither of those look like an iPod. Or do you think that they do, since they are both white (PS3 comes in other colors as well), and iPod is white as well? So, all new products that happen to be white, are iPod knock-offs?
For you, perhaps. But that doesn't mean it's best for everyone. Different people have different tastes and needs.
I think that resentment is justified. Apple got lots of code from KDE, code that would have taken alot of time and money for them to develop otherwise. And while Apple abides by the license, they have made the conscious decision to make it hard for KDE. I can understand why KDE-developers resentment towards Apple.
What I find interesting and sad, is the Apple's offer to KDE about using WebCore in KDE instead of KHTML. Apple gave KDE the cold shoulder for a long time ("So long, and thanks for all the code!"), taking advantage of improvements made by KDE-folks, while doing the bare minimium in return. And now people praise Apple for their offer of using WebCore in KDE. People think that Apple is somehow "saving" KDE, when the fact is that KDE would not need "saving" if Apple had played ball all along.
And Qt is widely used in non-free software, so I fail to see the point. It merely encourages people to write GPL'ed software, and that is a good thing in my book.
Starting with Qt4, it will be GPL'ed in Windows as well, so it will encourage people to write ree software for Windows as well. Again: a good thing, IMO. But you CAN still ue it for commercial apps if you so desire. But you have to pay for Qt one way or the other: either through source or money. And I have no problems with that. Source benefits the community as a whole, whereas money gets funneled in to developement of Qt, and that too benefits the community.
The KDE-developers commented about the USERS who whine when Safari-patches don't get merged in to KHTML. They never whined about Apple as such. They even mentioned that Apple is abiding with the license.
How exactly are they "pain to work with"? Apple got a kick-ass HTML-code from them, with NO questions asked, no price being asked and with zero red tape! How exactly does that mean they are "pain to work with"? If anything, this incident shows that COMPANIES are "pain to work with". KDE-developers REALLY wanted to work with Apple, but Apple wasn't interested!
Considering that this thing has been discussed quite a bit recently, I would have guessed that by now everyone who is interested on this would have read the ORIGINAL messages that sparked this whole thing? I mean this message