Fast User Switching is teh suck for XP. Watch little Billy complain when Quake 3 won't run at 200 fps because Janey fast-switched when she still had Windows Media Player and 30 browser windows open.
Not to mention the security issues with Windows Terminal Services, which is a prerequisite for the FUS service. Now I'm aware that XP's security is not OS X's problem, but the fundamental things I dislike about the whole Fast Switching concept will remain.
Looks like despite all our scoffing at the Weekly World News, (Insider Trading Time Traveler) they're still good for something. If Peter Howell, renowned journalist for the Toronto Star not only subscribes, but gets his inspiration from their publication, then surely we should reconsider.;)
At this point, it may be too late for me to respond, but anyway, yes, I used Opera's options to change my default HTML handler. I could have done it with Windows Explorer, for that matter.
The question is, could Grandma and the rest of the Luddites? That's what that applet exists for.
As I understand it, in SP1 for XP, you're allowed to change the default program for HTML files, etc, using the "Antitrust Solution" applet. (My name for it, can't remember the real one)
I suspect that whoever wrote the article about "removing IE" meant just that, removing the icon from prominent locations and changing the default browser to something else, rather than actually totally uninstalling IE. I've heard somewhere that extricating IE from XP would be roughtly akin to brain surgery with a spoon.
However, if someone can prove me wrong, I will be overjoyed! I haven't used IE in ages, thanks to excellent releases from all the alternative browser teams.
I seriously believe that after graphics and environmental sound have been taken to the absolute max, tactile feedback (read: teledildonics) will be the next big thing. Sex sells.
Have you ever read "Brave New World"? It's the whole "bearskin rug" movie concept.:) I like the idea, anyway. (If you have no idea what the hell I'm talking about, go Google for those two phrases in quotes)
Actually, I do acknowledge a bunch of your points. I agree that Opera takes some getting used to, especially with the "Transfers" window.
As for feature creep, Opera has had a number of features added and even removed over the years, and it's still fast and very small. (3-4 MB w/o Java, 12 MB with)
Your analogy with the tools is accurate, and I guess I'm the guy with the Leatherman. I'd just like to add my observation that Opera's UI can be stripped down quite quickly, if that's your aim, and I'd rather be able to pare down excessive features than not have enough, especially if that excess doesn't mean code bloat.
I feel obligated to defend Opera here, for the benefit of people who don't understand just what cross-platform development entails.:)
I haven't used Opera for Mac, and I understand it is many versions behind the Windows and Linux implementations, so I can see how Safari could beat it on that platform.
However, I use Opera 7.10 for Windows, and I can't see how a rendering engine could get much faster than Presto. (O7's) Furthermore, you can customize the layout of Opera's interface to the tiniest little detail, which is something I sorely missed when I tried, say, Mozilla. As for actual load speed, Opera loads almost instantaneously on my 1.47 GHz AMD box.
I'm sure Safari is a really nice app on the Mac, but I'm still leery of the lunatic fringe that salivates whenever Jobs and the boys produce one tiny little innovation. (My brother-in-law comes to mind here.:) )
As I understand it, MS' coffers are essentially deep enough to buy anyone they want; witness the state of affairs with the X-Box. (Rare Studios, anyone?)
It doesn't surprise me at all that they want to head Apple off at the pass.
Define DOS-type... as far as I am aware, NT (and by extension, 2000 and XP) has absolutely none of the DOS code, unless it uses the same TCP/IP stack... did DOS even have a TCP/IP stack?;)
IANA network admin, but wouldn't all that sending put something akin to a huge glut of SMTP traffic on their routers? CPU cycles and bandwidth are hot commodities even if he's not getting what he wants.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention the security issues with Windows Terminal Services, which is a prerequisite for the FUS service. Now I'm aware that XP's security is not OS X's problem, but the fundamental things I dislike about the whole Fast Switching concept will remain.
(See Digital Jihad!!1)
The question is, could Grandma and the rest of the Luddites? That's what that applet exists for.
I suspect that whoever wrote the article about "removing IE" meant just that, removing the icon from prominent locations and changing the default browser to something else, rather than actually totally uninstalling IE. I've heard somewhere that extricating IE from XP would be roughtly akin to brain surgery with a spoon.
However, if someone can prove me wrong, I will be overjoyed! I haven't used IE in ages, thanks to excellent releases from all the alternative browser teams.
Have you ever read "Brave New World"? It's the whole "bearskin rug" movie concept. :) I like the idea, anyway. (If you have no idea what the hell I'm talking about, go Google for those two phrases in quotes)
Wait... hmm... my method doesn't seem to be working any more... are they onto us /.ers?
Replace the "www" in the NYT URL with "archive"
Jebus, editors, is it really that hard?
Actually, I do acknowledge a bunch of your points. I agree that Opera takes some getting used to, especially with the "Transfers" window.
:)
As for feature creep, Opera has had a number of features added and even removed over the years, and it's still fast and very small. (3-4 MB w/o Java, 12 MB with)
Your analogy with the tools is accurate, and I guess I'm the guy with the Leatherman. I'd just like to add my observation that Opera's UI can be stripped down quite quickly, if that's your aim, and I'd rather be able to pare down excessive features than not have enough, especially if that excess doesn't mean code bloat.
Vive la difference, anyway.
I haven't used Opera for Mac, and I understand it is many versions behind the Windows and Linux implementations, so I can see how Safari could beat it on that platform.
However, I use Opera 7.10 for Windows, and I can't see how a rendering engine could get much faster than Presto. (O7's) Furthermore, you can customize the layout of Opera's interface to the tiniest little detail, which is something I sorely missed when I tried, say, Mozilla. As for actual load speed, Opera loads almost instantaneously on my 1.47 GHz AMD box.
I'm sure Safari is a really nice app on the Mac, but I'm still leery of the lunatic fringe that salivates whenever Jobs and the boys produce one tiny little innovation. (My brother-in-law comes to mind here. :) )
It doesn't surprise me at all that they want to head Apple off at the pass.
Funny, given that chlamydia is bacterial, and SARS is viral. Well, you're the expert.
"Please remember that the computers I met where often old and slow."
Now I know that reminds you of the G4, but that's not what he meant at all.
Define DOS-type... as far as I am aware, NT (and by extension, 2000 and XP) has absolutely none of the DOS code, unless it uses the same TCP/IP stack... did DOS even have a TCP/IP stack? ;)
DC++ is superior to DC.
IANA network admin, but wouldn't all that sending put something akin to a huge glut of SMTP traffic on their routers? CPU cycles and bandwidth are hot commodities even if he's not getting what he wants.
Parent post is troll, obviously. (Although I still like Rotten ;) )