Except that "folder view plasmoids" look retarded.
I want a desktop. I want a desktop that acts just like the desktop that all other relevant desktop environments on all other relevant operating systems. You know, like the one KDE3 has.
But no. This is just indicative of the future of KDE: "you want? Fuck you, we have a VISION." It pisses me off, because when I used a Linux desktop, KDE was always my choice. Can't say that anymore.
There are devs for KDE who invite personal attacks by being condescending assholes (hi there, aseigo!) and while at least Troy was removed from the project, the rest still tromp cheerfully along, fucking up what was a good DE.
Maybe the less dickish devs can save KDE from itself, but I don't hold much hope.
I like having icons on my desktop; it lets me locate icons spatially instead of paging through a list. I want it to work like KDE 3 and not waste my time on "plasmoids". Until it at least attains the functionality of KDE 3 (does it amaze anyone else that they say they won't have a basic desktop, like every other DE, until around KDE 4.3?), it's worthless to me.
Er, clue for you: I hate Apple, I've owned exactly one Mac in my life (bought it used and it runs Linux now), and I'm still calling this fucking disgusting.
I don't think it's a noble crusade to work in an Apple store
Sorry, my antecedents were fucked up. It was 1:30AM. You probably think that what the FSF has decided to do here, harrassing people just doing their fucking jobs about politics that are outside the realm of what they're allowed to comment on, is a "noble crusade."
You've made my point pretty effectively, then. Nobody wants FLAC? Really?
Sigh. File systems are not the same thing, trollboy, because file systems are not an inherently commercial product. FLAC support in a commercial product is viable if and only if the increase in revenue will more than offset the costs to implement the functionality and support it down the road. If a feature will lose the company money, they have no reason to kow-tow to your crazy babble.
Which ones? Or are you operating under a different definition of "open"?
Because causing you some nerd rage will be fun--it plays WAV, doesn't it? That looks pretty open to me. Lossless, even!
And, still, tons of DRM'd music.
If people buy the no-DRM music, doesn't it make sense that Apple will be able to offer more no-DRM music?
And Amazon has no DRM'd music on their music store. None. Zip. Nada.
Never mind the whole issue of requiring the iTunes client to buy said music, instead of, say, a web browser.
Irrelevant. They choose to offer their products through a program of their choice. If you don't like that, you can continue RAGING AT THE MACHIIIIIIIIIIIINE.
Oh, and MP3 isn't DRM'd, but it is heavily patented. Some AACs are DRM'd, some aren't, and all are heavily patented. That's a problem. It's just a problem that it's convenient for Apple to ignore.
Nope. Not a problem at all.
I notice that you didn't answer the question as to whether you buy DRM-free music. I must thus conclude that you don't, and as such you are just a whining little bitch.
I think that's exactly what the FSF wishes would happen. They just don't have the clout to do it. Otherwise, they'd have said exactly that! "Don't be a dick, don't try to book as many appointments at the same store as you can, just book one and be done with it." Oh, no no no, this is unwanted evangelism at its best.
Okay, so the freetards want to block everyone else from being about to get on with their day. Why should the freetards' "want" trump anyone else's, given that everyone else's is why the commercial establishment is open in the first place?
First, no one wanted hardlinked directories. Apple used them to do something cool (Time Machine).
Really? How the fuck do you know that? When they were first added to a file system, nobody wanted that? Please. Get your head out of your ass.
That's both incredibly capitalistic (nothing is worth doing unless it makes money? Really?)
What point is there in a company doing something that will lose it money and gain them nothing? Have you ever been in charge of a company, or even a division of a company? Something where making money is the fucking idea?
and missing the point -- Jobs did say he would embrace open formats. Actually, no, he said Apple would embrace them.
Ohh, so he has to embrace open formats you like. Never mind that QuickTime plays open formats, they're just not the open formats you like. Gotcha.
Not because of zealotry, but because at the very least, un-DRM'd media provides a better user experience. Doesn't that make it worth doing?
But as it turns out, even if we restrict the conversation to DRM, he's not following through.
MP3 isn't DRMed. AAC isn't DRMed. Apple sells DRM-free music on the iTunes Store: do you buy it? Do you buy DRM-free music from Amazon? I'm gonna bet "no," and lay my money on the side that says you're just a bitch.
Dunno about him, but I would have. Let me put it really fucking clearly for you, freetard:
Acting like a douchebag will not make people like your cause.
Me? They've just ensured that I will never release code under the GPL again (I was considering it for a project, but fuck 'em), I will recommend BSD over Linux in all future cases, and I will not donate to any projects that use the GPL, period.
The cost of integrating the code, ensuring that the code works, and continues to work with later versions, almost certainly outweighs the sales from people who want FLAC or OGG. Thus, it's not worth doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 95 worked. NT 4.0 worked. OS X 10.0 worked. They were all feature-complete and usable. KDE 4.0? Ahahaha, no. (And KDE 4.1 is still horrible.)
As for GNOME--I wouldn't know, I switched to KDE before GNOME 2.0.
Doesn't it amaze you that this extremely basic functionality was omitted at all before a release?
I use Server 2008 on my desktop, since I got it free via MSDN. I haven't bought a copy of Windows in years, and wasn't going to start with Vista. :P
No, I'll just go back to Windows. Like I did. :) I don't stick with dead projects.
I'll stick with clay pigeons. I know they actually work. Range Chickens 4.0 is obviously a developer's release, after all.
Now, now, now, KDE 4.1 is only a testing release. KDE 4.2 will have what you want, really.
</historical revisionism>
Except that "folder view plasmoids" look retarded.
I want a desktop. I want a desktop that acts just like the desktop that all other relevant desktop environments on all other relevant operating systems. You know, like the one KDE3 has.
But no. This is just indicative of the future of KDE: "you want? Fuck you, we have a VISION." It pisses me off, because when I used a Linux desktop, KDE was always my choice. Can't say that anymore.
This is stupid. Whole numbers indicate whole releases. Revision numbers indicate improvements.
It's not the world's fault that KDE really, really, really didn't want to look stupid by shoving their release back even further.
There are devs for KDE who invite personal attacks by being condescending assholes (hi there, aseigo!) and while at least Troy was removed from the project, the rest still tromp cheerfully along, fucking up what was a good DE.
Maybe the less dickish devs can save KDE from itself, but I don't hold much hope.
I like having icons on my desktop; it lets me locate icons spatially instead of paging through a list. I want it to work like KDE 3 and not waste my time on "plasmoids". Until it at least attains the functionality of KDE 3 (does it amaze anyone else that they say they won't have a basic desktop, like every other DE, until around KDE 4.3?), it's worthless to me.
It's sort of like when they took food acquisition and eating out of RPGs.
Yeah, because Nethack just sucks because you actually have to keep moving...
Range Chickens? What, are these replacing clay pigeons?
Richard Branson is going to decide all of a sudden that he doesn't want to fund it anymore? Gee, I didn't know Slashdotters were psychic.
Er, clue for you: I hate Apple, I've owned exactly one Mac in my life (bought it used and it runs Linux now), and I'm still calling this fucking disgusting.
I don't think it's a noble crusade to work in an Apple store
Sorry, my antecedents were fucked up. It was 1:30AM. You probably think that what the FSF has decided to do here, harrassing people just doing their fucking jobs about politics that are outside the realm of what they're allowed to comment on, is a "noble crusade."
You've made my point pretty effectively, then. Nobody wants FLAC? Really?
Sigh. File systems are not the same thing, trollboy, because file systems are not an inherently commercial product. FLAC support in a commercial product is viable if and only if the increase in revenue will more than offset the costs to implement the functionality and support it down the road. If a feature will lose the company money, they have no reason to kow-tow to your crazy babble.
Which ones? Or are you operating under a different definition of "open"?
Because causing you some nerd rage will be fun--it plays WAV, doesn't it? That looks pretty open to me. Lossless, even!
And, still, tons of DRM'd music.
If people buy the no-DRM music, doesn't it make sense that Apple will be able to offer more no-DRM music?
And Amazon has no DRM'd music on their music store. None. Zip. Nada.
Never mind the whole issue of requiring the iTunes client to buy said music, instead of, say, a web browser.
Irrelevant. They choose to offer their products through a program of their choice. If you don't like that, you can continue RAGING AT THE MACHIIIIIIIIIIIINE.
Oh, and MP3 isn't DRM'd, but it is heavily patented. Some AACs are DRM'd, some aren't, and all are heavily patented. That's a problem. It's just a problem that it's convenient for Apple to ignore.
Nope. Not a problem at all.
I notice that you didn't answer the question as to whether you buy DRM-free music. I must thus conclude that you don't, and as such you are just a whining little bitch.
I think that's exactly what the FSF wishes would happen. They just don't have the clout to do it. Otherwise, they'd have said exactly that! "Don't be a dick, don't try to book as many appointments at the same store as you can, just book one and be done with it." Oh, no no no, this is unwanted evangelism at its best.
They're assholes.
Okay, so the freetards want to block everyone else from being about to get on with their day. Why should the freetards' "want" trump anyone else's, given that everyone else's is why the commercial establishment is open in the first place?
First, no one wanted hardlinked directories. Apple used them to do something cool (Time Machine).
Really? How the fuck do you know that? When they were first added to a file system, nobody wanted that? Please. Get your head out of your ass.
That's both incredibly capitalistic (nothing is worth doing unless it makes money? Really?)
What point is there in a company doing something that will lose it money and gain them nothing? Have you ever been in charge of a company, or even a division of a company? Something where making money is the fucking idea?
and missing the point -- Jobs did say he would embrace open formats. Actually, no, he said Apple would embrace them.
Ohh, so he has to embrace open formats you like. Never mind that QuickTime plays open formats, they're just not the open formats you like. Gotcha.
Not because of zealotry, but because at the very least, un-DRM'd media provides a better user experience. Doesn't that make it worth doing?
But as it turns out, even if we restrict the conversation to DRM, he's not following through.
MP3 isn't DRMed. AAC isn't DRMed. Apple sells DRM-free music on the iTunes Store: do you buy it? Do you buy DRM-free music from Amazon? I'm gonna bet "no," and lay my money on the side that says you're just a bitch.
Dunno about him, but I would have. Let me put it really fucking clearly for you, freetard:
Acting like a douchebag will not make people like your cause.
Me? They've just ensured that I will never release code under the GPL again (I was considering it for a project, but fuck 'em), I will recommend BSD over Linux in all future cases, and I will not donate to any projects that use the GPL, period.
Brilliant move, fuckwards.
Brilliant post. Well said, sir.
Pushing people to say "wow, fuck the FSF, I agree with them and still think they should die in a fucking fire" is not a brilliant move at all.
And as part of their job, they have to act as representatives for the company. Their personal politics have nothing to do with it.
But judging from your fucktarded .sig, you probably think this shit they're doing is a NOBLE CRUSAAAAAAAADE !
If anything related to the 'project' is hosted on FSF web servers--then yes, yes it has.
But why should they? Because you want them to?
The cost of integrating the code, ensuring that the code works, and continues to work with later versions, almost certainly outweighs the sales from people who want FLAC or OGG. Thus, it's not worth doing.
It's simple fucking economics.
Whooooooooosh.