This happens for me often as well. I just wait a bit, reload the folder, and the icons for other machines show up. I think the probe for SMB servers is just slow, but it still works.
There are tons of other problems I have with SMB though that I'd love to have fixed... like Keychain never remembering my username/password for a share/server, no GUI for configuring network options like workgroup name, etc.
$75 for the initial package, maybe. Real support isn't included with that price. Nor is all the many extras you need with a Windows machine, like a virus scanner (that's more than $5/month right there).
If this was in the US, then contact the Better Business Beaureu. (Ya, I probably spelled that wrong, and no I don't care.) Complaining on Slashdot does the equivalent of Jack Shit, and Jack left town. Complaining to the BBB can result in real consequences for the hotel(s) in question.
Check out the D-Spam project. Very effective; claims to be 10x more accurate than a human. (If the parent-parent post is any indication of human skill at spam filtering, than 10x is a gross understatement. ~,^ )
The "flow" you speak of is a little different than temporal order of a complete work. The latter is similar to the order of chapters in a book; mix up the chapters and the book no longer even makes sense, much less present a good read.
A CD of songs like you describe is more like a collection of short stories. One story may be best placed after another, but changing that order in no way destroys in the integrity of the stories (or songs). And it's entirely irrelevant when you pick one of those songs out and place in among hundreds/thousands of other *completely* unrelated songs.
Operas (and yes, *some* pop/rock albums) have a very specific intended order that is integral to the work as a whole. Most other musics albums have orders which are specifically selected to sound well but which isn't mandatory to enjoying or appreciating the individual songs.
"Personally, and I believe I speak for many old farts here, I appreciate listening to music, be it an opera or a pop album, in the sequence in which the artist decided to present it," he said.
"Temporal order is an important element of how a work unfolds dynamically over time, an important factor underlying the aesthetic effect. Random shuffle pretty much flushes that down the toilet."
He is assuming, of course, that the songs being listened have any real order. A good deal of the albums produced have no theme, no real order, and are just collections of songs. This is especially true for rock/pop/blues stuff. Listening to an album in order just means you get a preset random chunk of tracks vs a dynamic random chunk of tracks... not to mention you often find that you only like several songs on a given album.
"C'mon Apple, OS X is "based on Unix", so how hard could it be to port iTunes over to Linux and Unix? If you really want to set an online music standard (and possibly reduce OSS-attempts at circumvention), you gotta give Linux some love."
Because Linux doesn't have Aqua. I doubt iTunes makes much use of any particular underlying UNIX features. It does use a particular toolkit (Aqua) designed to run on a particular graphics engine (which sure as hell isn't X11) using NeXT APIs (Objective-C based equivalent of STL/glib, basically) and utilizing tons of other services which are likewise tied to the platform (WebCore for browsing, Quicktime for multimedia, netconf for configuration, etc. etc.)
It's like asking to port an app from GNOME to KDE. An app written for either of those is maybe 1% dependent on the underlying OS and 99% dependent on the specific APIs and features of the desktop platform. A port from GNOME to KDE (or vice versa) would require a complete rewrite for most applications, and a good deal of work for any others. Same goes for porting iTunes.
Since when was he the one that "invented" RPGs? Maybe the same way Al Gore "invented" the Internet... RPGs existed in several forms long before Gygax. Gygax just made one of the more popular such systems that took off. It is true that a number of videa games took ideas from D you see THAC0 and such a lot in older CRPGs.
(The Al Gore "quote" was from one of the actual ARPAnet implementers; rather sad he got so heavily critized for that given he didn't invent the quote and the person who did had a valid reason for saying it.)
A lot of newbie users who have some desire/need to do UNIX software development (for example, a good deal of MUD "coders") could benefit from this a lot. Most suffer through the hell of trying to get Cygwin to compile and run their apps. Getting an easy-to-install Linux system that Just Works would be bliss for these people.
And no, a second box is not a solution. "Hardware is so cheap" doesn't cut out the fact that many aspiring coders may not even have $50 (hell, I started at 9, think I had that kind of chash?), may not have the desk space, may not want the extra power drain, may not want to get a second monitor (or a KVM), etc. Just running Linux in a "window" on Windows is very cheap ($0, assuming they already own the Windows machine), provides no physical space/power hassles, and would be rather easy to use.
Again, for some people, switching to Linux, a second box, or dual booting just *isn't a choice*. For those people, CoLinux is a boon. For the rest of us, it's just a sick toy.;-)
Usability doesn't mean "avoids security." It means the interface is easy to use. You can do this *with* security. For example, just asking the user to re-type their password before running admin tools, even if they have rights to run them. (No su'ing to root; no process should *ever* run as root with user input/control.) That means that a virus can't just start running admin commands without the user knowing.
SELinux (or, hopefully, a similar system with a sane configuration/management interface) can also assist with this by limiting what vulnerabilities can do.
And the interface design itself helps. Microsoft's attempts at usability equate to "do everything automatically." Compare this to GNOME where the design is based not on automation, but on streamlining. I fully believe GNOME is *more* usable than Windows in almost every way, yet it hasn't the security problems as apps don't try to auto-run executables from untrusted sources, embed scripting languages with system-modification abilities, etc.
In truth, the interface can be designed such that it makes using security easier, vs hiding security away.
Or maybe they just want more applications to be installed using the quite functional and usable Windows Installer? A lot of Open Source apps exist for Windows these days, most using either Winzip installer, WISE, or some low-quality hack of an installer. Getting these apps to use the Windows Installer is a good thing both for Microsoft (more market share of installer, as it were) plus for users, who will now have high quality installers for more applications.
Those aren't codified in law for moral reasons. They're law to ensure we continue functioning as society, which *is* what government is supposed to do. You can't kill a man because if you could kill at a whim, society would tear itself apart. Likewise, if anything you have could be taken from you, things would fall apart. It's not "killing is evil," it's "we can't allow killing and continue to be a functioning, growing society."
Anyone remember that one? I don't think any games use it these days, right?;-)
To be honest, this sounds rather useful, altho in an unfortunately "only for Microsoft developers" way. Porting apps between consoles and computers takes time, a lot of time, simply because portable toolkits don't exist, yet. Standard sets of game controllers between computers and consoles don't sound bad either, altho those have existed for some time.
Being able to write a game once, and with little modification have it running on both a PC and a console, is a Good Thing for developers and users. Lots of fun console games might start becoming available on the PC as well, for those of us that only need to own one game machine.
Of course, certain games will always remain best suited to a particular platform. i.e., playing an FPS with anything but a mouse and keyboard is just sick. Quit trying to make those damn things for consoles, will you?;-)
It's a good idea, perhaps one the GTK developers simply didn't think about. (Not every GNOME developer has access to an OS X machine to try out every little hidden detail you'd never guess from screenshots, after all. ~,^ )
The new file selector API makes it *very* easy to radically change the UI, because unlike the previous file selector API, aboslutely nothing about the UI or layout is exposed in the API. If you want to switch it to something like KDE, something like OS X, or somethign totally new, you can, and all apps will use the new layout and Just Work(tm). This isn't particularly ground breaking or spectacular, as that's how it should have been done form the start, but it *is* something to keep in mind for all those folks that want to experiment with alternative UIs.
So will eventually India be outsourcing jobs to the US? I mean, they'll have all those skilled technicians over there refusing to work for peanuts, and that's the only kind of people we'll have left here, so...
Actually, we just tried this the other day before our Office 03 deployment. We created a Word document with some basic text formatting and a table, and opened it on a Win98 machine with Office 07. It worked fine. All formatting and the table retained. Go figure.
I'll gladly take the Nintendo style graphics over the recent PC, XBox, or PS2 graphics *any* day. The problem is, the latter are all focusing on making "realistic" looking games. First off, if you're aiming for realism, even the tiniest failure to do so breaks the suspension of disbelief and ruins the entire experience. Second, realism isn't all that interesting - if you want real, get off your ass and go outside.
The "anime" look most Nintendo games has is much more friendly of a visual medium given that what you're playing is in fact a game. Take Zelda: Wind Waker, for example. There is not a single graphical style that could have been better suited to that game. The graphics didn't "get in the way," I didn't keep noticing how "hey that doesn't look right" (like I do in any game that *attempts* to look real), and the style actually allowed quite a few things that realism simply can't do (the wind blowing, for example).
The cartoon style is just much better suited to a real game. Leave the attempted-realism to movies, which draw you in base on sensory input. Games are driven by interaction, and the graphics should be those best suited to facilitate that play. If the entire game is based solely on running about shooting things, then maybe realism is a good thing, since that's the only thing the game can offer you that the original Quake doesn't.
Getting rid of file selectors all together is *waaay* too big of a change for a minor version increment. Maybe in GNOME 3.0, sure. But not just jumping from 2.4 to 2.6. That'd be like dropping a new VM in a stable kernel series or something.;-)
Therefore, DARPA has asked Anheuser-Busch to help them keep track of the treasonous fluid. Don't get me started on those frenchies and their wine.
Ya, but the French couldn't hurt us if they tried. All we'd do is glare and they'd surrender. In the odd case they don't, history indicates they'll lose anyhow.;-)
[note to the French: it's nothing personal. i just hate you all.]
Slashdot Mirror
This happens for me often as well. I just wait a bit, reload the folder, and the icons for other machines show up. I think the probe for SMB servers is just slow, but it still works.
There are tons of other problems I have with SMB though that I'd love to have fixed... like Keychain never remembering my username/password for a share/server, no GUI for configuring network options like workgroup name, etc.
$75 for the initial package, maybe. Real support isn't included with that price. Nor is all the many extras you need with a Windows machine, like a virus scanner (that's more than $5/month right there).
If this was in the US, then contact the Better Business Beaureu. (Ya, I probably spelled that wrong, and no I don't care.) Complaining on Slashdot does the equivalent of Jack Shit, and Jack left town. Complaining to the BBB can result in real consequences for the hotel(s) in question.
Check out the D-Spam project. Very effective; claims to be 10x more accurate than a human. (If the parent-parent post is any indication of human skill at spam filtering, than 10x is a gross understatement. ~,^ )
The "flow" you speak of is a little different than temporal order of a complete work. The latter is similar to the order of chapters in a book; mix up the chapters and the book no longer even makes sense, much less present a good read.
A CD of songs like you describe is more like a collection of short stories. One story may be best placed after another, but changing that order in no way destroys in the integrity of the stories (or songs). And it's entirely irrelevant when you pick one of those songs out and place in among hundreds/thousands of other *completely* unrelated songs.
Operas (and yes, *some* pop/rock albums) have a very specific intended order that is integral to the work as a whole. Most other musics albums have orders which are specifically selected to sound well but which isn't mandatory to enjoying or appreciating the individual songs.
"Personally, and I believe I speak for many old farts here, I appreciate listening to music, be it an opera or a pop album, in the sequence in which the artist decided to present it," he said.
"Temporal order is an important element of how a work unfolds dynamically over time, an important factor underlying the aesthetic effect. Random shuffle pretty much flushes that down the toilet."
He is assuming, of course, that the songs being listened have any real order. A good deal of the albums produced have no theme, no real order, and are just collections of songs. This is especially true for rock/pop/blues stuff. Listening to an album in order just means you get a preset random chunk of tracks vs a dynamic random chunk of tracks... not to mention you often find that you only like several songs on a given album.
Windows *did* have 95%+ market share and the customer influx gained from such a port more than makes up for the cost of redevelopment.
I also believe that Apple may already have much of that technology ported to Windows due to the Quicktime release.
"C'mon Apple, OS X is "based on Unix", so how hard could it be to port iTunes over to Linux and Unix? If you really want to set an online music standard (and possibly reduce OSS-attempts at circumvention), you gotta give Linux some love."
Because Linux doesn't have Aqua. I doubt iTunes makes much use of any particular underlying UNIX features. It does use a particular toolkit (Aqua) designed to run on a particular graphics engine (which sure as hell isn't X11) using NeXT APIs (Objective-C based equivalent of STL/glib, basically) and utilizing tons of other services which are likewise tied to the platform (WebCore for browsing, Quicktime for multimedia, netconf for configuration, etc. etc.)
It's like asking to port an app from GNOME to KDE. An app written for either of those is maybe 1% dependent on the underlying OS and 99% dependent on the specific APIs and features of the desktop platform. A port from GNOME to KDE (or vice versa) would require a complete rewrite for most applications, and a good deal of work for any others. Same goes for porting iTunes.
Since when was he the one that "invented" RPGs? Maybe the same way Al Gore "invented" the Internet... RPGs existed in several forms long before Gygax. Gygax just made one of the more popular such systems that took off. It is true that a number of videa games took ideas from D you see THAC0 and such a lot in older CRPGs.
(The Al Gore "quote" was from one of the actual ARPAnet implementers; rather sad he got so heavily critized for that given he didn't invent the quote and the person who did had a valid reason for saying it.)
A lot of newbie users who have some desire/need to do UNIX software development (for example, a good deal of MUD "coders") could benefit from this a lot. Most suffer through the hell of trying to get Cygwin to compile and run their apps. Getting an easy-to-install Linux system that Just Works would be bliss for these people.
;-)
And no, a second box is not a solution. "Hardware is so cheap" doesn't cut out the fact that many aspiring coders may not even have $50 (hell, I started at 9, think I had that kind of chash?), may not have the desk space, may not want the extra power drain, may not want to get a second monitor (or a KVM), etc. Just running Linux in a "window" on Windows is very cheap ($0, assuming they already own the Windows machine), provides no physical space/power hassles, and would be rather easy to use.
Again, for some people, switching to Linux, a second box, or dual booting just *isn't a choice*. For those people, CoLinux is a boon. For the rest of us, it's just a sick toy.
Usability doesn't mean "avoids security." It means the interface is easy to use. You can do this *with* security. For example, just asking the user to re-type their password before running admin tools, even if they have rights to run them. (No su'ing to root; no process should *ever* run as root with user input/control.) That means that a virus can't just start running admin commands without the user knowing.
SELinux (or, hopefully, a similar system with a sane configuration/management interface) can also assist with this by limiting what vulnerabilities can do.
And the interface design itself helps. Microsoft's attempts at usability equate to "do everything automatically." Compare this to GNOME where the design is based not on automation, but on streamlining. I fully believe GNOME is *more* usable than Windows in almost every way, yet it hasn't the security problems as apps don't try to auto-run executables from untrusted sources, embed scripting languages with system-modification abilities, etc.
In truth, the interface can be designed such that it makes using security easier, vs hiding security away.
Or maybe they just want more applications to be installed using the quite functional and usable Windows Installer? A lot of Open Source apps exist for Windows these days, most using either Winzip installer, WISE, or some low-quality hack of an installer. Getting these apps to use the Windows Installer is a good thing both for Microsoft (more market share of installer, as it were) plus for users, who will now have high quality installers for more applications.
Can anyone tell me where I can buy a G5 laptop?
Sure! Send me your CC info and I promise I'll send you a G5 laptop! I'm also selling Playstation 5s.
Those aren't codified in law for moral reasons. They're law to ensure we continue functioning as society, which *is* what government is supposed to do. You can't kill a man because if you could kill at a whim, society would tear itself apart. Likewise, if anything you have could be taken from you, things would fall apart. It's not "killing is evil," it's "we can't allow killing and continue to be a functioning, growing society."
Anyone remember that one? I don't think any games use it these days, right? ;-)
;-)
To be honest, this sounds rather useful, altho in an unfortunately "only for Microsoft developers" way. Porting apps between consoles and computers takes time, a lot of time, simply because portable toolkits don't exist, yet. Standard sets of game controllers between computers and consoles don't sound bad either, altho those have existed for some time.
Being able to write a game once, and with little modification have it running on both a PC and a console, is a Good Thing for developers and users. Lots of fun console games might start becoming available on the PC as well, for those of us that only need to own one game machine.
Of course, certain games will always remain best suited to a particular platform. i.e., playing an FPS with anything but a mouse and keyboard is just sick. Quit trying to make those damn things for consoles, will you?
So file a bug on bugzilla.gnome.org about it. :)
It's a good idea, perhaps one the GTK developers simply didn't think about. (Not every GNOME developer has access to an OS X machine to try out every little hidden detail you'd never guess from screenshots, after all. ~,^ )
The new file selector API makes it *very* easy to radically change the UI, because unlike the previous file selector API, aboslutely nothing about the UI or layout is exposed in the API. If you want to switch it to something like KDE, something like OS X, or somethign totally new, you can, and all apps will use the new layout and Just Work(tm). This isn't particularly ground breaking or spectacular, as that's how it should have been done form the start, but it *is* something to keep in mind for all those folks that want to experiment with alternative UIs.
So will eventually India be outsourcing jobs to the US? I mean, they'll have all those skilled technicians over there refusing to work for peanuts, and that's the only kind of people we'll have left here, so...
Actually, we just tried this the other day before our Office 03 deployment. We created a Word document with some basic text formatting and a table, and opened it on a Win98 machine with Office 07. It worked fine. All formatting and the table retained. Go figure.
People definitely "like that." :)
I'll gladly take the Nintendo style graphics over the recent PC, XBox, or PS2 graphics *any* day. The problem is, the latter are all focusing on making "realistic" looking games. First off, if you're aiming for realism, even the tiniest failure to do so breaks the suspension of disbelief and ruins the entire experience. Second, realism isn't all that interesting - if you want real, get off your ass and go outside.
The "anime" look most Nintendo games has is much more friendly of a visual medium given that what you're playing is in fact a game. Take Zelda: Wind Waker, for example. There is not a single graphical style that could have been better suited to that game. The graphics didn't "get in the way," I didn't keep noticing how "hey that doesn't look right" (like I do in any game that *attempts* to look real), and the style actually allowed quite a few things that realism simply can't do (the wind blowing, for example).
The cartoon style is just much better suited to a real game. Leave the attempted-realism to movies, which draw you in base on sensory input. Games are driven by interaction, and the graphics should be those best suited to facilitate that play. If the entire game is based solely on running about shooting things, then maybe realism is a good thing, since that's the only thing the game can offer you that the original Quake doesn't.
If you're that desparate, there are plenty of sites online with that kind of content. ;-)
Getting rid of file selectors all together is *waaay* too big of a change for a minor version increment. Maybe in GNOME 3.0, sure. But not just jumping from 2.4 to 2.6. That'd be like dropping a new VM in a stable kernel series or something. ;-)
SCO has a product?
They didn't have the right to copy or modify the libraries for Linux, however. (Assuming the lawsuit is true and they did this; I am not one to say.)
Fix the spelling/grammar mistakes your "Quality" team announcement. ;-)
Therefore, DARPA has asked Anheuser-Busch to help them keep track of the treasonous fluid. Don't get me started on those frenchies and their wine.
;-)
Ya, but the French couldn't hurt us if they tried. All we'd do is glare and they'd surrender. In the odd case they don't, history indicates they'll lose anyhow.
[note to the French: it's nothing personal. i just hate you all.]