because they're appealing to the mass market. just like pretty much every indie band is better than the britneyspears shit forced down our throats, so are the microbreweries better than the macrobreweries
that doesn't fix the problem with all qt apps. that also doesn't help because it should be default. windows is even remotely usable once you install about 30 apps, remove ie, remove OE, install SP2, reboot 4-5 times (due to all the 30 apps and updates). it just takes time, effort, and it isn't setup (out of the box) to be user friendly. that goes a long way towards making the whole system easier to use.
This seems to be just as far fetched as Apples "Worlds first 64bit desktop computer"
except for that whole they were the first large manufacturer to ship computers made for desktop usage that were 64bit
by pci-x you mean pci express. and nope, powermacs don't support pci-express yet. we do have agp and pci-x. so i guess we'll have to wait for the native agp version too it seems.
it always annoyed me that the only way i could upload files from a windows machine without an ftp client was via IE. though i suppose i still have to "download" a client, a simple few clicks to install an extension isn't so bad.
just add this userContent.css file to ~/Library/Application Support/Camino/chrome and you have *exactly* the same thing as adblock in firefox.
you can even add this style sheet in safari (use the last toolbar button) and it's the same as pithhelment.
looks are subjective, that is true. however usability is not. having 3 different look and feels for one desktop environment is a big problem. heck even microsoft and apple aren't very good at consistency now a days. (with microsoft you have the office look and feel, the win 2k look and feel, and the luna look and feel. yikes!) and apple now has aqua, metal, and pro tools look and feel. even gtk would be better for consistency than aqua and windows now a days.
if you're still a dock user you should really check out the application quicksilver. i haven't used the dock for anything over than drag and drop in awhile.
why in gods name every distro doesn't do this for the defaults is beyond me. it makes your desktop look 100% cleaner if you utilize different toolkits. however i'd say that gtk runs champ. every gtk app is better than the qt equivs i've found with one exception: k3b.
i consider myself a fairly competent desktop user (considering i'm a programmer, and gui developer) and i despise kde. despite the fact that some of those "advanced" features might even be useful for me. the simple fact is gnome is a lot easier to use on a day to day basis. i don't have to fool with serial searches through the menus/toolbars just to find what i'm looking for due to the sheer overwhelimg amount of features in kde. konqueror is an utter mess, and anyone who thinks otherwise has no objectivity.
those are the native implementations of jogl and joal (java opengl and java openal). you have to have native c interfaces with the system libraries to achieve these sorts of things.
the reason everyone uses it is because when microsoft copied the mac interface, they got sued by apple for putting the menu bar at they very top. that's right. even microsoft did this. so, because of the interface lawsuit, they put it in the window to skirt past this with a technicality.
i don't think you understand fitts law then if you think you have to put twice as much mileage on the mouse just to get to menu items. again it's not the distance of the target that matters. mac users can still get to the menu faster. isn't that all that really matters? despite the fact that you claim my examples aren't "real world" they are. they happen all the time. you act like you don't use any IM clients or you never minimize windows. i'm quite certain that that's a blatent lie and you do. quite frankly if microsoft had been able to 100% copy apple legally, you'd to this day be using apple style menus and never complain a bit because you wouldn't know any better. and funny enough, if someone came along and tried to introduce an inferior attached menu system you'd say that "the menu on the top is better for me and that's all that matters." the irony of the situation is funny.
first off, you can't set gnome up like that. there's no option in gtk/gnome apps to have a menu bar at the top globally shared for applications. qt can do this, and there's an option to turn it on in kcontrol. however every kde user needs gtk apps (gimp, gaim, evolution, firefox) to name a few of the *killer* gtk based applications that many kde users use. when you do this you get a mix of applications with menu bars at the top, and menu bars attached which looks and functions like crap. so of course no sane person would do this in linux and like it.
i'm willing to bet you aren't a usability expert, and haven't a single clue what you're talking about. so quite frankly, just because you prefer it doesn't make you right. if you read my article and still think your high-and-mighty inferior way is better, then who am i to challenge a fool?
Well, you're right in that GNOME copies Apple much more than MS. In fact, if they'd just bite the bullet and support putting the menubar at the top, they'd have MacOS Classic for x86.
i was going to start developing a "menu server" project where both gtk and qt could talk to a small gnome or kde applet (i.e. the server would be portable, with a gtk and qt frontend) so we could put menu-at-the-top menubars in both gnome and kde, both with native menus. i scrapped the project idea due to lack of time but i still want to do this one day. it would really get rid of this nagging lack of a good cross desktop environment menu problem.
On the other hand, it's a bit silly to say that KDE is copying MS. The Konqueror example is a poor one. Konqueror is a KPart host and nothing more. It's neither a web-browser or a file manager (or a PDF viewer or a.doc viewer or whatever), but is a generic document viewer that can use whatever document plug-ins it finds.
i'm well aware that konqueror is a kpart host. however that doesn't change the fact that what it does, out of the box, is JUST like windows IE. i mean design wise it's a mirror image.
who said we should try and switch people from windows? as linus said "destroying microsoft would be a completely unintentional side effect." we shouldn't strive to make something that makes people want to switch away from windows. we should strive to do the best thing possible. if we wanted to do the "good enough" method, people would just continue using windows because it already works the same.
The Windows GUI is not bad, really. In at least one respect (doesn't stick the menu bar at the top of the screen), it 's even better than Apple's.
you just lost all credibility with that one statement sir. please read my article on this topic available here. If you still insist on being a menu bar at the top of the screen troll, i suggest you don't bother replying.
do you have to learn how to open a door with a nob? how about telling the difference between a pull open door and a push open door? do you need to learn how to use a light switch whenever you see a new style light switch? do you have to relearn how to talk when conversing with another person?
the ultimate goal of any interface is to be so intuitive that you look at it and say "duh." just because we haven't reached this level of design in cars, or boats, etc doesn't mean that we can't strive to achieve them. computers shouldn't be hard. what so many of the "computers should be hard" people fail to realize is that all the human factors studying we do, benefits the power users just the same. the goal of most all interface designers is to reduce complexity, increase memorability and learning, and make the system easier to use for everyone not just beginners.
"The corporation *cannot* be ethical, if its only responsibility is to make a profit." - Milton Friedman
I think Milton said it best himself.
Re:I see these +0.1 releases discussed often, but.
on
Gnome 2.8 RC1 Released
·
· Score: 1
you have to consider that open source is far more trickle-down release centric. i'm sure the amount of new stuff between 1.0 and 2.0 is pretty significant. however, it's all those updates inbetween that lead up to a major change that you normally may not see with big software packages.
open source is much more evoluationary, than revolutionary. just because it doesn't have a wizz bang release cycle doesn't make it any less productive for getting major features done over time.
Slashdot Mirror
because they're appealing to the mass market. just like pretty much every indie band is better than the britneyspears shit forced down our throats, so are the microbreweries better than the macrobreweries
that doesn't fix the problem with all qt apps. that also doesn't help because it should be default. windows is even remotely usable once you install about 30 apps, remove ie, remove OE, install SP2, reboot 4-5 times (due to all the 30 apps and updates). it just takes time, effort, and it isn't setup (out of the box) to be user friendly. that goes a long way towards making the whole system easier to use.
This seems to be just as far fetched as Apples "Worlds first 64bit desktop computer"
except for that whole they were the first large manufacturer to ship computers made for desktop usage that were 64bit
Note: I could be talking out my ass if Firefox stores extensions in the user profile directory on Windows.
and they are
if only i had mod points
i agree. ruby also just got java bindings via jruby.
i'm looking forward to when we're closer towards a full fledged VM for ruby.. it's been interpreted since its inception as far as i know.
if the rumors are true, i'm pretty sure 3 dual core 3.5ghz ppc 64bit chips can emulate the power in a 700mhz celeron currently in the xbox.
by pci-x you mean pci express. and nope, powermacs don't support pci-express yet. we do have agp and pci-x. so i guess we'll have to wait for the native agp version too it seems.
it always annoyed me that the only way i could upload files from a windows machine without an ftp client was via IE. though i suppose i still have to "download" a client, a simple few clicks to install an extension isn't so bad.
but can you buy a standard 6600 video card for "pcs" and throw it in a mac?
just add this userContent.css file to ~/Library/Application Support/Camino/chrome and you have *exactly* the same thing as adblock in firefox. you can even add this style sheet in safari (use the last toolbar button) and it's the same as pithhelment.
looks are subjective, that is true. however usability is not. having 3 different look and feels for one desktop environment is a big problem. heck even microsoft and apple aren't very good at consistency now a days. (with microsoft you have the office look and feel, the win 2k look and feel, and the luna look and feel. yikes!) and apple now has aqua, metal, and pro tools look and feel. even gtk would be better for consistency than aqua and windows now a days.
if you're still a dock user you should really check out the application quicksilver. i haven't used the dock for anything over than drag and drop in awhile.
ever heard of bluecurve?
before bluecurve
after bluecurve
why in gods name every distro doesn't do this for the defaults is beyond me. it makes your desktop look 100% cleaner if you utilize different toolkits. however i'd say that gtk runs champ. every gtk app is better than the qt equivs i've found with one exception: k3b.
i consider myself a fairly competent desktop user (considering i'm a programmer, and gui developer) and i despise kde. despite the fact that some of those "advanced" features might even be useful for me. the simple fact is gnome is a lot easier to use on a day to day basis. i don't have to fool with serial searches through the menus/toolbars just to find what i'm looking for due to the sheer overwhelimg amount of features in kde. konqueror is an utter mess, and anyone who thinks otherwise has no objectivity.
try out logorrhea sometime. it can seach ichat logs. btw ichat logs are to my knowledge just serialized nsobjects. it isn't hard to reverse engineer.
those are the native implementations of jogl and joal (java opengl and java openal). you have to have native c interfaces with the system libraries to achieve these sorts of things.
the reason everyone uses it is because when microsoft copied the mac interface, they got sued by apple for putting the menu bar at they very top. that's right. even microsoft did this. so, because of the interface lawsuit, they put it in the window to skirt past this with a technicality.
i don't think you understand fitts law then if you think you have to put twice as much mileage on the mouse just to get to menu items. again it's not the distance of the target that matters. mac users can still get to the menu faster. isn't that all that really matters? despite the fact that you claim my examples aren't "real world" they are. they happen all the time. you act like you don't use any IM clients or you never minimize windows. i'm quite certain that that's a blatent lie and you do. quite frankly if microsoft had been able to 100% copy apple legally, you'd to this day be using apple style menus and never complain a bit because you wouldn't know any better. and funny enough, if someone came along and tried to introduce an inferior attached menu system you'd say that "the menu on the top is better for me and that's all that matters." the irony of the situation is funny.
first off, you can't set gnome up like that. there's no option in gtk/gnome apps to have a menu bar at the top globally shared for applications. qt can do this, and there's an option to turn it on in kcontrol. however every kde user needs gtk apps (gimp, gaim, evolution, firefox) to name a few of the *killer* gtk based applications that many kde users use. when you do this you get a mix of applications with menu bars at the top, and menu bars attached which looks and functions like crap. so of course no sane person would do this in linux and like it.
i'm willing to bet you aren't a usability expert, and haven't a single clue what you're talking about. so quite frankly, just because you prefer it doesn't make you right. if you read my article and still think your high-and-mighty inferior way is better, then who am i to challenge a fool?
i'm well aware that konqueror is a kpart host. however that doesn't change the fact that what it does, out of the box, is JUST like windows IE. i mean design wise it's a mirror image.
who said we should try and switch people from windows? as linus said "destroying microsoft would be a completely unintentional side effect." we shouldn't strive to make something that makes people want to switch away from windows. we should strive to do the best thing possible. if we wanted to do the "good enough" method, people would just continue using windows because it already works the same.
do you have to learn how to open a door with a nob? how about telling the difference between a pull open door and a push open door? do you need to learn how to use a light switch whenever you see a new style light switch? do you have to relearn how to talk when conversing with another person?
the ultimate goal of any interface is to be so intuitive that you look at it and say "duh." just because we haven't reached this level of design in cars, or boats, etc doesn't mean that we can't strive to achieve them. computers shouldn't be hard. what so many of the "computers should be hard" people fail to realize is that all the human factors studying we do, benefits the power users just the same. the goal of most all interface designers is to reduce complexity, increase memorability and learning, and make the system easier to use for everyone not just beginners.
you have to consider that open source is far more trickle-down release centric. i'm sure the amount of new stuff between 1.0 and 2.0 is pretty significant. however, it's all those updates inbetween that lead up to a major change that you normally may not see with big software packages.
open source is much more evoluationary, than revolutionary. just because it doesn't have a wizz bang release cycle doesn't make it any less productive for getting major features done over time.