I'm not an expert on what makes a haiku, or poetic forms in general, but I'm pretty sure just hitting return every 5 or 7 syllables doesn't cut it. This guy's hardly the creative genius some are claiming.
I know Windows is an absurdly generic name for a windows based operating system and I doubt there will be any confusion, but you have to admit, Lindows would be a bizarre name for an operating system if we weren't so familiar with the Windows OS.
Watch my karma get mauled for not completely siding with Linux... : )
Most posts I have so far read in this discussion somewhere include "I use Linux as a server...". Well, I don't know if everyone knew but there are a lot of people who don't run a server on their computers.
IMHO, Linux will never overtake another OS as a desktop operating system. You can point me to all the new stuff happening with Linux, and all the fgures for it's growth, but none of this is in the consumer market. When you see articles about Linux catching up with Microsoft, they are talking about NT, not 95, 98, etc.
I know geeks who use linux cant imagine such people, but you dont understand what normal people are like. They cant click the correct mouse button even if you are shouting directions. If you say "Goto File/Print" they wont even know you're talking about menus. In my office I'm sometimes called over to people's desks because they're in the wrong directory and they dont know what's going on. And you expect these people to use an OS where you often have to compile something to install it?
Mock if you like, but in respect of Windows and Mac OS, I am an experienced/power user. I program, etc, blah blah. I installed linux myself, and whenever I try to install a program my computer falls over and catches fire. I just dont have time to spend fixing everything that was wrong with it right from the install (mouse drivers, graphics card drivers).
But I've gone off into a ramble. The point is, linux is not simple enough for consumers. Yes, yes, I have used GUIs for it, etc. They're crap. They look like they're held on with sticky tape. Okay, stop ranting and finisht the post.
Fair enough, but the average home user really doesnt often use complicated keystroke combinations.
I forget issues such as command-clicking for menus and monitor height, as I invested in one of the numerous iMac stands availabe, and I have a small third party extension called FinderPop which duplicates the click and hold menus, as you mentioned are implemented in Internet Explorer.
It truly is unbelievable the amount people who have never used an iMac know about the mouse and the keyboard. They can tell, just by looking at an advert on TV that using it will give you Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. And that because its small it is impossible for large handed people to use. And because it's round its impossible to know which way it's pointing. And obviously, as there's only one button you can only do half the things in MacOS that you can do in Windows or Unix.
Well, here's the thing, see; because there's only one mouse button, they dont build anything into the OS that needs two buttons. Clever, huh?
I also havent gone down with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome yet. The small mouse is actually very comfortable to use with large hands - other mice try and fit your palm when they're far too small, but with the iMac mouse you just rest your fingers on it.
Now grabbing it the wrong way, come on. Are you guys complete morons? 1. It has a button on the front 2. It has a long wire coming out the front 3. It has a groove in the button for your fingers to find if you're really stuck 4. You leave it pointing the right way when you let go of it anyway.
Opening a control panel and altering settings is no way to alter settings? How d'you figure?
Also wanted to point out that option-click-click-and-hold would navigate through a file systems using spring-loaded folders, and once you'd finished would close the original window. It isnt a replacement for a right or middle button function, and isnt even possible to do under Windows or Unix.
Steve Jobs did not claim the G3 processor was the fastest available, only that it could run up to twice as fast as a PII of equivalent clock speed. That's still a lot of ifs to add to the end of his sentence, but lets at least be accurate. : )
What I would really be interested to see, should this turn out to be true, is if Apple would continue with their strategy of one model for consumers and one model for professionals.
If so, apart from whatever innovation they put into the machines, it could mean dirt cheap palmtop computing for the masses.
It has often been speculated that Apple would bundle an Apple branded handheld with iMacs and iBooks, and possible with Powerbooks and G4s too. If this does all turn out to be true I can't wait to see that happen.
Sorry if I'm joining in with a few of the "Wha?" posts, but you can download the source for Apple's Quicktime 4 server (possibly also known as the Darwin streaming server) for Mac, Windows and Unix from Apple's website. They give away the server and client software free. I hardly see this as 'controlling' the market.
Personally I've never had trouble with women, and therefore having never got into this kind of conversation, I would very much like someone to please tell me that guys who have trouble dont really talk like this!
Fortunately, I live in the UK, where there are laws against this sort of thing. Apple legally has to send me the stuff I ordered, and at the price I ordered it for. So all smiles here. : )
Re:4 GFLOPs, 3x Faster than A PIII, etc - selectiv
on
Apple announces the G4
·
· Score: 1
"1394 --> fire wire 802.11-->airport"
Well seeing as iMacs dont have FireWire or AirPort, I really dont see how that's relevant. Oh yeah, I'm sure first time computer buyers would be a lot less confused if they were calling then IEEE 1394 and IEEE 802.11. I also hear they like to talk in binary, and make their own processors.
But does anyone know why only whining Wintel advocates who used a Mac LCII in pre-school and think they're an expert ever post to Macintosh discussions?
Yeah, cos normally companies try and make their products sound bad, right? They at least have the courtesy to base their boasting (and I admit it is probably a bit of an exaggeration) on fact, unlike certain processors which make the internet go faster.:) But apart from the tests they said they based on Intel's test, on the QuickTime Webcast they did some demonstrations live with a 500MHz G4 and a 600MH Pentium III, including 2 tests on 3D rendering, and one with Photoshop filters.
I would be interested to know how much the rotoxane molecules change shape when altered electrically, and whether this shape change could be used as a mechanical funtion.
For example, could a few molecules be strung together into a leg, or a turning mechanism for wheels?
The applications for this type of IC on the back of a rotoxane limbed nanobot would be unlimited, from fixing computer parts in satellites, space stations, etc, to exploring Mars, the deep sea, your colon.:)
This reminds me of a time I was in San Fransisco, in an Apple Store. This woman came in while I was looking at software, and when asked if she needed help, insisted on buying a computer that would still be working in 20 years time.
The assistant tried and tried to explain to her that it would be hideousl slow, and there would be no software, but at the end of every sentence, the inevitable reply would come in that southern drawl.. "I just want a computer that'll work in 20 years time.."
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not an expert on what makes a haiku, or poetic forms in general, but I'm pretty sure just hitting return every 5 or 7 syllables doesn't cut it. This guy's hardly the creative genius some are claiming.
I know Windows is an absurdly generic name for a windows based operating system and I doubt there will be any confusion, but you have to admit, Lindows would be a bizarre name for an operating system if we weren't so familiar with the Windows OS.
Watch my karma get mauled for not completely siding with Linux... : )
I might just be being silly here, but what happens when this megawatt laser hits the oil? Does it involve flaming death?
Most posts I have so far read in this discussion somewhere include "I use Linux as a server...". Well, I don't know if everyone knew but there are a lot of people who don't run a server on their computers.
IMHO, Linux will never overtake another OS as a desktop operating system. You can point me to all the new stuff happening with Linux, and all the fgures for it's growth, but none of this is in the consumer market. When you see articles about Linux catching up with Microsoft, they are talking about NT, not 95, 98, etc.
I know geeks who use linux cant imagine such people, but you dont understand what normal people are like. They cant click the correct mouse button even if you are shouting directions. If you say "Goto File/Print" they wont even know you're talking about menus. In my office I'm sometimes called over to people's desks because they're in the wrong directory and they dont know what's going on. And you expect these people to use an OS where you often have to compile something to install it?
Mock if you like, but in respect of Windows and Mac OS, I am an experienced/power user. I program, etc, blah blah. I installed linux myself, and whenever I try to install a program my computer falls over and catches fire. I just dont have time to spend fixing everything that was wrong with it right from the install (mouse drivers, graphics card drivers).
But I've gone off into a ramble. The point is, linux is not simple enough for consumers. Yes, yes, I have used GUIs for it, etc. They're crap. They look like they're held on with sticky tape. Okay, stop ranting and finisht the post.
Fair enough, but the average home user really doesnt often use complicated keystroke combinations.
I forget issues such as command-clicking for menus and monitor height, as I invested in one of the numerous iMac stands availabe, and I have a small third party extension called FinderPop which duplicates the click and hold menus, as you mentioned are implemented in Internet Explorer.
It truly is unbelievable the amount people who have never used an iMac know about the mouse and the keyboard. They can tell, just by looking at an advert on TV that using it will give you Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. And that because its small it is impossible for large handed people to use. And because it's round its impossible to know which way it's pointing. And obviously, as there's only one button you can only do half the things in MacOS that you can do in Windows or Unix.
Well, here's the thing, see; because there's only one mouse button, they dont build anything into the OS that needs two buttons. Clever, huh?
I also havent gone down with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome yet. The small mouse is actually very comfortable to use with large hands - other mice try and fit your palm when they're far too small, but with the iMac mouse you just rest your fingers on it.
Now grabbing it the wrong way, come on. Are you guys complete morons?
1. It has a button on the front
2. It has a long wire coming out the front
3. It has a groove in the button for your fingers to find if you're really stuck
4. You leave it pointing the right way when you let go of it anyway.
Opening a control panel and altering settings is no way to alter settings? How d'you figure?
Also wanted to point out that option-click-click-and-hold would navigate through a file systems using spring-loaded folders, and once you'd finished would close the original window. It isnt a replacement for a right or middle button function, and isnt even possible to do under Windows or Unix.
Steve Jobs did not claim the G3 processor was the fastest available, only that it could run up to twice as fast as a PII of equivalent clock speed. That's still a lot of ifs to add to the end of his sentence, but lets at least be accurate. : )
The difference would be the specs. Duh. Fast professional ones, cheaper consumer ones.
What I would really be interested to see, should this turn out to be true, is if Apple would continue with their strategy of one model for consumers and one model for professionals.
If so, apart from whatever innovation they put into the machines, it could mean dirt cheap palmtop computing for the masses.
It has often been speculated that Apple would bundle an Apple branded handheld with iMacs and iBooks, and possible with Powerbooks and G4s too. If this does all turn out to be true I can't wait to see that happen.
Sorry if I'm joining in with a few of the "Wha?" posts, but you can download the source for Apple's Quicktime 4 server (possibly also known as the Darwin streaming server) for Mac, Windows and Unix from Apple's website. They give away the server and client software free. I hardly see this as 'controlling' the market.
Personally I've never had trouble with women, and therefore having never got into this kind of conversation, I would very much like someone to please tell me that guys who have trouble dont really talk like this!
What a whole crappy state of affairs.
Fortunately, I live in the UK, where there are laws against this sort of thing. Apple legally has to send me the stuff I ordered, and at the price I ordered it for. So all smiles here. : )
"1394 --> fire wire 802.11-->airport"
Well seeing as iMacs dont have FireWire or AirPort, I really dont see how that's relevant. Oh yeah, I'm sure first time computer buyers would be a lot less confused if they were calling then IEEE 1394 and IEEE 802.11. I also hear they like to talk in binary, and make their own processors.
But does anyone know why only whining Wintel advocates who used a Mac LCII in pre-school and think they're an expert ever post to Macintosh discussions?
Yeah, cos normally companies try and make their products sound bad, right? They at least have the courtesy to base their boasting (and I admit it is probably a bit of an exaggeration) on fact, unlike certain processors which make the internet go faster. :) But apart from the tests they said they based on Intel's test, on the QuickTime Webcast they did some demonstrations live with a 500MHz G4 and a 600MH Pentium III, including 2 tests on 3D rendering, and one with Photoshop filters.
I would be interested to know how much the rotoxane molecules change shape when altered electrically, and whether this shape change could be used as a mechanical funtion.
:)
For example, could a few molecules be strung together into a leg, or a turning mechanism for wheels?
The applications for this type of IC on the back of a rotoxane limbed nanobot would be unlimited, from fixing computer parts in satellites, space stations, etc, to exploring Mars, the deep sea, your colon.
This reminds me of a time I was in San Fransisco, in an Apple Store. This woman came in while I was looking at software, and when asked if she needed help, insisted on buying a computer that would still be working in 20 years time.
The assistant tried and tried to explain to her that it would be hideousl slow, and there would be no software, but at the end of every sentence, the inevitable reply would come in that southern drawl.. "I just want a computer that'll work in 20 years time.."
*scream*