That's probably because it frickin is. What do you want, a PC that looks like a pot plant? A rhubarb-shaped car?
Why does it have to look like a machine? Technology is supposed to integrate well with its environment to be more comfortable, especially in your home environment. For example, why do people prefer an air-conditioning system that is integrated well enough into the building so that they don't have to see the large, ugly box?
The nanode already proves that something better is possible, so is it asked too much? I don't think so.
Well, I would not have any objections if there were one button. Though, of course, nobody on slashdot ever needs that one;-).
I think your going to have to build your own.
I am hoping that one day, finally, maybe, there will be more boxes like the nanode.
Maby if your good with vanear you can make one look like a pice of furnature.
I already tried this (seriously). I ran into several problems though, most of them because I was too dumb to build everything properly. But also, the monitor's display quality dropped a lot, apparently because wood does not shield good enough. I do not recommend anyone to try this.
Is there/any/ well designed PC out there? The only great box I have ever seen is this one: http://mini-itx.com/news/images/story0334.jpg, which is built for the less-powerful mini-itx board only. I wish there were more boxes not looking so... PC. Hush (http://www.hush-technologies.com/start.html) is getting close, but not close enough... this is still look kind of cheap. Any hints?
Does gna.org (or gforge.org for that matter) support GNU Arch?
Gna! is based on CVS only. I don't know about gforge though.
Gna is practivally a debugified mirror of savannah.gnu.org. The administrators of Gna! are mostly from savannah, so a nice mail should be enough and they will migrate your project's CVS tree. (They did this for my projects, at least)
The basic reason for writing open-source is for the bragging rights.
Though this is probably parly true, for many people the reasons are different.
I have started writing free software because after all the software I got out of the community, I wanted to give something back.
For many the reason is simply to improve there own programming skills. (In fact, that is the reason for most programmers I worked with).
Besides, I disagree that there is too little effort put into GUI programming. I mean, look at the GNOME project, for example. That's what the whole thing is about - providing a clean, consistent and simple user interface. There are enormous efforts put into this area. Making a project compatible with the GNOME policies is consuming almost half of the time in every GNOME project. And the user interfaces of GNOME (and maybe KDE) are already better than on Windows systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Err... wait, it is not. This thing is my dream case! :-)
Wow, I /love/ it.
Thanks, guy!
Indeed, /very/ neat! Unfortunately they have only mini-itx cases either :(.
;-) Nice. (but no, not exactly my style ;) )
That's probably because it frickin is. What do you want, a PC that looks like a pot plant? A rhubarb-shaped car?
Why does it have to look like a machine? Technology is supposed to integrate well with its environment to be more comfortable, especially in your home environment. For example, why do people prefer an air-conditioning system that is integrated well enough into the building so that they don't have to see the large, ugly box?
The nanode already proves that something better is possible, so is it asked too much? I don't think so.
So it can't be a box with buttons.
;-).
Well, I would not have any objections if there were one button. Though, of course, nobody on slashdot ever needs that one
I think your going to have to build your own.
I am hoping that one day, finally, maybe, there will be more boxes like the nanode.
Maby if your good with vanear you can make one look like a pice of furnature.
I already tried this (seriously). I ran into several problems though, most of them because I was too dumb to build everything properly. But also, the monitor's display quality dropped a lot, apparently because wood does not shield good enough. I do not recommend anyone to try this.
Antec cases aren't that bad
Ah, they still look like a machine.
What exactly would you envision as your ideal case, aesthetically?
That nanode thingy is actually pretty cool. It is a mini-itx box though.
Is there /any/ well designed PC out there? The only great box I have ever seen is this one: http://mini-itx.com/news/images/story0334.jpg, which is built for the less-powerful mini-itx board only.
I wish there were more boxes not looking so... PC. Hush (http://www.hush-technologies.com/start.html) is getting close, but not close enough... this is still look kind of cheap. Any hints?
Does gna.org (or gforge.org for that matter) support GNU Arch?
Gna! is based on CVS only. I don't know about gforge though.
Gna is practivally a debugified mirror of savannah.gnu.org. The administrators of Gna! are mostly from savannah, so a nice mail should be enough and they will migrate your project's CVS tree. (They did this for my projects, at least)
The basic reason for writing open-source is for the bragging rights.
Though this is probably parly true, for many people the reasons are different. I have started writing free software because after all the software I got out of the community, I wanted to give something back.
For many the reason is simply to improve there own programming skills. (In fact, that is the reason for most programmers I worked with).
Besides, I disagree that there is too little effort put into GUI programming. I mean, look at the GNOME project, for example. That's what the whole thing is about - providing a clean, consistent and simple user interface. There are enormous efforts put into this area. Making a project compatible with the GNOME policies is consuming almost half of the time in every GNOME project. And the user interfaces of GNOME (and maybe KDE) are already better than on Windows systems.