Some people seem surprised that i remember this vividly. I was 3 years old, my mother was just starting to work on her law degree, and was writing up something important via professional write. The "microcomputer" we had i believe was built by my uncle, and the power button on that thing was big and visible. From my vague memory it was a red circular button, with at least an inch in radius. Just like a frustrated horny bull running towards a red cape, my nubby little index finger launched towards that big red button. Result: (insert the dirtiest swear words here), my father comes running in, my mother starts crying (my guess is it was important, and back then autosave was only a dream), and the rest of the memory is too fuzzy to remember. Perhaps for the reason that it was something that shouldn't be remembered. Now that i look at my watch, it's almost time for my psychotherapy appointment! Cheers!
that thai woman at the thai restaurant would never give me one of the recipes. at first I thought only the hispanic cooks in the back new, but now I know the real truth.
*rolls up in sock drawer and cries to sleep*
I have always been frustrated with the direct link from Linux to X-Windows. Using Linux as a desktop is understandable, but what about the other operating systems? FreeBSD? Solaris? Many unix operating systems can and usually use X-Windows as a GUI. If one has Linux, one may have X, but if one has X, it doesn't mean they are running the Linux kernel.
My usual window manager always seems to be based off of blackbox (fluxbox, openbox, etc)
This is a great deal when it comes to combining AMD processing with ATI gpu technology.
Yet almost every avid gamer and linux fan seems to prefer nvidia over ATI.
nvidia seems to have better overall support. It's the only gpu brand name i can use
to get accelerated graphics on my laptop running BSD.
It took me a while to get over the 3dfx buyout; I was a big voodoo fan, but i then
accepted nvidia as my gpu of choice.
Don't give up nvidia! you still have your supporters...
-nawcom
I find the relationship interesting - Steve Balmer is obviously not a big fan of Google. But think about it from his perception - Someone is receiving a computer with our OS preinstalled (a plus+) which includes our web browser preinstalled (a plus+) with a preinstalled google toolbar, along with the search on the taskbar (badbad -----) The user will identify google on there computer, way more than microsoft - simply because windows is the universal standard - at least for personal computers - so its visibility is more or less obesolete. When someone sees a google search bar - and has heard of the positive reviews, they would identify that as a more trusting utility to use. I think this is one reason why many basic computer users have (and still are) moving to firefox.
What i am trying to say is the more that multicolored google logo replaces the windows logo, the more the windows software will be replaced with an alternative. You make make your own conclusion (mine is a positive).
This example with google can be replaced eith any software. for example firefox or thunderbird. I think thunderbird will be able to fully replace outlook soon since the lightning project extension makes it look pretty damn close to it with the calender support.
My wish is that microsoft backs off on keeping their own software - mail, writing, web browsing, cd burning, yadda yadda. but i doubt that will happen.
[The above is an opinion. so please don't come and egg my server rack.]
If you don't trust the patch that software developer provides for its product,
then why trust to use the product at all?
It sounds like someone saying, "Our OS has security holes in it, but we don't
trust the fixes because they will just open up more holed until we verify for sure.... but since 90% of the world use this "hole-y" OS we'll just do what works. Like reporting a planned virus infection. *all hail bill*"
IMO I believe that your basic inexperienced user will focus more on how the menu is organized and icon placement rather than the name.
GNOME organizes programs by subject, and can be customized to a more organized set. Windows simply lists the programs (sometimes in order of when it was installed, not by alphabet). At times you just can't find it because it's rarely used - you have to do a little more work to find it. Other than the increased memory usage and wasted "graphic effects" on the xp start menu I do have to applaud about the browser and mail location, along with the list of most commonly used programs.
I'm not going to go into the names issue. If an computer illiterate user had a choice between "Outlook" and "Thunderbird" or "Excel" and "Calc" which would they choose? I'm sure it would be different for different people, but you get what i'm saying.
(and wtf is with the name eXPerience? i'd find "Windows Excel" an OS that goes beyond bounaries - by definition - more appealing.)
Since i've given enough examples - i shall shut up.
Slashdot Mirror
anyone remember ol' professional write? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfs:Write)
Some people seem surprised that i remember this vividly. I was 3 years old, my mother was just starting to work on her law degree, and was writing up something important via professional write. The "microcomputer" we had i believe was built by my uncle, and the power button on that thing was big and visible. From my vague memory it was a red circular button, with at least an inch in radius. Just like a frustrated horny bull running towards a red cape, my nubby little index finger launched towards that big red button. Result: (insert the dirtiest swear words here), my father comes running in, my mother starts crying (my guess is it was important, and back then autosave was only a dream), and the rest of the memory is too fuzzy to remember. Perhaps for the reason that it was something that shouldn't be remembered. Now that i look at my watch, it's almost time for my psychotherapy appointment! Cheers!
Microsoft software will always be a puzzle game to hackers and such; closed, hidden, and exciting to find.
that thai woman at the thai restaurant would never give me one of the recipes. at first I thought only the hispanic cooks in the back new, but now I know the real truth. *rolls up in sock drawer and cries to sleep*
I have always been frustrated with the direct link from Linux to X-Windows. Using Linux as a desktop is understandable, but what about the other operating systems? FreeBSD? Solaris? Many unix operating systems can and usually use X-Windows as a GUI. If one has Linux, one may have X, but if one has X, it doesn't mean they are running the Linux kernel.
My usual window manager always seems to be based off of blackbox (fluxbox, openbox, etc)
This is a great deal when it comes to combining AMD processing with ATI gpu technology. Yet almost every avid gamer and linux fan seems to prefer nvidia over ATI. nvidia seems to have better overall support. It's the only gpu brand name i can use to get accelerated graphics on my laptop running BSD. It took me a while to get over the 3dfx buyout; I was a big voodoo fan, but i then accepted nvidia as my gpu of choice. Don't give up nvidia! you still have your supporters... -nawcom
What i am trying to say is the more that multicolored google logo replaces the windows logo, the more the windows software will be replaced with an alternative. You make make your own conclusion (mine is a positive).
This example with google can be replaced eith any software. for example firefox or thunderbird. I think thunderbird will be able to fully replace outlook soon since the lightning project extension makes it look pretty damn close to it with the calender support.
My wish is that microsoft backs off on keeping their own software - mail, writing, web browsing, cd burning, yadda yadda. but i doubt that will happen.
[The above is an opinion. so please don't come and egg my server rack.]
No - the question is - when did you have the right to steal my post??? ;)
If you don't trust the patch that software developer provides for its product, then why trust to use the product at all?
It sounds like someone saying, "Our OS has security holes in it, but we don't trust the fixes because they will just open up more holed until we verify for sure.. .. but since 90% of the world use this "hole-y" OS we'll just do what works. Like reporting a planned virus infection. *all hail bill*"
-nawcom
IMO I believe that your basic inexperienced user will focus more on how the menu is organized and icon placement rather than the name.
GNOME organizes programs by subject, and can be customized to a more organized set. Windows simply lists the programs (sometimes in order of when it was installed, not by alphabet). At times you just can't find it because it's rarely used - you have to do a little more work to find it. Other than the increased memory usage and wasted "graphic effects" on the xp start menu I do have to applaud about the browser and mail location, along with the list of most commonly used programs.
I'm not going to go into the names issue. If an computer illiterate user had a choice between "Outlook" and "Thunderbird" or "Excel" and "Calc" which would they choose? I'm sure it would be different for different people, but you get what i'm saying.
(and wtf is with the name eXPerience? i'd find "Windows Excel" an OS that goes beyond bounaries - by definition - more appealing.)
Since i've given enough examples - i shall shut up.
You should of gotten a 5 for humorous (along with informative). :)