they invested millions (billions?) of dollars writing internal web applications which work in IE but no other web browsers. a huge mistake, yes, but you're talking about re-write work on the order of a hundred or so million dollars.
Sure. They think we can handle multiple monitors. They could use that as an excuse to have a "multiple monitor manager" -- with a menu bar at the top of each window. Then, an advanced option to enable "virtual monitors." Ta-da, multiple desktops.
Popping up a box in the middle of someone typing, with default actions selectable using commonly pressed keys, certainly doesn't result in "a decision being made." It results in accidents.
Do you never get any important documetns you have to look over handed to you in the office ?
Yes, I do. And if that co-worker shoves it in front of my face while I'm busy, I yell at them and toss it in the trash. Considerate co-workers often try to get your attention, rather than hijack your current activity.
You're missing the point. It is poor UI design. Really crappy UI design -- Windows (an other software) should never steal focus to ask you a question! If something has to steal focus, it should not have focus on any control -- not text input, not a button -- nothing. It should flash and/or beep to let the user know that they have been interrupted ("This important message brought to you by Error -128346324!").
Well, you're right. OSX is a much better foundation for good apps, because one doesn't have to fight the platform to make the apps good -- OSX actually helps. "Good apps" on Windows are typically good in spite of Windows.
Yeah.. it would be a shame to make Windows folks adjust to all that.
If they can bring iTunes over from Mac OS 9.x it's a Carbon app, they can surely bring over Safari, which is a Cocoa app. It wasn't too long ago that Apple/Next actually shipped "Cocoa" for Windows!
Maybe it *is* Konfabulator. Certainly looks like it -- and it even uses Javascript in the "Widgets." If Apple was joing to rip off Konfabulator, why would they make it so identical? Why use Javascript rather than their own Applescript? Etc.
I'm also curious how well Konquerer will handle close scrutiny. On the surface, it seems they copied Microsoft's design wholesale.
Unfortunately, I have the same fear. The Nautilus crew eschewed browser integration with their file manager, and I think that was the right choice. Apple did the same -- two completely different applications, one for managing files and the other for viewing web pages.
I don't recall anyone complaining about Finder's lack of Safari integration. Some people have tried to integrate Mozilla and/or GtkHTML with Nautilus, but those attempts have been rebuffed.
It's not just that. They integrated web browsing into the file manager -- which is different than merely integrating html viewing. They designed the entire Windows UI Shell to be, basically, remotely exploitable.
There's no good reason to confound the local file manager with a networked program.
Slashdot Mirror
they invested millions (billions?) of dollars writing internal web applications which work in IE but no other web browsers. a huge mistake, yes, but you're talking about re-write work on the order of a hundred or so million dollars.
Ah, yes. "Software Assurance."
Sure. They think we can handle multiple monitors. They could use that as an excuse to have a "multiple monitor manager" -- with a menu bar at the top of each window. Then, an advanced option to enable "virtual monitors." Ta-da, multiple desktops.
Yeah, I've done the registry things that prevent MOST focus-stealing. But they don't fix everything.
Popping up a box in the middle of someone typing, with default actions selectable using commonly pressed keys, certainly doesn't result in "a decision being made." It results in accidents.
Do you never get any important documetns you have to look over handed to you in the office ?
Yes, I do. And if that co-worker shoves it in front of my face while I'm busy, I yell at them and toss it in the trash. Considerate co-workers often try to get your attention, rather than hijack your current activity.
If you want to allow the user to release and renew their DHCP lease you have to give the user the right to load device drivers.
Whhaaa? That's pretty dumb, if true. Idiotic.
You're missing the point. It is poor UI design. Really crappy UI design -- Windows (an other software) should never steal focus to ask you a question! If something has to steal focus, it should not have focus on any control -- not text input, not a button -- nothing. It should flash and/or beep to let the user know that they have been interrupted ("This important message brought to you by Error -128346324!").
Ah, those right-wing National Socialists.
That's the problem with "right" vs "left" and "conservative" vs "liberal." They are false, or at best relative, dichotomies.
The libertarian's idea of the scale being "personal liberty" vs "state authority" is more correct.
It is only strange if believe the republicans' redefinition of patriotism to mean 'support for the Bush administration'
Face it -- Moore is the unshaved version of Limbaugh.
Moore is against things, rather than for things. That's the main problem I have with him. He's a bomb thrower, not a provider of solutions.
Maybe he go as far as to make documentaries about it because he cares so much for his country and that it's properly run?
That's pretty funny.
Moore doesn't want a president that's in a school browsing a book when USA is attacked by Al-Qaida.
Yeah, I'm sure that Bush was intentionally reading books to children during the attack. His secretary probably scheduled it.
Well, you're right. OSX is a much better foundation for good apps, because one doesn't have to fight the platform to make the apps good -- OSX actually helps. "Good apps" on Windows are typically good in spite of Windows.
Maybe if ".exe" on the end of a filename didn't imply "chmod +x"
XP, and especially "Longhorn," will be disasters, then! No one will use them!
Simple interface, spell checked entry fields, high security key stores, easy search access, etc
Yeah.. it would be a shame to make Windows folks adjust to all that.
If they can bring iTunes over from Mac OS 9.x it's a Carbon app, they can surely bring over Safari, which is a Cocoa app. It wasn't too long ago that Apple/Next actually shipped "Cocoa" for Windows!
Wow... you must be a stockholder.
the second richest man in the world, Warren Buffett, has thrown his weight behind the [Kerry] campaign.
Would ya look at that... the super-rich backing their home boy. Of course, eight of the 10 richest Senators are also Democrats...
They must be the "party of money."
How about the majority of folks who are not using Windowx XP? Can they install "IE SP2"?
Apple seems to.
Maybe it *is* Konfabulator. Certainly looks like it -- and it even uses Javascript in the "Widgets." If Apple was joing to rip off Konfabulator, why would they make it so identical? Why use Javascript rather than their own Applescript? Etc.
I hope it *is* Konfabulator!
I'm also curious how well Konquerer will handle close scrutiny. On the surface, it seems they copied Microsoft's design wholesale.
Unfortunately, I have the same fear. The Nautilus crew eschewed browser integration with their file manager, and I think that was the right choice. Apple did the same -- two completely different applications, one for managing files and the other for viewing web pages.
I don't recall anyone complaining about Finder's lack of Safari integration. Some people have tried to integrate Mozilla and/or GtkHTML with Nautilus, but those attempts have been rebuffed.
It's not just that. They integrated web browsing into the file manager -- which is different than merely integrating html viewing. They designed the entire Windows UI Shell to be, basically, remotely exploitable.
There's no good reason to confound the local file manager with a networked program.
Ballmer: Windows CE is like Pac-Man! It's a cancer!
And I was thinking that GStreamer would end up being the "GNU System's Media Framework."
Shows what I know.
1. Where can I get my free copy of Visual Studio?
:D
2. Microsoft's source code isn't "open."
3. "Shared source" as a brainwashing technique -- interesting theory!
... look towards members of the opposite sex (or the same sex, even) and not penguins, devils, or peices of mealy fruit.
And not, certainly, panes of glass in a wooden frame!