"Contraception" is not synonymous with "condom." There are many other forms of contraception (e.g., the pill, IUD, foam) that prevent pregnancy but do not prevent STDs. It's dangerous to suggest, or believe, otherwise.
Alas, no. That single file won't get deleted, but because of the -f option, rm will keep trying to delete everything that it can. You'll get a few "Directory not empty" errors if you were looking at the console, but everything else will be wiped.
Hmm...an interesting point, and I see where you're coming from. But MDI is no better. If an MDI frame can span multiple screens (and this was a question raised earlier, but I don't believe has been answered yet), they it puts the user in the same boat as the Mac: The menu bar appears on one screen. If the MDI frame cannot span multiple monitors, then additional screens become irrelevant.
My experience, at least, shows that having the menu bar on a single monitor isn't as bad as it might seem. Your mouse has to travel further to get to the main monitor, but the speed up the Fitz law provides here probably more than makes up for the proximity of the menu-in-a-window approach.
Let me also add, when you DO want to see two windows from the same program (say your graphics and your HTML), MDI makes this at best a pain in the ass, and at worst pratically impossible. To state my point again, it's a bad "solution" to what is a poor design in the first place.
Well blow me down but the second of those complaints is basically saying I am used to Photoshop and this new package is not Photoshop so if the item is on a different menu or in a different place it is confusing.
No, Popeye, what he's saying is that GIMP is unlike every other program on the Mac. And the Mac interface details are not the result of dumb luck, they are well thought out and the result of actual research into how humans and computers interact. As somebody else pointed out, good interface design is more than a matter of personal preference. There is both art and science involved. If a program breaks with human interface design guidelines and conventions, it better have a darn good reason for doing so, or it rightfully deserves to be criticized.
If you work in one program all day, then MDI doesn't matter: All the windows on the screen below to one program anyway. And, as another posted has pointed out, you can get the same effect on the Mac. Anyway you slice it, there is no need for MDI.
I'm not sure if you can do that or not, but it really would only work well if both monitors have the same vertical resolution. Otherwise, you'd either have wasted space on the larger monitor, or cropped space on the smaller monitor.
MDI has got to be the lamest interface idea ever. And what is MDI anyway? It's Microsoft's workaround to put the menu bar where it belongs: At the top of the screen, for all windows in a single application.
3) Those who download what is no longer commercially available. If they aren't selling it, there's no lost profit from the illicit copy, and thus no harm.
Except, if you download this older music, it may make you less likely to buy currently available music. You've got some music, after all. Same thing with "abandonware" games; you've downloaded, and are spending time playing, an older game, so you're less inclined (and have less time) to purchase current software.
I see your point, and it is frustrating when you can't legally get your hands on music that you'd like. But our (the U.S.) legal system doesn't allow people to make up new rules just 'cause they don't like the way things work. And we should be thankful for that.
Right on, Neal (or is it Bob?)! I've got no mod points, and nobody is going to read my comment, but your dead on. All you Linux geeks need to wake up and realize something: In front of your computer is a crappy place to watch a DVD anyway. Linux ain't a religion, boys!
And it's particularly disturbing that this gets mosted down, but cucumber boy doesn't. Damn slashdotters!
Linux users don't buy stuff other than LED mouse pads. Certainly not music or iPods, so why would Apple want to spend resources developing a Linux version of iTunes?
Whether its 31% or 51%, the iPod is still, by far, the most popular MP3 player. Remember that the 69% or 49% market left over is split by many, many other players.
That problem is that.NET is a moving target; i.e., new versions will come out during those 2-4 years. So downloads will still be required. Let's continue to use Java as an analogy. Java is approaching a decade since it's introduction, and yet its adoption on the desktop is still very limited. More and more people have downloaded the JVM (mostly developers, unfortunately), but with each new release of Java, the prior downloads become largely irrelevant.
The difference, of course, is that Microsoft, with control of the OS, can more easily get.NET into the hands of the average user, than can Sun.
You do realize the irony here, I hope. You've just discussed interviewing for a job, writing software for a paycheck, and yet you say "free software is the way the world *should* work"? Where, then, is the money supposed to come from to pay you for this job for which you're interviewing?
Slashdot Mirror
"Contraception" is not synonymous with "condom." There are many other forms of contraception (e.g., the pill, IUD, foam) that prevent pregnancy but do not prevent STDs. It's dangerous to suggest, or believe, otherwise.
Alas, no. That single file won't get deleted, but because of the -f option, rm will keep trying to delete everything that it can. You'll get a few "Directory not empty" errors if you were looking at the console, but everything else will be wiped.
What is WinHEC anyway? Is it a less severe form of the WinHELL that I go through every day at work?
Millions of parents think you are very, very disturbed.
"Einstein Express: When it absolutely, positively has to be there the day before yesterday"
My experience, at least, shows that having the menu bar on a single monitor isn't as bad as it might seem. Your mouse has to travel further to get to the main monitor, but the speed up the Fitz law provides here probably more than makes up for the proximity of the menu-in-a-window approach.
Let me also add, when you DO want to see two windows from the same program (say your graphics and your HTML), MDI makes this at best a pain in the ass, and at worst pratically impossible. To state my point again, it's a bad "solution" to what is a poor design in the first place.
No, Popeye, what he's saying is that GIMP is unlike every other program on the Mac. And the Mac interface details are not the result of dumb luck, they are well thought out and the result of actual research into how humans and computers interact. As somebody else pointed out, good interface design is more than a matter of personal preference. There is both art and science involved. If a program breaks with human interface design guidelines and conventions, it better have a darn good reason for doing so, or it rightfully deserves to be criticized.
If you work in one program all day, then MDI doesn't matter: All the windows on the screen below to one program anyway. And, as another posted has pointed out, you can get the same effect on the Mac. Anyway you slice it, there is no need for MDI.
MDI has got to be the lamest interface idea ever. And what is MDI anyway? It's Microsoft's workaround to put the menu bar where it belongs: At the top of the screen, for all windows in a single application.
Whether you thinks there's a good reason or not, it IS illegal to copy a song. End of story. You're committing a crime.
BUYING a used car is not, and should not be, illegal. BUYING an old song is not illegal, either. STEALING an old song is, and should be, illegal.
I see your point, and it is frustrating when you can't legally get your hands on music that you'd like. But our (the U.S.) legal system doesn't allow people to make up new rules just 'cause they don't like the way things work. And we should be thankful for that.
And it's particularly disturbing that this gets mosted down, but cucumber boy doesn't. Damn slashdotters!
Linux users don't buy stuff other than LED mouse pads. Certainly not music or iPods, so why would Apple want to spend resources developing a Linux version of iTunes?
Whether its 31% or 51%, the iPod is still, by far, the most popular MP3 player. Remember that the 69% or 49% market left over is split by many, many other players.
(I didn't want you to be disappointed.)
It's bad news for Microsoft because they'd surely love it if, for instance, Quicktime were crippled, forcing users to use only Windows Media.
But visions of them in the spin cycle evoke laughter!
[this] could save the software giant more than half a billion dollars in damages
That's the good news.
Microsoft will not be required to make changes that would have crippled IE's ability to work with plug-ins like QuickTime and Flash.
That's the bad news.
The difference, of course, is that Microsoft, with control of the OS, can more easily get .NET into the hands of the average user, than can Sun.
They that give up functionality to obtain a little security deserve neither functionality nor security.
Yeah, or something like that.
You do realize the irony here, I hope. You've just discussed interviewing for a job, writing software for a paycheck, and yet you say "free software is the way the world *should* work"? Where, then, is the money supposed to come from to pay you for this job for which you're interviewing?
Even better...I'd rather be a professional pulling down a half-million and dating a student who's happy!
I try not to discuss it with her, but, oh yeah, she's an expense!