I agree, this is my #2 most annoying feature of windows.
#1 is the drag and drop that uses the left mouse button, so when you manipulating (open/close subtree) something in the tree view you will very easily manage to drag and drop something.
The left mouse button is just too overloaded.
OS/2 WPS has a solution for both of these: - drag and drop is done using the "right" mouse button. - it requires a modifier for rename action (alt, I think)
The WPS (Workplace Shell) has a much better use for the left button drag: sweep select. You can just drag the mouse over the file icons with the left button pressed to select things. This is much better than clicking with Ctrl or using rubberband selection (also possible in WPS) to select multiple files. List views also work the same way.
I guess it's time to hack GNOME and KDE to do this, or write my own desktop.;-)
I made my own linux boot floppy (busybox and smbmount)
I mostly optimized restore speed (write to disk).
If your disk are mostly full, the thing is network bound (10MB/s + decompression = 20MB/s max write speed)
If your disks are mostly empty, it is possible to do various optimizations:
- when you have many disks in the system, gunzip becomes a bottleneck. Solution: don't compress the zeros, but keep track of zeros separately, which enables:
- writing the zeros while the rest of the data is downloaded/decompressed.
With this, I could restore 18GB disk with 1GB of data (windows install;) in ~10 minutes.
The automatic transmission based on the torque converter is one thing, a computer controlled electro-hydraulically operated manual or sequential gearbox is quite another. The second one should be able to beat a typical driver at least on average.
You are wrong. Since a few years ago (since Spain GP 2001), the cars are allowed to use full traction control, launch control and automatic gear changes).
There is still an option of using manual controls, obviously. (Bad things can happen when you are in the middle of the corner and the computer thinks it would be a good idea to downshift).
But on modern systems with large screens it is way too far away from the application windows (I hope you don't run everything maximized like most windows users do when force fed with MDI).
The correct solution is to use the context menu for most operations and possibly do away with menu bar altogether. The space is better used for taskbar/dock anyway.
I suggest every GNOME/KDE/... developer sets one day of the week where he will use X without using the mouse.
Proposal 2:
When above is no longer a problem... try using X without running a terminal emulator for anything. This will really help improve linux GUI for non-hackers.
In theory, this works, but it is purely of hack value (it was done a long time ago). It requires too much memory (unless you plan on having just a few windows open at the time).
Slashdot Mirror
So, how many pixels in the mp3?
;)
Will there be a dolby 5.1 pr0n^H^H^H^Hpicture viewer
I agree, this is my #2 most annoying feature of windows.
;-)
#1 is the drag and drop that uses the left mouse button, so when you manipulating (open/close subtree) something in the tree view you will very easily manage to drag and drop something.
The left mouse button is just too overloaded.
OS/2 WPS has a solution for both of these:
- drag and drop is done using the "right" mouse button.
- it requires a modifier for rename action (alt, I think)
The WPS (Workplace Shell) has a much better use for the left button drag: sweep select. You can just drag the mouse over the file icons with the left button pressed to select things. This is much better than clicking with Ctrl or using rubberband selection (also possible in WPS) to select multiple files. List views also work the same way.
I guess it's time to hack GNOME and KDE to do this, or write my own desktop.
It's good to take the good stuff from windows.
But there's not reason to take the bad (and it's more work, because good stuff is usually simple).
I suspect you shouldn't put all interim revisions into the version control system.
I feel exactly the same about *.doc *.xls *.ppt and *.vsd!
Long live xhtml. (and TeX).
I made my own linux boot floppy (busybox and smbmount)
;) in ~10 minutes.
I mostly optimized restore speed (write to disk).
If your disk are mostly full, the thing is network bound (10MB/s + decompression = 20MB/s max write speed)
If your disks are mostly empty, it is possible to do various optimizations:
- when you have many disks in the system, gunzip becomes a bottleneck. Solution: don't compress the zeros, but keep track of zeros separately, which enables:
- writing the zeros while the rest of the data is downloaded/decompressed.
With this, I could restore 18GB disk with 1GB of data (windows install
The fact that any .VBS scripts embeded in office files allow execution of almost anything on the system is no small flaw.
This capability should be removed (except maybe for signed scripts, like in javascript)
If he managed to get to 42 bytes the universe would probably end...
Agreed.
The only editor with better keyboard interface for editing text than VI.
Unfortunately screwed by the Caps/Ctrl keys on current keyboards.
The automatic transmission based on the torque converter is one thing, a computer controlled electro-hydraulically operated manual or sequential gearbox is quite another. The second one should be able to beat a typical driver at least on average.
You are wrong. Since a few years ago (since Spain GP 2001), the cars are allowed to use full traction control, launch control and automatic gear changes).
There is still an option of using manual controls, obviously. (Bad things can happen when you are in the middle of the corner and the computer thinks it would be a good idea to downshift).
But I hope they ban these things again ASAP.
I think you just convinced me not to buy NVIDIA stuff ever again if I can help it.
Too bad, I am pretty happy with my current ti4200, especially since I found the solution to rare lockups I had during UT.
I guess somebody will have to do some reverse engineering (too bad I don't have the time).
I can understand why they can't/won't release the code.
But there can be NO reason for not opening the full interface specifications for their cards.
Then the people complaining about binary drivers can write "better" open source drivers.
I am more interested in that one. But I will buy UT2003 when it has a linux client.
One thing I dislike in Mac GUI is the order of buttons in dialogs.
Unfortunately GNOME 2.0 inherits this problem. I am totally unable to use it until I find the option to reverse the order.
Seconded.
Installation simply by copying/unpacking is the best one possible. Much better than the InstallShi?^Held and the like.
The problem with install programs is that they require interaction and the user doesn't know what they will do.
RPMs are better in this respect, but could be significantly improved by removing the capability to run post/pre scripts.
(various registrations need to be done by code already instaled on the system by the detecting the type of package being installed...)
Yes.
But on modern systems with large screens it is way too far away from the application windows (I hope you don't run everything maximized like most windows users do when force fed with MDI).
The correct solution is to use the context menu for most operations and possibly do away with menu bar altogether. The space is better used for taskbar/dock anyway.
Tabbed Browsing is MDI (multiple document interface) in a loose sense.
It is just slightly less annoying than window-in-window MDI.
Recording all the time is not very useful unless it can record all/many channels at once. Can it?
Proposal 1:
I suggest every GNOME/KDE/... developer sets one day of the week where he will use X without using the mouse.
Proposal 2:
When above is no longer a problem... try using X without running a terminal emulator for anything.
This will really help improve linux GUI for non-hackers.
What is needed in this case is some more
serialization of the database access.
If you have 1000 clients requesting the same page data from DB it would be a good idea to not to fetch the data from the DB for each of them.
A well designed system could reuse the data fetched once to server several clients.
They CERTAINLY DO NOT!! ;)
In theory, this works, but it is purely of hack value (it was done a long time ago). It requires too much memory (unless you plan on having just a few windows open at the time).
I wonder what would be the best alternative.
+ all of Trek movies
You should still be able to get close to the old size by using appropriate configure options.
If not, please report a bug. I will take it very seriously.