For a very large website that garners so many hits run by non-journalists, it sure wields a lot of journalistic power, from reporting releases early (even when the author of said release criticized them for it last time), to slanting things by posting non-stop Microsoft exploits (and ignoring that Linux had nine in the same month), to outright killing people's websites left and right and simply ignoring the problem, to posting blatant hoaxes, duplicates, bizarre summaries that sometimes contradict the article link itself, and so on and so forth.
What's wrong with people pointing out the major flaws of this place? Nothing.
Besides, this really isn't news. It's a review. Many small manufactures link to reviews of their products. It's nothing new. So they are promoting an item. Who cares.
We do. It's another sign of lack of integrity, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing it out.
If you don't like it, don't click on the link. Go turn off reviews in your preference. No one forces you to come here. You don't have to pay to get the content if you so choose.
We don't have to sit still and be quiet about it either, just because some Slashdot fanboy thinks there is nothing wrong. Believe it or not, this place has a very large amount of power in the community, and it is in our best interests to be skeptical and critical, because the editors themselves certainly aren't.
Yes. And xine is not a part of Linux. It is a program which can run on top of Linux (And maybe other OSes as well, I never tried).
Ah, so now you're copping out. Apparently, you are trying to imply that this entire article was only about annoyances with the Linux kernel, which is the only "true" Linux. You're sounding ridiculous.
By your logic Windows must suck a lot more than Linux, because there are so many more bad programs that run on top of Windows than there are bad programs running on top of Linux.
Those bad programs don't come packaged with Windows.
Besides xine was not my first suggestion. Ogle was my first suggestion.
I don't care about Ogle. I was listing my annoyance with xine. That was the point of this article. I tried Ogle once, it crashed immediately despite all configurations and libraries installed, and so I didn't bother with it.
Why should they listen to anybody who just wants to complain?
It's called making something better by listening to the suggestions of people who actually use your program.
If you really want the program to become better, you have got to be more constructive.
What is more constructive than pointing out the things that need to be improved to make it a better program? You are making no sense whatsoever.
There have to be something you like about the program before you can participate in improving it.
First, who said there wasn't, and second, that's not true anyway.
Look, if you don't want people complaining about your projects, just keep them on your private network and never release them to the public. This whiny "don't complain!" mindset is ridiculous and is holding a lot of Linux projects back. People release their projects into the public, want it to be treated professionally, and then complain when, as expected, users complain and add suggestions for improvements like any other program in existence. Get over yourselves. You need to clearly state what your motives are--releasing a program to the public with no regard as to whether it works or not, or releasing a program completely with the users in mind. This fence-sitting most people do is sickening--they want their application seen as a professional-level replacement but don't want to deal with user demands. Why bother, then? The point of an application is for people to use it.
When you have reached the point, where you want to make a good program better, people will start listening to you.
I would think that by complaining, that obviously means people want a better program. Again, you're making no sense at all.
But just because they listen, they don't have to agree. Nobody is forced to think the same way as somebody else, that works both ways.
Then they are morons who should keep their applications on their private networks and never let them see the public light of day.
If they won't listen to user demands, that gives users all the more reason to complain about them. Get over it, and stop playing "poor pitiful me."
Any program with an open dialog button labelled "://" is a major, major annoyance. And it's a completely ass-backwards, retarded design decision that has no logical basis whatsoever. It's an example of the typical mindset of Linux developers.
And, of course, it will never change. People complain, but nobody listens, and so it continues to suck.
So basically we are going to see the pile of crap just keep getting bigger and bigger and bigger?
No. You're not even making sense.
No clear direction set by Microsoft? no long term road map for their product?
Good lord, what are you talking about? Of course there is a long term road map and a clear direction. Did you at all read up about the Windows timeline before you criticized it?
If it were ME, I would be VERY concerned when a company hasn't even set down where.NET is going to head towards.
Please. It's heading towards Longhorn and the Blackcomb updates. Why don't you actually read a little bit before coming off as ignorant? You'll do us all a favor.
All we have seen so far from the likes of you is speculative talk based on a wish and a hope that Microsofts gets the "message" and does something.
You clearly have a chip on your shoulder. There is no speculation. Longhorn is.NET based. Everything will be running as managed code, including explorer.exe itself. Of course, you'll come up with some random criticism again because you need to hate Microsoft, but the truth is that you're coming off as fanatical. Again, this has all been common knowledge, and Slashdot has done several articles on it.
I want to hear what place the.NET framework will play in the operating system 4-5 years from now. Will it be the sucessor to win32/win16?
Yes. This has been common knowledge for at least four years. Where have you been? Win32 is obsolete, and.NET is the future for Windows.
These are questions I want answered, not by speculation but Microsoft's management.
All of your questions have been answered for years. Microsoft's roadmap hasn't change except for the announcement of a server version of Longhorn and the dissipation of Blackcomb into a series of updates to Windows Server 2003 and Longhorn..NET is currently at version 1.1, and Visual Studio.NET 2003 has been released to take advantage of it, to create.NET apps and web services..NET is happening and will be fully in place in the operating system itself with Longhorn. Get over it.
I've seen lots of.NET apps, most of them internal company products. Off the top of my head, the p2p app Overnet is also.NET-based.
When Longhorn comes out, that is obviously the turning point for.NET. Windows itself will be running.NET, and explorer.exe, for instance, will be.NET managed code.
They have never once made a tough decision regarding their operating system, if they did, we wouldn't have win16 and DOS compatibility hanging around in Windows XP!
Microsoft has made lots of "tough" decisions, like using the NT kernel for their home line of Windows.
KDE does have a clean API without any of the draw backs which the Win32 has. Applications have been written from the ground up for KDE and hence, no "migration to a better solution" is required.
Are you kidding? KDE and QT are a mess. Win32 is obsolete anyway. It will be replaced in Longhorn.
Two things:
1.) There is no DOS compatibility in Windows XP. There is a command prompt with very minimal emulation.
2.) They're replacing the Windows API with.NET. So there won't be Win16 compatibility either except as a backwards-compatible DLL somewhere in the system folder.
The fact that all those things you listed and more are the same goddamned things people have been saying for years and years, and yet it never changes. And then people flame you for bringing it up.
"So why don't you contribute?"
Okay, so let's make Linux an OS only for programmers. Next.
Ultimately make computers easier to use and you will get more idiots using them. What we really need is a computer operation license like a driving license:)
Welcome to the reason Linux has taken so long to gain desktop market share--attitude.
By the way, people love to say XP "holds your hand," but all it does is require you to click to show the hard drive's contents for the first time, and provides a grouped view for Control Panel. Um, that's it, unless you count system tray popups that alert you to things like low disk space, which is a damned good idea anyway.
KDE is a clean, multi-platform API built from the ground up, not only for ease of use but easy development of applications to run on top of it as well as easy to maintain. Microsoft should learn something from that.
They did long ago; it's called.NET. It will be replacing Win32 in Longhorn, though backwards-compatible libraries will be provided for older apps.
KDE is awful as an interface, from menus that are spaced too closely together to a horrible start menu setup that STILL doesn't allow drag-and-drop, and so on and so forth. Creating other panels and taskbars is still a strange process, as is clicking those tiny little arrow buttons on the drag grips (yeah, that's usability all right).
People said that last year, and the year before, and so on into the past.
There are entire interface violations dying to be fixed, as well as technology problems like X itself, before Linux can be a desktop environment. For instance, sane install/uninstall procedures that don't require an "RPM manager," or app writers who don't use "://" as the button for their open dialogs.
I don't understand why it's so hard for free software to have good interfaces. The easy answer is because it's "programmers writing for programmers," but anyone who is used to Windows freeware and shareware knows that their interfaces are typically as high-quality as any other commercial application. Why are Windows programmers doing it and Linux programmers not? I'm genuinely curious. Is it the difference in easy-to-use development environments?
How could you have a hard time going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP? XP just made the widgets blue and gave the Start menu two columns instead of one.
Nothing you say can change the fact that pirating movies is illegal and immoral, even in spite of your typical Slashbot anti-corporation mindset that somehow justifies things for you.
With the exception of the few who are "important" enough to get cut in on a percentage of the net, these are union people who get paid by the hour and get paid rather well while work lasts. Their payment does not depend on whether or not the movie sells or is pirated.
Yes it does. If movies don't sell, those people won't get jobs in the first place. And quite frankly, if the fact that some union people get paid by the hour is your only justification, you need a new one. Next.
You are saying that no more movies are going to be made if somebody downloads a low-quality copy of the next Matrix movie? What are you smoking?
That's exactly true. If everybody downloads DVD-R rips of upcoming movies (and DVD-R rips are currently the rage), there won't be a reason to shell out for the DVD itself. Of course, you'll mention low-quality cam rips and ignore DVD-R, DivX, SVCD, and all the other high-quality rips floating all over the place complete with surround sound and subtitles.
The RIAA argument you're trying to make also requires you to demonstrate that significant losses in sales are occurring due to broadband downloads of movies.
It doesn't matter, pirating movies is still wrong and immoral. It's only a matter of time before broadband becomes so commonplace and downloading becomes so convenient that just grabbing the latest movie is merely an overnight affair. You are a fool to ignore this ever-growing snowball simply because you refuse to feel any guilt over it, and so justify it because you've grown accustomed to the convenience. You don't want it to go away.
EVIDENCE PLEASE, other than studies paid for by the MPAA to PR firms.
Ah, the copout ploy of playing it off as a PR stunt.
Your argument also, carried to its illogical conclusion says we have a moral obligation to buy even movies we don't like or these poor, starving industry employees will be out of work.
Why would you download a movie you didn't like? How is that still not wrong and illegal anyway?
Do they have the obligation to buy software from companies that employ us whether they like it, want it, or need it?
What are YOU smoking? The company buys software licenses for employee use.
You're just some lame Kazaa/eMule user trying to justify things to get rid of the pang of guilt that comes with the realization that what you do is illegal, immoral, and will not last forever. You're simply used to the convenience, but the free ride will not last forever.
Here comes the part where Slashbots accuse me of being a shill, bring up unrelated analogies usually involving cars, or try to shrug things off as a negligible loss. Nice try.
It'd be nice if the mods at least paid attention. Slashdot moderators these days have a reputation for being absolute crackheads. Meanwhile, I've never gotten moderator points to give.
Slashdot Mirror
For a very large website that garners so many hits run by non-journalists, it sure wields a lot of journalistic power, from reporting releases early (even when the author of said release criticized them for it last time), to slanting things by posting non-stop Microsoft exploits (and ignoring that Linux had nine in the same month), to outright killing people's websites left and right and simply ignoring the problem, to posting blatant hoaxes, duplicates, bizarre summaries that sometimes contradict the article link itself, and so on and so forth.
What's wrong with people pointing out the major flaws of this place? Nothing.
Besides, this really isn't news. It's a review. Many small manufactures link to reviews of their products. It's nothing new. So they are promoting an item. Who cares.
We do. It's another sign of lack of integrity, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing it out.
If you don't like it, don't click on the link. Go turn off reviews in your preference. No one forces you to come here. You don't have to pay to get the content if you so choose.
We don't have to sit still and be quiet about it either, just because some Slashdot fanboy thinks there is nothing wrong. Believe it or not, this place has a very large amount of power in the community, and it is in our best interests to be skeptical and critical, because the editors themselves certainly aren't.
Yes. And xine is not a part of Linux. It is a program which can run on top of Linux (And maybe other OSes as well, I never tried).
Ah, so now you're copping out. Apparently, you are trying to imply that this entire article was only about annoyances with the Linux kernel, which is the only "true" Linux. You're sounding ridiculous.
By your logic Windows must suck a lot more than Linux, because there are so many more bad programs that run on top of Windows than there are bad programs running on top of Linux.
Those bad programs don't come packaged with Windows.
Besides xine was not my first suggestion. Ogle was my first suggestion.
I don't care about Ogle. I was listing my annoyance with xine. That was the point of this article. I tried Ogle once, it crashed immediately despite all configurations and libraries installed, and so I didn't bother with it.
Why should they listen to anybody who just wants to complain?
It's called making something better by listening to the suggestions of people who actually use your program.
If you really want the program to become better, you have got to be more constructive.
What is more constructive than pointing out the things that need to be improved to make it a better program? You are making no sense whatsoever.
There have to be something you like about the program before you can participate in improving it.
First, who said there wasn't, and second, that's not true anyway.
Look, if you don't want people complaining about your projects, just keep them on your private network and never release them to the public. This whiny "don't complain!" mindset is ridiculous and is holding a lot of Linux projects back. People release their projects into the public, want it to be treated professionally, and then complain when, as expected, users complain and add suggestions for improvements like any other program in existence. Get over yourselves. You need to clearly state what your motives are--releasing a program to the public with no regard as to whether it works or not, or releasing a program completely with the users in mind. This fence-sitting most people do is sickening--they want their application seen as a professional-level replacement but don't want to deal with user demands. Why bother, then? The point of an application is for people to use it.
When you have reached the point, where you want to make a good program better, people will start listening to you.
I would think that by complaining, that obviously means people want a better program. Again, you're making no sense at all.
But just because they listen, they don't have to agree. Nobody is forced to think the same way as somebody else, that works both ways.
Then they are morons who should keep their applications on their private networks and never let them see the public light of day.
If they won't listen to user demands, that gives users all the more reason to complain about them. Get over it, and stop playing "poor pitiful me."
Next.
Soup Opera? Jesus, you're stupid.
We were talking about Linux annoyances.
Any program with an open dialog button labelled "://" is a major, major annoyance. And it's a completely ass-backwards, retarded design decision that has no logical basis whatsoever. It's an example of the typical mindset of Linux developers.
And, of course, it will never change. People complain, but nobody listens, and so it continues to suck.
So basically we are going to see the pile of crap just keep getting bigger and bigger and bigger?
.NET is going to head towards.
.NET based. Everything will be running as managed code, including explorer.exe itself. Of course, you'll come up with some random criticism again because you need to hate Microsoft, but the truth is that you're coming off as fanatical. Again, this has all been common knowledge, and Slashdot has done several articles on it.
.NET framework will play in the operating system 4-5 years from now. Will it be the sucessor to win32/win16?
.NET is the future for Windows.
.NET is currently at version 1.1, and Visual Studio .NET 2003 has been released to take advantage of it, to create .NET apps and web services. .NET is happening and will be fully in place in the operating system itself with Longhorn. Get over it.
No. You're not even making sense.
No clear direction set by Microsoft? no long term road map for their product?
Good lord, what are you talking about? Of course there is a long term road map and a clear direction. Did you at all read up about the Windows timeline before you criticized it?
If it were ME, I would be VERY concerned when a company hasn't even set down where
Please. It's heading towards Longhorn and the Blackcomb updates. Why don't you actually read a little bit before coming off as ignorant? You'll do us all a favor.
All we have seen so far from the likes of you is speculative talk based on a wish and a hope that Microsofts gets the "message" and does something.
You clearly have a chip on your shoulder. There is no speculation. Longhorn is
I want to hear what place the
Yes. This has been common knowledge for at least four years. Where have you been? Win32 is obsolete, and
These are questions I want answered, not by speculation but Microsoft's management.
All of your questions have been answered for years. Microsoft's roadmap hasn't change except for the announcement of a server version of Longhorn and the dissipation of Blackcomb into a series of updates to Windows Server 2003 and Longhorn.
I've seen lots of .NET apps, most of them internal company products. Off the top of my head, the p2p app Overnet is also .NET-based.
.NET. Windows itself will be running .NET, and explorer.exe, for instance, will be .NET managed code.
.NET. So there won't be Win16 compatibility either except as a backwards-compatible DLL somewhere in the system folder.
When Longhorn comes out, that is obviously the turning point for
They have never once made a tough decision regarding their operating system, if they did, we wouldn't have win16 and DOS compatibility hanging around in Windows XP!
Microsoft has made lots of "tough" decisions, like using the NT kernel for their home line of Windows.
KDE does have a clean API without any of the draw backs which the Win32 has. Applications have been written from the ground up for KDE and hence, no "migration to a better solution" is required.
Are you kidding? KDE and QT are a mess. Win32 is obsolete anyway. It will be replaced in Longhorn.
Two things:
1.) There is no DOS compatibility in Windows XP. There is a command prompt with very minimal emulation.
2.) They're replacing the Windows API with
You just need some reason to bash Microsoft.
Next.
The fact that all those things you listed and more are the same goddamned things people have been saying for years and years, and yet it never changes. And then people flame you for bringing it up.
"So why don't you contribute?"
Okay, so let's make Linux an OS only for programmers. Next.
Try PowerDVD 5.0 sometime with its color-correcting video and multi-channel mixdown.
Xine still amuses me with its "://" button. What do Linux developers smoke when they create things like that?
The error is in thinking that a computer should be intuitive.
Completely wrong. The error in your thinking is deciding there are limitations on what a computer can be.
Of course a computer can be intuitive, and it SHOULD be intuitive.
Next.
Ah, an anal retentive "GNU/Linux" weenie.
GNU is not an OS. Linux is an OS. I can remove GNU from my system and still use Linux.
Next.
Downloading someone's music doesn't make you a "customer."
Yeah, these sorts of jokes never get old.
/* comments */" post.
Cue the next "HERE IS THE INFRINGING CODE:
So download the free PowerToy. This is not rocket science.
In other words, you simply disagree with it, so you've decided to not believe it.
That's a real great mentality.
Ultimately make computers easier to use and you will get more idiots using them. What we really need is a computer operation license like a driving license :)
Welcome to the reason Linux has taken so long to gain desktop market share--attitude.
By the way, people love to say XP "holds your hand," but all it does is require you to click to show the hard drive's contents for the first time, and provides a grouped view for Control Panel. Um, that's it, unless you count system tray popups that alert you to things like low disk space, which is a damned good idea anyway.
KDE is a clean, multi-platform API built from the ground up, not only for ease of use but easy development of applications to run on top of it as well as easy to maintain. Microsoft should learn something from that.
.NET. It will be replacing Win32 in Longhorn, though backwards-compatible libraries will be provided for older apps.
They did long ago; it's called
KDE is awful as an interface, from menus that are spaced too closely together to a horrible start menu setup that STILL doesn't allow drag-and-drop, and so on and so forth. Creating other panels and taskbars is still a strange process, as is clicking those tiny little arrow buttons on the drag grips (yeah, that's usability all right).
People said that last year, and the year before, and so on into the past.
There are entire interface violations dying to be fixed, as well as technology problems like X itself, before Linux can be a desktop environment. For instance, sane install/uninstall procedures that don't require an "RPM manager," or app writers who don't use "://" as the button for their open dialogs.
I don't understand why it's so hard for free software to have good interfaces. The easy answer is because it's "programmers writing for programmers," but anyone who is used to Windows freeware and shareware knows that their interfaces are typically as high-quality as any other commercial application. Why are Windows programmers doing it and Linux programmers not? I'm genuinely curious. Is it the difference in easy-to-use development environments?
Well, gee, that's not Windows XP, that's Office XP. And no, personalized menus are off by default on the Start menu.
Next.
Barring extensions like litestep, Windows has never done this.
Hello? PowerToys?
How could you have a hard time going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP? XP just made the widgets blue and gave the Start menu two columns instead of one.
How is it not illegal and immoral?
It is against the law, and you deprive people of payment. This is very easy and clear-cut.
Nothing you say can change the fact that pirating movies is illegal and immoral, even in spite of your typical Slashbot anti-corporation mindset that somehow justifies things for you.
With the exception of the few who are "important" enough to get cut in on a percentage of the net, these are union people who get paid by the hour and get paid rather well while work lasts. Their payment does not depend on whether or not the movie sells or is pirated.
Yes it does. If movies don't sell, those people won't get jobs in the first place. And quite frankly, if the fact that some union people get paid by the hour is your only justification, you need a new one. Next.
You are saying that no more movies are going to be made if somebody downloads a low-quality copy of the next Matrix movie? What are you smoking?
That's exactly true. If everybody downloads DVD-R rips of upcoming movies (and DVD-R rips are currently the rage), there won't be a reason to shell out for the DVD itself. Of course, you'll mention low-quality cam rips and ignore DVD-R, DivX, SVCD, and all the other high-quality rips floating all over the place complete with surround sound and subtitles.
The RIAA argument you're trying to make also requires you to demonstrate that significant losses in sales are occurring due to broadband downloads of movies.
It doesn't matter, pirating movies is still wrong and immoral. It's only a matter of time before broadband becomes so commonplace and downloading becomes so convenient that just grabbing the latest movie is merely an overnight affair. You are a fool to ignore this ever-growing snowball simply because you refuse to feel any guilt over it, and so justify it because you've grown accustomed to the convenience. You don't want it to go away.
EVIDENCE PLEASE, other than studies paid for by the MPAA to PR firms.
Ah, the copout ploy of playing it off as a PR stunt.
Your argument also, carried to its illogical conclusion says we have a moral obligation to buy even movies we don't like or these poor, starving industry employees will be out of work.
Why would you download a movie you didn't like? How is that still not wrong and illegal anyway?
Do they have the obligation to buy software from companies that employ us whether they like it, want it, or need it?
What are YOU smoking? The company buys software licenses for employee use.
You're just some lame Kazaa/eMule user trying to justify things to get rid of the pang of guilt that comes with the realization that what you do is illegal, immoral, and will not last forever. You're simply used to the convenience, but the free ride will not last forever.
Here comes the part where Slashbots accuse me of being a shill, bring up unrelated analogies usually involving cars, or try to shrug things off as a negligible loss. Nice try.
It'd be nice if the mods at least paid attention. Slashdot moderators these days have a reputation for being absolute crackheads. Meanwhile, I've never gotten moderator points to give.
Nope, it's just that people want free shit.
Next...