Yep, I've seen that feature and locked all my stuff.
No, it doesn't stop them from moving around by themselves. Something is broken in the configuration/preferences system (it's been like this as long as I can remember using GNOME).
Have they fixed the panel in 2.6?
on
GNOME 2.6 Reviewed
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm considering upgrading to GNOME 2.6 but really the only reason would be because I want the damn panels to stop rearranging the icons/launchers/applets.
It seems like every other time I login all my icons, launchers, and applets have been magically rearranged on the panel. Man that pisses me off to no end.
The worst problem is when your system locks up or otherwise crashes and you're using ReiserFS. Oh man, I feel so lucky when my entire desktop and all the panels don't get trashed. I can't count how many times I've lost my entire GNOME setup due to my system locking up. Something about the GNOME preferences system, it must hold lots of files open all the time or something. This is one problem I can not tolerate and for a while I switched to KDE solely because of this insanely stupid behaviour.
Written like someone who has never used a functional language before. And I know a lot of functional programmers that would argue that OOP is not the way.
Give Haskell or Erlang a try. If you've never done functional programming it'll take a while to get used to it but it's worth it. I wouldn't bother with O'Caml straight away because it's kinda convoluted and the default syntax sucks.
Personally I feel future better languages will combine OOP and functional programming. Some languages are already doing it but I haven't seen any really tasty combinations yet.
Show me a non-trivial piece of software software that doesn't stink. I'm willing to bet that it flat out just does not exist. Period. I have never in my 20 years of programming seen a large piece of software that didn't stink. I've worked at all sorts of places. Open-source, small companies, large corporations, government agencies, and all of the software sucks.
We should not be asking the morons who put us where we are to fix the problem. To suggest they have a clue is ludicrous.
We need something fresh, something new, something creative to solve this problem. We have yet to hear from the person or people who will give us a revolution in software. It doesn't have to be like it is. We have been approaching the creation of software from the wrong angle since the beginning.
Besides the "compromising other systems" thing there is another issue.
You can't distribute or appear to be distributing copyrighted works (like Unreal Tournament). Even if what they give you is not the real thing they might still be punished under law (at least in the US).
It's the same thing as selling sugar as "cocain" in little baggies on the street. You'll still get arrested for selling drugs.
It's layers on layers of API's which just multiplies the complexity, amplifies bugs, and slows things down. Not to mention the bloat on bloat.
Plus it's not really very cross platform, there are so many "This works on Gtk but not Windows" or "This works on Windows but not anything else", etc. Your code turns into #ifdef spaghetti hell. You might as well write native versions for each platform.
The only truely viable cross platform (X11, Windows, MacOS) toolkits are:
2. Fltk (tight/fast, nice API, *limited power, ugly/no themes yet)... My current favorite but I have a lot of custom code to make it look good and add features I need.
3. Tk (*horrible API, not very flexible, can be slow)... I haven't used it much because the API sucks. Does this run under an X11 layer or native on MacOS?
4. Gtk (C based painful API or Gtkmm C++ bloat, kinda bloated but relatively fast on X11, slow on Windows, MacOS uses X11 layer, *buggy as hell)
I always boot off a customized Knoppix CD that has A/V software (clamav) on it. There is another live-cd based distro that has the A/V stuff by default (possibly Morphix, I can't remember).
Then I can scan and fix all the filesystem in peace. Used in combination with the full NTFS driver you can repair just about any Windows machine.
Of course that won't allow you to run Norton or whatever but I've never had a problem with Clam AntiVirus. Sometimes it seems they get virus definitions before the commercial guys.
I wish there was a free Linux alternative to AdAware then I could run that off my live-cd as well.
I find it interesting that C++ is not a consideration. He mentions "moving away from C/C++" but probably 99% of GNOME is C, not C++. I wouldn't be so quick to group C and C++ together like that. A lot of pain in Gtk/GNOME development is due to the pure C interfaces. I don't see many KDE developers complaining that they need "higher level" languages. They already use one: C++.
C++ offers everything Java and C# do but it also can do so much more. I mean Java and C# have only recently gotten generics. In C++ it is beyond simple to old your old C API's (although C# is pretty simple also).
Some people complain that C++ is too complex, but as Java and C# mature they are becoming just as complex. Why not make it easy get the best performance out of your hardware? Why not use a language that already has tons of power and flexibility?
As for cross platform compatibility... Both C and C++ are extremely portable. It's the API's that are not always so easy. However, this is no different than Java or C#. At some level you're using a C or C++ subsystem that needs to be ported to each platform. Why not just use it in the first place?
"The indictment alleged Mr Griffiths controlled access to a drop site for pirated software at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer network."
I'm with you. I believe in the "many simple devices" approach. Not only do they tend to do their job function better but they are more likely to actually work.
For example if you have everything on your laptop and the hard-drive gets dorked then you're SOL. Complicated equipment tends to break or become unusable for some reason. This is especially true of things that require massively complex software like general purpose operating systems. I mean, I can't count how many times Windows fudges itself or Linux+ReiserFS+GNOME+crash == screwed system (at least the desktop).
Simple, single purpose devices are awesome. They turn on fast, do their job well, and if they break you only lose that single purpose functionality until you can get another one.
I do wish they were all smaller though. Lots of bulky items is a huge PITA. Many very tiny devices is cool. This would be especially useful if all the devices followed a similar form factor. So you could stack them together like legos or take them apart as needed. Gimme!
C# does have some nice things that, say, Java lacks.
Add one more to your list:
In C# it is insanely easy to use external C-based libraries because you just have to "import" the function and away you go. This is much easier than the convoluted Java JNI stuff.
Argh, I forgot to mention that although the Dell has a lower viewing angle (at 88 deg) it has better brightness and contrast specs which are probably more important than viewing angle.
I agree you with that LCD seems to reduce eye strain.
Another cheaper and excellent LCD is Dell's 20" UXGA LCD.
Around $1000 (it's on sale for as little as $750 sometimes) and gives you 1600x1200 resolution. Note that the more expensive Apple 20" is only 1600x1024 but it does have a wider angle view (why you need more than 90deg I don't know; can you see the monitor from behind?).
I'm not big on Apple stuff. You're paying extra for the Apple logo. Plus their Cinema display needs way too much desk space with its tricycle landing gear feet.
DVDLab is one of the few apps that let me easily burn 480x480 mpeg streams. They work fine in most DVD players I've tried.
That's actually one of the few reasons I ever boot to Windows. I haven't found any easy to use Linux software. I hear dvdauthor works but until it's integrated into K3B with a menu builder or something then I'm out of luck.
I see a lot of posts in here about iDVD. I might give it a shot since I have a Mac sitting here that I hardly ever use. Thank goodness for firewire DVD burners.
Heh, your comment and the 10 year thing made me think back.
I remember the old pre-1.0 days. I was running a 386DX-40 and it took around 45 minutes to compile the kernel. Back then the kernel was extremely small and it still took that long. Ah, the good old days.
I'm still amazed at how fast the kernel compiles nowadays. Whenever I recompile, somewhere in the back of my head I still think it's going to take 45 minutes even though it only takes like 2 minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, I've seen that feature and locked all my stuff.
No, it doesn't stop them from moving around by themselves. Something is broken in the configuration/preferences system (it's been like this as long as I can remember using GNOME).
I'm considering upgrading to GNOME 2.6 but really the only reason would be because I want the damn panels to stop rearranging the icons/launchers/applets.
It seems like every other time I login all my icons, launchers, and applets have been magically rearranged on the panel. Man that pisses me off to no end.
The worst problem is when your system locks up or otherwise crashes and you're using ReiserFS. Oh man, I feel so lucky when my entire desktop and all the panels don't get trashed. I can't count how many times I've lost my entire GNOME setup due to my system locking up. Something about the GNOME preferences system, it must hold lots of files open all the time or something. This is one problem I can not tolerate and for a while I switched to KDE solely because of this insanely stupid behaviour.
LISP isn't a functional language. LISP can be any type of language.
Written like someone who has never used a functional language before. And I know a lot of functional programmers that would argue that OOP is not the way.
Give Haskell or Erlang a try. If you've never done functional programming it'll take a while to get used to it but it's worth it. I wouldn't bother with O'Caml straight away because it's kinda convoluted and the default syntax sucks.
Personally I feel future better languages will combine OOP and functional programming. Some languages are already doing it but I haven't seen any really tasty combinations yet.
Show me a non-trivial piece of software software that doesn't stink. I'm willing to bet that it flat out just does not exist. Period. I have never in my 20 years of programming seen a large piece of software that didn't stink. I've worked at all sorts of places. Open-source, small companies, large corporations, government agencies, and all of the software sucks.
We should not be asking the morons who put us where we are to fix the problem. To suggest they have a clue is ludicrous.
We need something fresh, something new, something creative to solve this problem. We have yet to hear from the person or people who will give us a revolution in software. It doesn't have to be like it is. We have been approaching the creation of software from the wrong angle since the beginning.
You didn't answer the question. I'm serious... why is the Apple superior?
It's not for the speed, it's not for the price, so what is it?
Superior? Why?
The Dell would be hella faster for sure. You guys still running those puny G4's?
I consider a trojan to be any piece of software that does something different than what it is described as doing (ie. a trick).
So yes, it's a trojan.
Besides the "compromising other systems" thing there is another issue.
You can't distribute or appear to be distributing copyrighted works (like Unreal Tournament). Even if what they give you is not the real thing they might still be punished under law (at least in the US).
It's the same thing as selling sugar as "cocain" in little baggies on the street. You'll still get arrested for selling drugs.
Yeah but wxWidgets (wxWindows) is kinda crappy.
It's layers on layers of API's which just multiplies the complexity, amplifies bugs, and slows things down. Not to mention the bloat on bloat.
Plus it's not really very cross platform, there are so many "This works on Gtk but not Windows" or "This works on Windows but not anything else", etc. Your code turns into #ifdef spaghetti hell. You might as well write native versions for each platform.
The only truely viable cross platform (X11, Windows, MacOS) toolkits are:
1. Qt (*too expensive, nice API, kinda bloated/slow)
2. Fltk (tight/fast, nice API, *limited power, ugly/no themes yet)... My current favorite but I have a lot of custom code to make it look good and add features I need.
3. Tk (*horrible API, not very flexible, can be slow)... I haven't used it much because the API sucks. Does this run under an X11 layer or native on MacOS?
4. Gtk (C based painful API or Gtkmm C++ bloat, kinda bloated but relatively fast on X11, slow on Windows, MacOS uses X11 layer, *buggy as hell)
The more interesting question is whether the very small subset of people who actually agree to participate are typical of the population as a whole.
From personal experience I'd say no. I'm willing to bet it's 35-54 year old females.
I always boot off a customized Knoppix CD that has A/V software (clamav) on it. There is another live-cd based distro that has the A/V stuff by default (possibly Morphix, I can't remember).
Then I can scan and fix all the filesystem in peace. Used in combination with the full NTFS driver you can repair just about any Windows machine.
Of course that won't allow you to run Norton or whatever but I've never had a problem with Clam AntiVirus. Sometimes it seems they get virus definitions before the commercial guys.
I wish there was a free Linux alternative to AdAware then I could run that off my live-cd as well.
I find it interesting that C++ is not a consideration. He mentions "moving away from C/C++" but probably 99% of GNOME is C, not C++. I wouldn't be so quick to group C and C++ together like that. A lot of pain in Gtk/GNOME development is due to the pure C interfaces. I don't see many KDE developers complaining that they need "higher level" languages. They already use one: C++.
C++ offers everything Java and C# do but it also can do so much more. I mean Java and C# have only recently gotten generics. In C++ it is beyond simple to old your old C API's (although C# is pretty simple also).
Some people complain that C++ is too complex, but as Java and C# mature they are becoming just as complex. Why not make it easy get the best performance out of your hardware? Why not use a language that already has tons of power and flexibility?
As for cross platform compatibility... Both C and C++ are extremely portable. It's the API's that are not always so easy. However, this is no different than Java or C#. At some level you're using a C or C++ subsystem that needs to be ported to each platform. Why not just use it in the first place?
Yep, especially compared to Terminal Services on Windows. That works at the widget level though.
Maybe we need a high performance network enabled version of Gtk.
Uh, except that it changes, moves, or could even be interactive given some sort of input/stimulus.
If the server he is using is located in the US, then maybe things are different.
Ding-ding
"The indictment alleged Mr Griffiths controlled access to a drop site for pirated software at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer network."
I've always wondered what the head of a huge whar-ez group looks like.
pimply faced punk? geek? criminal mafia d00d?
I'm with you. I believe in the "many simple devices" approach. Not only do they tend to do their job function better but they are more likely to actually work.
For example if you have everything on your laptop and the hard-drive gets dorked then you're SOL. Complicated equipment tends to break or become unusable for some reason. This is especially true of things that require massively complex software like general purpose operating systems. I mean, I can't count how many times Windows fudges itself or Linux+ReiserFS+GNOME+crash == screwed system (at least the desktop).
Simple, single purpose devices are awesome. They turn on fast, do their job well, and if they break you only lose that single purpose functionality until you can get another one.
I do wish they were all smaller though. Lots of bulky items is a huge PITA. Many very tiny devices is cool. This would be especially useful if all the devices followed a similar form factor. So you could stack them together like legos or take them apart as needed. Gimme!
C# does have some nice things that, say, Java lacks.
Add one more to your list:
In C# it is insanely easy to use external C-based libraries because you just have to "import" the function and away you go. This is much easier than the convoluted Java JNI stuff.
Depends on what version of C you mean.
ISO C99 allows variables to be declared on the fly much like C++.
Argh, I forgot to mention that although the Dell has a lower viewing angle (at 88 deg) it has better brightness and contrast specs which are probably more important than viewing angle.
I agree you with that LCD seems to reduce eye strain.
Another cheaper and excellent LCD is Dell's 20" UXGA LCD.
Around $1000 (it's on sale for as little as $750 sometimes) and gives you 1600x1200 resolution. Note that the more expensive Apple 20" is only 1600x1024 but it does have a wider angle view (why you need more than 90deg I don't know; can you see the monitor from behind?).
I'm not big on Apple stuff. You're paying extra for the Apple logo. Plus their Cinema display needs way too much desk space with its tricycle landing gear feet.
Will iDVD work with firewire DVD burners? It says you must have an Apple SuperDrive (pffft).
Why does iDVD require a 733 Mhz G4? Will it work on my ~400 Mhz G3?
That's what I was going to suggest for Windows.
DVDLab is one of the few apps that let me easily burn 480x480 mpeg streams. They work fine in most DVD players I've tried.
That's actually one of the few reasons I ever boot to Windows. I haven't found any easy to use Linux software. I hear dvdauthor works but until it's integrated into K3B with a menu builder or something then I'm out of luck.
I see a lot of posts in here about iDVD. I might give it a shot since I have a Mac sitting here that I hardly ever use. Thank goodness for firewire DVD burners.
Heh, your comment and the 10 year thing made me think back.
I remember the old pre-1.0 days. I was running a 386DX-40 and it took around 45 minutes to compile the kernel. Back then the kernel was extremely small and it still took that long. Ah, the good old days.
I'm still amazed at how fast the kernel compiles nowadays. Whenever I recompile, somewhere in the back of my head I still think it's going to take 45 minutes even though it only takes like 2 minutes.