It looks neat, but isn't one of the points of metal cases to block radio interference? It strikes me that plexiglass (or is it transparent aluminum?) cases would not work properly.
IANAP, though, so I could be way off.
The other problem is that everyone would see how messy the inside of my case is. It get embarrassed when I have to go into it when people are around.
I would be curious to know how it deals with the root account. I know that when I first used linux, I did everything as root. And, after being the Windows user (super or not), it might be surprising to joe public to learn that he doesn't have permission to access things on his own computer.
I have installed it nearly a dozen times on all sorts of hardware and have never had any problem. After using fdisk twice, it was not a bother. You don't have to name the cyls, you can specify partition sizes in megabytes and and fdisk suggests the correct starting cyls for you.
It looks nice, but the fact that there is a "My Computer" icon really bugs me. It seems that they are desparate to make it look like Windows, so they subordinate some of the "linux-ness" of the OS. I don't know if it is necessary to do that to make people feel comfortable. Often, if things look the same and behave differently, it is more confusing to the end user.
Anyway, the "My computer" paradigm completely undermines, imo, the filesystem structure of Unix. It just doesn't fit that way. It strikes me that it will be more confusing when the user actually begins to move on to learn more about the OS.
That's the problem. It looks so similar that when things don't work as expected, it is very confusing and disorienting.
Moving the selection is one of those little things that bugs the hell out of me. I don't really have a preference, but the GIMP was of doing it (float the selection) is slightly different from the Photoshop way, and it is easy to fall into old habits.
That's just my experience, at least. You might see it differently.
I guess I wasn't specific enough (first post rush, etc).
What would really turn me on is a Photoshop-like interface option. I (and a lot of others) have invested an incredible amount of time in the effort to learn Photoshop, and as a result, we are infinitely more productive in PS than in GIMP. Some sort of interface customizability that would result in a photoshop-like interface would, IMO, go a long way toward wooing full-time photoshop users.
Also, if it doesn't yet exist, a "GIMP for Photoshop users" document would be very useful. I know that there is a lot of functionality that I have not yet found (and don't have the time to discover) that is probably quite easy to implement.
You could always turn the colour off on the monitor if you wanted to simulate the MAC of the same period;-). I dont know who chose the orange,white,black and blue colour scheme of wb >1.x, they must have been pissed at the time. You >could always change the colour scheme to anything >you wanted to though.
That reminds me of a John Dvorak column that he wrote comparing the UI elegance of MacOS (probably about 7.1 at the time) and Windows 3.1. His point was that the Windows UI was better because you could customize the color 'down to the last pixel on the screen'. That's probably not the exact quote, but it's close.
He totally missed the point. Elegance is not being able to make the computer look like the neon sign in the red light district. Elegance is a rich UI with clearly defined standards and some room to move within those standards.
IMO, the Amiga UI is the most damned ugly thing that I have _ever_ seen. I don't want to have to change the color scheme. I don't want to have to change the mouse pointer.
>I would hardly call an OS that was Black & White >and non multi tasking "elegant"in comparasin to >one the was colour, did multitask and had the >best audio available at the time.
I was talking about interface. If you want a gorgeous black and white interface, look at the NeXT machines. They look teriffic in color, but they look just as good in B/W.
Everything about the mac's human interface was better than the Amiga. I liked the screen more, the mouse was better, and the keyboards were incomparably better.
I don't see why it's such a big deal. I prefer the NeXT way of doing things--the program icon (or tile) changes when the program is running to reflect what is going on. That's a cool implementation.
In terms of anything, it was totally borked. There was (IMO) never a more inelegant and obtuse interface than early workbenches.
Come now. Multiple icon sizes? It looked silly and inefficient when the screens had such funky resolutions (most of them sucky or otherwise small and cramped).
If you compare a Mac of the day to the colorful and visually nauseating workbench, there is no comparison. It's like comparing...well...it's like comparing something elegant and refined to something gaudy and colorful that is gaudy and colorful just becuase it can be.
Hmm. I totally disagree. The movie was the damned most frightening thing I have seen in a long time. What made it scary was the suspense and the fact that there was no violence and no gore. It was refreshing and terrifying at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if it will run linux.
Can you make a Beowulf out of them?
-awc
It looks neat, but isn't one of the points of metal cases to block radio interference? It strikes me that plexiglass (or is it transparent aluminum?) cases would not work properly.
IANAP, though, so I could be way off.
The other problem is that everyone would see how messy the inside of my case is. It get embarrassed when I have to go into it when people are around.
-awc
Caps -> Control is extremely important to me. The only problem is that I accidentally turn caps on all the time on others' computers.
I did it after getting some old workstation hardware--it was just too inconsistent to keep moving that one key in my mind. Now, I'll never go back.
-awc
That's pretty impressive.
And we had better be worried about being strung up on a cross of gold.
Someone should look into child laboor, too.
After all, it's almost 1900!
-awc
Do you mean cfdisk?
-awc
I would be curious to know how it deals with the root account. I know that when I first used linux, I did everything as root. And, after being the Windows user (super or not), it might be surprising to joe public to learn that he doesn't have permission to access things on his own computer.
-awc
I have installed it nearly a dozen times on all sorts of hardware and have never had any problem. After using fdisk twice, it was not a bother. You don't have to name the cyls, you can specify partition sizes in megabytes and and fdisk suggests the correct starting cyls for you.
It really isn't that bad.
-awc
It looks nice, but the fact that there is a "My Computer" icon really bugs me. It seems that they are desparate to make it look like Windows, so they subordinate some of the "linux-ness" of the OS. I don't know if it is necessary to do that to make people feel comfortable. Often, if things look the same and behave differently, it is more confusing to the end user.
Anyway, the "My computer" paradigm completely undermines, imo, the filesystem structure of Unix. It just doesn't fit that way. It strikes me that it will be more confusing when the user actually begins to move on to learn more about the OS.
-awc
He didn't post that he didn't like linux. He pointed out that he doesn't like fancy graphical tools. And that's a valid point.
If someone is doing development, I would really hope that he has enough savvy to get the distro installed without graphical hand-holding.
-awc
Does anyone have a track of where the eclipse should be visible?
-awc
That's the problem. It looks so similar that when things don't work as expected, it is very confusing and disorienting.
Moving the selection is one of those little things that bugs the hell out of me. I don't really have a preference, but the GIMP was of doing it (float the selection) is slightly different from the Photoshop way, and it is easy to fall into old habits.
That's just my experience, at least. You might see it differently.
-awc
I guess I wasn't specific enough (first post rush, etc).
What would really turn me on is a Photoshop-like interface option. I (and a lot of others) have invested an incredible amount of time in the effort to learn Photoshop, and as a result, we are infinitely more productive in PS than in GIMP. Some sort of interface customizability that would result in a photoshop-like interface would, IMO, go a long way toward wooing full-time photoshop users.
Also, if it doesn't yet exist, a "GIMP for Photoshop users" document would be very useful. I know that there is a lot of functionality that I have not yet found (and don't have the time to discover) that is probably quite easy to implement.
Does that make any sense?
Thanks for the response.
-awc
The gimp is great, but it still doesn't replace photoshop for me.
-awc
9", iirc.
And yes, they were better. The image was crisp, solid and easy to read.
Though the Amiga had all sorts of options when it came to resolution, in my eperience, they were very unpleasant to use.
You could always turn the colour off on the monitor if you wanted to simulate the MAC of the same ;-).
period
I dont know who chose the orange,white,black and blue colour scheme of wb >1.x, they must have been pissed at the time. You >could always change the colour scheme to anything >you wanted to though.
That reminds me of a John Dvorak column that he wrote comparing the UI elegance of MacOS (probably about 7.1 at the time) and Windows 3.1. His point was that the Windows UI was better because you could customize the color 'down to the last pixel on the screen'. That's probably not the exact quote, but it's close.
He totally missed the point. Elegance is not being able to make the computer look like the neon sign in the red light district. Elegance is a rich UI with clearly defined standards and some room to move within those standards.
IMO, the Amiga UI is the most damned ugly thing that I have _ever_ seen. I don't want to have to change the color scheme. I don't want to have to change the mouse pointer.
>I would hardly call an OS that was Black & White
>and non multi tasking "elegant"in comparasin to
>one the was colour, did multitask and had the
>best audio available at the time.
I was talking about interface. If you want a gorgeous black and white interface, look at the NeXT machines. They look teriffic in color, but they look just as good in B/W.
Everything about the mac's human interface was better than the Amiga. I liked the screen more, the mouse was better, and the keyboards were incomparably better.
-awc
I don't see why it's such a big deal. I prefer the NeXT way of doing things--the program icon (or tile) changes when the program is running to reflect what is going on. That's a cool implementation.
-awc
In terms of anything, it was totally borked. There was (IMO) never a more inelegant and obtuse interface than early workbenches.
Come now. Multiple icon sizes? It looked silly and inefficient when the screens had such funky resolutions (most of them sucky or otherwise small and cramped).
If you compare a Mac of the day to the colorful and visually nauseating workbench, there is no comparison. It's like comparing...well...it's like comparing something elegant and refined to something gaudy and colorful that is gaudy and colorful just becuase it can be.
Moderate away.
-awc
Haven't you tried this about three times before with the same comment.
And, each of those times, is it not correct that you were _far_ from being the first post?
-awc
Ouagadougou.
Hmm. I totally disagree. The movie was the damned most frightening thing I have seen in a long time. What made it scary was the suspense and the fact that there was no violence and no gore. It was refreshing and terrifying at the same time.
And nauseating, but that was part of the fun.
-awc
Right right. What I really wanted to know was why the ship in Alien was named the Nostromo.
-awc
"Space technology will probably never become so cheap that it will be a cost savings to transport it from ANOTHER planet as opposed to Saudi Arabia. "
I dunno...sometime OPEC can get a little full of itself. A trade war could push planetary oil prices up past interstellar rates.
Of course, I find it terribly amusing that we are even discussing "interstellar oil prices."
-awc
I hear that, in light of the recent failures, they're modifying all of the knobs on the space shuttle to go to eleven, rather than ten.
"It's for that extra boost," remarked one NASA official.
-awc
Do any of y'all know why the tanker was named Nostromo?
The Conrad novel of the same title is one of my favorite books, and I don't really see any parallels.
-awc
Sorry. Sometimes the networking gossip train leaves me behind.
-awc