I had the problem of different summary lengths for a while, but found out that Safari 2 has a slider that controls how long each article will be. I have it set to show the title and the first line of the text. This lets me see a little of the article and then I can click on it to read more if it looks interesting. I never did like the separate RSS readers - they never seemed to integrate well, but I have loved having Safari handle both web pages and RSS well.
I actually find that using RSS in Safari makes the web much more maneagable and consistent. Instead of bookmarking pages, I bookmark the RSS feeds. This way, it tells me how many new articles there are and when I click on it, I get a consistent format with the RSS data from each website. For slashdot, I have groups of RSS feeds, so I only have to click once to see all the new articles from Slashdot. It saves a lot of time since I don't keep refreshing the page to see what has changed - it simply tells me how many and marks them as new so I can look at them.
And, you can even search all the RSS feeds in Safari. There are several pages I track that look for good deals. I'm currently looking for a good, big, fast external hard drive, so I load the RSS feeds from several online deal finders and search through them. This takes seconds compared to minutes of opening and looking through each of those sites.
Most people can't be bothered with it because they have to go get a RSS reader separate from their internet browser. Most people also use the default browser that comes with their computer. Does this mean it is the best? If the default browser on most people's computer had an easy way to use RSS, then people would use it. Both Internet Explorer and Firefox barely use RSS. IE6 does nothing with the information. Firefox uses it as live bookmarks and let's you know when it has changed, which isn't particularly useful. I can see why people don't use them.
Contrast this with Safari on the Mac. If a page has an RSS feed, it shows an RSS icon in the address bar that you can click on and view as formatted text (IE and Firefox show you the xml code, which will really turn off users to RSS). You can click on the links or bookmark groups of RSS feeds. Safari then goes out and gets the current articles and keeps track of how many you have not viewed. So, a number in the bookmark lets you know if you have some articles that you haven't seen yet and you can see which ones are new when you click on the bookmark. This saves a lot of time by reducing the total number of articles I have to look through to see new ones (i.e. I'm not looking at articles I've already looked at).
Using it this way, the typical user won't even know that it is any different than before - they still click on the link and the information appears. They are pulling the information - it is not pushed at them.
And, you can even search all the RSS feeds in Safari. There are several pages I track that look for good deals. I'm currently looking for a good, big, fast external hard drive, so I load the RSS feeds from several online deal finders and search through them. This takes seconds compared to minutes of opening and looking through each of those sites.
Why does it have to be that large of a 3D space. Why not something where there are multiple layers that you can interact with. OS X and Linux already have transparent windows. Instead of actually switching to a different window, why can't you interact with the window below the current one through a modifier key or some sort. There has already been software that will let you video chat in a full screen that is transparent while you work on other things (http://rockfish.cs.unc.edu/pubs/TR05-010.pdf) This allows you to perform multiple things at a time with the same screen real estate.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Spotlight and the idea of a computerized assistant that I can talk to, but I think there is a lot more to a 3D computer desktop than just a 20,000 sq foot room. Think more like several layers that you can interact with simultaneously.
Just hours after I read the article this morning on CNN, I got an automated call from them. (You know, the ones with the recorded voice that says the stuff and "Press one to sign up for service.") Well, I pressed one and got a live person who asked: "Would you like to sign up for DirectTV?" I said: "No and please put me on your do not call list." I'm not entirely sure when, but I think she hung up around the time I said "please put." Needless to say, I was quite irritated with them. That is rude on two accounts: 1) the unsolicited call with a robotic person and 2) she hung up on me.
I wonder if they have gotten beyond the excessive heat issues. My hypercolor shirt was cool until I put it in the dryer - then it was just color. I'd hate my car to stop changing colors when it was left in the sun too long....
I don't completely hate commercials. I actually find myself going back and watching a few of them occasionally (since I generally skip them all). I do hate the same commercials being showed several times during one episode. I would actually watch commercials if they had a category for new commercials in various categories. Some of them are quite interesting and even funny once or twice. But, I want to watch them when I want to, not in the middle of a show.
It could actually be fun if TiVo set up a rating system for the commercials (thumbs up/thumbs down) while watching the commercial channel and if they had an option to watch the most popular commercials. This would benefit advertisers and comsumers. The advertisers would find out what commercials people think are interesting and the consumers would get more input and eventually, better commercials.
One way to get close to what you want is to turn on the subtitles. At the first fast-forward speed (I think it's double live speed), the subtitles are still there so you can read what is going on. This works really well for news and sports, but it's a little harder when it's a TV show.
I agree. My issue is with the SciFi channel. In Chicago, Comcast recently moved SciFi to digital. This is an extra $13 on top of $42 just to get one channel. I've thought about it and there really are only about 5 channels I want beyond basic ($8) cable. Even if they were priced at 4$ each, I would only pay $28 compared to $55 and I know that my money is funding the stations with the programming I want. Why should I subsidize some other channel that I don't like.
So, you have choice. They will continue to allow shows to be downloaded and in addition, you'll be able to have a DVR that can record TV shows in a format that you will be able to watch on your PowerBook. It seems like the best of both worlds.....
That is a good point - having a certification that says this browser works/doesn't work with these features would really put the pressure on the companies to comply with the standards. This does sort of exist with the Acid2 test, but few browsers actually pass the test.
Another example of a stupid hack is how to get tables to render correctly in IE. The following code puts a space between each cell of the table - incorrect because I specify that there shouldn't be any spaces:
"Yes? Where is the part about the high hopes for this operating system?"
The high hopes for the OS are back when the name suggests it was supposed to have shipped. Why is it called: "Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003" and they are only now (in 2005) getting a second Beta out? So, is this going to be two years out of date (or more) by the time it ships?
It may not be the highest quality, but it's a lot better than the other choices out there right now with DirectTV and Comcast. The Apple deal allows you to take it with you. The quality isn't too bad when it's made full screen. I'd definitely rather have higher quality, for it works pretty well if I want to take a show with me on the road.
And if you don't get cable for one month, buy the shows you want (if you could via the Apple model), you can pay for a TiVo.
There are two problems with the NBC/CBS deal: 1) it requires that you are subscribed to digital cable. In my area, that costs upwards of $60 a month. Then, if you want to download one of those shows, it's on top of the monthly fee. 2) It's tied to their system - you can only watch it on your TV.
The sweet part of the deal with Apple is that you can buy one without any subscription to anything and then take it with you wherever you go, either on your computer or your iPod. Given these two systems, I really hope the iTunes one wins - it gives the customer much more freedom of choice. I want to buy TV shows a la carte with no monthly fees. Why do I have to pay for 100 channels when all I want to watch is Battlestar Galactica. If I could buy it on a per episode basis, that would be max $7.96 a month compared to a monthly free of $60 to get a whole bunch of garbage on TV that I never watch.
I've been programming in Java on my Mac for about 4 years now. Just recently set up Tomcat to host my Java Server Pages. My Mac is not a dedicated server - I use it for a lot of other work, but it is very stable - I only reboot it every couple months to install the latest patches and other software.
I would like to see no operating system with a majority. If the marketshare was broken down as 49% Windows, 26% Mac, 25% Linux (give or take - just an example), then there would be far fewer issues all around.
Every system would be forced to have open document standards that would work on any system. I would then be able to use the system I prefered and so could everyone else. People wouldn't have to use any particular system. Just maybe someday you'll be able to order a computer and be able to choose from Windows, LInux, or Mac as an installed OS.
It makes it a little harder on developers because they have to write different versions of their software, but if they write it multiplatform from the beginning, it isn't too much harder.
I only wish $1450 could be inconsequential.... Paying a bill takes maybe one minute a month, or just buy the lifetime and be done with it. Still cheaper than MCE.
Glad it suits your needs - you're one of the few I've heard good things about it from.
And how much more money did you spend on your XPMCE? A TiVo costs $50 and fits nicely right above my cable box. Do you really like the huge box sitting next to it and cost what $1500? XPMCE isn't going to be replacing people's TiVo's until the price and form factor actually work in the living room.
But Windows is leaps on bounds ahead of all *nix distros, and always will be.
Maybe and maybe not - can you tell the future? Very little of what you said pertains to how Windows works well. You are simply skipping the install process, which, as you mention, you could do with any other OS install.
My concern is that the Windows install is going to be out of date within a week and will still require at least a few reboots to get all the latest security patches up and running. I still don't understand why it needs so many reboots to install the patches.
It's nice that it works so well for you, but that doesn't help the average joe home user who can't duplicate an image.
The installer is like a little baby that needs constant attention. It stops at various stages to ask you what options you want. Who sits and watches the OS install? If I come back an hour later, I find out that it is only 10 minutes into the install because it was to ask what the timezone is. I tell it and leave again, then a few minutes later it wants to ask me another question. Why can't it ask me all those questions at the beginning?
Microsoft is going to start renting out it's software online allowing them to change things at a whim and if you are late paying, they will pull the plug on all of your applications? Somehow, this doesn't seem to make sense for many companies since they keep their computers and software for many years. Just look at the Microsoft Assurance Program: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/def ault.mspx
So far, there has been very little that has been useful from it. This program is the main reason why Vista will ship in 2006 whether it is ready or not. This program will be up for renewal starting in 2007 and no company is going to sign up again unless the OS was updated within their past term - that is a big chunk of their money. This is also the reason why I would encourage everyone to stay clear of Vista - they are going to push it out regardless of what is wrong with it because they will probably be sued otherwise by all of these companies.
You mean there is no pain difference of the two for you, which I disagree with. What makes you think unborn babies fail to feel pain? Is there some instant after they are born where pain suddenly exists?
The sadness level that you refer do does not account for the sadness your parents would have felt. It's one thing to never have something (like a baby), it's something completely different to destroy it, especially when it is of your own choice. There is generally a great depression and feeling of loss in mothers after they have an abortion.
I thought that the features from each distro had to be shared back to the community by virtue of the GPL. Any modifications are available to everyone. So, all the features are available to everyone, but "good features" is a relative term. There is no single Linux distro that can be everything to everyone, hence many of them. I think 300 is too many, but there are different markets that are totally different. They are using Linux on cell phones, routers, desktop computers, laptops, servers, etc.
There are not only two versions of Windows. There is Tablet PC edition, Home Media Edition, Windows CE, etc. And, as for versions of just Windows XP, there are many different versions. Many companies create their own standard version that includes the utilities and features they want to include. Granted, they all come from MS, but they are customized. I'm not arguing in favor of Windows, but simple does not work when you need to span many different realms of consumer devices.
Slashdot Mirror
I had the problem of different summary lengths for a while, but found out that Safari 2 has a slider that controls how long each article will be. I have it set to show the title and the first line of the text. This lets me see a little of the article and then I can click on it to read more if it looks interesting. I never did like the separate RSS readers - they never seemed to integrate well, but I have loved having Safari handle both web pages and RSS well.
I actually find that using RSS in Safari makes the web much more maneagable and consistent. Instead of bookmarking pages, I bookmark the RSS feeds. This way, it tells me how many new articles there are and when I click on it, I get a consistent format with the RSS data from each website. For slashdot, I have groups of RSS feeds, so I only have to click once to see all the new articles from Slashdot. It saves a lot of time since I don't keep refreshing the page to see what has changed - it simply tells me how many and marks them as new so I can look at them.
And, you can even search all the RSS feeds in Safari. There are several pages I track that look for good deals. I'm currently looking for a good, big, fast external hard drive, so I load the RSS feeds from several online deal finders and search through them. This takes seconds compared to minutes of opening and looking through each of those sites.
Most people can't be bothered with it because they have to go get a RSS reader separate from their internet browser. Most people also use the default browser that comes with their computer. Does this mean it is the best? If the default browser on most people's computer had an easy way to use RSS, then people would use it. Both Internet Explorer and Firefox barely use RSS. IE6 does nothing with the information. Firefox uses it as live bookmarks and let's you know when it has changed, which isn't particularly useful. I can see why people don't use them.
Contrast this with Safari on the Mac. If a page has an RSS feed, it shows an RSS icon in the address bar that you can click on and view as formatted text (IE and Firefox show you the xml code, which will really turn off users to RSS). You can click on the links or bookmark groups of RSS feeds. Safari then goes out and gets the current articles and keeps track of how many you have not viewed. So, a number in the bookmark lets you know if you have some articles that you haven't seen yet and you can see which ones are new when you click on the bookmark. This saves a lot of time by reducing the total number of articles I have to look through to see new ones (i.e. I'm not looking at articles I've already looked at).
Using it this way, the typical user won't even know that it is any different than before - they still click on the link and the information appears. They are pulling the information - it is not pushed at them.
And, you can even search all the RSS feeds in Safari. There are several pages I track that look for good deals. I'm currently looking for a good, big, fast external hard drive, so I load the RSS feeds from several online deal finders and search through them. This takes seconds compared to minutes of opening and looking through each of those sites.
Why does it have to be that large of a 3D space. Why not something where there are multiple layers that you can interact with. OS X and Linux already have transparent windows. Instead of actually switching to a different window, why can't you interact with the window below the current one through a modifier key or some sort.
There has already been software that will let you video chat in a full screen that is transparent while you work on other things (http://rockfish.cs.unc.edu/pubs/TR05-010.pdf) This allows you to perform multiple things at a time with the same screen real estate.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Spotlight and the idea of a computerized assistant that I can talk to, but I think there is a lot more to a 3D computer desktop than just a 20,000 sq foot room. Think more like several layers that you can interact with simultaneously.
Just hours after I read the article this morning on CNN, I got an automated call from them. (You know, the ones with the recorded voice that says the stuff and "Press one to sign up for service.") Well, I pressed one and got a live person who asked: "Would you like to sign up for DirectTV?" I said: "No and please put me on your do not call list." I'm not entirely sure when, but I think she hung up around the time I said "please put." Needless to say, I was quite irritated with them. That is rude on two accounts: 1) the unsolicited call with a robotic person and 2) she hung up on me.
I wonder if they have gotten beyond the excessive heat issues. My hypercolor shirt was cool until I put it in the dryer - then it was just color. I'd hate my car to stop changing colors when it was left in the sun too long....
I don't completely hate commercials. I actually find myself going back and watching a few of them occasionally (since I generally skip them all). I do hate the same commercials being showed several times during one episode. I would actually watch commercials if they had a category for new commercials in various categories. Some of them are quite interesting and even funny once or twice. But, I want to watch them when I want to, not in the middle of a show.
It could actually be fun if TiVo set up a rating system for the commercials (thumbs up/thumbs down) while watching the commercial channel and if they had an option to watch the most popular commercials. This would benefit advertisers and comsumers. The advertisers would find out what commercials people think are interesting and the consumers would get more input and eventually, better commercials.
One way to get close to what you want is to turn on the subtitles. At the first fast-forward speed (I think it's double live speed), the subtitles are still there so you can read what is going on. This works really well for news and sports, but it's a little harder when it's a TV show.
I agree. My issue is with the SciFi channel. In Chicago, Comcast recently moved SciFi to digital. This is an extra $13 on top of $42 just to get one channel. I've thought about it and there really are only about 5 channels I want beyond basic ($8) cable. Even if they were priced at 4$ each, I would only pay $28 compared to $55 and I know that my money is funding the stations with the programming I want. Why should I subsidize some other channel that I don't like.
So, you have choice. They will continue to allow shows to be downloaded and in addition, you'll be able to have a DVR that can record TV shows in a format that you will be able to watch on your PowerBook. It seems like the best of both worlds.....
Another example of a stupid hack is how to get tables to render correctly in IE. The following code puts a space between each cell of the table - incorrect because I specify that there shouldn't be any spaces:But, this code - exactly the same, except for where the line breaks are - works as it is supposed to:
Are you sure your brain doesn't have any vulnerabilities? I'd much rather my computer get a virus than my own brain....
I have a patent on that gene. You owe me money.
Actually, Windows XP was released in 2001 (October 25th - more than 4 years ago).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001
It may not be the highest quality, but it's a lot better than the other choices out there right now with DirectTV and Comcast. The Apple deal allows you to take it with you. The quality isn't too bad when it's made full screen. I'd definitely rather have higher quality, for it works pretty well if I want to take a show with me on the road.
And if you don't get cable for one month, buy the shows you want (if you could via the Apple model), you can pay for a TiVo.
There are two problems with the NBC/CBS deal:
1) it requires that you are subscribed to digital cable. In my area, that costs upwards of $60 a month. Then, if you want to download one of those shows, it's on top of the monthly fee.
2) It's tied to their system - you can only watch it on your TV.
The sweet part of the deal with Apple is that you can buy one without any subscription to anything and then take it with you wherever you go, either on your computer or your iPod. Given these two systems, I really hope the iTunes one wins - it gives the customer much more freedom of choice. I want to buy TV shows a la carte with no monthly fees. Why do I have to pay for 100 channels when all I want to watch is Battlestar Galactica. If I could buy it on a per episode basis, that would be max $7.96 a month compared to a monthly free of $60 to get a whole bunch of garbage on TV that I never watch.
I've been programming in Java on my Mac for about 4 years now. Just recently set up Tomcat to host my Java Server Pages. My Mac is not a dedicated server - I use it for a lot of other work, but it is very stable - I only reboot it every couple months to install the latest patches and other software.
I would like to see no operating system with a majority. If the marketshare was broken down as 49% Windows, 26% Mac, 25% Linux (give or take - just an example), then there would be far fewer issues all around.
Every system would be forced to have open document standards that would work on any system. I would then be able to use the system I prefered and so could everyone else. People wouldn't have to use any particular system. Just maybe someday you'll be able to order a computer and be able to choose from Windows, LInux, or Mac as an installed OS.
It makes it a little harder on developers because they have to write different versions of their software, but if they write it multiplatform from the beginning, it isn't too much harder.
I only wish $1450 could be inconsequential.... Paying a bill takes maybe one minute a month, or just buy the lifetime and be done with it. Still cheaper than MCE.
Glad it suits your needs - you're one of the few I've heard good things about it from.
And how much more money did you spend on your XPMCE? A TiVo costs $50 and fits nicely right above my cable box. Do you really like the huge box sitting next to it and cost what $1500? XPMCE isn't going to be replacing people's TiVo's until the price and form factor actually work in the living room.
The installer is like a little baby that needs constant attention. It stops at various stages to ask you what options you want. Who sits and watches the OS install? If I come back an hour later, I find out that it is only 10 minutes into the install because it was to ask what the timezone is. I tell it and leave again, then a few minutes later it wants to ask me another question. Why can't it ask me all those questions at the beginning?
So, is this kind of like Napster's slogan: "Own nothing, have everything?"e lls_nothing/
f ault.mspx
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/27/napster_s
Microsoft is going to start renting out it's software online allowing them to change things at a whim and if you are late paying, they will pull the plug on all of your applications? Somehow, this doesn't seem to make sense for many companies since they keep their computers and software for many years. Just look at the Microsoft Assurance Program:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/de
So far, there has been very little that has been useful from it. This program is the main reason why Vista will ship in 2006 whether it is ready or not. This program will be up for renewal starting in 2007 and no company is going to sign up again unless the OS was updated within their past term - that is a big chunk of their money. This is also the reason why I would encourage everyone to stay clear of Vista - they are going to push it out regardless of what is wrong with it because they will probably be sued otherwise by all of these companies.
You mean there is no pain difference of the two for you, which I disagree with. What makes you think unborn babies fail to feel pain? Is there some instant after they are born where pain suddenly exists?
The sadness level that you refer do does not account for the sadness your parents would have felt. It's one thing to never have something (like a baby), it's something completely different to destroy it, especially when it is of your own choice. There is generally a great depression and feeling of loss in mothers after they have an abortion.
I thought that the features from each distro had to be shared back to the community by virtue of the GPL. Any modifications are available to everyone. So, all the features are available to everyone, but "good features" is a relative term. There is no single Linux distro that can be everything to everyone, hence many of them. I think 300 is too many, but there are different markets that are totally different. They are using Linux on cell phones, routers, desktop computers, laptops, servers, etc.
There are not only two versions of Windows. There is Tablet PC edition, Home Media Edition, Windows CE, etc. And, as for versions of just Windows XP, there are many different versions. Many companies create their own standard version that includes the utilities and features they want to include. Granted, they all come from MS, but they are customized. I'm not arguing in favor of Windows, but simple does not work when you need to span many different realms of consumer devices.