I've always had a problem with the idea of competing to get into desktop usage. Not in that we shouldn't be able to, but that the goal seems to be to compete with microsoft by copying them. Both parts of that seem wrong. This article http://news.google.com/url?ntc=04SL0&q=http://www. onlamp.com/pub/wlg/3971 talks about some of the ideas I've been thinking I think there should be a new definition of desktop, and in true Linux fashion, it should support multiple definitions! one might be the way MS defines it, but everyone (including MS, look at how they are handling Longhorn)) don't agree the current one is very good. Linux and X-win is so flexible, I hate seeing projects like gnone and KDE shorting out all that flexibility to force every app to work with thier definition. Me, I think of a desktop like a real desk: it's always there and I put things on it to use them. I don't need a desktop to use them though...In terms of apps, I'd like to be able to put a document on the desktop to work on it, but not have the document tied to to the dektop/PC I was using to work on it. X-win allows for this kind of idea already, but there's just no apps/setupsd to take advanatage of it. KDE and gnome are fine, but they assume that every app is only running under thier framework and thier framework can't do it all.
I'm now convinced. aliens are messing with our sun to take pot shots at us. someone get hubble to start looking for them floating near the sun!
the end is nigh....time to stock up on duct tape and beef jerky...
when they first started talking about these, the idea was to have a laptop docking staion: it would have the keyboard, batter, and screen of a laptop that the core would plu into
Here's an idea: every cash register I see prints two reciepts. One goes to the customer, one stays in the machine and is just viewable through a little window. How hard would it be to add that to the voting machine? Just have it print a reciept that the nmachine keeps. Have it locked under a glass shield so the voter can verify before leaving the booth. At the end of the day, collect the receipts and archiv them for recounts, etc. Wouldn't this work? Am I missing something?
I've always wanted to replace the normal RC signal with WiFi. I can picture the robot battle craze moving to a standardized battle field where the people battling sit down at a standardized terminal and control RC mechs to fight with. using WiFi, you could build your own mechs as long as they could be controlled via WiFi. the battle field just has a wireless cloud over it. 'course, there's always the cool factor of having to log into and secure your mech before battle:)
This isn't a replacement or even an add-on. It uses stuff we already have to offer more to the internet. For all those who don't see the point and think that using numbers is a step backwards, think about this: the "old-fashioned" method of using numbers has worked well for years with the telephone. people already have the habit to use phone numbers. those habits can now be used for the internet. And here's the thing I like: all companies have to do is register their existing phone numbers in this and instantly everyone in the country has an intenet directory in thier house. It's called a phone book. and there's even one that sorts by category!:) Also, everything that now stores phone numbers can be used for internet too (address books, bussiness cards, etc.) Not to mention you no longer need a full keybord to use a web browser (think web-tv's, net appliances, etc.)
How about a dual mode device that sits between cell towers and 802.11 phones? Use the cell network as the backbone for node-to-node communication and use 802.11 for the "last mile" kind of situation. Then we can finally have a nation-wide wireless data cloud by just putting up those devices.
Instead of replacing cell phones, somethign like that could change the role of the cell network...and make use of the infrastructure that's already there and waiting...hmm...
Everytime I see stuff about VoIP, I get the same question pop up that I get about any service which lives on the internet. Why aren't companies offering what they do best, instead of offering a huge package that they barely know and that spans a bunch of different laws/technologies? This fits in with VoIP in that a company could offer just the service to connect VoIP to POTS. Then, it could be regulated and the rest of the pieces wouldn't have to worry about it. And I could choose to pay for that service IF I NEED IT.
Of course I've been confused for the same reason about ISP's from the beginning, (I always wanted to be able to buy my connection separate from my email if that was what I needed) so maybe I've just skewed in how I think in general...packages are nice, but I like choices on the pieces
Slashdot Mirror
I've always had a problem with the idea of competing to get into desktop usage. Not in that we shouldn't be able to, but that the goal seems to be to compete with microsoft by copying them. Both parts of that seem wrong. This article http://news.google.com/url?ntc=04SL0&q=http://www. onlamp.com/pub/wlg/3971 talks about some of the ideas I've been thinking
I think there should be a new definition of desktop, and in true Linux fashion, it should support multiple definitions! one might be the way MS defines it, but everyone (including MS, look at how they are handling Longhorn)) don't agree the current one is very good. Linux and X-win is so flexible, I hate seeing projects like gnone and KDE shorting out all that flexibility to force every app to work with thier definition.
Me, I think of a desktop like a real desk: it's always there and I put things on it to use them. I don't need a desktop to use them though...In terms of apps, I'd like to be able to put a document on the desktop to work on it, but not have the document tied to to the dektop/PC I was using to work on it. X-win allows for this kind of idea already, but there's just no apps/setupsd to take advanatage of it. KDE and gnome are fine, but they assume that every app is only running under thier framework and thier framework can't do it all.
OK, done with the rant....for now....
I'm now convinced. aliens are messing with our sun to take pot shots at us. someone get hubble to start looking for them floating near the sun! the end is nigh....time to stock up on duct tape and beef jerky...
when they first started talking about these, the idea was to have a laptop docking staion: it would have the keyboard, batter, and screen of a laptop that the core would plu into
Here's an idea: every cash register I see prints two reciepts. One goes to the customer, one stays in the machine and is just viewable through a little window. How hard would it be to add that to the voting machine? Just have it print a reciept that the nmachine keeps. Have it locked under a glass shield so the voter can verify before leaving the booth. At the end of the day, collect the receipts and archiv them for recounts, etc. Wouldn't this work? Am I missing something?
I've always wanted to replace the normal RC signal with WiFi. I can picture the robot battle craze moving to a standardized battle field where the people battling sit down at a standardized terminal and control RC mechs to fight with. using WiFi, you could build your own mechs as long as they could be controlled via WiFi. the battle field just has a wireless cloud over it. 'course, there's always the cool factor of having to log into and secure your mech before battle :)
This isn't a replacement or even an add-on. It uses stuff we already have to offer more to the internet. For all those who don't see the point and think that using numbers is a step backwards, think about this: the "old-fashioned" method of using numbers has worked well for years with the telephone. people already have the habit to use phone numbers. those habits can now be used for the internet. And here's the thing I like: all companies have to do is register their existing phone numbers in this and instantly everyone in the country has an intenet directory in thier house. It's called a phone book. and there's even one that sorts by category! :)
Also, everything that now stores phone numbers can be used for internet too (address books, bussiness cards, etc.) Not to mention you no longer need a full keybord to use a web browser (think web-tv's, net appliances, etc.)
How about a dual mode device that sits between cell towers and 802.11 phones? Use the cell network as the backbone for node-to-node communication and use 802.11 for the "last mile" kind of situation. Then we can finally have a nation-wide wireless data cloud by just putting up those devices.
Instead of replacing cell phones, somethign like that could change the role of the cell network...and make use of the infrastructure that's already there and waiting...hmm...
Everytime I see stuff about VoIP, I get the same question pop up that I get about any service which lives on the internet. Why aren't companies offering what they do best, instead of offering a huge package that they barely know and that spans a bunch of different laws/technologies? This fits in with VoIP in that a company could offer just the service to connect VoIP to POTS. Then, it could be regulated and the rest of the pieces wouldn't have to worry about it. And I could choose to pay for that service IF I NEED IT.
Of course I've been confused for the same reason about ISP's from the beginning, (I always wanted to be able to buy my connection separate from my email if that was what I needed) so maybe I've just skewed in how I think in general...packages are nice, but I like choices on the pieces