No, the developers of Gimp did not experience this horrible thing, the horrible Default Window Manger functionality of Microsoft Windows. A window manager with no Focus-on-Mouse-Over, and a taskbar that didn't properly ignore Gimp's dialog boxes.
Gimp was not created for Windows, it was created for X-Windows. That the port to win32 wasn't perfectly implemented to work with Windows' quirks is not related to the original quite decent design.
That's why they didn't turn around and say "Hey you know what? the behaviour of the windows in Gimp is painful. How come if I click a tool on the toolbar, I have to click back in the job window before I can use the tool? And why do they clutter up my taskbar like that?"
Because, they didn't have those problems. They had a decent Windowmanager, and a decent taskbar replacement.
Without the slightest doubt, Photoshop is *not* for normal users, either.. just look at the pocket-industry of photoshop educational videos, photoshop tricks, tips, manuals, and secret methods. Normal users don't need that stuff. They just crop photos, and print. Artists/Professionals/Hobbyists do need that stuff, 'cause Photoshop and the Gimp, like most decent applications are complex and *Gasp* not exactly like every other application.
since about half the time they are explaining _what_ RAM and Processors are, or showing off different websites... and never getting deep into the subject of technology.
Glossing over the details is not very geeky, so, it's more of an educational/entertainment show for the hordes of 'ordinary' people.
in my (rather picky) opinion, a tech show should assume the watcher has a basic knowledge of modern computers, or it wastes too much valuable time educatin' the peasents wot dat Tel-E-Vision thang is.
I'm sorry, but the "Wheel of Time" series is horrible. I think JK Rowlings is a mediocre writer... but Robert Jordan can't write a good book to save his life.
Length != Quality
And length is the only thing that the Wheel of Time series has in abundance. Well, that and far too much description of whatever clothing the character he's focusing on is wearing today.
Enough of this, I'm hardly the only one who hates his books.
Probably not, but it's pretty boring to hear them over and over again.. guess I'm getting too old.
On second thought, maybe it's because he's only "mis-spoken" a few times that there are so few jokes to be made.
Anyway, Internet-TV has been here, already.. for years. Big Whoop. Will it be better from the crappy CNN and horrible FOX and pitiful MSNBC or the neutered ABC & CBS networks?
Maybe, but I kinda doubt it. It'll probably be full of advertisements, infomercials and other useless pap within the year.. if not from the start.
One can only wish for investigative, Fact-based-journalism that doesn't mindlessly repeat whatever important-person-x says or yak-yak about celebrity-scandal #1,043,323.
Yeah, sure.. I can easily hop in my time-machine and go back to November, 17th, 1975 to buy Product X. After that, I'll go to September 3rd, 1984 to buy Product Z.
Yeah, it'll be cheaper, easier and more fun, too!
Oh, how about those things you can't purchase at all, eh? The ones that are so special that people refuse to even resell them? What are my options there? Rob someone? Give up in disgust? Or make a digital copy?
I'd like to think we'd all agree on making a copy... but I'm sure someone will say, "all the above", or "suicide" just for spite.
Why should we bother? It's obvious they don't care what WE (people who file bug reports, beg for features, or offer constructive criticism) want in Gnome, so there is no point to donate in hopes they will fix stuff that THEY don't care about.
They will just continue adding or removing whatever features they want... and there is no point hiring an outside developer.. the Gnome devs will just ignore any patches they don't feel "belong" in gnome, too.
The only options would be to fork it, or hire yourself a team of patchers. It's just ridiculous.:|
Re:Minimalism? Great!
on
Arch In Depth
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Since Archlinux doesn't work on the humble p-133 (i686 only, remember?) this point is moot.
I'm pretty sure the point she was making was that the scum of the world, A.K.A "the peasants" were being propped up by a kind of socialist hero.. and THAT was what really bothered her.
She didn't like the idea that people might bend or break the rules if their livelihoods depended on it.
She didn't like the idea that people who got rich might actually have to pay to help those pathetic dirty vermin climb out of the cesspit of poverty. She wanted each person to save themselves in a sort of anti-socialism, where no-one need feel sorry about his suffering neighbor and no-one need help them.
Those that are incapable of helping themselves and used others to support themselves (the unemployed relying on social aid, for instance) are seen as parasites on their "superiors".
Let's see.. Robin Hood steals from, among others. the Prince and travelers that go through his woods.
Wouldn't this amount to taxation?
Don't the rich get rich from taxing the peasants that live on their lands?
Aren't they stealing money from the poor.. and instead of using it for charity, they use it to buy themselves jewels and all that crap?
What really is theivery?
If you think, like Rand, that Robin Hood is actually an evil villain, who in the stories benefits the vast majority of the local population by returning their money (which was stolen by those heavy taxes that the rich so enjoy), then you are a believer in 'law' over 'kindness'.
Robin Hood is merely a social catalyst, a counter to the excessive taxation.
Robin Hood, unlike what Rand believed, is not the great evil who propped up the weak, helpless, worthless scum that unhabited the bottom of her dark fantasy.
He was a hero, an equalizer, and something the rich fear more than death -- the denial of their ability to squeeze every last drop of cash out of your hands and into theirs.
If a starving child hasn't produced any nice artwork or cleaned your floor, it's "needs" don't matter. It is a mediocre child, and not worthy of charity or kindness.
You are morally abligated to let that child die.
You are a good person, unlike those who would take pity on the suffering.
Slashdot Mirror
there's a native linux version of epsxe, so why are you running it under wine?
The first announcement (few hours ago) was that the satellite failed to get a signal, and I had given it up for dead.
Good thing it was easily fixed.
Now... for the results, please.
No, the developers of Gimp did not experience this horrible thing, the horrible Default Window Manger functionality of Microsoft Windows. A window manager with no Focus-on-Mouse-Over, and a taskbar that didn't properly ignore Gimp's dialog boxes.
Gimp was not created for Windows, it was created for X-Windows. That the port to win32 wasn't perfectly implemented to work with Windows' quirks is not related to the original quite decent design.
That's why they didn't turn around and say "Hey you know what? the behaviour of the windows in Gimp is painful. How come if I click a tool on the toolbar, I have to click back in the job window before I can use the tool? And why do they clutter up my taskbar like that?"
Because, they didn't have those problems. They had a decent Windowmanager, and a decent taskbar replacement.
Without the slightest doubt, Photoshop is *not* for normal users, either.. just look at the pocket-industry of photoshop educational videos, photoshop tricks, tips, manuals, and secret methods. Normal users don't need that stuff. They just crop photos, and print. Artists/Professionals/Hobbyists do need that stuff, 'cause Photoshop and the Gimp, like most decent applications are complex and *Gasp* not exactly like every other application.
since about half the time they are explaining _what_ RAM and Processors are, or showing off different websites... and never getting deep into the subject of technology.
Glossing over the details is not very geeky, so, it's more of an educational/entertainment show for the hordes of 'ordinary' people.
in my (rather picky) opinion, a tech show should assume the watcher has a basic knowledge of modern computers, or it wastes too much valuable time educatin' the peasents wot dat Tel-E-Vision thang is.
Yeah, the right-wingers sure did get upset at Clinton for trying to kill Osama.
Funny, that.
Agreed. Killing innocent people is perfectly justifiable in response to the killing of innocent people.
Now, we must stop at nothing to destroy all falafal stands located in the Western World [TM].
Once their network of tasty food services is disrupted, we'll only need to wait for them to starve.
Only then will we defeat the terrorists.
I'm sorry, but the "Wheel of Time" series is horrible. I think JK Rowlings is a mediocre writer... but Robert Jordan can't write a good book to save his life.
Length != Quality
And length is the only thing that the Wheel of Time series has in abundance. Well, that and far too much description of whatever clothing the character he's focusing on is wearing today.
Enough of this, I'm hardly the only one who hates his books.
Is there an apology or anything?
Didn't think so
i couldn't as you can't find them on P2P
Yes, you can.
Remember, if more than one person likes it, it's probably on a P2P network somewhere..
No, I'm not. The Democratic party is quite off my politics. As are most American political groups.
I trust AC's very little and those who label me as something I'm not, not at all.
Yes, it'd be funny if it was true... but it isn't, so it isn't.
Probably not, but it's pretty boring to hear them over and over again.. guess I'm getting too old.
On second thought, maybe it's because he's only "mis-spoken" a few times that there are so few jokes to be made.
Anyway, Internet-TV has been here, already.. for years. Big Whoop. Will it be better from the crappy CNN and horrible FOX and pitiful MSNBC or the neutered ABC & CBS networks?
Maybe, but I kinda doubt it. It'll probably be full of advertisements, infomercials and other useless pap within the year.. if not from the start.
One can only wish for investigative, Fact-based-journalism that doesn't mindlessly repeat whatever important-person-x says or yak-yak about celebrity-scandal #1,043,323.
Yeah, sure.. I can easily hop in my time-machine and go back to November, 17th, 1975 to buy Product X. After that, I'll go to September 3rd, 1984 to buy Product Z.
Yeah, it'll be cheaper, easier and more fun, too!
Oh, how about those things you can't purchase at all, eh? The ones that are so special that people refuse to even resell them? What are my options there? Rob someone? Give up in disgust? Or make a digital copy?
I'd like to think we'd all agree on making a copy... but I'm sure someone will say, "all the above", or "suicide" just for spite.
BitMover removed it and BitMover has complete control over it, therefore it's BitMover's fault bitkeeper is now non-free.
That Larry blames OSDL for his decision doesn't take away from the fact that it was his decision.
You blame the driver, not the tree.
Or, in this case, you blame little Joe for taking home his fancy wooden ball just because John is carving one that looks similar to it.
for April fools jokes...
Mount their system partition read-only. Every decent operating system has had this trusty security feature for years.
Why should we bother? It's obvious they don't care what WE (people who file bug reports, beg for features, or offer constructive criticism) want in Gnome, so there is no point to donate in hopes they will fix stuff that THEY don't care about.
:|
They will just continue adding or removing whatever features they want... and there is no point hiring an outside developer.. the Gnome devs will just ignore any patches they don't feel "belong" in gnome, too.
The only options would be to fork it, or hire yourself a team of patchers. It's just ridiculous.
Since Archlinux doesn't work on the humble p-133 (i686 only, remember?) this point is moot.
I'm pretty sure the point she was making was that the scum of the world, A.K.A "the peasants" were being propped up by a kind of socialist hero.. and THAT was what really bothered her.
She didn't like the idea that people might bend or break the rules if their livelihoods depended on it.
She didn't like the idea that people who got rich might actually have to pay to help those pathetic dirty vermin climb out of the cesspit of poverty. She wanted each person to save themselves in a sort of anti-socialism, where no-one need feel sorry about his suffering neighbor and no-one need help them.
Those that are incapable of helping themselves and used others to support themselves (the unemployed relying on social aid, for instance) are seen as parasites on their "superiors".
Let's see.. Robin Hood steals from, among others. the Prince and travelers that go through his woods.
Wouldn't this amount to taxation?
Don't the rich get rich from taxing the peasants that live on their lands?
Aren't they stealing money from the poor.. and instead of using it for charity, they use it to buy themselves jewels and all that crap?
What really is theivery?
If you think, like Rand, that Robin Hood is actually an evil villain, who in the stories benefits the vast majority of the local population by returning their money (which was stolen by those heavy taxes that the rich so enjoy), then you are a believer in 'law' over 'kindness'.
Robin Hood is merely a social catalyst, a counter to the excessive taxation.
Robin Hood, unlike what Rand believed, is not the great evil who propped up the weak, helpless, worthless scum that unhabited the bottom of her dark fantasy.
He was a hero, an equalizer, and something the rich fear more than death -- the denial of their ability to squeeze every last drop of cash out of your hands and into theirs.
If a starving child hasn't produced any nice artwork or cleaned your floor, it's "needs" don't matter. It is a mediocre child, and not worthy of charity or kindness.
You are morally abligated to let that child die.
You are a good person, unlike those who would take pity on the suffering.
Yes, this disturbs you, because you are afraid of death. So, you must create (or borrow) a fantasy -- an explanation to regain a measure of peace.
I and many others don't need such a emotional support structure.
Snow Crash
"the will of the people"
sounds nice, but means nothing these days.
"the will of congress"
will do nicely, thanks.
try miniT and session saver
many slashdotters are.
(not me, of course)