Thank you for being another example of why I really, really don't like the GPL or its users.
"How do we lock this up so the original developers can't use this?"
I'd say you ought to be ashamed, but your sense of shame has likely atrophied away a long time ago. (And you lot do the same to BSD developers on occasion, who are at least nominally "your own." Pathetic.)
If it's run-time linked to a GPL work, it's probably a derivative work anyway.
As far as the plugin host is concerned, it's a data file that happens to run as code when run. The plugin just has to adhere to some specification (and I'm sure that somebody will reverse-engineer the spec, if it's not publicly available just as text). That doesn't make it a derivative work.
By demographics, yes, Lincoln probably would have been a Democrat. That said, Truman, Kennedy, and LBJ would likely have been Republicans. (Truman and LBJ almost certainly, Kennedy maybe.) The goalposts have shifted considerably over the last 150 years...
I dunno about you, but my flip phone has a speaker on the front that's only used if the ringer is on (it never is, I set it to vibrate). Since that speaker is on the same face as the camera, one would think that the camera would beep through it.
Yes, most OSes operate with click-to-focus; that's what I was referring to by mouse management. But for most users, they'll expect mouse focus stuff to be tied in with mouse focus. That's how it is on Windows (anything mouse-related goes under Mouse in the control panel) and, IIRC, OS X does similarly. That covers something like 99% of users. And you expect them to change to accomodate you?
I've got no problem with your OS acting weird if that's your bag, but I hope you don't expect other people to give it more than a cursory look if you're intentionally bucking the trend that 99% of the market uses. Seeing as how GNOME is in theory about the user rather than the geek.
Alt-tab task switching is essentially something that I don't feel really needs to be configured at all, but if it does--sure, put it in with keyboard options. That's the logical place, from a user POV, to look. Ask yourself this--how many users even know what "focus" means? Putting stuff under that heading makes sense?
(A technically minded user will find it under "focus" immediately, of course. But from dealing with GNOME devs it seems like they're not the attempted target market.)
Oh, I haven't tried other open source alternatives?
I have no interest in staying with KDE 3.5 when it's soon to be put into a maintenance state where bugs won't be fixed. Nor do I really want to switch distros (though Linux Mint looks interesting, I might install it on a box just for kicks) or start going through unsupported maintainers just to enable KDE 3.5.
I've tried Fluxbox. It's nice on the machine I'm using it for, but it sucks as a desktop.
I've tried GNOME. It sucks less than KDE 4, but not enough that I actually want to use it.
I've tried XFCE. It's GNOME but worse.
I've tried IceWM. I believe my reaction can be best summed up as "ehhhh."
Frankly, KDE 3.5 was the only environment that acted the way I liked. But my desktop distro doesn't offer it anymore and, frankly, I can't be arsed to keep a custom build or deal with unsupported third-party maintainers. It is easier to switch to Windows than to deal with that shit.
You will note that I did not blame the developers for troubles with KDE 4 (in that post; I think they were entirely fucking stupid for releasing an alpha-quality product as a.0 release and that the project has tubed since they started thinking aseigo was worth listening to, but I don't ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity). But when my distro of choice, which I have used for years on end, forcibly upgrades to KDE 4 (breaking the trust and credibility that they have earned over the years), yes, I am paying for it.
Why would I? It's time spent doing something I want to do.
Everything is an investment of time and I feel that, with few exceptions, investments of that time should either be interesting, personally rewarding, or profitable. Not a hard concept, though I see that plenty of people here hurf-durf about it without thinking.
Actually, I like Linux fine; I've got it running on two server machines right now. There was a pretty long stretch of time where I used KDE 3.5 exclusively and I have OpenSuSE it as the second on my laptop.
I also like Windows fine. It works, it's quick, it gets the hell out of my way and lets me concentrate on my work. It's a little more cumbersome for web development--IIS7 is very nice, but on the pricey Server 2008 and the improvements don't merit me shelling out money for personal use--but I have no problems, ethical or practical, with Windows.
I like Linux. But I don't like clueless, out-of-touch developers. When I say something like "my time is not free," it's to drive home a point: just because something has zero monetary cost does not mean it does not have cost, and if open-source developers want to gain traction, that needs to be recognized and compensated for. An example: program X is proprietary, costs $50, but works out of the box. Program Y is open source, costs $0, but takes three hours to configure to work correctly. Which is a normal person going to pick?
(This is one reason why open source has more traction in higher-end markets, I think--it might take as long or longer to configure, but it doesn't have that four-digit price tag.)
As demonstrated by your other reply to another post of mine, your idea of an organized DE seems very much to be geek-think, not user-think. Which is fine, but don't expect anybody else to think it doesn't suck.
OS X 10.0 was usable. Slow and pretty crapful, but at least it fucking worked.
Why was it released as KDE 4.0 if it wasn't feature-complete? Why didn't they call it KDE 3.99.x or KDE Developer Preview 1? Why did they have to call it KDE 4.0?
Answer: because there was a very large amount of "wink wink, nudge nudge" to their disclaimers.
I don't mean to insult you, but this is a pretty excellent example of geek-think. The vast majority of people manage focus with the mouse and alt-tab on both other major OSes. Bucking the trend because there's a minority of users with different settings just confuses people who are used to more popular OSes.
There are times when you have to do what doesn't seem to be the Right Thing in order to make something user-friendly.
I love how your post was modded "informative." Good work.;-)
Seriously though, and in keeping with what I think was the real point of your post (and a point I agree with) the Fluxbox machine is only being used as a test LAMP server for now, so no big deal--if I had a better box lying around that one would be in the closet gathering dust. On a machine I used as a desktop, though? I want the modern conveniences of a real desktop. And the other "alternative" desktop managers aren't very good. So it's GNOME or KDE or bust, as far as I see it.
(And Web 2.0 JavaScript isn't that slow. At least for the sites I visit.)
I consider any use of my time that isn't for something I want to do to be "paying" for it in some way. In this case, the post I replied to said
The difference, though, is that with MS, you're paying for a product to work. With open-source, you're not paying for it...
Which is true, from a monetary point of view. However, that is not the only "payment". The cost of the time it takes to make the "free" solution usable must be taken into account, just as the time it takes to make the proprietary solution usable must be taken into account. There are many times where the free solution, even with the cost of my time, is cheaper than the proprietary solution. There are many times when the reverse is true.
But refusing to acknowledge that time does have a cost is foolish. And that's part of the biggest problem I have with KDE4: it costs more in time to deal with their new problems and idiotic changes than it does to go reinstall Windows XP (which is what I did). My time is not free and if the open source solution is more of a hassle than the proprietary solution, it very well may be cheaper for me to choose the proprietary one.
I never said I used the open source product when alternatives existed. That's the point. I do not, because the cost, while not monetary, still exists.
So does that make you a douche for putting words in my mouth?;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Erm...you do know that xming has absolutely nothing to do with POSIX, yes? It's an X server for remote clients.
And I use Linux/BSD where appropriate. It's not appropriate in some environments, so Cygwin/POSIX/SFU have to suffice.
Thank you for being another example of why I really, really don't like the GPL or its users.
"How do we lock this up so the original developers can't use this?"
I'd say you ought to be ashamed, but your sense of shame has likely atrophied away a long time ago. (And you lot do the same to BSD developers on occasion, who are at least nominally "your own." Pathetic.)
Banshee's getting pretty good.
I didn't say it was good, just that it was there. :-P
I was under the impression that SFU is a good bit better? (I've never used it.)
You do know that Windows already has a POSIX subsystem, right?
Nobody really used it.
But I suspect that this is all moot. If FSF puts a plugin mechanism in GCC, they're probably going to modify the license attached to it, too.
And LLVM/clang will continue to rise and GCC will start sliding. Great ideas.
If it's run-time linked to a GPL work, it's probably a derivative work anyway.
As far as the plugin host is concerned, it's a data file that happens to run as code when run. The plugin just has to adhere to some specification (and I'm sure that somebody will reverse-engineer the spec, if it's not publicly available just as text). That doesn't make it a derivative work.
I know twitter says he doesn't like it, but we all know he does. Keep polishing!
By demographics, yes, Lincoln probably would have been a Democrat. That said, Truman, Kennedy, and LBJ would likely have been Republicans. (Truman and LBJ almost certainly, Kennedy maybe.) The goalposts have shifted considerably over the last 150 years...
Better than Ubuntu, IMO. Their tools feel more polished.
I didn't elect Rep. King. So, no, "we all" didn't.
I dunno about you, but my flip phone has a speaker on the front that's only used if the ringer is on (it never is, I set it to vibrate). Since that speaker is on the same face as the camera, one would think that the camera would beep through it.
You forgot the laser beams.
Yes, most OSes operate with click-to-focus; that's what I was referring to by mouse management. But for most users, they'll expect mouse focus stuff to be tied in with mouse focus. That's how it is on Windows (anything mouse-related goes under Mouse in the control panel) and, IIRC, OS X does similarly. That covers something like 99% of users. And you expect them to change to accomodate you?
I've got no problem with your OS acting weird if that's your bag, but I hope you don't expect other people to give it more than a cursory look if you're intentionally bucking the trend that 99% of the market uses. Seeing as how GNOME is in theory about the user rather than the geek.
Alt-tab task switching is essentially something that I don't feel really needs to be configured at all, but if it does--sure, put it in with keyboard options. That's the logical place, from a user POV, to look. Ask yourself this--how many users even know what "focus" means? Putting stuff under that heading makes sense?
(A technically minded user will find it under "focus" immediately, of course. But from dealing with GNOME devs it seems like they're not the attempted target market.)
Oh, I haven't tried other open source alternatives?
I have no interest in staying with KDE 3.5 when it's soon to be put into a maintenance state where bugs won't be fixed. Nor do I really want to switch distros (though Linux Mint looks interesting, I might install it on a box just for kicks) or start going through unsupported maintainers just to enable KDE 3.5.
I've tried Fluxbox. It's nice on the machine I'm using it for, but it sucks as a desktop.
I've tried GNOME. It sucks less than KDE 4, but not enough that I actually want to use it.
I've tried XFCE. It's GNOME but worse.
I've tried IceWM. I believe my reaction can be best summed up as "ehhhh."
Frankly, KDE 3.5 was the only environment that acted the way I liked. But my desktop distro doesn't offer it anymore and, frankly, I can't be arsed to keep a custom build or deal with unsupported third-party maintainers. It is easier to switch to Windows than to deal with that shit.
You will note that I did not blame the developers for troubles with KDE 4 (in that post; I think they were entirely fucking stupid for releasing an alpha-quality product as a .0 release and that the project has tubed since they started thinking aseigo was worth listening to, but I don't ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity). But when my distro of choice, which I have used for years on end, forcibly upgrades to KDE 4 (breaking the trust and credibility that they have earned over the years), yes, I am paying for it.
Why would I? It's time spent doing something I want to do.
Everything is an investment of time and I feel that, with few exceptions, investments of that time should either be interesting, personally rewarding, or profitable. Not a hard concept, though I see that plenty of people here hurf-durf about it without thinking.
Actually, I like Linux fine; I've got it running on two server machines right now. There was a pretty long stretch of time where I used KDE 3.5 exclusively and I have OpenSuSE it as the second on my laptop.
I also like Windows fine. It works, it's quick, it gets the hell out of my way and lets me concentrate on my work. It's a little more cumbersome for web development--IIS7 is very nice, but on the pricey Server 2008 and the improvements don't merit me shelling out money for personal use--but I have no problems, ethical or practical, with Windows.
I like Linux. But I don't like clueless, out-of-touch developers. When I say something like "my time is not free," it's to drive home a point: just because something has zero monetary cost does not mean it does not have cost, and if open-source developers want to gain traction, that needs to be recognized and compensated for. An example: program X is proprietary, costs $50, but works out of the box. Program Y is open source, costs $0, but takes three hours to configure to work correctly. Which is a normal person going to pick?
(This is one reason why open source has more traction in higher-end markets, I think--it might take as long or longer to configure, but it doesn't have that four-digit price tag.)
How about controlling my right click.
As demonstrated by your other reply to another post of mine, your idea of an organized DE seems very much to be geek-think, not user-think. Which is fine, but don't expect anybody else to think it doesn't suck.
OS X 10.0 was usable. Slow and pretty crapful, but at least it fucking worked.
Why was it released as KDE 4.0 if it wasn't feature-complete? Why didn't they call it KDE 3.99.x or KDE Developer Preview 1? Why did they have to call it KDE 4.0?
Answer: because there was a very large amount of "wink wink, nudge nudge" to their disclaimers.
I don't mean to insult you, but this is a pretty excellent example of geek-think. The vast majority of people manage focus with the mouse and alt-tab on both other major OSes. Bucking the trend because there's a minority of users with different settings just confuses people who are used to more popular OSes.
There are times when you have to do what doesn't seem to be the Right Thing in order to make something user-friendly.
That looks very interesting. I'll have to check it out.
I love how your post was modded "informative." Good work. ;-)
Seriously though, and in keeping with what I think was the real point of your post (and a point I agree with) the Fluxbox machine is only being used as a test LAMP server for now, so no big deal--if I had a better box lying around that one would be in the closet gathering dust. On a machine I used as a desktop, though? I want the modern conveniences of a real desktop. And the other "alternative" desktop managers aren't very good. So it's GNOME or KDE or bust, as far as I see it.
(And Web 2.0 JavaScript isn't that slow. At least for the sites I visit.)
I consider any use of my time that isn't for something I want to do to be "paying" for it in some way. In this case, the post I replied to said
The difference, though, is that with MS, you're paying for a product to work. With open-source, you're not paying for it ...
Which is true, from a monetary point of view. However, that is not the only "payment". The cost of the time it takes to make the "free" solution usable must be taken into account, just as the time it takes to make the proprietary solution usable must be taken into account. There are many times where the free solution, even with the cost of my time, is cheaper than the proprietary solution. There are many times when the reverse is true.
But refusing to acknowledge that time does have a cost is foolish. And that's part of the biggest problem I have with KDE4: it costs more in time to deal with their new problems and idiotic changes than it does to go reinstall Windows XP (which is what I did). My time is not free and if the open source solution is more of a hassle than the proprietary solution, it very well may be cheaper for me to choose the proprietary one.
I never said I used the open source product when alternatives existed. That's the point. I do not, because the cost, while not monetary, still exists.
So does that make you a douche for putting words in my mouth? ;-)
Their reason wasn't a very good one, is what I'm saying.
I'm pretty sure most people would think of mouse focus options being tied to the mouse, seeing as how that's what you're using to determine focus.