Totally. I've run into a few too many people who, when asked what format they were trying to save from their scanner, said "Word." And all they wanted to do was send the picture, not create a newsletter with a graphic in it. People don't know how to use the right tool for the right job, and it never occurs to them that ".doc" might not be the ideal format for standalone images.
I didn't say anything about open source. While I do think that open source is generally a Good Thing, it it is also a means to an end. One of its main roles is in promoting open standards. And open standards are what matters, because they let software of all types compete based on user-oriented features rather than a leapfrog game of who supports DHTML or tags or whatever other garbage they can come up with.
It's great to see a mainstream article taking this relatively well-rounded look at Firefox. There have been a million stories about how it has tabs and is free and secure, but that's just a part of the story.
Even if people don't care about any of the end-user features, it's important to support a more open Internet by using clients that at least make an attempt at conforming to standards. Many people may not care about this but there's no way they can care if they don't have the chance to hear about it.
At risk of being redundant, this really has nothing to do with Macs. He could have been using an "invulnerable Linux box" or something equally silly. Your anecdote is really a case of someone not understanding the issues surrounding wireless security, because the exact same thing would have happened with any OS and any access point. Using an unencrypted wireless network is like installing Ethernet ports on the outside of your facility and expecting passers by to not bother using them. Just plain silly and totally unrelated to which desktop OS you run.
Agreed. I once set up a Debian-based system to filter incoming and outgoing mail for an Exchange server (ick... wasn't my choice) and ClamAV / Amavis were wonderful. The developers deserve whatever support we can offer.
I use Safari a lot myself, but one possible reason for favoring Camino is good old fashioned principle. All else being equal, some people simply would rather use software that is totally open-source (even though Safari itself is partly open, thanks to KTML/WebKit.)
On the other hand, if Safari follows KDE's lead (Safari's still based off Konqueror/KDE code, I believe), and ports the Moz rendering engine for use with Safari, they could, in theory at least, also make Firefox's plugins work also...
The abundance of extensions for Firefox is in no small part thanks to the way the interface was handled (XUL.) Most of them would be useless in Safari even if it used Gecko, just like Camino can't currently use Firefox extensions either. To make them usable you'd have to adopt both the front-end and back-end of Firefox. And if you're going to do that, you might as well just use Firefox itself.
But why would Google be "warning" Apple? Spotlight is for searching data on your computer, not the Internet. And Google's desktop search app only exists on Windows. It's not as if the two are in competition when it comes to searching.
The question remains: Do you really want to know early that you have Alzheimer disease, as there is no effective treatment yet?
Interesting question. I doubt I'd really want to know, as much as it may sound like sticking my head in the sand. What good can it do for one's quality of life to spend their days worrying about a disease, if nothing can be done about it anyway? Maybe it would be good to be able to put your affairs in order, but besides that probably not.
May not be needed, but a nice gesture
on
Nero Burning for Linux
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Through all the posts saying this was silly and unnecessary, let's not forget that even if the software is non-Free and irrelevant (to many of us), it can also be seen as a step in the right direction.
Yes, *NIX fans already have k3b, X-CD-Roast, ECLiPt, and others. But on the flip side, this software is in the vein of what many people have been asking for -- mainstream recognition and support of Linux.
FWIW Netscape 8 is not a bundle of that stuff unless there's more to it that they haven't revealed yet. At this point, it's just Firefox with a new skin and the option to render pages with IE's engine.
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't really see how "Firefox" could be seen as less embarassing to say than "Mozilla" if you're worried about that kind of thing.;)
I agree, generally. Firefox is great for mainstream use. But personally I am put off by its relatively simplistic preferences, and lack of other features (cookie manager, for example) that I learned to love in the suite. I have no problem with standalone apps, but I would like to see more comprehensive preferences and the return of certain features that they never brought over from Mozilla's Navigator component.
I didn't write the parent to your post, but if I were stting up a machine for a novice to use, I'd probably go with Fedora. It may not be the flashiest system but all the apps have a consistent look thanks to the nice job they've done with theming everything. I know how to go find all the stuff I need and set up a system myself, but when it comes down to it I want a system that I can just install in half an hour, run some updates, and be done. Fedora does that nicely, and includes some decent little apps for setting your default browser, mail client, etc.
You didn't deserve to be modded down for that. However, I don't think the original poster intended to imply any connection between Mozilla's release and a supposed slowing of Firefox growth. I understand how could be interpreted that way, but I personally saw it more as someone combining two news items into one because they were both about Mozilla.org projects.
I could get round the bloatedness issue by compiling a version with stuff like the mail component left out...
You know, if you are a Windows or Linux user you can already do a custom install to leave most of that out if you so desire. You can leave out mail and newsgroups, the address book, and the IRC client. At that point you have just the browser and composer left. Maybe it's not quite as barebones as you'd like, but the point is that you can get most of the way there without doing your own recompile.
Slashdot Mirror
Totally. I've run into a few too many people who, when asked what format they were trying to save from their scanner, said "Word." And all they wanted to do was send the picture, not create a newsletter with a graphic in it. People don't know how to use the right tool for the right job, and it never occurs to them that ".doc" might not be the ideal format for standalone images.
That should have been "or blink tags"... the brackets managed to hide it in my final post.
I didn't say anything about open source. While I do think that open source is generally a Good Thing, it it is also a means to an end. One of its main roles is in promoting open standards. And open standards are what matters, because they let software of all types compete based on user-oriented features rather than a leapfrog game of who supports DHTML or tags or whatever other garbage they can come up with.
While I am not an Australian, I'd have to say "The Age" is a pretty mainstream publication. I see it linked all the time at Google News.
It's great to see a mainstream article taking this relatively well-rounded look at Firefox. There have been a million stories about how it has tabs and is free and secure, but that's just a part of the story.
Even if people don't care about any of the end-user features, it's important to support a more open Internet by using clients that at least make an attempt at conforming to standards. Many people may not care about this but there's no way they can care if they don't have the chance to hear about it.
At risk of being redundant, this really has nothing to do with Macs. He could have been using an "invulnerable Linux box" or something equally silly. Your anecdote is really a case of someone not understanding the issues surrounding wireless security, because the exact same thing would have happened with any OS and any access point. Using an unencrypted wireless network is like installing Ethernet ports on the outside of your facility and expecting passers by to not bother using them. Just plain silly and totally unrelated to which desktop OS you run.
Agreed. I once set up a Debian-based system to filter incoming and outgoing mail for an Exchange server (ick... wasn't my choice) and ClamAV / Amavis were wonderful. The developers deserve whatever support we can offer.
I use Safari a lot myself, but one possible reason for favoring Camino is good old fashioned principle. All else being equal, some people simply would rather use software that is totally open-source (even though Safari itself is partly open, thanks to KTML/WebKit.)
It's because saying "free as in XYZ" demonstrates what an excellent understanding the poster has of open-source licenses. Shut up and be impressed. :P
Note that they didn't say the Thunderbird project as a whole has been cancelled, just that the next version will be 1.0.2 instead of 1.0.1.
I should add that Apple *does* have Sherlock but that's been around for years...
But why would Google be "warning" Apple? Spotlight is for searching data on your computer, not the Internet. And Google's desktop search app only exists on Windows. It's not as if the two are in competition when it comes to searching.
Through all the posts saying this was silly and unnecessary, let's not forget that even if the software is non-Free and irrelevant (to many of us), it can also be seen as a step in the right direction.
Yes, *NIX fans already have k3b, X-CD-Roast, ECLiPt, and others. But on the flip side, this software is in the vein of what many people have been asking for -- mainstream recognition and support of Linux.
That's a rather amusing statement considering Steve Jobs said a while back that he wants Apple to be like Sony. I wonder who Sony wants to be like....
FWIW Netscape 8 is not a bundle of that stuff unless there's more to it that they haven't revealed yet. At this point, it's just Firefox with a new skin and the option to render pages with IE's engine.
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't really see how "Firefox" could be seen as less embarassing to say than "Mozilla" if you're worried about that kind of thing. ;)
I agree, generally. Firefox is great for mainstream use. But personally I am put off by its relatively simplistic preferences, and lack of other features (cookie manager, for example) that I learned to love in the suite. I have no problem with standalone apps, but I would like to see more comprehensive preferences and the return of certain features that they never brought over from Mozilla's Navigator component.
Maybe it's just me, but the phrase "bastardized internet explorer" seems rather redundant.
I didn't write the parent to your post, but if I were stting up a machine for a novice to use, I'd probably go with Fedora. It may not be the flashiest system but all the apps have a consistent look thanks to the nice job they've done with theming everything. I know how to go find all the stuff I need and set up a system myself, but when it comes down to it I want a system that I can just install in half an hour, run some updates, and be done. Fedora does that nicely, and includes some decent little apps for setting your default browser, mail client, etc.
While like the new theme a lot, I certainly can't argue with you there. Bluecurve is among the best themes I've used.
You didn't deserve to be modded down for that. However, I don't think the original poster intended to imply any connection between Mozilla's release and a supposed slowing of Firefox growth. I understand how could be interpreted that way, but I personally saw it more as someone combining two news items into one because they were both about Mozilla.org projects.