I install various Operating Systems (usually Linux of some sort) frequently (just for "fun").
I live for beta software.
But unlike most anyone reading this - Sci-Fi/Fantasy, Anime and Video Games bore the crap out of me.
What I'm saying is...
I could never imagine how anyone could have thought he was innocent. I guess I'm not quite geeky enough (even though I wrote this in my underwear at 4:20 AM).
Maybe I'm martian.
But I digress...
There has always been too much circumstantial evidence for anyone to conclude that he was anything but guilty.
Poor kids.
Now the question is... should it now be KillerFS, KillaFS or MurderFS?:)
They shipped the Linux/BSD version of Yahoo! Messenger years ago. It's not been updated since. I'm sure they are aware of Pidgin/Kopete users but that still doesn't change the fact that The Windows client is much more Yahoo-specific feature rich than using Pidgin or Kopete.
I personally don't IM much anyway. I find it mostly a distraction. But when I do, I miss what you can do in Windows that you can't do in Linux.
Despite my being a huge "fan" and user of Open Source software, I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion.
While OpenOoffice.org has many features that are more than enough for the average user (e.g. Me), Microsoft Office has more and many that many users can't do without.
And Microsoft Office 2007 (once you get used to the "ribbon") is even better than Office 2003, which is better than anything from OpenOffice.org.
Personally, I'm happy with OpenOffice.org in Linux but I'm also open-minded enough to know that it's inferior to Microsoft Office 2003/2007.
It's pretty much a copy of Microsoft Office 2000 (which is 9 years old).
You get what you pay for...
When was the last time you used Microsoft Office and what version was it?
The best example of them being open source? Most of their servers run on FreeBSD and that they give to the community back by providing free hosting to freebsd.org.
On the other hand, music.yahoo.com is very Windows-centric and most of the content pretty much shuts out non-Windows users.
They do have a Yahoo! Messenger client for Linux and FreeBSD but it's been ignored for years.
Their Windows client is much more sophisticated and feature rich (some would say bloated, but it does offer more Yahoo-specific functionally than you get with Pidgin or Kopete).
These are but a few examples.
I'd say they are #2 to Google in more ways than one.
With that said, I'm thrilled they won't be part of Microsoft (for now anyway).
Yahoo! was around long before MSN or Google. They are an Internet pioneer. I remember when they were just a Directory (no search function).
Apparently your idea of "left wing" is very similar to most people's idea of what apolitical (or at worst "centrist" or "moderate") is.
Besides, geeks (excluding me of course) tend to be more Libertarian than anything else. I really don't see./ linking to lots of "left wing" (or "right wing") sites as a rule.
OK, I can go with the DVD/CD but what does Linux have to do with Windows software? You need a better icon for "Open-Source". You could have used the FreeBSD logo. It would have made as much sense.:)
"Icedove" only exists because of the Debian Anal-Retentive um.. I mean
Free Software Guidelines.
Thanfully, more sane Linux distributions (e.g. Fedora,
openSUSE, Mandriva, Ubuntu...) still ship Mozilla products with the
names and logos people (especially newbies) have come to expect.
Yes, thankfully Windows Media Video and RealVideo have fallen out of favor. Flash is much more efficient means of delivery of streaming video (and audio).
Real or Windows Media formats are a PITA in Linux. Flash works beautifully.
Several years ago I hated flash, because 90% of the time I came across it it was advertising or unnecessary "splash" pages on corporate websites.
That is still around, but it's primary use in recent years has become for the delivery of streaming media.
I block Flash everywhere except for sites with Flash video/audio that I like (e.g. YouTube, CNN, TheFreeDictionary).
Does anybody actualy read the faqs for software they use? It explicitly says NOT to use filterset-g with ABP RIGHT IN THEIR OWN DOCUMENTATION - FILTERSET-G IS NOT OPTIMIZED FOR ABP! Just use Easylist+EasyElement and if your paranoid the ABP Tracking Filter and you have the best ad-blocking system on the planet.
Dude, lay off the caffeine or pop a Xanax or two.
He was talking about Adblock and not Adblock plus. They are two seperate applications.
Billy Jon is selectively ignoring problems. The problem in the bug we're talking about here will be ignored unless somebody else fixes what he, in essence, broke.
The fact that somebody should feel the need to do that is absurd. Why should sombody else clean up his "mess".
And and as far as nobdy helping, you may find this shocking, but the vast majority of us "users" are just that... USERS.
Heck, I've been a Linux user (on and off) since 1999 and it wasn't till 2004 that I learned "./configure && make && make install".
But I'm compling code that somebody else wrote. Writing code is beyond the scope of my knowledge. And the fact is most people have no interest in comping from code let alone writing it. So why should they be expected to do so?
I assumed for a long time that XScreensaver was not part of X (the GUI anyway) as it's a GTK2 app and the natiive X apps (i.e. the ones that come with X.org itself) are not.
And as I mentioned in my linked blog post, I did indeed remove gnome-screensaver and install xscreensaver. The problem is, I'm tech-savvy enough to do that. The "average" user GNOME strives for is not.
Perhaps you've misunderstood my main point here. The problem isn't so much for me as it is for GNOME in general. I know a workaround. But the point is, there should not have to be a workaround, period.
Up next: GNOME finds context menus to be "broken" and eliminates them. But if you want them, you can get them via "hacks".
Huh, did you actually read through the whole thread that you linked?
Did I read through it?
Yes, did you?;)
Did you see how many comments "angrykeyboarder" made throughout it.
I'd have made more, but they didn't like what I said. It got been banned from GNOME Bugzilla (well, as far as that email address was concerned anyway;>).
Now, in regard to your quote:
So what?
Billy Jon's defense does not change the fact that for ordinary users (the very ones GNOME wants to attract), screen savers are now broken.
I've used GNOME for years. I don't care what he says. They were not broken and worked just fine till he "fixed" them.
And by the looks of the comments in that thread (and in this one) I'm hardly alone in this opinion...
John Q. Gnuboy's new girlfriend who's been a Mac lover for years.
Johnny is trying to woo her into the world of "Free Software" and away from from "evil proprietary operating systems"
And since the FLOSS masses seem to think that GNOME is the most "Mac-like" FLOSS desktop out there, he suggests she try Ubuntu (even more "user friendly" - compared to say Gentoo for instance).
She gives it a shot and does find it easy to use (save for that annoying DVD thing, but GNOME/Ubuntu have no control over that).
So then she decides to look at the screen savers. She's always found them fun and runs them in OS X regularly.
She finds one in GNOME that she likes but (like most ordinary mortals) wants to change some of it's settings (you know, just like she did in Mac OS X).
She takes a look at the screen saver applet and can't seem to find the button to click to configure the screen saver she otherwise likes...
MacOS System 7 MacOS System 8 Mac OS 9 Mac OS X Windows 3.1 Windows NT 3.5 Windows 95 Windows NT 4.0 Windows 98 Windows 98SE Windows Me Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows Vista KDE Xfce & Guhh-nome [pre 2.15].
You know...
Go into a control panel/center/applet, make a few mouse clicks, move some sliders around and boom! It's done.
No "hacking" required.
Compared to the rest of what GNOME is doing, this screen saver thing is a giant step backwards.
Billy Jon needs to be replaced. Now if we could just find his boss....
Slashdot Mirror
Think of it this way. You (as a taxpayer) were saved the cost of the trial (and any possible appeals).
I can't believe the mods overlooked this one.
So here's my vote.:
+5, Insightful
This is why I don't fit in anywhere.
/. and Digg.
:)
I read (and post to)
I spend most of my time at my computer.
I install various Operating Systems (usually Linux of some sort) frequently (just for "fun").
I live for beta software.
But unlike most anyone reading this - Sci-Fi/Fantasy, Anime and Video Games bore the crap out of me.
What I'm saying is...
I could never imagine how anyone could have thought he was innocent. I guess I'm not quite geeky enough (even though I wrote this in my underwear at 4:20 AM).
Maybe I'm martian.
But I digress...
There has always been too much circumstantial evidence for anyone to conclude that he was anything but guilty.
Poor kids.
Now the question is... should it now be KillerFS, KillaFS or MurderFS?
They shipped the Linux/BSD version of Yahoo! Messenger years ago. It's not been updated since. I'm sure they are aware of Pidgin/Kopete users but that still doesn't change the fact that The Windows client is much more Yahoo-specific feature rich than using Pidgin or Kopete.
I personally don't IM much anyway. I find it mostly a distraction. But when I do, I miss what you can do in Windows that you can't do in Linux.
Despite my being a huge "fan" and user of Open Source software, I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion.
While OpenOoffice.org has many features that are more than enough for the average user (e.g. Me), Microsoft Office has more and many that many users can't do without.
And Microsoft Office 2007 (once you get used to the "ribbon") is even better than Office 2003, which is better than anything from OpenOffice.org.
Personally, I'm happy with OpenOffice.org in Linux but I'm also open-minded enough to know that it's inferior to Microsoft Office 2003/2007.
It's pretty much a copy of Microsoft Office 2000 (which is 9 years old).
You get what you pay for...
When was the last time you used Microsoft Office and what version was it?
Yahoo! is actually only partly open source.
The best example of them being open source? Most of their servers run on FreeBSD and that they give to the community back by providing free hosting to freebsd.org.
On the other hand, music.yahoo.com is very Windows-centric and most of the content pretty much shuts out non-Windows users.
They do have a Yahoo! Messenger client for Linux and FreeBSD but it's been ignored for years.
Their Windows client is much more sophisticated and feature rich (some would say bloated, but it does offer more Yahoo-specific functionally than you get with Pidgin or Kopete).
These are but a few examples.
I'd say they are #2 to Google in more ways than one.
With that said, I'm thrilled they won't be part of Microsoft (for now anyway).
Yahoo! was around long before MSN or Google. They are an Internet pioneer. I remember when they were just a Directory (no search function).
And despite the emphasis on search (by the media and Yahoo! itself) Yahoo! offers much much more than search). It's existence is one major reason AOL (in it's original incarnation) eventually failed.
I wish it were as least as popular as Mac. Things like playing DVDs would "just work".
On a serious note, I didn't wanted to open ksnapshot. That has to be the ugliest KDE theme I've ever come across.
Apparently the mod(s) disagreed. He has a +5 as of this writing.
Apparently your idea of "left wing" is very similar to most people's idea of what apolitical (or at worst "centrist" or "moderate") is.
./ linking to lots of "left wing" (or "right wing") sites as a rule.
Besides, geeks (excluding me of course) tend to be more Libertarian than anything else. I really don't see
With that said..
Ron Paul for the low ball!
Peace.
CNet has been promoting open source software for Windows for quite some time.
Open Source Windows programs have been offered on Download.com for the past several years.
Tux and a CD/DVD-ROM?
:)
OK, I can go with the DVD/CD but what does Linux have to do with Windows software? You need a better icon for "Open-Source". You could have used the FreeBSD logo. It would have made as much sense.
cWND is a notorious right-winger "news" site. They're about as right-wing as you can get. They make Fox News look ultra-liberal
./ linking to any site with such a huge political bias.
I'm troubled by
"Icedove" only exists because of the Debian Anal-Retentive um.. I mean Free Software Guidelines.
Thanfully, more sane Linux distributions (e.g. Fedora, openSUSE, Mandriva, Ubuntu...) still ship Mozilla products with the names and logos people (especially newbies) have come to expect.
Yes, thankfully Windows Media Video and RealVideo have fallen out of favor. Flash is much more efficient means of delivery of streaming video (and audio).
Real or Windows Media formats are a PITA in Linux. Flash works beautifully.
Several years ago I hated flash, because 90% of the time I came across it it was advertising or unnecessary "splash" pages on corporate websites.
That is still around, but it's primary use in recent years has become for the delivery of streaming media.
I block Flash everywhere except for sites with Flash video/audio that I like (e.g. YouTube, CNN, TheFreeDictionary).
Times have changed (thankfully)
Dude, lay off the caffeine or pop a Xanax or two.
He was talking about Adblock and not Adblock plus. They are two seperate applications.
Filterset G works just fine with Adblock.
How so?
I've got more free time than the average person. However, I tried out NoScript a year ago and ditched it within hours.
I don't have the patience for whitelisting. And frankly, I want JavaScript enabled on 95% of the sites I visit anyway (even ones I've never been to).
NoScript is for the truly anal-retentive surfers with more free time than even I have.
Billy Jon is selectively ignoring problems. The problem in the bug we're talking about here will be ignored unless somebody else fixes what he, in essence, broke.
The fact that somebody should feel the need to do that is absurd. Why should sombody else clean up his "mess".
And and as far as nobdy helping, you may find this shocking, but the vast majority of us "users" are just that... USERS.
Heck, I've been a Linux user (on and off) since 1999 and it wasn't till 2004 that I learned "./configure && make && make install".
But I'm compling code that somebody else wrote. Writing code is beyond the scope of my knowledge. And the fact is most people have no interest in comping from code let alone writing it. So why should they be expected to do so?
I assumed for a long time that XScreensaver was not part of X (the GUI anyway) as it's a GTK2 app and the natiive X apps (i.e. the ones that come with X.org itself) are not.
And as I mentioned in my linked blog post, I did indeed remove gnome-screensaver and install xscreensaver. The problem is, I'm tech-savvy enough to do that. The "average" user GNOME strives for is not.
Perhaps you've misunderstood my main point here. The problem isn't so much for me as it is for GNOME in general. I know a workaround. But the point is, there should not have to be a workaround, period.
Up next: GNOME finds context menus to be "broken" and eliminates them. But if you want them, you can get them via "hacks".
Did I read through it?
Yes, did you?
Did you see how many comments "angrykeyboarder" made throughout it.
I'd have made more, but they didn't like what I said. It got been banned from GNOME Bugzilla (well, as far as that email address was concerned anyway
Now, in regard to your quote:
So what?
Billy Jon's defense does not change the fact that for ordinary users (the very ones GNOME wants to attract), screen savers are now broken.
I've used GNOME for years. I don't care what he says. They were not broken and worked just fine till he "fixed" them.
And by the looks of the comments in that thread (and in this one) I'm hardly alone in this opinion...
Probably not.
How about this scenario.:
John Q. Gnuboy's new girlfriend who's been a Mac lover for years.
Johnny is trying to woo her into the world of "Free Software" and away from from "evil proprietary operating systems"
And since the FLOSS masses seem to think that GNOME is the most "Mac-like" FLOSS desktop out there, he suggests she try Ubuntu (even more "user friendly" - compared to say Gentoo for instance).
She gives it a shot and does find it easy to use (save for that annoying DVD thing, but GNOME/Ubuntu have no control over that).
So then she decides to look at the screen savers. She's always found them fun and runs them in OS X regularly.
She finds one in GNOME that she likes but (like most ordinary mortals) wants to change some of it's settings (you know, just like she did in Mac OS X).
She takes a look at the screen saver applet and can't seem to find the button to click to configure the screen saver she otherwise likes...
This is "usability"?
I'm using the one that applies to (among others):
MacOS System 7
MacOS System 8
Mac OS 9
Mac OS X
Windows 3.1
Windows NT 3.5
Windows 95
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 98
Windows 98SE
Windows Me
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Vista
KDE
Xfce
& Guhh-nome [pre 2.15].
You know...
Go into a control panel/center/applet, make a few mouse clicks, move some sliders around and boom! It's done.
No "hacking" required.
Compared to the rest of what GNOME is doing, this screen saver thing is a giant step backwards.
Billy Jon needs to be replaced. Now if we could just find his boss....
Yes.
GNOME supposedly bends over backwards to make itself simple enough that Grandma should be able to use it.
Hacking configuration files is by no means simple.
Before Billy Jon came along, screen savers in GNOME worked. Period.
Why "fix" something that wsan't broken? Billy's "fix" in fact broke it.
If GNOME wants to be [new] user-friendly, then they need to be consistant with that approach.
Windows and MacOS have had configurable screen savers for years (if not from day one).
Xfce has them. KDE has them (and has since day one). Why? Because it's what people are accustomed to. They are cool. They are fun.
Are they "serious"? Of course not.
Is the breakage a usabiliy issue? Well, it certainly is with the new users GNOME stives to aquire (as well as a lot of us old timers as well).
Hacking a screensaver to get it to work like it should is for geeks. GNOME doesn't "market" itself to geeks (anymore).
P.S. Read through the comments in the prviously mentioned bug. It is indeed a "usability" issue.
There is a lot I still like about GNOME. But there is even more that I like about KDE.
I use both.
So then...
That raises a question....
Am I using Kubuntu with GNOME or Ubuntu with KDE?
It's back now. :)