CGDisplayCapture() is something else altogether. That said, I suspect you're right about BeginFullScreen(), which was the QT call I attempted to use earlier.
If it were possible, I would think that somebody would be able to offer just one example of a fullscreen application on the Mac.
That isn't a game or multimedia app, which have different needs/requirements.
The proposed plist for an Info.plist in the parent is not an apple plist, since you're using CFBundleVersion etc as an element, when in fact it's supposed to be a key in a dictionary object.
See my other reply.
Also, consider that an element's name acts as a key, and that nested elements are in effect dictionaries.
Furthermore, I would point out that the example given was produced using five seconds worth of thought. To satisfy your other criticisms, we could easily produce something like this:
And I wasn't suggesting that the type should be inferred, only that string should be a default. You have the option of explicitly stating that the type is string, whereas you are required to state the type in any other case.
OK, you make a couple of good points here. I now recall I became upset over this when using Darwin, and not Mac OS X. Darwin more or less forces you to go mucking about with the plist/XML things by hand (i.e., via emacs or whatever). If you do that in OS X, I'm sure you'll get burned somehow unless you really know what you're doing.
And I see I my abbreviated version of how the plist should look is incomplete; you're right, array and dict could be seen as being ambiguous here, so you will likely have to differentiate between the two. I'd offer that dict should be implied. So the example continues to work, however, if you were to require an array then you'd need to somehow indicate that.
It's my experience however that arrays are fairly rare, that almost all the action is with key/value pairs, which is what XML gives you out of the box.
I fail to see how that can be the case when you're introducing extraneous elements when there is no need... you can just as easily serialize to/deserialize from native XML.
How is this:
Does it not occur to you that the person who "designed" this DTD didn't know the first thing about XML?
Look at the collection elements! Array, dict and key! Why have these when they are implicit in XML!!! An array in XML is nothing more than a series of elements with the same name! A dict is nothing more than an element containing other elements! A key IS an element!
It's not a knock against the plist format per se, again, before XML we all had our own formats for representing hierarchical/aggregate data. It's the conversion to XML that's brain damaged. And now they are set to base all system configuration on this format. Shiver.
...you have a fixed idea of how an interface should behave...
Yes I do. That's my perogative, isn't it? The question is, is it Apple's perogative to actually work so as to deny me the ability to customize their environment so that it suits me.
I find a common, fixed position, always there menubar is a great feature.
A fullscreen option wouldn't take this away from you. Simply don't ever use fullscreen. You get what you want, I get what I want. What's the problem with that?
Apps that need fullscreen can go fullscreen...
Apps that Apple says need fullscreen can, yes. But what about apps that I say need it? Terminal.app for instance. Or Safari? Carbonized Emacs? Why should I be barred from having this feature if it doesn't otherwise impact on you?
Firefox could do what these above apps do if they really wanted...
I don't believe that is the case. I may have done something wrong, but when attempting to write a patch for Carbon Emacs that would allow it to use fullscreen mode much of the event handling became compromised, which isn't surprising considering that the necessary call(s) are part of the QuickTime API.
Firefox tends to follow GUI conventions on each of the platforms they support...
If that were the case, they wouldn't provide the Fullscreen option in the first place.
Their filenames all have a habit of flipflopping case.
So I'm stuck with a file system that is incompatible with every other Unix system on the planet because you choose to use poorly written software?
Treating these choices as "utterly asinine" and "engineers have a track record of making really stupid decisions" really just demonstrates your own point of view.
Whose point of view did you think I was trying to demonstate?
I really want to settle on OS X because a lot of what the parent says is correct. But what's holding me back is Apple. They will deliberately compromise functionality for the sake of supposed ease-of-use, actually going out of their way to see to it that I don't get to use my computer the way I want.
I'm not talking about things like the dock, which while horrible is capable of being disabled, or their insistence on one-button mice (which can be easily replaced.)
I'm talking about something like fullscreen mode, i.e., the ability to position a window such that its contents occupy the entire screen (no menu bar, no dock, no window titles, etc.) Apple will not let the user do this.
Now, you can chalk this up to making the computer easy-to-use I suppose, but then consider, Apple won't even let developers implement fullscreen functionality (unless it's media playback or game software.) Consider the very latest version of Firefox. Under Gnome, they can provide a fullscreen function which does exactly what the user would expect, position the window so that its contents occupy the fullscreen. They weren't able to do this on the Mac however, because Apple won't provide the API that allows an Aqua program to function in fullscreen mode.
What's grating about this isn't that the feature isn't available, it's that they won't let anybody implement the feature. Why? Because they think they know how you should use your computer better than you do. What arrogance!
I'm on a Mac now, but it really isn't by choice (hardware problems on my Linux box.) There is a lot to like about OS X. But I always feel like I'm fighting Apple when using it.
And it's not just fullscreen mode, there are any number of braindamaged decisions they've made which make the machine so much less usable than it could be. Case-insensitive file names. My God, how utterly asinine! Or their ongoing campaign to rework configuration files in/etc from a simple, clean syntax and move them over into/Library/Frameworks or wherever and use their absolutely retarded plist/XML format to represent the data instead. Take a look at this file format sometime, it's enough to make you want to reformat and put Gentoo on there instead!
The engineers have a track record of making really stupid decisions such that I'm afraid of adopting the OS outright. I'd be too fearful of what idiocy the next version will bring.
One has to wonder if these people are AOL users.
(although in fairness, Symbiot and Idiot are similarly spelled, it's not like they don't warn you up front.)
DirecTV doesn't have the same hardcore porn offerings though. Dish lets you order up porn like you would HBO or ShowTime. DirecTV makes you go with Playboy (not porn) or buy AlaCarte (big bucks.)
I'd wager that computer literacy amongst people who've tried Linux would be twice what it is today if when you typed help foobar bash would perform a man foobar if 'foobar' wasn't a builtin command.
And it'd probably be double that if you incorporated some kind of search facility too. Type in help disk space and get a hit on the df command, for instance.
Regulation is the worst possible scenario for OSS, regardless of any pretense towards open sourcing software. Regulation means bureaucrats, who wield great power, and who will be attractive places for people like Microsoft, who possess vast fortunes, to spend it.
For instance, imagine that they mandate open source, but then throw in a requirement that the programmer assume responsibility for its performance, or become liable in other ways. Then, the only people who would be able to participate would be companies with deep pockets. Like Microsoft.
Who are you replying to? The first post? Can't figure out how to use the Reply to This link?
And the Ian being referred to here is Ian Holm, who played Bilbo.
Dolt indeed.
No, that wouldn't work at all, would it.
Or would it? With the motion-capture technology they've so obviously perfected with Gollum, I could see Ian playing a younger Bilbo. And if memory serves, there aren't any other hobbits in the story, right? I mean, it's The Hobbit, not The Hobbits or Meet The Hobbits (or my favorite, Honey, Look What The Wurm Coughed Up.)
Other mappable relationship environments?
on
Guilty By Association
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
You mean like this?
Won't be long before/. is mined for this data, regardless of what the robots.txt file says about it.
Spending all our money on the moon, that is. The moon has military value. Mars doesn't.
If anything should serve as a base between here and Mars it should be ISS (after all it's a big reason we built the thing.) ISS should also be exploited as a place where returning astronauts (or samples) can be studied, safely, without risk to life on Earth (as low as that risk might be.)
It's hard to see how they can continue to maintain that they were just "licensing" IP from SCO. As the memo appears to be genuine, it seems to me that Redmond has a lot of explaining to do. Especially to the Justice Department; I mean, if this isn't predatory behavior then I don't know what is.
Slashdot Mirror
CGDisplayCapture() is something else altogether. That said, I suspect you're right about BeginFullScreen(), which was the QT call I attempted to use earlier. If it were possible, I would think that somebody would be able to offer just one example of a fullscreen application on the Mac. That isn't a game or multimedia app, which have different needs/requirements.
OK, you make a couple of good points here. I now recall I became upset over this when using Darwin, and not Mac OS X. Darwin more or less forces you to go mucking about with the plist/XML things by hand (i.e., via emacs or whatever). If you do that in OS X, I'm sure you'll get burned somehow unless you really know what you're doing.
And I see I my abbreviated version of how the plist should look is incomplete; you're right, array and dict could be seen as being ambiguous here, so you will likely have to differentiate between the two. I'd offer that dict should be implied. So the example continues to work, however, if you were to require an array then you'd need to somehow indicate that. It's my experience however that arrays are fairly rare, that almost all the action is with key/value pairs, which is what XML gives you out of the box.
Does it not occur to you that the person who "designed" this DTD didn't know the first thing about XML?
Look at the collection elements! Array, dict and key! Why have these when they are implicit in XML!!! An array in XML is nothing more than a series of elements with the same name! A dict is nothing more than an element containing other elements! A key IS an element!
It's not a knock against the plist format per se, again, before XML we all had our own formats for representing hierarchical/aggregate data. It's the conversion to XML that's brain damaged. And now they are set to base all system configuration on this format. Shiver.
I really want to settle on OS X because a lot of what the parent says is correct. But what's holding me back is Apple. They will deliberately compromise functionality for the sake of supposed ease-of-use, actually going out of their way to see to it that I don't get to use my computer the way I want.
I'm not talking about things like the dock, which while horrible is capable of being disabled, or their insistence on one-button mice (which can be easily replaced.)
I'm talking about something like fullscreen mode, i.e., the ability to position a window such that its contents occupy the entire screen (no menu bar, no dock, no window titles, etc.) Apple will not let the user do this.
Now, you can chalk this up to making the computer easy-to-use I suppose, but then consider, Apple won't even let developers implement fullscreen functionality (unless it's media playback or game software.) Consider the very latest version of Firefox. Under Gnome, they can provide a fullscreen function which does exactly what the user would expect, position the window so that its contents occupy the fullscreen. They weren't able to do this on the Mac however, because Apple won't provide the API that allows an Aqua program to function in fullscreen mode.
What's grating about this isn't that the feature isn't available, it's that they won't let anybody implement the feature. Why? Because they think they know how you should use your computer better than you do. What arrogance!
I'm on a Mac now, but it really isn't by choice (hardware problems on my Linux box.) There is a lot to like about OS X. But I always feel like I'm fighting Apple when using it.
And it's not just fullscreen mode, there are any number of braindamaged decisions they've made which make the machine so much less usable than it could be. Case-insensitive file names. My God, how utterly asinine! Or their ongoing campaign to rework configuration files in /etc from a simple, clean syntax and move them over into /Library/Frameworks or wherever and use their absolutely retarded plist/XML format to represent the data instead. Take a look at this file format sometime, it's enough to make you want to reformat and put Gentoo on there instead!
The engineers have a track record of making really stupid decisions such that I'm afraid of adopting the OS outright. I'd be too fearful of what idiocy the next version will bring.
At least with Linux, I have some control.
The human-controlled asteroid is now the most deadly weapon in the arsenal.
(don't bother submitting it as a story, I already tried.)
One has to wonder if these people are AOL users. (although in fairness, Symbiot and Idiot are similarly spelled, it's not like they don't warn you up front.)
DirecTV doesn't have the same hardcore porn offerings though. Dish lets you order up porn like you would HBO or ShowTime. DirecTV makes you go with Playboy (not porn) or buy AlaCarte (big bucks.)
I'd wager that computer literacy amongst people who've tried Linux would be twice what it is today if when you typed help foobar bash would perform a man foobar if 'foobar' wasn't a builtin command. And it'd probably be double that if you incorporated some kind of search facility too. Type in help disk space and get a hit on the df command, for instance.
Regulation is the worst possible scenario for OSS, regardless of any pretense towards open sourcing software. Regulation means bureaucrats, who wield great power, and who will be attractive places for people like Microsoft, who possess vast fortunes, to spend it. For instance, imagine that they mandate open source, but then throw in a requirement that the programmer assume responsibility for its performance, or become liable in other ways. Then, the only people who would be able to participate would be companies with deep pockets. Like Microsoft.
Who are you replying to? The first post? Can't figure out how to use the Reply to This link? And the Ian being referred to here is Ian Holm, who played Bilbo. Dolt indeed.
No, that wouldn't work at all, would it. Or would it? With the motion-capture technology they've so obviously perfected with Gollum, I could see Ian playing a younger Bilbo. And if memory serves, there aren't any other hobbits in the story, right? I mean, it's The Hobbit, not The Hobbits or Meet The Hobbits (or my favorite, Honey, Look What The Wurm Coughed Up.)
You mean like this? Won't be long before /. is mined for this data, regardless of what the robots.txt file says about it.
Spending all our money on the moon, that is. The moon has military value. Mars doesn't. If anything should serve as a base between here and Mars it should be ISS (after all it's a big reason we built the thing.) ISS should also be exploited as a place where returning astronauts (or samples) can be studied, safely, without risk to life on Earth (as low as that risk might be.)
It's hard to see how they can continue to maintain that they were just "licensing" IP from SCO. As the memo appears to be genuine, it seems to me that Redmond has a lot of explaining to do. Especially to the Justice Department; I mean, if this isn't predatory behavior then I don't know what is.