Back in the day (i.e. on the VAX), my prompt was " ". Much better than "" because I could tell when the system was done with a command, but it was still confusing enough to make normal people not mess with my account.
Am I the only person that thinks "And as soon as we get really good with the genetic engineering, I want my own half height clone to mow my lawn." is a Brave New World reference?
>> The web is not at all about stylized content. It's about content. Period.
>The web is about _lots_ of things, and to say something as sweeping as the above proves you don't understand that yet.
Yeah, the "web" might be about a lot of things, but keep this in mind:
HTML labels content, it does not control layout.
We should all think about this when we write web pages. If you write a web page with HTML, you have to remember that it isn't there to make your page look "right" or pretty, it is there to describe what the content is so that any browser can display it in an arbitrary way. If one browser wants to use the em tag to bold something, and another wants to use it to underline something that is FINE.
If you want to write a more complex "web" interface using something other than HTML, that does control layout (CSS anyone), then fine, but don't expect HTML to do something beyond defining what the content is.
Even though I do have some issues with the way the standard Win32 GUI works, it does generally work. It's not perfect, but it does a job and it does that job fairly well.
As proof if this I'd like to point to the more recent trend of skinable GUI's. Winamp, Mozilla, MS Windows Media Player 7, Sonque, K-jofel, etc. They almost all allow the user to pick a new skin. Which means they get a totally different interface. Usually they have the same number of buttons and those buttons retain the same basic function, but they can me moved and changed in any number of ways. This can be confusing sometimes and, at worst, it can make the app totally useless.
Even slight changes can cause problems. For example, Quicktime 4 Player for Windows has it's own skinned look, but the play button is grey when the video is not playing, and white when the video is playing. This is the opposite of the general standard. i.e. it looks like you can't press the button when you are actually supposed to press it.
Granted there are a number of people that really enjoy making the desktop look a certain way, reguardless of useability. Check out themes.org to see tons of configurations and widgets that are hard to read and understand. Let those people do whta they want, but let me have clean black text on a white background and easy to understand icons and widgets.
My point it, it's more important to be consistant and have a functional GUI than it is to do something "cool" with the GUI, for most people.
My personal experience is that a 486dx2-66 with 16 megs of ram work fine for burning CD's at x2 (on IDE, even). My CD machine just has a stripped down Win98 install and two 800MB partitions for making images. I use VNC to start the process and then I just don't touch it. The reason I use Win98 (I have used linux to burn CD's before) is due to the software. Right now I mainly use CDR-Win because it works well and it uses a common image format. Burning at higher speeds may require a faster machine.
My understanding of this issue is that the Athlon needs a highly consistant power supply and the recommended supplies are the ones that have been tested and work. This is documented on amd's homepage in the athlon processor section under "Recommended Power Supplies". Or, to quote from that page:
To ensure reliable operation of AMD Athlon(TM) Processor-based systems, an AMD-recommended 250W or larger ATX 2.01 power supply is required for the majority of system configurations. Recommendations are based on the ability of a supply to provide the power sequencing and current requirements of AMD Athlon systems. The current supplied on the +5VDC power rail as well as the combined current supplied by the +5-VDC and +3.3-VDC power rails has been tested on the supplies listed below.
When selecting a power supply for your system, please refer to the following list of power supplies that have been evaluated and are recommended by AMD for use with AMD Athlon processors. The following power supplies are recommended for their capability to supply appropriate power on both the +5-VDC and +3.3-VDC power rails. In addition, this list is not intended to be a comprehensive listing of all power supplies that support AMD Athlon processors.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the day (i.e. on the VAX), my prompt was " ". Much better than "" because I could tell when the system was done with a command, but it was still confusing enough to make normal people not mess with my account.
Am I the only person that thinks "And as soon as we get really good with the genetic engineering, I want my own half height clone to mow my lawn." is a Brave New World reference?
>> The web is not at all about stylized content. It's about content. Period.
>The web is about _lots_ of things, and to say something as sweeping as the above proves you don't understand that yet.
Yeah, the "web" might be about a lot of things, but keep this in mind:
HTML labels content, it does not control layout.
We should all think about this when we write web pages. If you write a web page with HTML, you have to remember that it isn't there to make your page look "right" or pretty, it is there to describe what the content is so that any browser can display it in an arbitrary way. If one browser wants to use the em tag to bold something, and another wants to use it to underline something that is FINE.
If you want to write a more complex "web" interface using something other than HTML, that does control layout (CSS anyone), then fine, but don't expect HTML to do something beyond defining what the content is.
Even though I do have some issues with the way the standard Win32 GUI works, it does generally work. It's not perfect, but it does a job and it does that job fairly well.
As proof if this I'd like to point to the more recent trend of skinable GUI's. Winamp, Mozilla, MS Windows Media Player 7, Sonque, K-jofel, etc. They almost all allow the user to pick a new skin. Which means they get a totally different interface. Usually they have the same number of buttons and those buttons retain the same basic function, but they can me moved and changed in any number of ways. This can be confusing sometimes and, at worst, it can make the app totally useless.
Even slight changes can cause problems. For example, Quicktime 4 Player for Windows has it's own skinned look, but the play button is grey when the video is not playing, and white when the video is playing. This is the opposite of the general standard. i.e. it looks like you can't press the button when you are actually supposed to press it.
Granted there are a number of people that really enjoy making the desktop look a certain way, reguardless of useability. Check out themes.org to see tons of configurations and widgets that are hard to read and understand. Let those people do whta they want, but let me have clean black text on a white background and easy to understand icons and widgets.
My point it, it's more important to be consistant and have a functional GUI than it is to do something "cool" with the GUI, for most people.
My personal experience is that a 486dx2-66 with 16 megs of ram work fine for burning CD's at x2 (on IDE, even). My CD machine just has a stripped down Win98 install and two 800MB partitions for making images. I use VNC to start the process and then I just don't touch it. The reason I use Win98 (I have used linux to burn CD's before) is due to the software. Right now I mainly use CDR-Win because it works well and it uses a common image format. Burning at higher speeds may require a faster machine.