It's not just the controls on web pages, though. Among other things, Firefox seems to use a custom routine to draw and handle popup menus (right-clicking), and doesn't use Cocoa to draw the toolbar or scroll bars. It just feels wrong all over.
And even if Aqua's "just not suited for the Web," as you say, there's still no standard I'm aware of that indicates controls have to be downright ugly. And Firefox is ugly. -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Remember the Acid2 challenge mentioned on Slashdot a few days ago? Safari and Firefox both failed miserably, but Dave Hyatt, an Apple developer working on Safari's WebCore, has made amazing progress (in less than a week!) at compliance using the Acid2 test as a guide.
It would be nice to see the same pace of development on Gecko, but I'm not holding my breath. -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Some Slashdotters love to preach that (1) only idiots would run untrusted code, and (2) you can't do damage without root privileges. I think my sig demonstrates quite handily their folly on both counts. -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Those of us with Macs know that Firefox is really obnoxious on our platform. It makes a very halfhearted attempt at elegance, but fails miserably on almost all counts. Scrollbars don't disable in background windows, HTML controls are rendered in ugly beveled grays, the Preferences dialog is inexplicably a sheet, proxy settings aren't inherited from the System Preferences, text areas in forms aren't beneficiaries of Cocoa's text-editing magic, popup menus are rendered in the wrong font, and on, and on, and on.
If Firefox wants to be taken seriously as a native browser on the Mac, it has a long way to go to catch up to Safari in terms of aesthetics and usability. -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
The problem is that there's really no good reason to trust information you find on Wikipedia. With an established encyclopedia, or even a new encyclopedia with a brand and a reputation to protect, you know there's an incentive for them to present information accurately and in an unbiased manner (or at least from a perspective whose biases you can predict). Wikipedia, on the other hand, has no such reputation--indeed, the disclaimer essentially states you'd have to be crazy to trust it--and therefore, no credibility.
Uh, the article "summary" contains a reference to homosexual acts with a Slashdot editor. Troll, anyone? -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Why couldn't unscrupulous companies just move the development and distribution of their spyware to countries not under the jurisdiction of US law? If WeatherBug is hosted in Australia, for example, there's not much the US Congress can do to stop it. Right? -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
I'm a pretty heavy smoker (I average a pack a day, more on weekends) and I've had no problems with the slot-loading optical drive on my PowerBook, which I've owned for three years. So I'm a little surprised to see all these reports of problems from other people in this thread. Maybe the thick felt lining Apple uses in its slot-loading optical drives keeps dust and smoke particles out? -- perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Har har. Your other "points" aside, perhaps you'd be interested to learn that OS X's widgets are on the left because that's where the close box has been ever since January 1984. "Every other OS on the planet" apparently chose to follow Windows' example, and can you guess why Windows originally put the widgets on the right? Yep. To be different for the sake of being different.
And your calling the color highlight on KDE's close button a "nice visual cue" while sniping about the same thing on the Mac is pretty bizarre, too, but who's really keeping track?
Supposedly, Tiger (due out in several months) will take the first steps towards resolution independence. With luck, by the time Tiger's successor comes out, we'll have displays capable of printer-level DPI... or is that too much to hope for?
Hey, nice catch.:) But seriously--the best interfaces work on a subconscious level. If you have to actually notice something, in the sense that you have to stop and think about it, it's not intuitive. Mostly.
Sure, try this search, which turns up a bunch of things, including these articles: "All human embryonic stem cell lines approved for use in federally funded research are contaminated with a foreign molecule from mice that may make them risky for use in medical therapies, according to a study released Sunday."
"Yes, if you work on certain projects, you are expected to keep track of what gets used for it. Just like, oh, pretty much anything else in the business world. You don't work on Client A's stuff on Client B's dime, why should labwork be any different?"
I generally agree, but please consider that the consequences for a minor slipup would be completely disproportionate to the accounting error, given the political climate: millions of people are ready to pounce on any lab doing such "unethical" work. This is more than enough to scare off a lot of labs. Not everyone is lucky enough to receive state funding, like Stanford, or to have significant private resources to draw on, like Harvard.
Of course, all this sort of obscures the greater issue: why should the federal government withhold funds for stem-cell research at all?
Well, I think if you were Johnny Cochran you could probably argue that proper kerning and subpixel rendering reduce eyestrain and contribute to an ergonomically correct work environment. But I was actually just thinking about the Linux desktop in general, for home/consumer use. Sorry to have posted in a slightly offtopic discussion.
Thanks, that's good to know. How good is the autohinting algorithm? I wonder if Adobe's patented the (stellar) optical kerning system they use in InDesign.
I didn't start looking into this recently. But is it really impossible to: (1) encode MP3s and AACs, (2) render text using TrueType kerning tables, or (3) take advantage of subpixel rendering, on Linux desktops, without breaking patent laws? With all the hype surrounding Linux on the desktop, I have trouble believing these common activities could be illegal, but nor have I seen anything indicating otherwise. What's the deal?
(And please, no Stallmanesque rants about how intellectual property should be abolished. I don't have the patience for these ill-conceived prescriptive arguments.)
Indeed, Mac OS X 10.3 can be had for less than the cost of a license for Windows XP Professional. On the other hand, if you cut costs too much, you risk ending up with some wretched abortion like desktop Linux.
I think that what left-brain types often fail to realize is that an interface that doesn't give the user the urge to rinse his eyes with Liquid-Plumr is, perhaps, one of the most important features a desktop environment can have.
Well, unless I'm fundamentally misunderstanding something, the reason all existing lines are contaminated is that the process commonly used to sustain them unavoidably leads to contamination. Further, no one knew this would happen until it had already been tried, and--more to the point--not until after the funding ban had taken effect. The contamination is NOT the result of sloppy science, so it's hard to argue that funding ought to be pulled to punish scientists "screwing up the line they've been given to work on."
And while I agree there's no legal ban on embryonic stem cell research, the current state of federal funding policy makes it impossible for research to continue without risking funding for unrelated projects. Again, this situation parallels the federal government withholding highway dollars to states where it's legal to drink before age 21. If you're in a position to cut off someone's oxygen supply (whether highway dollars or research grants), you don't need legislation to implement a de facto ban.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just the controls on web pages, though. Among other things, Firefox seems to use a custom routine to draw and handle popup menus (right-clicking), and doesn't use Cocoa to draw the toolbar or scroll bars. It just feels wrong all over.
And even if Aqua's "just not suited for the Web," as you say, there's still no standard I'm aware of that indicates controls have to be downright ugly. And Firefox is ugly.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Remember the Acid2 challenge mentioned on Slashdot a few days ago? Safari and Firefox both failed miserably, but Dave Hyatt, an Apple developer working on Safari's WebCore, has made amazing progress (in less than a week!) at compliance using the Acid2 test as a guide.
It would be nice to see the same pace of development on Gecko, but I'm not holding my breath.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Some Slashdotters love to preach that (1) only idiots would run untrusted code, and (2) you can't do damage without root privileges. I think my sig demonstrates quite handily their folly on both counts.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Those of us with Macs know that Firefox is really obnoxious on our platform. It makes a very halfhearted attempt at elegance, but fails miserably on almost all counts. Scrollbars don't disable in background windows, HTML controls are rendered in ugly beveled grays, the Preferences dialog is inexplicably a sheet, proxy settings aren't inherited from the System Preferences, text areas in forms aren't beneficiaries of Cocoa's text-editing magic, popup menus are rendered in the wrong font, and on, and on, and on.
If Firefox wants to be taken seriously as a native browser on the Mac, it has a long way to go to catch up to Safari in terms of aesthetics and usability.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
The problem is that there's really no good reason to trust information you find on Wikipedia. With an established encyclopedia, or even a new encyclopedia with a brand and a reputation to protect, you know there's an incentive for them to present information accurately and in an unbiased manner (or at least from a perspective whose biases you can predict). Wikipedia, on the other hand, has no such reputation--indeed, the disclaimer essentially states you'd have to be crazy to trust it--and therefore, no credibility.
Which is exactly the amount of trust it deserves.
Sure, yes. Someone decomposed it here.
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Uh, the article "summary" contains a reference to homosexual acts with a Slashdot editor. Troll, anyone?
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
I know what JFC is. What's CNW?
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Why couldn't unscrupulous companies just move the development and distribution of their spyware to countries not under the jurisdiction of US law? If WeatherBug is hosted in Australia, for example, there's not much the US Congress can do to stop it. Right?
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
I'm a pretty heavy smoker (I average a pack a day, more on weekends) and I've had no problems with the slot-loading optical drive on my PowerBook, which I've owned for three years. So I'm a little surprised to see all these reports of problems from other people in this thread. Maybe the thick felt lining Apple uses in its slot-loading optical drives keeps dust and smoke particles out?
--
perl -e '$??s:;s:s;;$?::s;;=]=>%-{<-|}<&|`{;;y; -/:-@[-`{-};`-{~" -;;s;;$_;see'
Har har. Your other "points" aside, perhaps you'd be interested to learn that OS X's widgets are on the left because that's where the close box has been ever since January 1984. "Every other OS on the planet" apparently chose to follow Windows' example, and can you guess why Windows originally put the widgets on the right? Yep. To be different for the sake of being different.
And your calling the color highlight on KDE's close button a "nice visual cue" while sniping about the same thing on the Mac is pretty bizarre, too, but who's really keeping track?
I just cut and pasted it back into the submission queue. Let's see if the editors pick it up. :)
Supposedly, Tiger (due out in several months) will take the first steps towards resolution independence. With luck, by the time Tiger's successor comes out, we'll have displays capable of printer-level DPI... or is that too much to hope for?
Hey, nice catch. :) But seriously--the best interfaces work on a subconscious level. If you have to actually notice something, in the sense that you have to stop and think about it, it's not intuitive. Mostly.
Sure, try this search, which turns up a bunch of things, including these articles: "All human embryonic stem cell lines approved for use in federally funded research are contaminated with a foreign molecule from mice that may make them risky for use in medical therapies, according to a study released Sunday."
"Yes, if you work on certain projects, you are expected to keep track of what gets used for it. Just like, oh, pretty much anything else in the business world. You don't work on Client A's stuff on Client B's dime, why should labwork be any different?"
I generally agree, but please consider that the consequences for a minor slipup would be completely disproportionate to the accounting error, given the political climate: millions of people are ready to pounce on any lab doing such "unethical" work. This is more than enough to scare off a lot of labs. Not everyone is lucky enough to receive state funding, like Stanford, or to have significant private resources to draw on, like Harvard.
Of course, all this sort of obscures the greater issue: why should the federal government withhold funds for stem-cell research at all?
Well, I think if you were Johnny Cochran you could probably argue that proper kerning and subpixel rendering reduce eyestrain and contribute to an ergonomically correct work environment. But I was actually just thinking about the Linux desktop in general, for home/consumer use. Sorry to have posted in a slightly offtopic discussion.
Thanks, that's good to know. How good is the autohinting algorithm? I wonder if Adobe's patented the (stellar) optical kerning system they use in InDesign.
What? Where, bitch?
I didn't start looking into this recently. But is it really impossible to: (1) encode MP3s and AACs, (2) render text using TrueType kerning tables, or (3) take advantage of subpixel rendering, on Linux desktops, without breaking patent laws? With all the hype surrounding Linux on the desktop, I have trouble believing these common activities could be illegal, but nor have I seen anything indicating otherwise. What's the deal?
(And please, no Stallmanesque rants about how intellectual property should be abolished. I don't have the patience for these ill-conceived prescriptive arguments.)
Indeed, Mac OS X 10.3 can be had for less than the cost of a license for Windows XP Professional. On the other hand, if you cut costs too much, you risk ending up with some wretched abortion like desktop Linux.
I think that what left-brain types often fail to realize is that an interface that doesn't give the user the urge to rinse his eyes with Liquid-Plumr is, perhaps, one of the most important features a desktop environment can have.
Holy shit dude, what's your problem? Does every innocent mistake have to be an opportunity for a flamewar?
Well, unless I'm fundamentally misunderstanding something, the reason all existing lines are contaminated is that the process commonly used to sustain them unavoidably leads to contamination. Further, no one knew this would happen until it had already been tried, and--more to the point--not until after the funding ban had taken effect. The contamination is NOT the result of sloppy science, so it's hard to argue that funding ought to be pulled to punish scientists "screwing up the line they've been given to work on."
And while I agree there's no legal ban on embryonic stem cell research, the current state of federal funding policy makes it impossible for research to continue without risking funding for unrelated projects. Again, this situation parallels the federal government withholding highway dollars to states where it's legal to drink before age 21. If you're in a position to cut off someone's oxygen supply (whether highway dollars or research grants), you don't need legislation to implement a de facto ban.
Ugh, I guess for a moment there my fanboyism got the better of me. I'll have to watch that. :)
Hahaha! Yeah, true. :)