it seems you missed the point i tried to show. it wasn't to blame microsoft for anything. just patent nonsense and inability to discover which patent is actual invention and which one is not (either by prior art or triviality where simple life occurrence was presented in the code form). main problem being that people in patent office don't even understand what they are granting patent for (missed in 99.99% in software)
and your comment is also proof that brain is not essential part for some people to function.
most (99.999999%) of software patents are just observing the life and written in code, thus not invented. and when 99.99% of process is consisting bogus obvious claims where people claim they invented something... how can this be essential? i will go so far and admit the rest could be treated as valid inventions, but how to separate them from bogus claims when people granting patent have no clue about what they are granting patent for. if your method has too many false positives, you have to wonder if your method is actually doing its job or it just creates more work for you and others.
imagine this. even showing of sorted item list is patented, ffs. now wonder, just how did people organize records before computers? by your claim, the patent from 197x played vital role in correcting that mistake (or having sorted books in bookcase and sorted items on screen falls into completely different categories, if you plan on disputing with mechanism that sorts, you can always also imagine you could as well hire someone to sort records for you and thus employ same mechanism). or this example... http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12006 (microsoft patenting virtual desktops in 2004, by your claims... if there would not be this research i would still be imagining i used them in 90s)
i'm all for patents in other areas. with my lack of understanding those they seem quite logical, but someone with understanding those areas might dispute my claims just i dispute yours.
well, i for one don't struggle with OSX interface. i literally lose my mind after 1 minute with it. but i only need 5 seconds with official OSX terminal to have my head bursting out of pure anger
even though i hate windows, after 1 minute i can start getting respect for windows xp that barely works and it completely ridden with malware. gnome-shell is actually really nearing my current desktop where - i don't have application menu or any launcher at all, i use gnome-do - i don't have desktop files enabled to prevent clutter and kinda force my self to save files where they belong - perform all my internet searches from my desktop, not browser - don't have taskbar as i never minimize windows, instead i'm rearranging them across desktops with my order this kind of work simply boosts my productivity
but then again, that is just me. someone might like osx desktop and hate mine. someone might feel wonderful about windows. there will never be perfection in this department
lol, your comment just shows you never used linux. working out of the box? windows? LOOOOOOOL, one word... drivers. i won't say that about mac as it comes with dedicated drivers for its hardware, but there is still software which can't be easily installed in one move. but still, my linux installation finishes 1 minute after dvd is ejected. including all software i need for my work, i actually spent 10 minutes to make one rpm which specifies dependencies (aka. all software i need). install that and everything installs.
why not delegating? good luck using two different toolkits in your software. ever tried that before?
i always preferred shade instead of minimize, but it is still kinda the same. i also had utter repulsive reaction after trying shell in fedora 14 (old one). even more, i was upset about min/max removal. then i actually tried damn thing and i love it. the only thing that didn't bother me was removing desktop icons. 3 years now, i'm doing that my self as i hate unorganized clutter which desktop files bring.
with dynamic workspaces.. it somehow really works without minimizing and smart maximizing with mouse works much better than maximize ever did. i'd suggest you try it, there is a live cd on gnome3 and see.
btw. you can still minimize with keyboard shortcut or right title menu
ever heard of static building? there is a reason why distros are built dynamically, but there is also a reason why some company would want to ship static compiled
i'd only say one thing, try it http://gnome3.org/tryit.html it is free and you don't even need to install (last image has some problems with intel drivers, rest should work)
there is a difference how it works, since most of it works trough object introspection and calls native code, same as python. did you ever feel python apps would be sluggish? i sure didn't.
if anything shell is one of more responsive desktops there as long as you have 3d hardware. i tested it with nvidia ion and ati 3650 and it performs just as well as my tweaked desktop with compiz if not better. both cards are shit of the line not top of the line.
why do people comment blindly instead of trying to test and actually make sane comments standing on the ground?
actually in shell settings (Settings manager>>desktop>>shell) there is buttons setting which only contains close:. my best guess is that you can get them back here
actually, i just tested live image. and boy... it rocks like hell. as much as i was skeptical about minimize, maximize removal... in 1 minute i started wondering why were they there in the first place. managing maximization like in gnome 3 fells so much more natural. and minimize? when you have smart desktop managing, there is actually no point in having it. and automatic desktops... ROCK
so... in 1 minute it felt natural in 5, i started wondering how dumb interfacing with desktop was before shell
now, just give me good session manager and i'm willing to forget every single pain with interfaces as they were. don't know if i like docked dialogs copied from apple though, but fortunately they can easily be set off to standard behavior with settings manager. although i don't plan to do that first second, i want to be sure i have it right.
p.s. the version that came with fedora 14 annoyed the hell out of me and i went back to standard after 1 day
you should really watch Hunter Prey http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270291/ this is how one makes classic in these times. movie is awesome and not lacking one single thing
my best guess is that uncontrolled lunatics would live in the open, while those few who can actually control them selves would live in asylum. it's a simple number and space problem
2.5mio is sold poor? well, it is not same as battlefield, but whole lot more than development costs. if they wouldn't like battlefield figures more, ME would surrely warrant a sequel
i kinda feel that most people liked that game (taking into account people that finished at least 1 speed run)... scores, videos on youtube (i doubt you will find game with more videos and more tributes), being constantly mentioned in gaming forums as their wish for sequel tells me game has avid fan base.
its only problem was it wasn't straight out shooter and most people didn't know what to think about it. it is much easier to sell generic shit like battlefield
Slashdot Mirror
if they eat hamburgers to be americans... what does this say about vegetarians? are they cow wannabies?
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/2518/imageinf.jpg
hearing sony and identity protection in same sentence after all what happened => one can only be sarcastic
this news should be posted on April 1st
wrong link in copy/paste. sorry for that
it seems you missed the point i tried to show. it wasn't to blame microsoft for anything. just patent nonsense and inability to discover which patent is actual invention and which one is not (either by prior art or triviality where simple life occurrence was presented in the code form). main problem being that people in patent office don't even understand what they are granting patent for (missed in 99.99% in software)
not software ones, but i liked these very much
invention of ... stick
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=hhYJAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,360,693
one man going as far as this
http://www.ipmenu.com/archive/AUI_2001100012.pdf
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/australia.wheel/
http://www.google.si/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=trivial+patents search should be better link than my ramblings how nothing works in this department
and your comment is also proof that brain is not essential part for some people to function.
most (99.999999%) of software patents are just observing the life and written in code, thus not invented. and when 99.99% of process is consisting bogus obvious claims where people claim they invented something... how can this be essential? i will go so far and admit the rest could be treated as valid inventions, but how to separate them from bogus claims when people granting patent have no clue about what they are granting patent for. if your method has too many false positives, you have to wonder if your method is actually doing its job or it just creates more work for you and others.
imagine this. even showing of sorted item list is patented, ffs. now wonder, just how did people organize records before computers? by your claim, the patent from 197x played vital role in correcting that mistake (or having sorted books in bookcase and sorted items on screen falls into completely different categories, if you plan on disputing with mechanism that sorts, you can always also imagine you could as well hire someone to sort records for you and thus employ same mechanism). or this example... http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12006 (microsoft patenting virtual desktops in 2004, by your claims... if there would not be this research i would still be imagining i used them in 90s)
i'm all for patents in other areas. with my lack of understanding those they seem quite logical, but someone with understanding those areas might dispute my claims just i dispute yours.
why? job's fairly easy if you simply delete all and not search your information
$root@localhost global_internet> rm -rf /
only problem i see with that is trouble reading news after i delete internet;)
really? can't put them back?
gconftool-2 -s -t string /desktop/gnome/shell/windows/button_layout ":minimize,maximize,close"
you shouldn't listen to your self too much... after RTFA ... do also a little RTFM
MDI? you mean MDI which was suggested to avoid from xp onward? even MS is avoiding it like plague. you mean SDI or CSDI more likely
well, i for one don't struggle with OSX interface. i literally lose my mind after 1 minute with it. but i only need 5 seconds with official OSX terminal to have my head bursting out of pure anger
even though i hate windows, after 1 minute i can start getting respect for windows xp that barely works and it completely ridden with malware. gnome-shell is actually really nearing my current desktop where
- i don't have application menu or any launcher at all, i use gnome-do
- i don't have desktop files enabled to prevent clutter and kinda force my self to save files where they belong
- perform all my internet searches from my desktop, not browser
- don't have taskbar as i never minimize windows, instead i'm rearranging them across desktops with my order
this kind of work simply boosts my productivity
but then again, that is just me. someone might like osx desktop and hate mine. someone might feel wonderful about windows. there will never be perfection in this department
here is your patch
gconftool-2 -s -t string /desktop/gnome/shell/windows/button_layout ":minimize,maximize,close"
happy?
actually, it is just not ongoing anymore. so he should use any form of past tense.
apple has been evil for a long time. people just didn't care.
lol, your comment just shows you never used linux. working out of the box? windows? LOOOOOOOL, one word... drivers. i won't say that about mac as it comes with dedicated drivers for its hardware, but there is still software which can't be easily installed in one move. but still, my linux installation finishes 1 minute after dvd is ejected. including all software i need for my work, i actually spent 10 minutes to make one rpm which specifies dependencies (aka. all software i need). install that and everything installs.
why not delegating? good luck using two different toolkits in your software. ever tried that before?
i always preferred shade instead of minimize, but it is still kinda the same. i also had utter repulsive reaction after trying shell in fedora 14 (old one). even more, i was upset about min/max removal. then i actually tried damn thing and i love it. the only thing that didn't bother me was removing desktop icons. 3 years now, i'm doing that my self as i hate unorganized clutter which desktop files bring.
with dynamic workspaces.. it somehow really works without minimizing and smart maximizing with mouse works much better than maximize ever did. i'd suggest you try it, there is a live cd on gnome3 and see.
btw. you can still minimize with keyboard shortcut or right title menu
obviously... as a developer... YOU FAIL!
ever heard of static building? there is a reason why distros are built dynamically, but there is also a reason why some company would want to ship static compiled
i'd only say one thing, try it http://gnome3.org/tryit.html it is free and you don't even need to install (last image has some problems with intel drivers, rest should work)
there is a difference how it works, since most of it works trough object introspection and calls native code, same as python. did you ever feel python apps would be sluggish? i sure didn't.
if anything shell is one of more responsive desktops there as long as you have 3d hardware. i tested it with nvidia ion and ati 3650 and it performs just as well as my tweaked desktop with compiz if not better. both cards are shit of the line not top of the line.
why do people comment blindly instead of trying to test and actually make sane comments standing on the ground?
actually in shell settings (Settings manager>>desktop>>shell) there is buttons setting which only contains close:. my best guess is that you can get them back here
actually, i just tested live image. and boy... it rocks like hell. as much as i was skeptical about minimize, maximize removal... in 1 minute i started wondering why were they there in the first place. managing maximization like in gnome 3 fells so much more natural. and minimize? when you have smart desktop managing, there is actually no point in having it. and automatic desktops... ROCK
so... in 1 minute it felt natural
in 5, i started wondering how dumb interfacing with desktop was before shell
now, just give me good session manager and i'm willing to forget every single pain with interfaces as they were. don't know if i like docked dialogs copied from apple though, but fortunately they can easily be set off to standard behavior with settings manager. although i don't plan to do that first second, i want to be sure i have it right.
p.s. the version that came with fedora 14 annoyed the hell out of me and i went back to standard after 1 day
too 1980?
you should really watch Hunter Prey http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270291/
this is how one makes classic in these times. movie is awesome and not lacking one single thing
more faithful representation of jar jar emotions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdJ9wdqHM4A
i'm voting for the part between opening and ending title. that one really sucked just as all actors showed in it.
and like it wasn't enough to completely destroy good 3 parts with remake, now is destroying even 3 awful ones?
my best guess is that uncontrolled lunatics would live in the open, while those few who can actually control them selves would live in asylum. it's a simple number and space problem
don't know about that, but if cars would follow most drivers thoughts... i can only imagine every good looking babe to finish under the hood
in any other game i HATE 1st person.
in ME just works, watch this and look how good it was done
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTrf5anN4k8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=iv&v=GdyOQSsw0f8&annotation_id=annotation_405148
parkour and 3rd person would be cheap prince of persia, nothing else
me didn't cost that much. it just couldn't measure up to profits of BBC2.
2.5mio is sold poor? well, it is not same as battlefield, but whole lot more than development costs. if they wouldn't like battlefield figures more, ME would surrely warrant a sequel
i kinda feel that most people liked that game (taking into account people that finished at least 1 speed run)... scores, videos on youtube (i doubt you will find game with more videos and more tributes), being constantly mentioned in gaming forums as their wish for sequel tells me game has avid fan base.
its only problem was it wasn't straight out shooter and most people didn't know what to think about it. it is much easier to sell generic shit like battlefield