Humans are omnivores not vegetarians. This mutation would have allowed them to be omnivores rather than carnivores.
Only a massive modern globally fueled artificial availability of things that can't grow in one place allowed people to be vegetarians and mostly skinny and malnourished vegetarians at that.
Meat on the other hand requires no exotic combinations or preparations to keep you nourished. You are made of meat, and all animal meats have everything you need to produce and maintain the meat that is your body.
Stop spreading the lie that poverty is the result of being incapable and/or lazy. You'd have a hard time finding a less capable and more lazy bunch than the 1%.
So these POS battery powered power tools all over the shelves are NASA's fault? What good is a drill that can't manage to drill through a 2x4 before expending a charge?
They actually trick you now. Sometimes you have to read the fine print to find out they don't have a cord and its access to continual operation.
"technology has afforded that even the poorest of our poor (in the US) has cable televisions, cellular phones and a beater car to drive."
Must be nice to live in a bubble. The poorest of the poor in the US have no tv's, phones, or cars. The pain of their empty bellies, their untreated medical needs, and their anguish at hearing the cries of their starving children is ended when they freeze to death in a urine/vomit/and feces mixed puddle in some alleyway.
Probes have done so much more... what? From a physics and science perspective we've accomplished more probing from here. Beyond that, some of us think the whole point of this space exploration stuff is enabling human space travel and colonization. Probes have done a spectacularly poor job of that. The blame for a big part of the cost of getting man to mars rests on probes.
If all we are going to do is send probes to measure remote atmospheres it doesn't seem worth the cost to do at all.
If you are a drive manufacturer why would you want to prevent the helium from leaking as opposed to slowing it so it breaks after the warranty period?
If you reduce the air friction within the drive you reduce mechanical failure rates and that eats into future purchases. If you can build in a failure mechanism like this you are set.
They can't permanently contain helium so it naturally leaks out of the drives over time and guarantees they eventually break. If they made magnetic bearings and vacuum work the drives would last too long.
The "almost as good" statement this thread is talking about refers to the comments made by Apple's attorney. You are quoting a statement from Samsung's attorney. Nobody disputes that Samsung claimed the Android solution isn't as good.
Apple said, "They suggest that they have a lesser solution, but that is simply not true".
The guy I replied to reworded this as Apple saying Android was 'almost' as good. The above quote says its not a lesser solution and 'almost' as good would be a lesser solution. He injected the 'almost' out of air and I was curious as to why.
Barbarism is watching another human being die of treatable illness when you have the means to stop it or watching people starve when you have more than you need. I don't care how you spin it.
And cut the BS fallacies about those who lack means being lazy or lacking ability. There are plenty of talented people starving and plenty of worthless idiots with full bellies and full pantries.
GIMP is awful compared with Photoshop. Hell, for the things paint can do, paint is easier to work with than GIMP. It just has a horrible and unintuitive interface.
Writing novels doesn't take much software. You can do that with a latex editor and the sffms class. Tada, all done and as good as anything in windows the only reason you can't say better than anything in windows is you can run the same thing in windows. I'm sorry but your job is the niche.
Outlook for example isn't a 'niche' app, it is a basic workplace necessity in almost every office. Having a Linux near equivalent is better than nothing but nobody is going to start using Linux to have something almost as good as whats on windows. In mot cases they won't even switch for something as good or better, they want the apps they've already invested time and effort learning.
Hardware support, prior to windows 7 linux had gotten fairly good here with just about everything working out of the box. I've had problems with the past two laptops I've used. External displays are also still an issue as well if you want to extend your desktop rather than cloning it. From what I've found the same graphics card that can run dual or triple display extended with full spec resolutions in windows can rarely do so in linux out of the box.
Interfacing with windows domains is still a problem as well. Sure it works, it just doesn't work easily and seamlessly. And of course the lack of outlook is a show stopper if you have to work.
"I know I had to put some hours into making it work for me"
And THAT is the problem that needs solved before the Linux desktop will take over. I don't have time to monkey will getting my system to work. I don't like the new "hide all the options and icons to give a 'clean' look" inspiration that is spreading through the gui design world but at the end of the day, who cares? Whatever it is, you adapt and move on. But knowing Linux doesn't prevent you from having to spend hours getting it to work or guarantee it will work at the end of the hours.
Most of the Linux desktops that aren't KDE and GNOME fail in the launch your apps department. Even KDE and GNOME have issues there. Drag and drop shortcuts and files to the desktop is a good thing. The horrible hide all my applications behind unity concept is a bad thing.
As for why the (pre-8) windows UI would be called horrible I don't know. It's gone downhill since XP but most everything bad about new GUI's is bad GUI design copied from Apple. In general you can sum it all up as hiding all the options to make things look "clean." That means it is harder to find and access options so you are trading actual function for the aesthetic concept of "clean."
"The Linux desktop needs to be _better_, not _just as good_."
Yes Linux does need to be better and not just as good. But the basic look and feel isn't the place to be better. In fact, it would be better if everyone, including windows stopped trying to make it better. Pick a scheme and stop fscking changing it. I'm sorry there is simply no way you could reshape the graphical interface that would make it enough better to justify reducing everyone's productivity enough to learn your change. Some of the efforts in mimicing the windows UI aren't copying, they are catch up. For example, getting drag and drop and shortcuts working correctly isn't copying.
I agree that Linux is already better in ways. But it isn't nearly as good in ways. Your favorite applications don't run on it and neither does your hardware. There is absolutely nothing wrong with copying that functionality, especially the driver part.
Don't forget bookkeeping software. So long as you can't run the latest quickbooks and peachtree including up to the minute update support you will never infiltrate the small business.
Adopting the look and feel of windows wouldn't turn Linux into a crappy OS. Look and feel isn't what makes windows crappy. Being familiar is the biggest functional gain that a look and feel could hope to provide. Other functional aspects of look and feel really aren't that important. Just pick a damn scheme, adopt it everywhere, and stop fscking with it already.
As for the rest of how apps work, the attitude in the parent post is why when many OSS developers make an app easier to use they think of dumbing down and remove functionality. There is absolutely no reason that advanced functionality can't be exposed in an easy to use interface or has to require a steep learning curve.
This is the same repeated BS that is spread over and over again. The fact is most GUI aspects or program layouts issues don't matter much. You can prefer one or the other but there are lots of ways to do it and none of them offer some big advantage beyond aesthetic preference and fringe usage cases. If you are an underdog on the desktop you absolutely should be copying the market leader, not because you can't do better but because giving something that looks and feels familiar is more of a killer app than any "better" gui aesthetic.
There also is still an attitude of elitism. Somebody got the idea that software could have functionality or be dumbed down for idiots and that those are the only two choices. This happens in commercial software but this attitude seems especially rampant in the OSS world. It's bullshit. Most types of application can be made extremely easy and intuitive to use while retaining advanced capabilities. In most cases the advanced capabilities can be easy to use as well.
So yes, copy or convert, especially where the market leader has killer apps that the Linux desktop lacks.
Basically this seems to suggest that all charity and donations would require a special permit. Even asking someone for help when starving.
But after a bit of thought, it occurs to me that people in Finland don't have to beg for help. Here you need no permit but the collection jar on the counter is for something like a child with cancer. In Finland you wouldn't need a collection jar. Poor and hungry or in need of shelter would beg here. In Finland they would be fed, housed, and given medical treatment without any begging.
We truly are barbaric here in the US in some ways.
Yes, I included that quote. If Samsung's solution isn't lesser than Apple's the only possibilities that remain are that it is equal or that it is superior. It seems fair to paraphrase that as "as good" where "almost as good" run in direct contrast to the quote, almost as good would in fact be a lesser solution.
Slashdot Mirror
Humans are omnivores not vegetarians. This mutation would have allowed them to be omnivores rather than carnivores.
Only a massive modern globally fueled artificial availability of things that can't grow in one place allowed people to be vegetarians and mostly skinny and malnourished vegetarians at that.
Meat on the other hand requires no exotic combinations or preparations to keep you nourished. You are made of meat, and all animal meats have everything you need to produce and maintain the meat that is your body.
Stop spreading the lie that poverty is the result of being incapable and/or lazy. You'd have a hard time finding a less capable and more lazy bunch than the 1%.
So these POS battery powered power tools all over the shelves are NASA's fault? What good is a drill that can't manage to drill through a 2x4 before expending a charge?
They actually trick you now. Sometimes you have to read the fine print to find out they don't have a cord and its access to continual operation.
"technology has afforded that even the poorest of our poor (in the US) has cable televisions, cellular phones and a beater car to drive."
Must be nice to live in a bubble. The poorest of the poor in the US have no tv's, phones, or cars. The pain of their empty bellies, their untreated medical needs, and their anguish at hearing the cries of their starving children is ended when they freeze to death in a urine/vomit/and feces mixed puddle in some alleyway.
Probes have done so much more... what? From a physics and science perspective we've accomplished more probing from here. Beyond that, some of us think the whole point of this space exploration stuff is enabling human space travel and colonization. Probes have done a spectacularly poor job of that. The blame for a big part of the cost of getting man to mars rests on probes.
If all we are going to do is send probes to measure remote atmospheres it doesn't seem worth the cost to do at all.
"It will get out, but with the right design the timescale may be too long to worry about at room temperature."
Built in failure mechanism. They only need or want it to last longer than the warranty period.
Nothing is completely helium tight.
If you are a drive manufacturer why would you want to prevent the helium from leaking as opposed to slowing it so it breaks after the warranty period?
If you reduce the air friction within the drive you reduce mechanical failure rates and that eats into future purchases. If you can build in a failure mechanism like this you are set.
They can't permanently contain helium so it naturally leaks out of the drives over time and guarantees they eventually break. If they made magnetic bearings and vacuum work the drives would last too long.
Yes. u?
The "almost as good" statement this thread is talking about refers to the comments made by Apple's attorney. You are quoting a statement from Samsung's attorney. Nobody disputes that Samsung claimed the Android solution isn't as good.
Apple said, "They suggest that they have a lesser solution, but that is simply not true".
The guy I replied to reworded this as Apple saying Android was 'almost' as good. The above quote says its not a lesser solution and 'almost' as good would be a lesser solution. He injected the 'almost' out of air and I was curious as to why.
So let me see if I follow. It's okay that we let our people starve and suffer from treatable illness because some third party might be racist?
Barbarism is watching another human being die of treatable illness when you have the means to stop it or watching people starve when you have more than you need. I don't care how you spin it.
And cut the BS fallacies about those who lack means being lazy or lacking ability. There are plenty of talented people starving and plenty of worthless idiots with full bellies and full pantries.
GIMP is awful compared with Photoshop. Hell, for the things paint can do, paint is easier to work with than GIMP. It just has a horrible and unintuitive interface.
Writing novels doesn't take much software. You can do that with a latex editor and the sffms class. Tada, all done and as good as anything in windows the only reason you can't say better than anything in windows is you can run the same thing in windows. I'm sorry but your job is the niche.
Outlook for example isn't a 'niche' app, it is a basic workplace necessity in almost every office. Having a Linux near equivalent is better than nothing but nobody is going to start using Linux to have something almost as good as whats on windows. In mot cases they won't even switch for something as good or better, they want the apps they've already invested time and effort learning.
Hardware support, prior to windows 7 linux had gotten fairly good here with just about everything working out of the box. I've had problems with the past two laptops I've used. External displays are also still an issue as well if you want to extend your desktop rather than cloning it. From what I've found the same graphics card that can run dual or triple display extended with full spec resolutions in windows can rarely do so in linux out of the box.
Interfacing with windows domains is still a problem as well. Sure it works, it just doesn't work easily and seamlessly. And of course the lack of outlook is a show stopper if you have to work.
"I know I had to put some hours into making it work for me"
And THAT is the problem that needs solved before the Linux desktop will take over. I don't have time to monkey will getting my system to work. I don't like the new "hide all the options and icons to give a 'clean' look" inspiration that is spreading through the gui design world but at the end of the day, who cares? Whatever it is, you adapt and move on. But knowing Linux doesn't prevent you from having to spend hours getting it to work or guarantee it will work at the end of the hours.
Most of the Linux desktops that aren't KDE and GNOME fail in the launch your apps department. Even KDE and GNOME have issues there. Drag and drop shortcuts and files to the desktop is a good thing. The horrible hide all my applications behind unity concept is a bad thing.
As for why the (pre-8) windows UI would be called horrible I don't know. It's gone downhill since XP but most everything bad about new GUI's is bad GUI design copied from Apple. In general you can sum it all up as hiding all the options to make things look "clean." That means it is harder to find and access options so you are trading actual function for the aesthetic concept of "clean."
"The Linux desktop needs to be _better_, not _just as good_."
Yes Linux does need to be better and not just as good. But the basic look and feel isn't the place to be better. In fact, it would be better if everyone, including windows stopped trying to make it better. Pick a scheme and stop fscking changing it. I'm sorry there is simply no way you could reshape the graphical interface that would make it enough better to justify reducing everyone's productivity enough to learn your change. Some of the efforts in mimicing the windows UI aren't copying, they are catch up. For example, getting drag and drop and shortcuts working correctly isn't copying.
I agree that Linux is already better in ways. But it isn't nearly as good in ways. Your favorite applications don't run on it and neither does your hardware. There is absolutely nothing wrong with copying that functionality, especially the driver part.
Don't forget bookkeeping software. So long as you can't run the latest quickbooks and peachtree including up to the minute update support you will never infiltrate the small business.
There is more to the system than JUST the interface.
Adopting the look and feel of windows wouldn't turn Linux into a crappy OS. Look and feel isn't what makes windows crappy. Being familiar is the biggest functional gain that a look and feel could hope to provide. Other functional aspects of look and feel really aren't that important. Just pick a damn scheme, adopt it everywhere, and stop fscking with it already.
As for the rest of how apps work, the attitude in the parent post is why when many OSS developers make an app easier to use they think of dumbing down and remove functionality. There is absolutely no reason that advanced functionality can't be exposed in an easy to use interface or has to require a steep learning curve.
This is the same repeated BS that is spread over and over again. The fact is most GUI aspects or program layouts issues don't matter much. You can prefer one or the other but there are lots of ways to do it and none of them offer some big advantage beyond aesthetic preference and fringe usage cases. If you are an underdog on the desktop you absolutely should be copying the market leader, not because you can't do better but because giving something that looks and feels familiar is more of a killer app than any "better" gui aesthetic.
There also is still an attitude of elitism. Somebody got the idea that software could have functionality or be dumbed down for idiots and that those are the only two choices. This happens in commercial software but this attitude seems especially rampant in the OSS world. It's bullshit. Most types of application can be made extremely easy and intuitive to use while retaining advanced capabilities. In most cases the advanced capabilities can be easy to use as well.
So yes, copy or convert, especially where the market leader has killer apps that the Linux desktop lacks.
Basically this seems to suggest that all charity and donations would require a special permit. Even asking someone for help when starving.
But after a bit of thought, it occurs to me that people in Finland don't have to beg for help. Here you need no permit but the collection jar on the counter is for something like a child with cancer. In Finland you wouldn't need a collection jar. Poor and hungry or in need of shelter would beg here. In Finland they would be fed, housed, and given medical treatment without any begging.
We truly are barbaric here in the US in some ways.
Yes, I included that quote. If Samsung's solution isn't lesser than Apple's the only possibilities that remain are that it is equal or that it is superior. It seems fair to paraphrase that as "as good" where "almost as good" run in direct contrast to the quote, almost as good would in fact be a lesser solution.
From the summary, " 'They suggest that they have a lesser solution, but that is simply not true,' "
" He's lying your honor, their Samsung multitouch is almost as good as Apple's"
I find it interesting that you edited them saying just as good to be "almost" as good.