Qt/KDE programs are actually compiled twice. Qt code is not valid C++, and it must be translated into something that a C++ compiler can handle through the MOC compiler. This is why it's so slow.
AMD's 64-bit chips are backwards compatible with the 32-bit x86 ISA. That's the whole point. It's perfect to compare Intel's 32-bit offering with AMD's 64-bit chip, because it shows that the AMD chip can still perform well even in compatibility mode without using any of the extra strengths that it houses in 64-bit mode. It's a good buy for now. It's a good buy for later.
What's happening here is that the unofficial packages don't support the menu format that your distrobution is using. You install these new unofficial packages, and, when that happens, the old packages are removed. The old official packages contained the menu links, and the new unofficial packages don't. If you want to not have to manage the menu items yourself, then you need to only install Mandrake or SuSE packages.
Re:Does it matter? Opera's still the best browser.
on
Netscape 7.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
Try the latest Mozilla Firefox Go to URL on the context menu. What does that mean? In the linux version just highlight a bit of text and middle-click on the page somewhere and it will open it as a url.
The ability to create states (a set of tabs that open to particular pages). You can bookmark groups of tabs in Mozilla and Mozilla Firefox. This is the same thing.
Multiple searchs engines from the context menu. This is no closer than the searchbar in the upper-right with Mozilla Firefox.
Actually, it doesn't. It opens it same as normal, then closes the parent window. The difference is that unless you're very careful the windows will be in different locations and different sizes. Both are really annoying when you're trying to get to a directory that is pretty deep quickly.
The idea is that you learn the locations that these windows will appear, and you're able to consistently maneuver to them. The advantage that this has to the model that you're suggesting is that the window for a certain directory will always look the same. If you need to browse a huge directory and expand the window, your small directory window will remain small. This helps increase your recognition of the file's location.
/home/me/Documents/Articles/2003/spatial-nautilus. If my tool can't help me get there, I'm not going to use it.
What's you've just described is pretty easy to deal with. Put a shortcut for Documents on the desktop. I bet Documents has a few core sub-directories and maybe a bunch of files. Articles will be at the top, double click it. Now you have a bunch of directories naming years. Click the one you want. Now you have the directory with your file. Hit File -> Close Parent Windows and the "clutter" is gone.
Clearly you never spent any time in the #gaim irc channel. Before.60 went out of the door, Gentoo offered a gaim-cvs which had many many bugs. This is because they were using a cvs version of gaim. These people would use this and then go to #gaim to complain about it not working, often many times an hour. This created MASSIVE amounts of frustration, because the Gentoo users had absolutely no clue about anything involving gaim's cvs development of.60.
How the fuck can any FSF ass-crevice complain about an advertising clause as long as Dick insists that if someone wants to talk Linux they'd better be saying it 'GNU/Linux'?
Because it really is GNU/Linux. The tools that were used to actually build the operating system were mostly GNU, and still are in major GNU/Linux distributions. The linux kernel has grown in size and scope, but it still isn't so massive as to justify ignoring the tools that linux developers found handy when they went looking for a system to use.
The problem with the BSD license is exactly what you said, it's just an open source license. For those of us that are more interested in free software, this is unacceptable.
You're mistaking the GPL for the LGPL. The API would not be subject to copyrights, but any sources compiled against it would be GPL because the license of the GPL does not allow for abstraction layers like that.
Perhaps they opened the specs, but they surely didn't open reading them and using them for any purpose. The License for implementing the specs requires that you attach their license to all files and derivative works.
Branding Mozilla: Towards Mozilla 2.0 Recommendations for the branding and visual identity of the Mozilla Foundation's product and project line - by Steven Garrity Summary
This document is intended to offer suggestions to the Mozilla Foundation for the future of the Mozilla brand and visual identity. It is not intended to replace or redo the good work that has already been done in this area. Any suggestions made here that contradict, conflict, or replace guidelines, recommendation, or other work that has already been done reflects more my ignorance as the author than my opinion of what has been done.
As the Mozilla project moves towards an end-user focus from a developer and platform focus, the branding and visual identity of the organization and its software will need to be revisited. With the recent separation from Netscape and AOL, the need for the Mozilla project to have a brand of its own is all the more necessary. Keep What Works
First, the Mozilla project has a lot going for it. It has a long heritage, reaching back to the early Netscape web browsers. The Mozilla name was an apt choice as a nod to the roots of the project. It is also unique (free of trademark issues), memorable, and relatively easy to spell and pronounce. Mozilla is a good name. Lose What Doesn't Work
The Mozilla project is lacking a strong visual identity. The Mozilla lizard is widely recognized by developers and early-adopters on the web, but does not reach far beyond these groups. It is also used inconsistently across projects and products.
Any good visual identity builds on what is already established, while improving on the weaknesses of past. So too should the visual identity of the Mozilla project and products. A unified, consistent, but flexible brand and visual identity would be a great compliment to the technology developed under the Mozilla project. Products, Projects, and the Foundation
The broad scope of the Mozilla project has lead to confusion among end users. The term "Mozilla" is used to describe a web browser, a suite of applications, a platform, and an entire collection of software projects.
The recently formed Mozilla Foundation has already started the work of clarifying the terminology. The name of the Mozilla Foundation itself is a good and clear name that obviously defines the official organization that manages the Mozilla project.
They have also clarified the eventual naming of key Mozilla products; the current Mozilla Firebird project is the temporary development name for what will eventually be called Mozilla Browser; the current Mozilla Thunderbird project is the temporary development name for what will eventually be called Mozilla Mail. This is clear, simple, and smart.
Seemingly simple and obvious declarations like this are important for the success of the Mozilla project. People can't use software that they don't know how to ask for. People can't tell others about software that they don't know what to call.
The Mozilla Browser and Mozilla Mail names are clear, simple, and strong names for what will become the flagship products of the Mozilla project. Version Numbers
The Mozilla application suite is approaching version 2.0 (version 1.5 at the time of this writing) and the independent applications are approaching 1.0 (Mozilla Firebird is at 0.71 and Mozilla Thunderbird is at a humble 0.3 at the time of this writing). Many have speculated that the official replacement of the application suite with the independent applications would be appropriate time to declare them version 2.0.
The change in focus and new independent applications certain does warrant a new version number.
The Mozilla Suite ver. 2.0:
* Mozilla Browser
* Mozilla Mail
* Mozilla Calendar
* Mozilla Composer
The Visual Identity So Far
As the software produced by the Mozilla project stabilizes and matures, so too should its visual identity. The Mozilla 1.0 suite was generally internally
Exactly, you can't say the same thing about Windows. When the Operating System bundles and prods the hell out of the user to use things like Outlook, it is immediately judged as a flaw in the OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Qt/KDE programs are actually compiled twice. Qt code is not valid C++, and it must be translated into something that a C++ compiler can handle through the MOC compiler. This is why it's so slow.
AMD's 64-bit chips are backwards compatible with the 32-bit x86 ISA. That's the whole point. It's perfect to compare Intel's 32-bit offering with AMD's 64-bit chip, because it shows that the AMD chip can still perform well even in compatibility mode without using any of the extra strengths that it houses in 64-bit mode. It's a good buy for now. It's a good buy for later.
"Why is there not one single case-insensitive filesystem for Linux?"
Because everybody that codes in C knows how to type in a case-sensitive manner.
You can always try https://gna.org/projects/savane It's what powers savannah.gnu.org
What's happening here is that the unofficial packages don't support the menu format that your distrobution is using. You install these new unofficial packages, and, when that happens, the old packages are removed. The old official packages contained the menu links, and the new unofficial packages don't. If you want to not have to manage the menu items yourself, then you need to only install Mandrake or SuSE packages.
Try the latest Mozilla Firefox
Go to URL on the context menu.
What does that mean? In the linux version just highlight a bit of text and middle-click on the page somewhere and it will open it as a url.
The ability to create states (a set of tabs that open to particular pages).
You can bookmark groups of tabs in Mozilla and Mozilla Firefox. This is the same thing.
Multiple searchs engines from the context menu.
This is no closer than the searchbar in the upper-right with Mozilla Firefox.
Why settle? Use Mozilla.
Did everybody forget that these guys are a monopoly? By definition, they did their best to eliminate any choice their users had in the first place.
Is there something you do that will ever make that easy to browse?
Actually, it doesn't. It opens it same as normal, then closes the parent window. The difference is that unless you're very careful the windows will be in different locations and different sizes. Both are really annoying when you're trying to get to a directory that is pretty deep quickly.
The idea is that you learn the locations that these windows will appear, and you're able to consistently maneuver to them. The advantage that this has to the model that you're suggesting is that the window for a certain directory will always look the same. If you need to browse a huge directory and expand the window, your small directory window will remain small. This helps increase your recognition of the file's location.
/home/me/Documents/Articles/2003/spatial-nautilus. If my tool can't help me get there, I'm not going to use it.
What's you've just described is pretty easy to deal with. Put a shortcut for Documents on the desktop. I bet Documents has a few core sub-directories and maybe a bunch of files. Articles will be at the top, double click it. Now you have a bunch of directories naming years. Click the one you want. Now you have the directory with your file. Hit File -> Close Parent Windows and the "clutter" is gone.
What am I supposed to do? Dump the files of all projects together in my home directory, so I can save the "/workspace/some_project" part?
Symlink that directory to your desktop. All of the files stay in the same place and now you have a shortcut to the directory.
Middle-clicking on any part of a webpage that isn't a link in Firefox causes it to load the contents of the xselection.
It's spelled: 1337
Clearly you never spent any time in the #gaim irc channel. Before .60 went out of the door, Gentoo offered a gaim-cvs which had many many bugs. This is because they were using a cvs version of gaim. These people would use this and then go to #gaim to complain about it not working, often many times an hour. This created MASSIVE amounts of frustration, because the Gentoo users had absolutely no clue about anything involving gaim's cvs development of .60.
That's rather impossible really, or did you mean think differently?
It's not meaningless at all. I'm one of the many /.ers that's been waiting on this file dialog for a very long time. This is not a minor revision.
xmms with 2.0: http://beepmp.sourceforge.net/
How the fuck can any FSF ass-crevice complain about an advertising clause as long as Dick insists that if someone wants to talk Linux they'd better be saying it 'GNU/Linux'? Because it really is GNU/Linux. The tools that were used to actually build the operating system were mostly GNU, and still are in major GNU/Linux distributions. The linux kernel has grown in size and scope, but it still isn't so massive as to justify ignoring the tools that linux developers found handy when they went looking for a system to use.
The problem with the BSD license is exactly what you said, it's just an open source license. For those of us that are more interested in free software, this is unacceptable.
You're mistaking the GPL for the LGPL. The API would not be subject to copyrights, but any sources compiled against it would be GPL because the license of the GPL does not allow for abstraction layers like that.
Didn't a Mr Stallman write a license with a similar requirement some years back?
Didn't Microsoft call that license viral and denounce its usage?
(perhaps that will clarify my humor)
Perhaps they opened the specs, but they surely didn't open reading them and using them for any purpose. The License for implementing the specs requires that you attach their license to all files and derivative works.
Branding Mozilla: Towards Mozilla 2.0
Recommendations for the branding and visual identity of the Mozilla Foundation's product and project line - by Steven Garrity
Summary
This document is intended to offer suggestions to the Mozilla Foundation for the future of the Mozilla brand and visual identity. It is not intended to replace or redo the good work that has already been done in this area. Any suggestions made here that contradict, conflict, or replace guidelines, recommendation, or other work that has already been done reflects more my ignorance as the author than my opinion of what has been done.
As the Mozilla project moves towards an end-user focus from a developer and platform focus, the branding and visual identity of the organization and its software will need to be revisited. With the recent separation from Netscape and AOL, the need for the Mozilla project to have a brand of its own is all the more necessary.
Keep What Works
First, the Mozilla project has a lot going for it. It has a long heritage, reaching back to the early Netscape web browsers. The Mozilla name was an apt choice as a nod to the roots of the project. It is also unique (free of trademark issues), memorable, and relatively easy to spell and pronounce. Mozilla is a good name.
Lose What Doesn't Work
The Mozilla project is lacking a strong visual identity. The Mozilla lizard is widely recognized by developers and early-adopters on the web, but does not reach far beyond these groups. It is also used inconsistently across projects and products.
Any good visual identity builds on what is already established, while improving on the weaknesses of past. So too should the visual identity of the Mozilla project and products. A unified, consistent, but flexible brand and visual identity would be a great compliment to the technology developed under the Mozilla project.
Products, Projects, and the Foundation
The broad scope of the Mozilla project has lead to confusion among end users. The term "Mozilla" is used to describe a web browser, a suite of applications, a platform, and an entire collection of software projects.
The recently formed Mozilla Foundation has already started the work of clarifying the terminology. The name of the Mozilla Foundation itself is a good and clear name that obviously defines the official organization that manages the Mozilla project.
They have also clarified the eventual naming of key Mozilla products; the current Mozilla Firebird project is the temporary development name for what will eventually be called Mozilla Browser; the current Mozilla Thunderbird project is the temporary development name for what will eventually be called Mozilla Mail. This is clear, simple, and smart.
Seemingly simple and obvious declarations like this are important for the success of the Mozilla project. People can't use software that they don't know how to ask for. People can't tell others about software that they don't know what to call.
The Mozilla Browser and Mozilla Mail names are clear, simple, and strong names for what will become the flagship products of the Mozilla project.
Version Numbers
The Mozilla application suite is approaching version 2.0 (version 1.5 at the time of this writing) and the independent applications are approaching 1.0 (Mozilla Firebird is at 0.71 and Mozilla Thunderbird is at a humble 0.3 at the time of this writing). Many have speculated that the official replacement of the application suite with the independent applications would be appropriate time to declare them version 2.0.
The change in focus and new independent applications certain does warrant a new version number.
The Mozilla Suite ver. 2.0:
* Mozilla Browser
* Mozilla Mail
* Mozilla Calendar
* Mozilla Composer
The Visual Identity So Far
As the software produced by the Mozilla project stabilizes and matures, so too should its visual identity. The Mozilla 1.0 suite was generally internally
Exactly, you can't say the same thing about Windows. When the Operating System bundles and prods the hell out of the user to use things like Outlook, it is immediately judged as a flaw in the OS.