I thought the Suse configuration tools where KDE-based. In the same way that Mandrake needs gtk in an otherwise "pure" kde system for it's configuration tools?
Personally I would prefer gimp to have the same kind of interface as Kdevelop 3.0 so that everybody can choose exactly what interface they want - personally I would like my main "gimp" window to be the picture I am editing, because I rarely edit with more than one picture at a time - and for those when I do, I would prefer tabs to choose between them.
And since I edit on a laptop with 1024x768 screen, IDEAl mode would be perfect to hide all those bloody huge dialogs out the way until when I want 'em!!!
Running against spamoracle (bayesian filter)... with a test sample of approximately 1500 spam/1500 legitimate emails : Nope, it recognises that as spam alright:-)
Read the article. The company set up dozens of websites in order to get themselves in the top ranks of google - as in, all of the top 10 that you would see on google would in actual fact *be the same company*.
That acn hardly be considered a situation in which you can price-compare. Google is simply fixing the problem.
You can download the desktop manager in powertools, but it doesn't work in anywhere near a remotely useful way. Some of the more serious bugs:
1. There is no way to move a window to a particular desktop other than to create it on that desktop. 2. When a modal dialog or message box appears in an application, the applicaiton will automatically *move* to your current desktop. 3. It doesn't work properly with Microsoft's own applications, such as Visual Studio. This alone makes it unusable for me at work.
(We are talking XP here, ostensibly the most mature and feature complete of the windows desktops).
Well, I could rant some more. Basically, the reason there is no desktop manager on windows is apparent as soon as you try to use one - they simply show up all of the gaping holes and design flaws in the underlying window manager, where no two windows behave in the same way.
Ok, I'll stop ranting now and get back to coding. Thank heavens for KDE:-)
Televisions don't actually run at 25 frames per second - they run at (talking PAL here), 50 fields per second, where each field contains half of the picture (1 field takes the odd lines, one takes the even lines, etc).
Each field happens at a different place in time, so on a normal television, you never actually see one "complete" frame.
The advantage is that it increases the amount of temporal information, which humans are more sensitive to.
In order to generate the same amount of temporal information on a computer, you need to update the screen the same number of times as there are fields - 50 fps. This is why you need a high frame rate to reach the same smoothness as television.
Now start an application on one desktop. Now, move it to another desktop.
Whoops, I don't believe you can. But that's ok, just start it on the correct desktop in the first place.
Whoops, but if the window auto-raises because of a dialog or something, the app changes desktop as well.
Erm, at this point I gave up since it defeated the purpose of having multiple desktops if you can't choose which desktop to put your app on and make it stay there:-)
Well, having recently started my career in the software industry, I agree, except that I don't believe the cost is actually lower, but much higher.
What tends to happen is that someone says "we want this done yesterday", so everyone codes like mad (and as a result, produces shite code) to meet the deadline. Then, after the deadline, they have to go back and write it properly, if they are lucky. Otherwise, they have to throw more crap on top of the old crap until it becomes too late to tidy up and the only solution is to throw everything away and start over from scratch.
When they cycle begins all over again.
Now I haven't been in the industry long enough (heh, like, two or three months) to know that this is the case for sure, but it's very obvious that if you write code badly, at some point your going to have to write it again.
If your told to write crap code (i.e. write it quick, cut all the corners, ignore coding standards, don't test it properly, don't design for reusability, just get it finished) then your company has just pissed money down the drain.
X is not as precious as an earth. Replacing X would be more like abandoning a smoke-filled factory with endless rooms and machinery added onto it at odd angles with difficult procedures to follow, making it very hard to work there or learn how in the first place. Just start over clean and fresh with new ideas.
Why not simply tidy up the factory? I will agree that X is quite cluttered with old ideas that may not be implemented in the best way, but if you try and build a replacement, you had better make sure that it can do *everything* that the current X can do. Then, you can tout your cleaner architecture and new features as an advantage over X.
It would be much easier and far less daunting to start with the current version of X, pick something you don't like, and work on that. Make a more flexible, powerful system that then uses an X compatability layer to restrict that power to what X can handle, but make sure that it can *at least* to everything that X can already handle, otherwise you will simply break stuff and irritate people.
But if your intent on starting a replacement from scratch, I'll see you in 10 years;-)
Please god, not a "similar in quality" outlook clone. I have had the misfortune to use that pile of crap for the past week, and quality is not a word that springs to my mind.
As a quick example, notice how the list view in which your email messages are displayed has a scrollbar that doesn't conform with any other scrollbar used in any other microsoft package.
Or the fact that it is incapable of reading your open standards news groups like every other email/news client under the sun - including it's "lite" version, outlook express.
And it feels "clunky", as if it's been thrown together without much thought - which is not a good feel for what is supposed to be a mature app. Maybe I'm spoilt as a KDE user, but I like my user interface to be a pleasant and consistant experience.
Hello world compiled on gcc is 3072 bytes. What kind of floppy disks do you use?
But the code is very efficient, it took me all of 30 seconds to write. Think, I could have an hour or so on making in 50 bytes in length instead, now that would have been *really* inefficient of me, wouldn't it? Especially when it means I have to rewrite it everytime I change platform, and that I would probably have trouble changing it if the string needed to be translated into german, and considering that my computer these days has a clock speed more than 100 times greater than the atari...
Well, you need to be able to make a living somewhere...
but at the same time that they are working on their hobby for fun, they are building up a great deal of working knowledge in their respective area, building up relations and respect from a huge group of software developers who will turn into managers some day, as well as having the advantage that other people can see and criticise their code, thus letting them get a much broader and more rounded view of what developing a software project takes...
No, I can't see what is so successful about it at all.
Free source software does not tend to have "that one shining beacon" of a feature to it's name, but what it does do is have a huge amount of breadth with the features - they become incredibly easy to implement, which means that software is easier to right (obviously, you need to pick the right toolkits for this to be true though).
For instance, in writing a KDE application, with a *tiny* amount of effort, your new application will get dockable widgets and toolbars, menus which can be rearranged from a simple document (without a recompile), full internationalisation support, multiple undo/redo functionality as standard, network transparency, automatic layout/resizing management... the list goes on and on.
Now the innovation isn't that these things are new, but that they are incredibly easy to implement and use, which leads to a greater consistancy of application.
Of course, this ins't true of all open source applications, but you will find that the same occurs - whereas in a closed source application, you tend to get innovative features which work in a single application, in the open source world,. the same features will be implemented so generally that any application can use them.
Of course they are happy. You got lot's of college kids actually learning how to code on large scale projects that they normally wouldn't have had the chance to see until three or four years down the line. And then they get employed and the IT industry is better for it.
To be fair, I am against privacy in general - but it has to be completely no privacy. In other words, if people are watching me, I should know that they are watching me, and visa-versa.
So the point that I let an unknown and untrusted website know what I am doing with my own details attached is the time when they publically announce all the info that they are recieving and what they are doing with it.
Off topic rant, I know, but what can I say - I've had a drink:-)
What percentage of people browsing the web are blind or the like? maybe 1%? Why should I make my site accessable to the 1%? I know this is flame bait, but let me take this a step further..
Because one day, you might be one of those 1% and then you'll really wish that the other 99% cared about the 1%.
<i>My site is in english, so I also be required (or whatever he is pushing for, I don't care.) to support russian? or all of the other languages?</i>
Your site does, if it is written properly. Try looking at the language translation page on google, which will automatically translate a web page for you, or Babel fish.
Whilst the translation isn't perfect, I have not seen a page anytime recently where I couldn't at least get the gist of what was being said.
More to the point, we should be welcoming this kind of attack (you know what I mean), if it shows that there is a weakness in the way that a vital component of the internet works, then knowing about it early means that solutions can be fielded and tested to secure the internet against these attacks.
I am very glad that this kind of attack is being discussed in the open; rather than being hidden from public view. Much better that it discussed now rather than after somebody attempts to render the internet useless.
Converts from RPM to debs, or tar.gz's, etc. apt-get it if your debian, urpmi it if you want it on Mandrake for any reason (converting those goddamn debs!), I guess if your slackware you already know how to find it...
I wish I had mod points at the moment - you'd get +1 insightful.
I have two nephews (one in secondary school, one getting close), and all they do is fight and argue over who's turn it is on the computer to play games. Nothing wrong with games, but what about browsing the web to solve your homework problems, or typing up your homework rather than hand-writing it? Nope, they can't do that in the slightest.
Could I browse the internet at that age myself? No, it wasn't widespread at the time. Do I look back and wish I could of? You betcha.
It's simple - make it a left mouse drag. You avoid all conflict with the popup windows, and you get rid of the broken design where the user cannot be sure exactly what the left-mouse drag action will do.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought the Suse configuration tools where KDE-based. In the same way that Mandrake needs gtk in an otherwise "pure" kde system for it's configuration tools?
Personally I would prefer gimp to have the same kind of interface as Kdevelop 3.0 so that everybody can choose exactly what interface they want - personally I would like my main "gimp" window to be the picture I am editing, because I rarely edit with more than one picture at a time - and for those when I do, I would prefer tabs to choose between them.
And since I edit on a laptop with 1024x768 screen, IDEAl mode would be perfect to hide all those bloody huge dialogs out the way until when I want 'em!!!
Running against spamoracle (bayesian filter)... with a test sample of approximately 1500 spam/1500 legitimate emails : Nope, it recognises that as spam alright :-)
Score: 1.00 -- 15
Details: viral:01 barely:98 attack:98 spammers:98 annual:98 season:98 spammers:98 8000:98 user:01 i'd:02 missed:03 friday:04 appears:07 done:
07 spam:90
Read the article. The company set up dozens of websites in order to get themselves in the top ranks of google - as in, all of the top 10 that you would see on google would in actual fact *be the same company*.
That acn hardly be considered a situation in which you can price-compare. Google is simply fixing the problem.
You can download the desktop manager in powertools, but it doesn't work in anywhere near a remotely useful way. Some of the more serious bugs :
:-)
1. There is no way to move a window to a particular desktop other than to create it on that desktop.
2. When a modal dialog or message box appears in an application, the applicaiton will automatically *move* to your current desktop.
3. It doesn't work properly with Microsoft's own applications, such as Visual Studio. This alone makes it unusable for me at work.
(We are talking XP here, ostensibly the most mature and feature complete of the windows desktops).
Well, I could rant some more. Basically, the reason there is no desktop manager on windows is apparent as soon as you try to use one - they simply show up all of the gaping holes and design flaws in the underlying window manager, where no two windows behave in the same way.
Ok, I'll stop ranting now and get back to coding. Thank heavens for KDE
Televisions don't actually run at 25 frames per second - they run at (talking PAL here), 50 fields per second, where each field contains half of the picture (1 field takes the odd lines, one takes the even lines, etc).
Each field happens at a different place in time, so on a normal television, you never actually see one "complete" frame.
The advantage is that it increases the amount of temporal information, which humans are more sensitive to.
In order to generate the same amount of temporal information on a computer, you need to update the screen the same number of times as there are fields - 50 fps. This is why you need a high frame rate to reach the same smoothness as television.
Would be much simpler if it worked properly.
:-)
Now start an application on one desktop. Now, move it to another desktop.
Whoops, I don't believe you can. But that's ok, just start it on the correct desktop in the first place.
Whoops, but if the window auto-raises because of a dialog or something, the app changes desktop as well.
Erm, at this point I gave up since it defeated the purpose of having multiple desktops if you can't choose which desktop to put your app on and make it stay there
I think you'll find that most of the most productive people in open source are funded by themselves, becuase they have jobs.
Well, having recently started my career in the software industry, I agree, except that I don't believe the cost is actually lower, but much higher.
What tends to happen is that someone says "we want this done yesterday", so everyone codes like mad (and as a result, produces shite code) to meet the deadline. Then, after the deadline, they have to go back and write it properly, if they are lucky. Otherwise, they have to throw more crap on top of the old crap until it becomes too late to tidy up and the only solution is to throw everything away and start over from scratch.
When they cycle begins all over again.
Now I haven't been in the industry long enough (heh, like, two or three months) to know that this is the case for sure, but it's very obvious that if you write code badly, at some point your going to have to write it again.
If your told to write crap code (i.e. write it quick, cut all the corners, ignore coding standards, don't test it properly, don't design for reusability, just get it finished) then your company has just pissed money down the drain.
Oh well, that's capitalism for you.
X is not as precious as an earth. Replacing X would be more like abandoning a smoke-filled factory with endless rooms and machinery added onto it at odd angles with difficult procedures to follow, making it very hard to work there or learn how in the first place. Just start over clean and fresh with new ideas.
;-)
Why not simply tidy up the factory? I will agree that X is quite cluttered with old ideas that may not be implemented in the best way, but if you try and build a replacement, you had better make sure that it can do *everything* that the current X can do. Then, you can tout your cleaner architecture and new features as an advantage over X.
It would be much easier and far less daunting to start with the current version of X, pick something you don't like, and work on that. Make a more flexible, powerful system that then uses an X compatability layer to restrict that power to what X can handle, but make sure that it can *at least* to everything that X can already handle, otherwise you will simply break stuff and irritate people.
But if your intent on starting a replacement from scratch, I'll see you in 10 years
Please god, not a "similar in quality" outlook clone. I have had the misfortune to use that pile of crap for the past week, and quality is not a word that springs to my mind.
As a quick example, notice how the list view in which your email messages are displayed has a scrollbar that doesn't conform with any other scrollbar used in any other microsoft package.
Or the fact that it is incapable of reading your open standards news groups like every other email/news client under the sun - including it's "lite" version, outlook express.
And it feels "clunky", as if it's been thrown together without much thought - which is not a good feel for what is supposed to be a mature app. Maybe I'm spoilt as a KDE user, but I like my user interface to be a pleasant and consistant experience.
Hello world compiled on gcc is 3072 bytes. What kind of floppy disks do you use?
But the code is very efficient, it took me all of 30 seconds to write. Think, I could have an hour or so on making in 50 bytes in length instead, now that would have been *really* inefficient of me, wouldn't it? Especially when it means I have to rewrite it everytime I change platform, and that I would probably have trouble changing it if the string needed to be translated into german, and considering that my computer these days has a clock speed more than 100 times greater than the atari...
Yes, but most kids move out between 20-25 years into the investment....
Well, you need to be able to make a living somewhere...
but at the same time that they are working on their hobby for fun, they are building up a great deal of working knowledge in their respective area, building up relations and respect from a huge group of software developers who will turn into managers some day, as well as having the advantage that other people can see and criticise their code, thus letting them get a much broader and more rounded view of what developing a software project takes...
No, I can't see what is so successful about it at all.
Free source software does not tend to have "that one shining beacon" of a feature to it's name, but what it does do is have a huge amount of breadth with the features - they become incredibly easy to implement, which means that software is easier to right (obviously, you need to pick the right toolkits for this to be true though).
For instance, in writing a KDE application, with a *tiny* amount of effort, your new application will get dockable widgets and toolbars, menus which can be rearranged from a simple document (without a recompile), full internationalisation support, multiple undo/redo functionality as standard, network transparency, automatic layout/resizing management... the list goes on and on.
Now the innovation isn't that these things are new, but that they are incredibly easy to implement and use, which leads to a greater consistancy of application.
Of course, this ins't true of all open source applications, but you will find that the same occurs - whereas in a closed source application, you tend to get innovative features which work in a single application, in the open source world,. the same features will be implemented so generally that any application can use them.
Of course they are happy. You got lot's of college kids actually learning how to code on large scale projects that they normally wouldn't have had the chance to see until three or four years down the line. And then they get employed and the IT industry is better for it.
To be fair, I am against privacy in general - but it has to be completely no privacy. In other words, if people are watching me, I should know that they are watching me, and visa-versa.
:-)
So the point that I let an unknown and untrusted website know what I am doing with my own details attached is the time when they publically announce all the info that they are recieving and what they are doing with it.
Off topic rant, I know, but what can I say - I've had a drink
What percentage of people browsing the web are blind or the like? maybe 1%? Why should I make my site accessable to the 1%? I know this is flame bait, but let me take this a step further..
Because one day, you might be one of those 1% and then you'll really wish that the other 99% cared about the 1%.
<i>My site is in english, so I also be required (or whatever he is pushing for, I don't care.) to support russian? or all of the other languages?</i>
Your site does, if it is written properly. Try looking at the language translation page on google, which will automatically translate a web page for you, or Babel fish.
Whilst the translation isn't perfect, I have not seen a page anytime recently where I couldn't at least get the gist of what was being said.
More to the point, we should be welcoming this kind of attack (you know what I mean), if it shows that there is a weakness in the way that a vital component of the internet works, then knowing about it early means that solutions can be fielded and tested to secure the internet against these attacks.
I am very glad that this kind of attack is being discussed in the open; rather than being hidden from public view. Much better that it discussed now rather than after somebody attempts to render the internet useless.
I don't know, but they never send bug reports.
Never heard of alien?
Converts from RPM to debs, or tar.gz's, etc. apt-get it if your debian, urpmi it if you want it on Mandrake for any reason (converting those goddamn debs!), I guess if your slackware you already know how to find it...
I wish I had mod points at the moment - you'd get +1 insightful.
I have two nephews (one in secondary school, one getting close), and all they do is fight and argue over who's turn it is on the computer to play games. Nothing wrong with games, but what about browsing the web to solve your homework problems, or typing up your homework rather than hand-writing it? Nope, they can't do that in the slightest.
Could I browse the internet at that age myself? No, it wasn't widespread at the time. Do I look back and wish I could of? You betcha.
Why else do so many lose the ability to walk the moment they leave the night club (and the BASS) and try and walk home?
It's simple - make it a left mouse drag. You avoid all conflict with the popup windows, and you get rid of the broken design where the user cannot be sure exactly what the left-mouse drag action will do.
I'm not suprised, I've got three different books on the Win32 API and it isn't mentioned in any of them.
So much for internationalisation