This means some wierd app you use to control industrial machinery that was written for Windows 95 most likely still works on Windows XP.
Ha! Let me guess, you've never worked with implementing an application of any consequence across different versions of Windows before and you are talking out of your ass here. I'm right, aren't I? I have enough issues with upgrading relatively simple business applications from 2K or 98 to WinXP.
If you assume that your industrial control code that you wrote for win95 will work in WinXP, please let me and others know first so we can evacuate ourselves from the building. Sheesh...
You have a naive view of the media. If/when someone posts a reasonable reply to this garbage, the news media will pick up on it as "controversy" and portray each sides as having a legitimate difference of opinion. They won't bother to try to find the truth of the matter, in fact they will even paper over facts that make them appear to favour a particular "side".
I tried the SuSE 9.1 LiveCD the other day
on
Suse 9.1 Reviews?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I was highly frustrated to see they didn't bother to include Ximian Gnome on the CD -- it was KDE or nothing. I have two network cards in my machine, and I was dissapointed to see that even though only one card had an cable plugged in it made the dead card primary so I couldn't access the internet. Of course, because it did that I got to play with YaST2 a little bit, and it was an impressive tool.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that it isn't the resposibility of the Gnome developers produce what the Gnome users want?
Was I saying that, or was I saying that he sounds like someone that would appreciate the design decisions of KDE? You have a choice, you know... you can even mix and match if you don't want to fully choose between them. It's not hard to use substitute konqueror for nautilus if you like it. I just don't get what all the complaining is about -- Gnome isn't broken, it's just different from what they seem want. All I was doing is pointing out that he seemed to be wanting what KDE is providing.
I'm not attacking his view, I'm simply pointing out that that the design choices he indicated are more representative of the KDE project than the Gnome project. I happen to _like_ the direction that the Gnome developers are taking the project. But saying that KDE works great for people that think like he seems to... how is that unfair?
And like you I also like the XFCE project, and I'd run it myself if I was using a desktop that was sluggish running Gnome. But my problem with KDE isn't the widget set or the icons -- there are themes for KDE that look very pretty. I'm talking about the basic approach to applications -- each project's position on the balancing of neat-o features and usability.
I guess that I've never had the same problems with Gnome that you seem to describe. I appreciate that they've made some hard decisions to produce an incredibly sleek and kickass Desktop Environment. So maybe I resent it a bit when people bitch at the developers of the project for the very reasons that help define it.
What would you think about people that whinged about Ferrari for making cars that were too low to the ground? I'd say, look at Honda, they make great cars for people that prefer those design choices. It doesn't mean you suck for not liking it, it's just a realization that Hondas and Ferraris aren't for everyone, and it's good to have the choice between the two.
Of course, there is obviously a middle ground between the two. Judging by the response here it sounds like some people like Gnome but want just a little bit more functionality. In the case of the spatial browsing option, in hindsight they should have probably made it more obvious how to make the old behaviour the default. But in general, they do a really good job of keeping things simple and functional, and I hope they continue with this general direction.
It's "okay" to prefer KDE for any reason you'd like. Your preferences are yours and it's not my place to criticise what you prefer. On my slower computers I use XFCE, that is my preference... is that okay with you?
Look dude... you are acting like it's the responsibility of the Gnome developers to produce a desktop that you like. It sounds to me that you like the design choices of KDE over the design choices of Gnome. Personally, I find the KDE applications and general desktop environment ugly and cluttered, while I enjoy the simple and sleek elegance of Gnome. So it should be apparent to you that I prefer the design choices of Gnome over the design choices of KDE.
Two desktop environments for X11, each optimized for users with different preferences for user interfaces. And the best part is that they all interoperate, so I have no problem running KWorldClock in my Gnome environment, and you can run Evolution or whatever you want in your KDE. Check out what Havoc had to say about how modern DEs can interoperate these days.
So by my definitions, Gnome is progressing rapidly. I'm enjoying version 2.6 over 2.4 after using it for only a few days. Do I consider KDE to be regressing because it is getting more cluttered and ugly by my standards? That would hardly be fair... it's progressing in it's own way, and the same is true for the Gnome project. Mr. Rodney King, we _can_ all get along, just don't let slashdot know.
Based on the screenshots I saw yesterday, it was pretty obvious to me that they had taken a stock Fedora Core installation and changed the icon for the "Start" button from a Red Hat to a magnifying glass.
I'd say these people are doing very little and claiming very much -- typical.
Whenever I read about new some new security measure, I wonder if they are talking about security for me or security from me. Am I buying a lock on my front door to keep potential burglers out, or a lock on my door to keep me out? So the answer is no... I'm not interested in paying for an upgrade that prevents me from using the content I purchased. What do they think we are, stupid? Oh right, that...
That's it... I'm giving up on Debian. I know they mean well but some users just want a stable system that has had application updates since 1994. I agree with the ideology of their actions, I think the unfree documenation should be removed from the project. But that should be a project goal for the next release, because we were nearly ready for one in the coming months.
It's sad, because the idea of a community driven project is noble, and I hate to see it fail. But this is failure -- they have abandoned their release goals and further postponed an already rediculously overdue rlease. They just aren't serious about maintaining a stable release, and thus I'm not going to take them seriously.
Not that they owe me anything -- I appreciate all the hard work that the Debian Developers do. But this is just the last straw...
You don't like Epiphany because it doesn't have the features of Galeon or Firefox? Boy-o, I'm afraid that you are missing the point completely. Epiphany is meant to be a cool, crisp, and simple browser for Gnome. It does that job wonderfully. It's not capable of these things because it's not designed to, following the HIG that proclaims (paraphrasing of course) useability over features. That's the freaking point... an equivilent argument is that that Christians worship God too much.
The Gnome project is different in that respect than the KDE project. I wouldn't say it's better than KDE, that's not really fair. Since I appreciate the care they put towards useablity, and am willing to sacrific some gee-whiz features, Gnome is the right desktop environment for me. Notice how I'm not speaking for anyone else? The KDE folks have a lot of nice apps... k3b for example. They deserve all the credit they get. But I find every application cluttered and ugly -- though rich in features -- it's a matter of personal taste so don't flame me for being honest.
Based on what I just said, is it any surprise now that I *love* Epiphany? It's a delicious browsing experience and one of the best things about the Gnome project. It fits with the general sensibility of the project, and it rocks. Advanced users can install Firefox or Mozilla if they'd like to -- most distros can/do include one of those. This is just about the default browser choice, and they wisely chose the browser that best fits the project.
Think about it for a second. They "are now enabling former MP3.com artists to visit www.MP3isBack.com and recover their MP3.com music, instantly re-generating their artist pages with just a few clicks. " Sounds pretty clear to me that they aren't allowed to redistribute the music without permission of the orginal artist due to the mp3.com orginal TOS, but they could pass on the files without right of redistribution. And if the artist reauthorizes the distribution on the new sites, they have the files and the permission.
Damn it, how I am suppose to have a good old-fashioned flame war if you're going to be so reasonable when you reply?;-)
So anyhow, I think we're in agreement about anything worth debating here. I should point out that there is a good local theatre just a few blocks from my house, but I do realize that you are correct -- that is the exception not the rule. Oh and if you follow the link... those prices are in Canadian dollars (heh heh heh).
I am talking about the method of pricing, not the prices themselves. Put your frustration with ticket prices aside for a second and try to abstract the problem so you understand what I am saying. To use your coffee analogy, it would be a good deal if the coffee shops had their 16-ounce latte for $4 and sold the lid for $2 instead of having a fixed price of $6 for the coffee plus lid. In that situation, every customer is better off or equal with the variable pricing scheme than they would be with a fixed price. The same applies to movie ticket pricing.
Oh, and you seem to be under the mistaken impression that movie theatres are fleecing you... if that were true they would be making money hand over fist but guess what, they aren't. The cinema business is notoriously unprofitable, and major players routinely lose money or go bankrupt. Do you have idea idea how expensive real estate is? How about the costs of maintaining a large-scale enterprise like those huge multiplexes? I didn't think so. Someone is indeed fleecing you, but it's the movie production companies and the actors that are getting rich off your $12 tickets, not the shareholders of your local cinema.
$18 for the wife and I to see "Funny Guy 3: Pratfalls and Flatulence" at the local Chaineplex is decidedly not a good deal.
Guess what? Paying $18 for that movie and skipping the $7 popcorn is a better deal than paying $23 to get in the door and $2 for popcorn. Why? Because people with only $18 to spend get to see the movie, and people with $25 can still get a movie and popcorn.
I'm not talking about the quality of movies out today, or the relative costs of DVD or second-run theatres. I'm talking about theatres using variable prices to maximize profits from the people best able to pay the money, which is a good deal for everyone.
And your comments make it appear that you aren't reading my comments properly. Please explain exactly when popular Gnome applications receive ongoing usability testing (which consists of the passive observation of people using the software within the experimental circumstances I have previously described).
Perhaps *you* aren't reading your own comments properly. You said usability testing wasn't being done, I showed you that indeed it was. So now you twist your original comment and pretend you were talking about ongoing usability testing. I get the distinct impression that you will continue arguing this point by adding new definitions and specifications as to what defines 'usablilty testing' so that you can continue to make your point. I know, I know, you're never wrong...
If your point is "free software projects don't do ongoing useability testing" that is seemingly correct, but that is a far cry from "Free software lacks usability testing" which was the title of your original post and a good summary of your original argument. The fact is that Gnome has done this type of testing and come up with a set of guidelines that they adhere to pretty closely.
Does this mean that they couldn't benefit from more usability testing? I'm not saying that... they probably could, and I imagine they will. But in the meantime the good folks at Gnome have proven than free software can produce a desktop with usability as a primary focus and that free software isn't "ill-equipped to do anything even approaching proper usability testing."
I'm more concerned about them busting people for "outside food." I mean really, I could get a steak dinner for the price of their popcorn and a drink!
As everyone and their dog knows, the theatres make most of their money on food and drink sales. Many people take this as a sign they should whinge and complain about the greedy theatre companies, but that's missing the point. The point is, the cost of the ticket is actually a good deal because by charging exhorbatent prices for popcorn they can get money from people with more disposable income while still allowing people with less disposable income to see the movie.
See the point now? If you don't like wasting money you win, because you are paying less than you would if similar profit margins were applied to the ticket prices and the concessions. If you don't mind paying $5 for popcorn, you can and the theatre stays in business as a result. The only loss to regular folk is that they don't get cheap food while they watch an underpriced ticket -- I say tough beans because you're getting a pretty good deal as it is.
I do believe you are wrong.
on
GNOME for Grandma
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Sun did studies like the ones you are referring to and contributed the results back into Gnome. Sure enough, I found a reference to this on the Gnome.org HIG website.
Your original comment makes it appear that you have not used a recent version of Gnome (2.4 or 2.6) because it that project a very prominent example of how free software can have a focus on usability and still provide useful applications. You really ought to try it out if you haven't lately.
Slashdot Mirror
eh? WTF, you Canadian or something?
This means some wierd app you use to control industrial machinery that was written for Windows 95 most likely still works on Windows XP.
Ha! Let me guess, you've never worked with implementing an application of any consequence across different versions of Windows before and you are talking out of your ass here. I'm right, aren't I? I have enough issues with upgrading relatively simple business applications from 2K or 98 to WinXP.
If you assume that your industrial control code that you wrote for win95 will work in WinXP, please let me and others know first so we can evacuate ourselves from the building. Sheesh...
You have a naive view of the media. If/when someone posts a reasonable reply to this garbage, the news media will pick up on it as "controversy" and portray each sides as having a legitimate difference of opinion. They won't bother to try to find the truth of the matter, in fact they will even paper over facts that make them appear to favour a particular "side".
I was highly frustrated to see they didn't bother to include Ximian Gnome on the CD -- it was KDE or nothing. I have two network cards in my machine, and I was dissapointed to see that even though only one card had an cable plugged in it made the dead card primary so I couldn't access the internet. Of course, because it did that I got to play with YaST2 a little bit, and it was an impressive tool.
:-( :-(
ROFL LOL
Are you seriously trying to tell me that it isn't the resposibility of the Gnome developers produce what the Gnome users want?
Was I saying that, or was I saying that he sounds like someone that would appreciate the design decisions of KDE? You have a choice, you know... you can even mix and match if you don't want to fully choose between them. It's not hard to use substitute konqueror for nautilus if you like it. I just don't get what all the complaining is about -- Gnome isn't broken, it's just different from what they seem want. All I was doing is pointing out that he seemed to be wanting what KDE is providing.
I'm not attacking his view, I'm simply pointing out that that the design choices he indicated are more representative of the KDE project than the Gnome project. I happen to _like_ the direction that the Gnome developers are taking the project. But saying that KDE works great for people that think like he seems to... how is that unfair?
And like you I also like the XFCE project, and I'd run it myself if I was using a desktop that was sluggish running Gnome. But my problem with KDE isn't the widget set or the icons -- there are themes for KDE that look very pretty. I'm talking about the basic approach to applications -- each project's position on the balancing of neat-o features and usability.
I guess that I've never had the same problems with Gnome that you seem to describe. I appreciate that they've made some hard decisions to produce an incredibly sleek and kickass Desktop Environment. So maybe I resent it a bit when people bitch at the developers of the project for the very reasons that help define it.
What would you think about people that whinged about Ferrari for making cars that were too low to the ground? I'd say, look at Honda, they make great cars for people that prefer those design choices. It doesn't mean you suck for not liking it, it's just a realization that Hondas and Ferraris aren't for everyone, and it's good to have the choice between the two.
Of course, there is obviously a middle ground between the two. Judging by the response here it sounds like some people like Gnome but want just a little bit more functionality. In the case of the spatial browsing option, in hindsight they should have probably made it more obvious how to make the old behaviour the default. But in general, they do a really good job of keeping things simple and functional, and I hope they continue with this general direction.
Are you seriously trying to say that you support Nazism?
Oh sorry... was I putting words in your mouth?
It's "okay" to prefer KDE for any reason you'd like. Your preferences are yours and it's not my place to criticise what you prefer. On my slower computers I use XFCE, that is my preference... is that okay with you?
Look dude... you are acting like it's the responsibility of the Gnome developers to produce a desktop that you like. It sounds to me that you like the design choices of KDE over the design choices of Gnome. Personally, I find the KDE applications and general desktop environment ugly and cluttered, while I enjoy the simple and sleek elegance of Gnome. So it should be apparent to you that I prefer the design choices of Gnome over the design choices of KDE.
Two desktop environments for X11, each optimized for users with different preferences for user interfaces. And the best part is that they all interoperate, so I have no problem running KWorldClock in my Gnome environment, and you can run Evolution or whatever you want in your KDE. Check out what Havoc had to say about how modern DEs can interoperate these days.
So by my definitions, Gnome is progressing rapidly. I'm enjoying version 2.6 over 2.4 after using it for only a few days. Do I consider KDE to be regressing because it is getting more cluttered and ugly by my standards? That would hardly be fair... it's progressing in it's own way, and the same is true for the Gnome project. Mr. Rodney King, we _can_ all get along, just don't let slashdot know.
Yes, it's really too bad that he didn't tell you exactly how he got it to work. Forshame!
You might find this enlightening.
Right wing racist idiots like you ought to take a look at this before making claims about the importance of IQ.
Guess what? IQ doesn't mean shit, except that you can do IQ tests really well.
Based on the screenshots I saw yesterday, it was pretty obvious to me that they had taken a stock Fedora Core installation and changed the icon for the "Start" button from a Red Hat to a magnifying glass.
I'd say these people are doing very little and claiming very much -- typical.
I wish Redhat would officially support home users, but I guess that's not where the potential money is.
I can almost see the light bulb going off in your head.
Whenever I read about new some new security measure, I wonder if they are talking about security for me or security from me. Am I buying a lock on my front door to keep potential burglers out, or a lock on my door to keep me out? So the answer is no... I'm not interested in paying for an upgrade that prevents me from using the content I purchased. What do they think we are, stupid? Oh right, that...
That's it... I'm giving up on Debian. I know they mean well but some users just want a stable system that has had application updates since 1994. I agree with the ideology of their actions, I think the unfree documenation should be removed from the project. But that should be a project goal for the next release, because we were nearly ready for one in the coming months.
It's sad, because the idea of a community driven project is noble, and I hate to see it fail. But this is failure -- they have abandoned their release goals and further postponed an already rediculously overdue rlease. They just aren't serious about maintaining a stable release, and thus I'm not going to take them seriously.
Not that they owe me anything -- I appreciate all the hard work that the Debian Developers do. But this is just the last straw...
You don't like Epiphany because it doesn't have the features of Galeon or Firefox? Boy-o, I'm afraid that you are missing the point completely. Epiphany is meant to be a cool, crisp, and simple browser for Gnome. It does that job wonderfully. It's not capable of these things because it's not designed to, following the HIG that proclaims (paraphrasing of course) useability over features. That's the freaking point... an equivilent argument is that that Christians worship God too much.
The Gnome project is different in that respect than the KDE project. I wouldn't say it's better than KDE, that's not really fair. Since I appreciate the care they put towards useablity, and am willing to sacrific some gee-whiz features, Gnome is the right desktop environment for me. Notice how I'm not speaking for anyone else? The KDE folks have a lot of nice apps... k3b for example. They deserve all the credit they get. But I find every application cluttered and ugly -- though rich in features -- it's a matter of personal taste so don't flame me for being honest.
Based on what I just said, is it any surprise now that I *love* Epiphany? It's a delicious browsing experience and one of the best things about the Gnome project. It fits with the general sensibility of the project, and it rocks. Advanced users can install Firefox or Mozilla if they'd like to -- most distros can/do include one of those. This is just about the default browser choice, and they wisely chose the browser that best fits the project.
Think about it for a second. They "are now enabling former MP3.com artists to visit www.MP3isBack.com and recover their MP3.com music, instantly re-generating their artist pages with just a few clicks. " Sounds pretty clear to me that they aren't allowed to redistribute the music without permission of the orginal artist due to the mp3.com orginal TOS, but they could pass on the files without right of redistribution. And if the artist reauthorizes the distribution on the new sites, they have the files and the permission.
That link being: http://www.terminalcity.ca/Film/cinemas/Van+East.h tm
Damn it, how I am suppose to have a good old-fashioned flame war if you're going to be so reasonable when you reply? ;-)
So anyhow, I think we're in agreement about anything worth debating here. I should point out that there is a good local theatre just a few blocks from my house, but I do realize that you are correct -- that is the exception not the rule. Oh and if you follow the link... those prices are in Canadian dollars (heh heh heh).
I am talking about the method of pricing, not the prices themselves. Put your frustration with ticket prices aside for a second and try to abstract the problem so you understand what I am saying. To use your coffee analogy, it would be a good deal if the coffee shops had their 16-ounce latte for $4 and sold the lid for $2 instead of having a fixed price of $6 for the coffee plus lid. In that situation, every customer is better off or equal with the variable pricing scheme than they would be with a fixed price. The same applies to movie ticket pricing.
Oh, and you seem to be under the mistaken impression that movie theatres are fleecing you... if that were true they would be making money hand over fist but guess what, they aren't. The cinema business is notoriously unprofitable, and major players routinely lose money or go bankrupt. Do you have idea idea how expensive real estate is? How about the costs of maintaining a large-scale enterprise like those huge multiplexes? I didn't think so. Someone is indeed fleecing you, but it's the movie production companies and the actors that are getting rich off your $12 tickets, not the shareholders of your local cinema.
$18 for the wife and I to see "Funny Guy 3: Pratfalls and Flatulence" at the local Chaineplex is decidedly not a good deal.
Guess what? Paying $18 for that movie and skipping the $7 popcorn is a better deal than paying $23 to get in the door and $2 for popcorn. Why? Because people with only $18 to spend get to see the movie, and people with $25 can still get a movie and popcorn.
I'm not talking about the quality of movies out today, or the relative costs of DVD or second-run theatres. I'm talking about theatres using variable prices to maximize profits from the people best able to pay the money, which is a good deal for everyone.
And your comments make it appear that you aren't reading my comments properly. Please explain exactly when popular Gnome applications receive ongoing usability testing (which consists of the passive observation of people using the software within the experimental circumstances I have previously described).
Perhaps *you* aren't reading your own comments properly. You said usability testing wasn't being done, I showed you that indeed it was. So now you twist your original comment and pretend you were talking about ongoing usability testing. I get the distinct impression that you will continue arguing this point by adding new definitions and specifications as to what defines 'usablilty testing' so that you can continue to make your point. I know, I know, you're never wrong...
If your point is "free software projects don't do ongoing useability testing" that is seemingly correct, but that is a far cry from "Free software lacks usability testing" which was the title of your original post and a good summary of your original argument. The fact is that Gnome has done this type of testing and come up with a set of guidelines that they adhere to pretty closely.
Does this mean that they couldn't benefit from more usability testing? I'm not saying that... they probably could, and I imagine they will. But in the meantime the good folks at Gnome have proven than free software can produce a desktop with usability as a primary focus and that free software isn't "ill-equipped to do anything even approaching proper usability testing."
I'm more concerned about them busting people for "outside food." I mean really, I could get a steak dinner for the price of their popcorn and a drink!
As everyone and their dog knows, the theatres make most of their money on food and drink sales. Many people take this as a sign they should whinge and complain about the greedy theatre companies, but that's missing the point. The point is, the cost of the ticket is actually a good deal because by charging exhorbatent prices for popcorn they can get money from people with more disposable income while still allowing people with less disposable income to see the movie.
See the point now? If you don't like wasting money you win, because you are paying less than you would if similar profit margins were applied to the ticket prices and the concessions. If you don't mind paying $5 for popcorn, you can and the theatre stays in business as a result. The only loss to regular folk is that they don't get cheap food while they watch an underpriced ticket -- I say tough beans because you're getting a pretty good deal as it is.
Sun did studies like the ones you are referring to and contributed the results back into Gnome. Sure enough, I found a reference to this on the Gnome.org HIG website.
Your original comment makes it appear that you have not used a recent version of Gnome (2.4 or 2.6) because it that project a very prominent example of how free software can have a focus on usability and still provide useful applications. You really ought to try it out if you haven't lately.