And I know more than 3 people who don't mind using Windows. In fact, they even refuse to use anything else. They'd rather spend money on a commercial anti-spyware/anti-virus package, than using Firefox. At least two of them brag about how good SP2 is, and that they're completely happy with IE6 from SP2.
Joe User doesn't care about that kind of stuff. He downloads WinXP SP 2 and then brags about that it's a "huge improvement" and that security problems are a thing of the past.
Whether that's true is another story. But that's the Joe User mentality.
There aren't many Motif apps left today. The only Motif apps that I know are Netscape 4 and RealPlayer. Netscape 4 is dead; nobody uses it anymore. The latest version of RealPlayer uses GTK 2. 99% of all GTK and QT apps use the same or similar keyboard bindings. Also, inexperienced users are likely to use RedHat/Fedora/Mandrake, which have unified themes, thus making both toolkits look the same.
"This isn't OSS zealotry refusing to acknowledge any criticism of certain software, this is simply people giving their response to a comment that was flawed in a number of ways."
And this is exactly why Slashdot is fundamentally flawed. Criticism against OSS is always modded up, including the posts that claim that OSS criticism is modded down. However, valid counter-arguments against that criticism are usually modded down, and are marked as "OSS zealotry that can't stand criticism".
Of course it's not. The Windows source code is a mess. I highly doubt Microsoft can manage an open source project of that size, without hiring people who have experience in open source management.
Open source is not just open-the-source-code-and-I-don't-care. You have to manage it properly. Bad management is the root of forks. Well-managed projects are much less likely to fork.
What part of Evolution is not good? It's almost exactly like MS Outlook. If you don't like MS Outlook, what's wrong with Thunderbird? Or heck, why not just Hotmail? Hotmail is the most popular email service among teenagers in The Netherlands. Everybody here uses it. It's considered cool. And it works in Mozilla/FireFox.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same...
on
Doom 3 for Linux Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yeah so tell me, why do so many EXTREMELY Linux-critical posts on Slashdot get modded up? Even posts that claim that Linux-critical posts will get modded down, are modded up. You are either very ignorant, or lying.
"Note that my entire post had NOTHING to do with OO.org being open source as to why it's technical, so you're barking up the wrong tree."
That doesn't matter. "Open source == by definition unusable" is the common Slashdot mentality.
"Saying "nyah nyah, I like it and my other friend does too" is EXACTLY the kind of response that makes products sit and not be utilized."
And yet people use the same argument to defend Windows, Internet Explorer and MS Office. "What Internet Explorer problems? Internet Explorer works fine for me, and many others. FireFox? I don't care."
MS Fudmakers? I think most "GPL is viral" trolls are from BSD Fudmakers. "The GPL is evil! BSD is freeer! lolololololol!!!" Their reasoning is similar to "People in my country have the freedom to kill other people. Your country's law restricts people from killing others. Therebefore my country is freeer than yours."
"it's clearly designed by technical people and doesn't have the slightest bit of usability in mind."
It isn't. OpenOffice is derived from StarOffice, made by StarDivision Inc (now acquired by Sun). In other words: OpenOffice is derived from a commercial product! *Shock*, *shrudder*, commercial products are always designed by tons of usability experts and can never, ever be unusable junk like open source software, right? Right? If anything, your statement just proofed that commercial software can be just as bad, if not worse, at usability, which goes against common Slashdot sense that commercial software is always perfect and can never be unusable.
In other news, a friend of mine tried OpenOffice and he quite likes it. Just because you think it's unusable doesn't mean it is unusable to everyone.
"You said that by using C++ and the design of the client library that we're making some huge mistake"
I never said that.
"and we should be used $SOME_OTHER_DESIGN instead."
I never said that either.
"but maybe I just havn't tweaked my XF86Config just right"
You don't have to tweak your XF86Config. It's always on by default, if supported by the driver. Again, both the ATI and the NV(idia) drivers support it. If you're using a different driver, you may not be so lucky.
"Funny you should mention MacOS X really, don't you think? There is another OS which doesn't use X and largly abandons other UNIX concepts in favour of a more integrated, desktop oriented approach."
Largly abandoned UNIX concepts? Under the hood, MacOS X is still very much a Unix. POSIX compatible, similar commandline/shell, user seperation, etc. While OS X doesn't use X, it uses Display PDF, which is also a client/server architecture... like X.
"That does not mean that we should throw away what we already have and start again. [SNIP]"
Your point being? I don't see what that has got anything to do with what I said.
"When did toolkits like Qt and GTK+ support RENDER?"
Qt and Gtk both since 2.0. And that's many years ago.
"What drivers include RENDER extensions?"
At least the proprietary and open source NVidia drivers, and the open source ATI driver. I don't know about everything else. But frankly, NVidia and ATI cover 99% of the computers these days.
"but it's only been fully usable in the last 6"
Riiiiight. XRender was already very usable on RedHat 7.2, on which I installed GNOME 2. Antialiased fonts worked perfectly.
So you're saying that you are willing to create a 10 million line professional-quality software package and release it under the BSD license, because others can take your software and relicense it under a proprietary license?
"Sure, you can do compositing now with RENDER, but not six months ago, or last year, or in 1998 when Kurt wrote the appserver"
Completely irrelevant. We're not living in 6 months ago, or in 1998. It can be done NOW, and that's all that matters. Time does not go backwards. And you're wrong. XRender existed 6 months ago. It existed a year ago. It existed 2 years ago. I forgot how old it is but it's definitely more than 2 years old. Even the ancient RedHat 7.2 had it.
"the fact that it is heavy weight"
So can you explain how X can run so well on embedded systems? Or computers from the 80s, which are much less powerful than computers today?
"that is simply does not have a standard toolkit"
Because we all know software like Norton AntiVirus, ZoneAlarm, ApezBot, Revemu, tons of VB apps out there made by kids, WinAmp, Windows Media Player, MSN Explorer, etc do not use custom controls, right? Let's face it: people will create custom controls no matter what standard toolkit you throw down their throat. If X had a "standard toolkit" built into the server, we'd still be stuck with Xaw or Motif today.
"We don't want that Unix mindset and we don't want X."
So you're completely ignoring any technical merit in today's technology. That's an emotional argument. It just makes you look like a zealot. And according to Slashdot morals, being a zealot is by definition a Bad Thing(tm).
And how's the BSD license any better in that regard? How does the BSD license promote professional-quality software any more than the GPL does? Everyone is always like "GPL is viral! BSD is freeer! GPL is EVIL!!! lolololololol!!!"
"and neither of them are network friendly. There are the XV (X video) extensions (as prefered by Mplayer) - and there is OpenGL (used by the likes of Doom). Yes, Mplayer doesn't *require* XV support, it can fall back to older video output methods, but at the cost of increased CPU usage. FYI, XV typically doesn't work over the network."
Then you are wrong. XV *is* network transparent! So is GLX (OpenGL-over-X)! Tadaa, there goes your theory. Don't believe me? ssh to another machine on your LAN (with X forwarding enabled) and run an OpenGL game, like Chromium or GLtron or whatever. It works! Run mplayer with the xv output - it works! Both Xv and OpenGL are network transparent. This just proofs that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
In case you didn't know, the last few years the Slashdot community has dramatically changed. If you love a certain piece of software because it's open source, you'll get flamed down as an "open source zealot". And being a zealot is by definition a bad and immoral thing, at least and especially on Slashdot. As for the "about just as good", most Slashdotters claim that Gimp, along with most (if not all) other open source software, is totally unusable, and that "programmers must be banned from UI design".
Now ask those peoples' kids. They're likely to know HTML, and therebefore PNG too.
Anyway, that doesn't matter. I've successfully debunked the original point - that TIFF has name recognition. The average user doesn't know TIFF, so the name recognition point is moot.
Slashdot Mirror
It means that you can't get infected by those ActiveX one-click-installed spyware/viruses.
And I know more than 3 people who don't mind using Windows. In fact, they even refuse to use anything else. They'd rather spend money on a commercial anti-spyware/anti-virus package, than using Firefox. At least two of them brag about how good SP2 is, and that they're completely happy with IE6 from SP2.
Well the people I've heard from say that they haven't got ANY problems at all with SP2, and then continue to praise how good it is.
Joe User doesn't care about that kind of stuff. He downloads WinXP SP 2 and then brags about that it's a "huge improvement" and that security problems are a thing of the past.
Whether that's true is another story. But that's the Joe User mentality.
There aren't many Motif apps left today. The only Motif apps that I know are Netscape 4 and RealPlayer. Netscape 4 is dead; nobody uses it anymore. The latest version of RealPlayer uses GTK 2. 99% of all GTK and QT apps use the same or similar keyboard bindings. Also, inexperienced users are likely to use RedHat/Fedora/Mandrake, which have unified themes, thus making both toolkits look the same.
So use the Bluecurve theme for both toolkits?
Next time you do that, install the XP theme for GNOME/KDE, or something like that. Or an Aqua theme.
"This isn't OSS zealotry refusing to acknowledge any criticism of certain software, this is simply people giving their response to a comment that was flawed in a number of ways."
And this is exactly why Slashdot is fundamentally flawed. Criticism against OSS is always modded up, including the posts that claim that OSS criticism is modded down. However, valid counter-arguments against that criticism are usually modded down, and are marked as "OSS zealotry that can't stand criticism".
Of course it's not. The Windows source code is a mess. I highly doubt Microsoft can manage an open source project of that size, without hiring people who have experience in open source management.
Open source is not just open-the-source-code-and-I-don't-care. You have to manage it properly. Bad management is the root of forks. Well-managed projects are much less likely to fork.
"Office -> still no good email client"
What part of Evolution is not good? It's almost exactly like MS Outlook.
If you don't like MS Outlook, what's wrong with Thunderbird?
Or heck, why not just Hotmail? Hotmail is the most popular email service among teenagers in The Netherlands. Everybody here uses it. It's considered cool. And it works in Mozilla/FireFox.
Yeah so tell me, why do so many EXTREMELY Linux-critical posts on Slashdot get modded up? Even posts that claim that Linux-critical posts will get modded down, are modded up. You are either very ignorant, or lying.
We are at the point that you just proved that both Syllable and MacOS X did not largely abandoned UNIX concepts. ;)
"Note that my entire post had NOTHING to do with OO.org being open source as to why it's technical, so you're barking up the wrong tree."
That doesn't matter. "Open source == by definition unusable" is the common Slashdot mentality.
"Saying "nyah nyah, I like it and my other friend does too" is EXACTLY the kind of response that makes products sit and not be utilized."
And yet people use the same argument to defend Windows, Internet Explorer and MS Office. "What Internet Explorer problems? Internet Explorer works fine for me, and many others. FireFox? I don't care."
MS Fudmakers? I think most "GPL is viral" trolls are from BSD Fudmakers. "The GPL is evil! BSD is freeer! lolololololol!!!"
Their reasoning is similar to "People in my country have the freedom to kill other people. Your country's law restricts people from killing others. Therebefore my country is freeer than yours."
"it's clearly designed by technical people and doesn't have the slightest bit of usability in mind."
It isn't. OpenOffice is derived from StarOffice, made by StarDivision Inc (now acquired by Sun). In other words: OpenOffice is derived from a commercial product! *Shock*, *shrudder*, commercial products are always designed by tons of usability experts and can never, ever be unusable junk like open source software, right? Right?
If anything, your statement just proofed that commercial software can be just as bad, if not worse, at usability, which goes against common Slashdot sense that commercial software is always perfect and can never be unusable.
In other news, a friend of mine tried OpenOffice and he quite likes it. Just because you think it's unusable doesn't mean it is unusable to everyone.
"You said that by using C++ and the design of the client library that we're making some huge mistake"
I never said that.
"and we should be used $SOME_OTHER_DESIGN instead."
I never said that either.
"but maybe I just havn't tweaked my XF86Config just right"
You don't have to tweak your XF86Config. It's always on by default, if supported by the driver. Again, both the ATI and the NV(idia) drivers support it. If you're using a different driver, you may not be so lucky.
"Funny you should mention MacOS X really, don't you think? There is another OS which doesn't use X and largly abandons other UNIX concepts in favour of a more integrated, desktop oriented approach."
Largly abandoned UNIX concepts? Under the hood, MacOS X is still very much a Unix. POSIX compatible, similar commandline/shell, user seperation, etc. While OS X doesn't use X, it uses Display PDF, which is also a client/server architecture... like X.
"That does not mean that we should throw away what we already have and start again. [SNIP]"
Your point being? I don't see what that has got anything to do with what I said.
"When did toolkits like Qt and GTK+ support RENDER?"
Qt and Gtk both since 2.0. And that's many years ago.
"What drivers include RENDER extensions?"
At least the proprietary and open source NVidia drivers, and the open source ATI driver. I don't know about everything else. But frankly, NVidia and ATI cover 99% of the computers these days.
"but it's only been fully usable in the last 6"
Riiiiight. XRender was already very usable on RedHat 7.2, on which I installed GNOME 2. Antialiased fonts worked perfectly.
"The UNIX mindset does not work on the desktop"
MacOS X does not work on the desktop?
So you're saying that you are willing to create a 10 million line professional-quality software package and release it under the BSD license, because others can take your software and relicense it under a proprietary license?
"Sure, you can do compositing now with RENDER, but not six months ago, or last year, or in 1998 when Kurt wrote the appserver"
Completely irrelevant. We're not living in 6 months ago, or in 1998. It can be done NOW, and that's all that matters. Time does not go backwards.
And you're wrong. XRender existed 6 months ago. It existed a year ago. It existed 2 years ago. I forgot how old it is but it's definitely more than 2 years old. Even the ancient RedHat 7.2 had it.
"the fact that it is heavy weight"
So can you explain how X can run so well on embedded systems? Or computers from the 80s, which are much less powerful than computers today?
"that is simply does not have a standard toolkit"
Because we all know software like Norton AntiVirus, ZoneAlarm, ApezBot, Revemu, tons of VB apps out there made by kids, WinAmp, Windows Media Player, MSN Explorer, etc do not use custom controls, right?
Let's face it: people will create custom controls no matter what standard toolkit you throw down their throat. If X had a "standard toolkit" built into the server, we'd still be stuck with Xaw or Motif today.
"We don't want that Unix mindset and we don't want X."
So you're completely ignoring any technical merit in today's technology. That's an emotional argument. It just makes you look like a zealot. And according to Slashdot morals, being a zealot is by definition a Bad Thing(tm).
And how's the BSD license any better in that regard? How does the BSD license promote professional-quality software any more than the GPL does? Everyone is always like "GPL is viral! BSD is freeer! GPL is EVIL!!! lolololololol!!!"
Be prepared to get trolled down by the "GPL is viral" trolls.
"and neither of them are network friendly. There are the XV (X video) extensions (as prefered by Mplayer) - and there is OpenGL (used by the likes of Doom). Yes, Mplayer doesn't *require* XV support, it can fall back to older video output methods, but at the cost of increased CPU usage. FYI, XV typically doesn't work over the network."
Then you are wrong. XV *is* network transparent! So is GLX (OpenGL-over-X)! Tadaa, there goes your theory. Don't believe me? ssh to another machine on your LAN (with X forwarding enabled) and run an OpenGL game, like Chromium or GLtron or whatever. It works! Run mplayer with the xv output - it works!
Both Xv and OpenGL are network transparent. This just proofs that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
In case you didn't know, the last few years the Slashdot community has dramatically changed. If you love a certain piece of software because it's open source, you'll get flamed down as an "open source zealot". And being a zealot is by definition a bad and immoral thing, at least and especially on Slashdot. As for the "about just as good", most Slashdotters claim that Gimp, along with most (if not all) other open source software, is totally unusable, and that "programmers must be banned from UI design".
I'm not saying Gimp is bad. I'm saying the majority of Slashdotters mindlessly flame down Gimp, and will flame you down too just for being pro-Gimp.
Now ask those peoples' kids. They're likely to know HTML, and therebefore PNG too.
Anyway, that doesn't matter. I've successfully debunked the original point - that TIFF has name recognition. The average user doesn't know TIFF, so the name recognition point is moot.