Nevermind the fact that X has had multiple desktops for years
And just to add to what everyone else is saying, Expose has nothing to do with multiple desktops. Multiple desktops are a pain in the arse. Got them on my linux box, got them on W2k (via my Nvidia card). Never use them on either, because they're shit. They simply spread the problem over multiple desktops.
I want immediate access to all my windows so I can find the window I'm looking for, when I've got eight or ten open on-screen. single keyboard click. Expose gives me that with a single key press. Multiple desktops and tile all windows doesn't come close.
But hey, thanks for playing. Better luck next time...
can anyone explain to me how it's any better than pressing F11 in WindowMaker, to get the Window List?
The other guy's right. The experience is outstanding (not a word that ever sprang to mind when using WindowMaker), but if you want an explanation of how it works, try here.
"My non-techie friends drool over the transparency and scaling effects, even though UI research has shown that they add practically nothing to getting real work done.
Let me guess, you haven't actually ever *used* Expose, have you? Or even seen it, I'd warrant.
It's the first enhancement I've seen to an OS in the last fifteen years or so that actually *will* make significant differences to my productivity.
But hey, if KDE cuts it for you, you keep right on using it...
Mac OS is steadily improving and improvment costs money.
Coincidentally, I installed it on my Powerbook yesterday. I'm extremely impressed. It's very fast and responsive by comparison with 10.2, and Expose is an absolute dream though.
However, I didn't pay for it myself, so I can't really answer the question of whether it's 'worth' $129. I think if I had been paying for it myself -- because it is an expensive upgrade for the functionality. But if I had stumped up the money and bought it, I don't think I'd have been disappointed or felt ripped off.
Gay, as in homosexual. One who takes a penis up the 'ole pooper, assuuming that one is male. Faggots, as they say. Cum-guzzling aids bags, as it were. Alternate lifesyles. Bone doggers. Smoking Steve's salami. Gay like the guy who uses too many quotation marks below. The skank on your crank smells not of tuna, but of pewp. A male who prefers the one-eyed worm instead of the fleshy love tube. A, ahem, queer. Looking for a life partner.
Writing this list of euphemisms got you hard, didn't it?
How about it? Its a pretty ridiculous idea because they aren't actually blocking *anything*.
Other people are, acting on the information that they provide. Doesn't the USA have rules about freedom of speech and freedom of information?
Do you think it should be made illegal to tell the world that a certain IP block is generating high levels of spam? Because that's all that Spamhaus effectively does.
I thnk that most of the "fanboys", or people who acutaly took the time to learn and use Linux would agree with me that in the past year alone there has been exponential progres with KDE and GNOME to the point that they really are ready for the desktop, if not very very close.
It absolutely depends on what you want to do on your desktop. If all you do is very basic spreadsheets, word processing, browsing and email, then Linux is fine.
If you want the flexibility to run a much wider range of applications -- for example, professional music, professional graphics for print, a whole range of niche applications, Linux doesn't cut it. Similarly, if you need to run very complex spreadsheets, or if you want a games machine with a choice of modern games, Linux wouldn't be a sensible choice.
I guess the way most people look at it is, if you're going to invest say, $700 on a computer, why would you limit your functionality by refusing to spend the additional $100 which can allow you access to that much wider range of software -- although if you don't actually need any of that, it's absolutely unreasonable to be expected to pay the Microsoft tax.
If she has to figure it out for herself then good luck trying it with Windows.
Come on, you're really stretching things now. Even the most clueless non-techie person knows that this stuff happens in Control Panels, and Display would be the obvious place to start looking.
A little trial and error and you've got it, with no real risk of adverse effects.
Where does the clueless experimenter start looking in Linux? In/etc/X11?/home/youraccount/.xinitrc?/home/youraccount/.gnome? And the chances of screwing up your display are fairly high even if you've bothered to read the docs.
I agree, but at the same time unless you're been a vegetable the past few years it is common fucking knowledge that this goes on in prison. To me that is one more deterrent to the people committing these crimes in the first place.
Unfortunately, to the people who actually commit these offences, it's no deterrent at all. Why? Because they don't believe that they'll get caught. This is why, in the days when we still had public hanging for theft, there were pickpockets who stole from the crowd at the hanging.
Where it might have a serious deterrent effect though, is when a criminal knows that they've been detected and knows that there is a very strong chance that they'll be sent away for the involuntary ass-raping.
At that point, there's a very strong likelihood that at least some of them will think 'oh no, I can't go through that again. I've been used as the bukakke queen by twenty big, black studs one time too many.'
At which point, out comes the gun and the witnesses all get wasted.
Even if you don't get away with it, there are no rapes on death row...
Well, this is how so much content for consumer media is generated. ZDnet or whoever trawl through their advertisers to see who has new products. Five big spending companies say 'yeah, we've got new MP3 players', and they say 'OK, we'll do a review piece. Wanna buy some advertising?'
Now you *know* that they aren't going to say anything critical about any of those machines, so they say 'yeah, look, it has these new cool features.'
That's how it works. That's how it always worked. But in this case, either they know they can't get away with all of the usual hyperbole, or alternatively they used a writer with some small modicum of integrity, and so what's his conclusion?
"There are a couple of new machines with new features, some of which improve on the iPod, but the truth is, as a general all around useful MP3 player, the iPod continues to kick the shit out of everything else."
Intellectual honesty is a real rarity in consumer product reviews where editors will tell you to eat shit, and then criticize you because you complained that the odour was pungent when it should have been fragrant, and you didn't wear the appropriate shit-eating grin while dining.
I suspect that this guy wrote an intellectually honest review, but then some asshole editor or subeditor decides to present the story as 'five reasons not to buy an iPod' -- but the writer refuses to concede that anything else out there comes close as an all-around general mp3 playing type thingie.
Disclaimer. I don't and never have worked for Ziff Davis, nor have I ever owned an iPod. However, I do have friends who own them and they wouldn't use anything else.
You may be correct. Although I did two years post-grad work in a law faculty, I'm married to a lawyer, and I often find her logic somewhat impenetrable.
Legally spoken they did already produce a truckload of papers. All lelgally correct (even if not true). They found loopholes in the law (or not) that kept/. bus for the last months. It kept them busy for a certain rate as well.
It seems that your reading of the court filings differs hugely from mine. Which particular loopholes in the law would these be?
So far, all that they've done is produce a whole load of allegations, underpinned by what appears to be somewhat specious reasoning that's completely unsupported by any evidence -- or at least any evidence that they're prepared to release to IBM in the discovery process.
This are the same kind of people who defend muggers, killers, and verything else the law forbids. Does that do harm to them?
No, but that says absolutely nothing about how *well* they do their jobs. When I talk about the damage to their reputation, I'm talking about the damage to their business reputation, not their social reputation. Although some people might feel that the idea of suing IBM over contributing to linux might have been inspired, unless they've got something *in law* to back up those allegations, then other people will start to regard the firm as a joke.
All that they've shown us so far has been the Utah variation of the Chewbacca defence.
One of the things that I find interesting about this whole case is the fact that Boies used to be a partner in Cravath, Swaine and Moore -- the law firm that are handling the case for IBM.
You've got to wonder what Dave's ex-partners currently make of all this. I guess initially they might have been somewhat anxious, thinking 'Oh no, one of our own coming after us. He'll be tuned in to all our cunning strategies and will use them against us.'
Now though, they must be laughing their asses off, thinking 'Good job that dummy left before he did any real damage to our reputation.'
On the other hand, given his twenty percent of all new investment in SCO, Boies has already had one decent payday, but you've got to wonder whether that will be sufficient to compensate for the damage to his firm's reputation that their handling of this case must have done to date?
Re:Nice, but not a ton of info from it.
on
Kylix in Limbo
·
· Score: 1
I, for one, will be very disappointed if they abandon this product
Damn. I thought this was going to say 'I, for one, welcome our new product-abandoning overlords.'
Slashdot Mirror
good for you, and good for apple.
Not so good. The early versions of OSX were pretty damn slow, so it isn't very hard to improve from a crappy starting position.
What's $10.75 a month? A beer a week.
But some of us would rather have the beer than the OS upgrade...
Ok, it's "clean up all windows" with eye candy.
Bzzzt. Wrong again.
Again, why do you think this is innovative?
See my post below.
Nevermind the fact that X has had multiple desktops for years
And just to add to what everyone else is saying, Expose has nothing to do with multiple desktops. Multiple desktops are a pain in the arse. Got them on my linux box, got them on W2k (via my Nvidia card). Never use them on either, because they're shit. They simply spread the problem over multiple desktops.
I want immediate access to all my windows so I can find the window I'm looking for, when I've got eight or ten open on-screen. single keyboard click. Expose gives me that with a single key press. Multiple desktops and tile all windows doesn't come close.
But hey, thanks for playing. Better luck next time...
can anyone explain to me how it's any better than pressing F11 in WindowMaker, to get the Window List?
The other guy's right. The experience is outstanding (not a word that ever sprang to mind when using WindowMaker), but if you want an explanation of how it works, try here.
"My non-techie friends drool over the transparency and scaling effects, even though UI research has shown that they add practically nothing to getting real work done.
Let me guess, you haven't actually ever *used* Expose, have you? Or even seen it, I'd warrant.
It's the first enhancement I've seen to an OS in the last fifteen years or so that actually *will* make significant differences to my productivity.
But hey, if KDE cuts it for you, you keep right on using it...
Mac OS is steadily improving and improvment costs money.
Coincidentally, I installed it on my Powerbook yesterday. I'm extremely impressed. It's very fast and responsive by comparison with 10.2, and Expose is an absolute dream though.
However, I didn't pay for it myself, so I can't really answer the question of whether it's 'worth' $129. I think if I had been paying for it myself -- because it is an expensive upgrade for the functionality. But if I had stumped up the money and bought it, I don't think I'd have been disappointed or felt ripped off.
Gay, as in homosexual. One who takes a penis up the 'ole pooper, assuuming that one is male. Faggots, as they say. Cum-guzzling aids bags, as it were. Alternate lifesyles. Bone doggers. Smoking Steve's salami. Gay like the guy who uses too many quotation marks below. The skank on your crank smells not of tuna, but of pewp. A male who prefers the one-eyed worm instead of the fleshy love tube. A, ahem, queer. Looking for a life partner.
Writing this list of euphemisms got you hard, didn't it?
Go on. You can admit it to me. I won't judge you.
I prefer the method that Bill Gates proposes in his book, The Road Ahead.
Uh-oh. I suspect that any method Bill Gates proposes regarding the internet is bound to suck.
Sending an email to someone carries a small nominal cost, that money going to the recipient.
And who administers these billions of micropayments, shuffling around the planet every day? Let me guess....
Wouldn't be Microsoft, by any chance?
I almost think I'd prefer the spam...
No, just someone who believe that there are better technical solutions
Talk is cheap. If you believe there are better solutions, I suggest that you implement them. If you're correct, people will use them.
Till then though, we'll stick with Spamhaus.
How about it? Its a pretty ridiculous idea because they aren't actually blocking *anything*.
Other people are, acting on the information that they provide. Doesn't the USA have rules about freedom of speech and freedom of information?
Do you think it should be made illegal to tell the world that a certain IP block is generating high levels of spam? Because that's all that Spamhaus effectively does.
I thnk that most of the "fanboys", or people who acutaly took the time to learn and use Linux would agree with me that in the past year alone there has been exponential progres with KDE and GNOME to the point that they really are ready for the desktop, if not very very close.
It absolutely depends on what you want to do on your desktop. If all you do is very basic spreadsheets, word processing, browsing and email, then Linux is fine.
If you want the flexibility to run a much wider range of applications -- for example, professional music, professional graphics for print, a whole range of niche applications, Linux doesn't cut it. Similarly, if you need to run very complex spreadsheets, or if you want a games machine with a choice of modern games, Linux wouldn't be a sensible choice.
I guess the way most people look at it is, if you're going to invest say, $700 on a computer, why would you limit your functionality by refusing to spend the additional $100 which can allow you access to that much wider range of software -- although if you don't actually need any of that, it's absolutely unreasonable to be expected to pay the Microsoft tax.
If she has to figure it out for herself then good luck trying it with Windows.
/etc/X11? /home/youraccount/.xinitrc? /home/youraccount/.gnome? And the chances of screwing up your display are fairly high even if you've bothered to read the docs.
Come on, you're really stretching things now. Even the most clueless non-techie person knows that this stuff happens in Control Panels, and Display would be the obvious place to start looking.
A little trial and error and you've got it, with no real risk of adverse effects.
Where does the clueless experimenter start looking in Linux? In
I agree, but at the same time unless you're been a vegetable the past few years it is common fucking knowledge that this goes on in prison. To me that is one more deterrent to the people committing these crimes in the first place.
Unfortunately, to the people who actually commit these offences, it's no deterrent at all. Why? Because they don't believe that they'll get caught. This is why, in the days when we still had public hanging for theft, there were pickpockets who stole from the crowd at the hanging.
Where it might have a serious deterrent effect though, is when a criminal knows that they've been detected and knows that there is a very strong chance that they'll be sent away for the involuntary ass-raping.
At that point, there's a very strong likelihood that at least some of them will think 'oh no, I can't go through that again. I've been used as the bukakke queen by twenty big, black studs one time too many.'
At which point, out comes the gun and the witnesses all get wasted.
Even if you don't get away with it, there are no rapes on death row...
Well, this is how so much content for consumer media is generated. ZDnet or whoever trawl through their advertisers to see who has new products. Five big spending companies say 'yeah, we've got new MP3 players', and they say 'OK, we'll do a review piece. Wanna buy some advertising?'
Now you *know* that they aren't going to say anything critical about any of those machines, so they say 'yeah, look, it has these new cool features.'
That's how it works. That's how it always worked. But in this case, either they know they can't get away with all of the usual hyperbole, or alternatively they used a writer with some small modicum of integrity, and so what's his conclusion?
"There are a couple of new machines with new features, some of which improve on the iPod, but the truth is, as a general all around useful MP3 player, the iPod continues to kick the shit out of everything else."
Intellectual honesty is a real rarity in consumer product reviews where editors will tell you to eat shit, and then criticize you because you complained that the odour was pungent when it should have been fragrant, and you didn't wear the appropriate shit-eating grin while dining.
I suspect that this guy wrote an intellectually honest review, but then some asshole editor or subeditor decides to present the story as 'five reasons not to buy an iPod' -- but the writer refuses to concede that anything else out there comes close as an all-around general mp3 playing type thingie.
Disclaimer. I don't and never have worked for Ziff Davis, nor have I ever owned an iPod. However, I do have friends who own them and they wouldn't use anything else.
It was originally British prison slang (albeit now passed into common parlance) for a child molester. (ie, a nonsensical crime)
Sometimes, you'll also hear the term 'Bacon'.
Bacon = bacon bonce = nonce = paedophine.
Hope that helps.
It looks like they really had to stretch to find 5 reasons.
The article is nothing more than an extended commercial for a range of new MP3 players, and at the end of the day, what conclusion do they come to?
Quote: "While not ideal for some niche activities, it's still hands down the best-designed MP3 player in the world."
So did either the person who submitted the article, or the editor who approved it actually bother to read the damn thing?
Don't give your right name, no no no
What I'm so bemused by though, is how someone who's so concerned with A_nonymity managed to figure out that I really am a McD.
Coincidence?
If I am sued by McD
I've got no intention of suing you. Honest.
McD wants to spend $1M
I'd like to spend a million, but I don't have it.
Then you don't understand the logic of lawyers.
/. bus for the last months. It kept them busy for a certain rate as well.
You may be correct. Although I did two years post-grad work in a law faculty, I'm married to a lawyer, and I often find her logic somewhat impenetrable.
Legally spoken they did already produce a truckload of papers. All lelgally correct (even if not true). They found loopholes in the law (or not) that kept
It seems that your reading of the court filings differs hugely from mine. Which particular loopholes in the law would these be?
So far, all that they've done is produce a whole load of allegations, underpinned by what appears to be somewhat specious reasoning that's completely unsupported by any evidence -- or at least any evidence that they're prepared to release to IBM in the discovery process.
This are the same kind of people who defend muggers, killers, and verything else the law forbids. Does that do harm to them?
No, but that says absolutely nothing about how *well* they do their jobs. When I talk about the damage to their reputation, I'm talking about the damage to their business reputation, not their social reputation. Although some people might feel that the idea of suing IBM over contributing to linux might have been inspired, unless they've got something *in law* to back up those allegations, then other people will start to regard the firm as a joke.
All that they've shown us so far has been the Utah variation of the Chewbacca defence.
One of the things that I find interesting about this whole case is the fact that Boies used to be a partner in Cravath, Swaine and Moore -- the law firm that are handling the case for IBM.
You've got to wonder what Dave's ex-partners currently make of all this. I guess initially they might have been somewhat anxious, thinking 'Oh no, one of our own coming after us. He'll be tuned in to all our cunning strategies and will use them against us.'
Now though, they must be laughing their asses off, thinking 'Good job that dummy left before he did any real damage to our reputation.'
On the other hand, given his twenty percent of all new investment in SCO, Boies has already had one decent payday, but you've got to wonder whether that will be sufficient to compensate for the damage to his firm's reputation that their handling of this case must have done to date?
I, for one, will be very disappointed if they abandon this product
Damn. I thought this was going to say 'I, for one, welcome our new product-abandoning overlords.'
I've been spending *way* too much time here.
We have:
The porton,
The erecton
You can't really have a decent porton unless you have a good, solid erecton first...
Some people find vagra helpful under these circumstances.
Don't forget they get 20% of any equity investment in SCO as well
Not to mention 20% of the proceeds from the sale of all those SCO/Linux licenses.
I can't see Boies eating too many lawyerly dinners on the proceeds of *that* though.
If I offered you millions of dollars to supply torture equipment to (e.g.) North Korea, or explosives to Al Quaeda, would you do it?
Is this a serious offer, or just another of those goddamned rhetorical questions?