Yes, and if you don't like that something is copyrighted by a company you can wait that out as well. Because, as we all know, people live hundreds of years, it's not like a patent lasts longer than 1/4th of an average human life or something.
Uh but the visual feedback would be the display of the page itself and the change in the displayed logical page number.
That may be the page after that as well, if you acidentaly press the key twice, IMHO having space and page up/page down scroll screenfulls, but overlapping last/first lines has solved this well, there is no need to enforce pages, in fact it would prevent centring things you want to concentrate on (you can move around a book to do this, but not a monitor).
No doubt there will be niches, but I doubt most of them can be filled by shareware.
As I see it...
Pure proprietary software will be pushed into "hard and specialized" niches, mostly math intensive stuff that only so many people can do well, FOSS in this domain is and will continue to be mostly unpolished university research. As the problems get better understood FOSS will move in and big players on to other grounds. This could go on for a long time.
Bussiness applications will be mostly a thinlayer of proprietary stuff on top of a FOSS stack and in house software based directly on copylefted FOSS. This shouldn't shrink too much as long as new bussines methods are intorduced.
Proprietary games will contine to sell mainly on expensive artwork, with the latest generation of engines beeing proprietary and older ones either directly freed (as id does now) or feature-duplicated by FOSS developers. Creating content for FOSS engines and experimental gameplay might be a niche for shareware authors.
Mass market software will continue to be what dedicated FOSS developers do and as people come to trust it will replace most boxed software (maybe in the same boxes, we'll see how Xara does) and shareware. Shareware might continue to serve power user needs because it's developers are often close to users and can stay ahead in specialized features, but FOSS isn't weak in this aspect either.
Single use applications (where traditionaly shareware has been very strong) and plug-ins will increasingly be implemented by power users as FOSS high-level programing languages, development enviroments and libraries mature.
Yet for all this supposed power of the FOSS movement, if the author of this bingo card creator is to be believed, there isn't even a really good open source bingo card creator.
I'm not sure if the TOS grants them such broad rights, as it also contains this:
The foregoing license granted by you terminates once you remove or delete a User Submission from the YouTube Website.
Now IANAL, but that seems to pose problems with physical distribution. As for them trying to find a revenue stream by selling hi-res access or similar--I see no problem with that, they foot the bandwith bill after all.
What I'm wondering about is if Youtube is compatible with Creative Commons licenses because of the DRM provisions, the "non-commercial" one is right out of the window of course.
For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions.
They require an non-exclusive license, but they need that, because of the way the whole service works. And yes, it's bold in the original, probably because of people like the parent poster.
They are under no obligation to let your custom linux kernel to boot on your hardware (that you have an honest to god reciept for the hunk of silicon and plastic sitting below your TV).
Why can't you kde cids realize that what is best for you isn't best for eveyone. Having to click around to get a sane view of files just because you have to copy Windows certainly isn't best for me, having load and save dialogs that aren't identical just because they are both file dialogs isn't either.
Do you gnome kids just not save things very often or what?
Don't know about you, but when I save lots of files (say downloading them) I usualy save them in the same place, so no, I probably don't save many files at many different locations and have no problem with the save dialog beeing as simple as possible when it opens up.
Where's the myth? gnome uses a retarded, unified registry as opposed to files in ~/.gnome/ like sane Linux apps. If this isn't copycatting the mistakes of microsoft with windows, what is?
Gconf has plugable backends, the default is XML files ~/.gconf/, they aren't unified and can be edited in a text editor if the need arises. Other backends, such as databases (might be good in a big network) are possible. It has such nice things as the ability to revert any single setting to it's default state and descriptions for options (the other big problem with the Windows registry).
How about working well with other applications?
How does Gnome stop you from using other applications.
I like a number of window managers that don't have the same level of native applications [..]
Neither KDE nor GNOME nor XFCE are window managers.
[..] KDE has the customization and features that I want, and the ones I don't want stay out of the way for the most part.
That's good for you and KDE, same is true for me and GNOME.
Particularly the whole KOffice interface design drives me nuts in a similar way to the gnome stuff, but it doesn't interfere with thing that I do use, as is the case with the gnome-ification of The GIMP.
The driving you nuts part seems to be true, otherwise I can't explain how you come to the conclusion that GIMP is "gnome-ificated"
File dialogs in gtk apps on windows are MUCH more usable than those on Linux. You also don't get, due to the windows standard widgets, the backwards buttons in dialogs and inconsistent operation of interfaces.
Again: usable for you doesn't make it some global fact, just look at how many people use vi! I happen to like the breadcrumb buttons, how does removing them make the dialog more useable for me? I have no idea what you mean by "inconsistent operation of interfaces".
For instance, why is it that hitting enter doesn't confirm and dismiss all dialogs? It's retarded.
Because not all dialogs are confirmation dialogs perhaps? And for the ones that are, I don't want the "Format/dev/hda5?" dialog confirmed by pressing enter!
gtk apps are just about at the point where they are gnome-specific [..]
I'll say one thing to that: bullshit.
[..] failing completely to integrate with any NON-gnome (xfce excluded, because it's practically "gnome lite") on Linux.
You can't integrate a GUI app with Linux, there is no Linux Desktop Enviroment to integrate with, there are no Linux Interface Guidlines. You can either be integrated with KDE, GNOME or XFCE (no it's not GNOME lite, you don't know GNOME if you say that) or you can stay unintegrated.
You were complaining about "arbitrary, idiotic, and backwards conventions" not beeing unable to press ~/ to get to your home folder, I find the horizontal scrolling to be an arbitrary, idiotic, and backwards convention.
Can you please explain what you gnome apologists get out of defending unintuitive (I hate to use that word, but gnome is backasswards enough to warrant it) and just plain stupid interface decisions? The whole "gnome philosophy" (which I can't even begin to understand) makes using gtk apps a trial in frustration, one that I'm less and less willing to put up with.
There you go again pressing your personal preference as some global fact compleatly missing the point of my post. You find that using "gtk apps a trial in frustration", I don't, why should they change their ways because of you and despite me? You hate to use "unintutive", but do so anyway, why?
The issues with the gtk2 dialogs isn't about "complainers", it's about making apps that much more difficult to use by having arbitrary, idiotic, and backwards conventions. Of course those seem to be the hallmarks of modern gtk development, so the real answer is to replace the few gtk-exclusive apps that still lack competent or superior alternatives.
The issues with the KDE dialogs isn't about "complainers", it's about making apps that much more difficult to use by having arbitrary, idiotic, and backwards conventions. Of course those seem to be the hallmarks of modern KDE development, so the real answer is to replace the few KDE-exclusive apps that still lack competent or superior alternatives.
What's the point of hiding all the useful parts of a file dialog when the file dialog is still gigantic?
What's the point of horizontal scrolling in a file dialog?
What's the point in copying the windows registry?
What's the point in repeating myths?
It seems to me that the gtk/gnome crowd just doesn't like Linux very much, and doesn't really understand it.
Ah, I see, so that bullshit like this doesn't seem so stupid. Linux is kernel no more no less, about the only "Linux way" is to release early and often.
I still can't figure out what the gnome philosophy is supposed to be, other than "apple didn't do it stupid enough to begin with."
[..] and it would definitely explain why the gtk devs spend more time integrating their toolkit with windows than they do integrating it with Linux, which theoretically should be their native platform.
Well, you can open files with it... You can even switch from the default brain-dead horizontal scroll (who needs good defaults anyway, that's so GNOME, ew) and with newer versions there is even a non-customizable bookmark bar. Yes it's usable, but so is ed.
I like Outlook, but its not available for Linux. Evolution doesn't work enough like it [..]
He's right, Evolution should aslo add helpful features and clear error messages. I'm sure there is a lot more we could learn from Outlook, but these are the nice things Microsoft has brightened the days of me and my users in the last two weeks.
Slashdot Mirror
Stories aren't ideas nor concepts.
Yes, and if you don't like that something is copyrighted by a company you can wait that out as well. Because, as we all know, people live hundreds of years, it's not like a patent lasts longer than 1/4th of an average human life or something.
It's been years, and there is still no msi-get.
No doubt there will be niches, but I doubt most of them can be filled by shareware.
As I see it...
Pure proprietary software will be pushed into "hard and specialized" niches, mostly math intensive stuff that only so many people can do well, FOSS in this domain is and will continue to be mostly unpolished university research. As the problems get better understood FOSS will move in and big players on to other grounds. This could go on for a long time.
Bussiness applications will be mostly a thinlayer of proprietary stuff on top of a FOSS stack and in house software based directly on copylefted FOSS. This shouldn't shrink too much as long as new bussines methods are intorduced.
Proprietary games will contine to sell mainly on expensive artwork, with the latest generation of engines beeing proprietary and older ones either directly freed (as id does now) or feature-duplicated by FOSS developers. Creating content for FOSS engines and experimental gameplay might be a niche for shareware authors.
Mass market software will continue to be what dedicated FOSS developers do and as people come to trust it will replace most boxed software (maybe in the same boxes, we'll see how Xara does) and shareware. Shareware might continue to serve power user needs because it's developers are often close to users and can stay ahead in specialized features, but FOSS isn't weak in this aspect either.
Single use applications (where traditionaly shareware has been very strong) and plug-ins will increasingly be implemented by power users as FOSS high-level programing languages, development enviroments and libraries mature.
Ideas and concepts aren't protected by copyright.
I'm not sure if the TOS grants them such broad rights, as it also contains this:
Now IANAL, but that seems to pose problems with physical distribution. As for them trying to find a revenue stream by selling hi-res access or similar--I see no problem with that, they foot the bandwith bill after all.What I'm wondering about is if Youtube is compatible with Creative Commons licenses because of the DRM provisions, the "non-commercial" one is right out of the window of course.
From TFTOS:
They require an non-exclusive license, but they need that, because of the way the whole service works. And yes, it's bold in the original, probably because of people like the parent poster.
If it's really an open source license then GStreamer can use it as it's LGPLed.
Siged.
I have one question: troll or paranoid? P.S: Remeber bitkeeper!
Why can't you kde cids realize that what is best for you isn't best for eveyone. Having to click around to get a sane view of files just because you have to copy Windows certainly isn't best for me, having load and save dialogs that aren't identical just because they are both file dialogs isn't either.
Good thing that nothing could ever go wrong with "rm -rf foo /*"
Not as much difficult as annoying. KDE file dialogs look like Win32 file dialogs with even more widgets... *puts on asbestos shorts*
Well, you can open files with it... You can even switch from the default brain-dead horizontal scroll (who needs good defaults anyway, that's so GNOME, ew) and with newer versions there is even a non-customizable bookmark bar. Yes it's usable, but so is ed.
It didn't have new and exiting features, like a port of Microsoft Outlook.
It's actually a rendering architecture, equivalents in Windows Vista and Mac OS X seem to be regarded as exiting...