Ten years ago, I dumped Windows 3.11 off my Packard-Bell Pentium 60 and replaced it with IBM OS/2.
I took this drastic action because I had found by painful experience that Windows only worked as long as I didn't try to do any actual work with it. It was clearly beta quality at best, and I'm reserving more than a few choice words here. To call it junk is putting it mildly.
After the switch to OS/2, my system was like a new computer. It was actually USING the 32-bit instruction capability of the Pentium for which I paid a premium. It would actually handle actual work without crashing every half-hour. Oh, I could go on and on...
The point is, that I, an uninformed PC buyer, had been duped by Microsoft. When the light of reality shone in on the fraud, I resolved then and there to NEVER buy ANY other Microsoft product, EVER.
In the intervening years, Microsoft has proven, time after time, that they are nothing more than a gang of felons out to con the world. If you do business with Microsoft, you are dealing with a gang of organized criminals, plain and simple. If you give money to Microsoft for any reason, you are paying protection, plain and simple. What part of extortion don't you understand?
The top of the screen menu bar is the dumbest piece of interface design since the one button mouse. The reason Adobe inerfaces are consistant is that they haven't dared to change anything in the last 20 years for fear of running afoul of the Mac interface police.
"In KDE, turning off the click-to-raise also turns off the ability to raise windows by clicking on the title bar, which is not very useful or user friendly."
Hmm...
Under...Actions, I'm seeing separate controls for Titlebar > Active, Titlebar > Inactive, Inactive Inner Window; each of those has separate action selection lists for Left, Middle, and Right Mouse Buttons.
Active windows can be raised and lowered by your choice of action. Mine happens to be currently set as left click in titlebar to raise and middle click in titlebar to lower active windows, while clicking inside of an inactive window equals "Activate, Raise & Pass Click", although I could just as easily have it "Activate & Pass Click" or "Activate & Raise" or "Activate".
Then there's the focus behavior...
It is also worth noting that this functionality is right there in the Control Center, and results can be immediately tested. User access to it is not through some obscure, inscrutable, easy to mangle text (or worse) file somewhere that requires a logout/login or a reboot before the changes hit the screen.
You are correct about the child raising the parent, but frankly I never thought of that as a problem. If you think it's an issue, file a bug report.
"... an annoying bug that is in Windows and has been copied on all the modern Linux desktops: the fact that clicking inside windows raises them to the top."
If you don't like it, in KDE, go to Control Center > Desktop > Window Behavior > Actions and change it. That is an example of the flexibility built in to Free Software by the diverse opinions of its contributors. The proprietary vendors won't offer choices like that, because they would then have to support all the poor confused users who messed their UI up and can't figure out how to fix it.
If you want a truly inconfigurable GUI, built from many years worth of homogenized commitee consensus on how to best pander to stupid users, try OS X. Personally, I prefer choice.
7, 8, 9, and now 10 speeds on the rear hub? I am not a road biker, but I can tell you why this situation has developed.
It is simply because front derailleurs don't work. They cannot be shifted under load, because they are located on the tension side of the chain. No amount of tweaking or gizmos will ever make them work the way they should, because the operating principle is quite simply bad engineering design. So we are given ever narrower hub widths, producing ever weaker rear wheels, with ever more asymetrical handling characteristics, and ever more overlapping drive ratios. Does your 30 speed have a wider ratio range than my 21 speed wall-climber which goes from 1.545:1 to 1:4? I didn't think so.
The chain and derailleur system has been around since the Wright brothers, who used chain drive on their airplanes, doubtless because that's what was laying around the shop. In case no one noticed, there have been a few advancements in engineering and material science since then.
A revolutionary change in bicycle drive design is LONG overdue, particularly for fully suspended mountain bikes. I'm not saying this is it, but at least they are trying, which is more than I can say for Shimano.
Slashdot Mirror
Ten years ago, I dumped Windows 3.11 off my Packard-Bell Pentium 60 and replaced it with IBM OS/2.
I took this drastic action because I had found by painful experience that Windows only worked as long as I didn't try to do any actual work with it. It was clearly beta quality at best, and I'm reserving more than a few choice words here. To call it junk is putting it mildly.
After the switch to OS/2, my system was like a new computer. It was actually USING the 32-bit instruction capability of the Pentium for which I paid a premium. It would actually handle actual work without crashing every half-hour. Oh, I could go on and on...
The point is, that I, an uninformed PC buyer, had been duped by Microsoft. When the light of reality shone in on the fraud, I resolved then and there to NEVER buy ANY other Microsoft product, EVER.
In the intervening years, Microsoft has proven, time after time, that they are nothing more than a gang of felons out to con the world. If you do business with Microsoft, you are dealing with a gang of organized criminals, plain and simple. If you give money to Microsoft for any reason, you are paying protection, plain and simple. What part of extortion don't you understand?
I refuse to support organized crime.
Do you?
The top of the screen menu bar is the dumbest piece of interface design since the one button mouse. The reason Adobe inerfaces are consistant is that they haven't dared to change anything in the last 20 years for fear of running afoul of the Mac interface police.
Hmm...
Under
Active windows can be raised and lowered by your choice of action. Mine happens to be currently set as left click in titlebar to raise and middle click in titlebar to lower active windows, while clicking inside of an inactive window equals "Activate, Raise & Pass Click", although I could just as easily have it "Activate & Pass Click" or "Activate & Raise" or "Activate".
Then there's the focus behavior...
It is also worth noting that this functionality is right there in the Control Center, and results can be immediately tested. User access to it is not through some obscure, inscrutable, easy to mangle text (or worse) file somewhere that requires a logout/login or a reboot before the changes hit the screen.
You are correct about the child raising the parent, but frankly I never thought of that as a problem. If you think it's an issue, file a bug report.
"... an annoying bug that is in Windows and has been copied on all the modern Linux desktops: the fact that clicking inside windows raises them to the top."
If you don't like it, in KDE, go to Control Center > Desktop > Window Behavior > Actions and change it. That is an example of the flexibility built in to Free Software by the diverse opinions of its contributors. The proprietary vendors won't offer choices like that, because they would then have to support all the poor confused users who messed their UI up and can't figure out how to fix it.
If you want a truly inconfigurable GUI, built from many years worth of homogenized commitee consensus on how to best pander to stupid users, try OS X.
Personally, I prefer choice.
7, 8, 9, and now 10 speeds on the rear hub?
I am not a road biker, but I can tell you why this situation has developed.
It is simply because front derailleurs don't work. They cannot be shifted under load, because they are located on the tension side of the chain. No amount of tweaking or gizmos will ever make them work the way they should, because the operating principle is quite simply bad engineering design. So we are given ever narrower hub widths, producing ever weaker rear wheels, with ever more asymetrical handling characteristics, and ever more overlapping drive ratios. Does your 30 speed have a wider ratio range than my 21 speed wall-climber which goes from 1.545:1 to 1:4? I didn't think so.
The chain and derailleur system has been around since the Wright brothers, who used chain drive on their airplanes, doubtless because that's what was laying around the shop. In case no one noticed, there have been a few advancements in engineering and material science since then.
A revolutionary change in bicycle drive design is LONG overdue, particularly for fully suspended mountain bikes. I'm not saying this is it, but at least they are trying, which is more than I can say for Shimano.
RMS has a pretty good idea what it means:s t.html
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-tru