But it would be more accurate to say the manufacturer was misleading you by saying that your card was the same as my card when it wasn't.
But it is the same. It does the exact same thing in Windows in the exact same way. That's like claiming that Apple's switching their OS from PPC to x86 makes it an entirely different OS that should go in a different box... no, it doesn't work that way in the real world. Maybe it does in fantasy-Linux-land, but in the real world nobody gives a crap what specific chips are soldiered on the board, just how it works.
Just checking the the ivtv supported hardware page there appears to be four different PVR-250s that they say will work. Is your card one of those? If you've tried to get it working recently or if your card is a different version from the ones they have listed maybe you could let them know so they can update the page.
It wouldn't do any good, because as I said before, the only way to tell if you have a "good" one or a "bad" one is to actually install it and IVTV and see if it works. Like I've been saying, all WinPVR 250s work the exact same in Windows regardless of whatever minor hardware change they made that the IVTV people couldn't cope with.
Anyway, it was like a year and a half ago. I don't even have my PC set up anymore.
(PS: For the third time this morning, the Submit button acts like the Preview button in Safari.)
Re:The problem with guis is they don't work
on
GUIs Get a Makeover
·
· Score: 1
Just recently, while formating a document in MS Word, I desperately wished to be able to select multiple sections at once.
You can do this in Word. I'm pretty sure you use the Control key when selecting, but it's been a long while since I've worked with it.
(PS: Yet again the Submit button acts like the Preview button in Safari. Ugh.)
Re:The problem with guis is they don't work
on
GUIs Get a Makeover
·
· Score: 1
P.S. Re-edit the post quickly because you forgot to insert br's.
1) Slashcode doesn't allow you to re-edit posts once they've been posted.
2) The post looks fine to me. Sure it's not your browser? Or maybe yet another Slashcode bug.
As a side note: don't you just hate it when manufacturers make different, mutually incompatible devices, and stick identical names on them? How are we supposed to know what we're buying, that way?
It doesn't matter, because (regardless of the sub-model of device) they all work flawlessly in Windows. The OS they're advertised to work with.
The problem is the Linux users who lied to me about their working, when at least one of the people who told me this KNEW that not all WinPVR 250 cards works. All the IVTV (the driver required) documentation also lies about this, even though you can find out the truth if you dig around in Google. Of course, the IVTV docs haven't been updated since (apparently) 2001 because all the directions are either incomplete or plain wrong, but still.
Anyway, it still sucks if _your_ device is not supported, even though the information you gathered before finding out indicated that it would be.
Yes it does. It also sucks that so many people wasted my time telling me my computer would make a perfect MythTV box with hardware I already owned when, as it turns out, this hardware doesn't work at all in Linux.
(PS: Yet again Slashcode has treated the Submit button as the Preview button in Safari. Fix this bug already! Christ.)
Re:The problem with guis is they don't work
on
GUIs Get a Makeover
·
· Score: 1
You're changing the debate. The post I was replying to basically says "a CLI is better for all users than a GUI". It didn't discuss which GUI is better than another. If WindowMaker is "nice" for you, then good... use it. As long as you're not a hypocrite saying a CLI is always better while, at the same time, using a GUI.
By the way "real virtual desktops"-- good oxymoron there.
Well, ok, but you'd still think they'd spend at least a few minutes checking out the technology that's been sitting idle (and exposed to weather) for ten thousand years and still works perfectly after all that time. Even if it was just spring-loaded holographic big-screen TVs.
Yes. One of the many things Windows does that is better for accessibility than Apple. Also, Windows has much better full keyboard access.
I wasn't making any statements about OS X being better or worse than Windows, I was just saying that if you use OS X, that utility is damned handy and it should be part of the OS.
Re:The problem with guis is they don't work
on
GUIs Get a Makeover
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
ny filesystem manipulation?
ANY filesystem manipulation?
Like if I wanted to sort my digital images (with the helpful camera name IMG0030-IMG0090) based on which ones were pictures of my cat? That would be quicker with a CLI?
Come on, man. Think about these things for a few minutes before you post them. You'll look smarter.
Re:The problem with guis is they don't work
on
GUIs Get a Makeover
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Depends on the type of "expert." What if I'm an expert drafter? Or an expert artist (visual or musical)? Or, hell, even an expert accountant?
The only experts who really benefit from CLIs are experts who deal primarily in text.
But the most important thing to me is this: It's very easy to run a CLI in a GUI; it's impossible to run a GUI in a CLI. Therefore, all computers should come with a nice GUI by default and users can easily run Terminal.app (or whatever) if they want a CLI.
The other thing the GIMP fans regularly forget to mention is that Photoshop Elements (that does about 80-90% of what Photoshop proper does, and everything a typical home user will ever need Photoshop for) costs only $90. Or sometimes less. And, naturally, it's also about three times easier-to-use than GIMP is.
Usually, they're too busy rallying on about "GIMP is cheap and Photoshop is $600! Yada yada!" to mention the affordable Photoshop version.
It looks like a weird combination of OS X and Windows with a good dose of Quicksilver for good measure. (Quicksilver is a nifty Mac OS X app that lets you type in a few letters then "intelligently" finds what you were trying to do and presents it to you-- very much like the center pane on the first screenshot there.)
If you mean the Desktop toolbar (which usually resides on the taskbar and can become a menu if it holds more items than there is space), it simply contains every icon that you have on your desktop. So to add entries to it, you just add an icon to your desktop.
I have no clue if that's the answer you're after or not.
I love how everyone on Slashdot, a supposedly tech-oriented site, is such a luddite.
Look, why not let the desklets exist, and then you can just turn them off if you don't want them, ok? Why impose your view "this is useless" on the entire universe when you can, with the click of a button, just turn it off and work your own way?
Criminy. We see the same crap about Auto-Format in Word all the time. If you don't like it, just turn it the hell off.
* Mouse tracking across multiple, big displays is slow or inaccurate unless you've got the twitch muscles of a fifteen year old first-person gamer. I want trackers on top of each screen that can monitor where I'm looking and move the mouse cursor to that spot.
It puts a nice big green target around your mouse so you can locate it more easily when you have lots of screen real estate.
This SHOULD be a standard OS feature, but for some moronic reason Apple chose to stick with the same 16-pixel tall mouse they used on 512x384 screens for 1600x1200 screens. I guess everyone at Apple has 20/15 vision.
So you don't hate ribbons, you hate change at all. That's fine, but don't pretend that it's some specific change you hate when you haven't even given it a chance.
Right. So we'll mandate that people acquire every possible piece of hardware on the planet before they're allowed to put together a Linux distribution.
That has nothing to do with what I said. What I said is that if the distribution claims to support a particular piece of hardware, they should QA their install process to make sure that particular piece of hardware works. I was assuming when I wrote that that the USB keyboard worked after the distro was installed but (as the original poster replied) it turns out I was wrong about that... so perhaps this statement is wrong and the distro doesn't support USB keyboards at all anyway, in which case you wouldn't expect them to work with the installer any more than the OS itself.
Because, you know, the Windows installer also supports all makes and models of SATA drive and SCSI controller that an installed Windows supports, without requiring such things as inserting driver disks and the like.
We're not talking about Windows, we're talking about a Linux distro. This sentence is entirely irrelevant. Why the hell do Linux users always have to bring Windows into everything? It's a sick obsession.
Maybe his keyboard isn't a real USB keyboard? I don't know if this is the case for keyboard, but I know there are standards for certain classes of USB hardware, and I would consider it perfectly acceptible if some OS supported devices that comply with the standard and not devices that didn't.
So it's an imaginary USB keyboard?... ok, snark aside, I understand what you're getting at, but there are two factors here: 1) Why would someone build a USB keyboard that didn't support the USB standard and (therefore) required special drivers before it worked? 2) The term "real" here is very misleading. Obviously it's a real keyboard, it's made of plastic and sitting on the desk. What you mean is "standards-compliant" or something similar. And you're right, Linux can't reasonably support this type of keyboard if one exists. (And I doubt any exist.)
In that case, they're lying, and they deserve whatever liars deserve. I've personally never encountered this, but if you have, you have every right to be outraged.
The problem with my WinPVR 250 was that every person in Linux-ville assured me, over and over, that WinPVR 250s worked with Linux. It turns out the *truth* is that *some* WinPVR 250s work with Linux, and there's no way to tell (short of installing the hardware and trying out it) which ones do and which ones do not. As mine was way past it's return/exchange date, and there was no way to tell if another would work even if I did exchange it, it turns out that my WinPVR 250 does not work with Linux. Anybody claiming that WinPVR 250s work with Linux without mentioning that only some do is lying, IMO.
I've had other bad experiences, but they're pretty old and out-of-date. (RedHat 6.2 claiming to support my Soundblaster 128 then not producing any sound, for example. I think there were a couple others, but I'd have to go back and look at my notes.)
If Linux supports the USB keyboard when it's fully installed, there's no reason that the installer shouldn't except the programmers of it didn't bother to do any sort of QA process what-so-ever.
If you go to (to use an example) Ubuntu's website, and check the specs, and it says right there in black and white "supports USB keyboards," then that means it should support USB keyboards all-around. If it doesn't, it should say "supports USB keyboards (PS/2 keyboard required for install)" or something that isn't as misleading.
I don't know what distros he tried, but I've encountered tons of examples of Linux distributions claiming to support things that they didn't actually support. The latest one was probably my WinPVR 250 card that numerous people claimed was supported in Linux, but which never worked despite installing the driver following the exact directions.
Gamers who think have a LOT more to fear from a possible Electronic Arts monopoly on game development than they do from a slight decrease in competition for console hardware. In fact, in most console generations there have only been two serious contenders and a few hanger-ons. Having three strong contenders is a rare thing, and losing one would just put us back to the status quo.
EA, meanwhile, has sewn up exclusive licenses for all the popular sports, and something like 75% of all video games sold are EA games. Think about that if you care about the gaming industry.
I don't get what Microsoft could possibly have to gain from buying Sony's gaming systems. They already have their own console which, frankly, is better in almost every way. They already support a HD format that's almost entirely incompatible with the one Sony supports. They'd basically be throwing 75% of the stuff bought from Sony out the window.
The only thing they need from Sony is Japanese developer support, and that wouldn't necessarily come along with the Playstation should they acquire it.
I could see Samsung or some other adventurous company buying it, maybe. But Microsoft, never.
I love it when people start the post with, basically: "I have no sense of aesthetics whatsoever" and then proceed to give aesthetic reviews of websites.
If you don't know it, and you admit you don't know it, why the heck should anybody keep reading the post? That's just goofy as hell.
What about the episode where they used the arrow or whatever to get *TELEPORTED* to a holodeck-chamber somewhere. How did they get back? Did the arrow activate it again to teleport them back? Why didn't they stick around to figure out the teleportation technology? Or at least take the teleporter with them?
That was just bad. They could have at least spent a couple lines of dialog giving a method of getting back to Kobol and why they couldn't bring the teleporter with them.
One of the big features of the original 1984 Macintosh was the brag that it had enough CPU power to do speech synthesis while updating the entire screen at the same time. It did a scrolling marque of the text it was reading aloud. When was Wargames made? I'm sure it was after 1984...
Could be worse. Remember around the time of Tora, Tora, Tora when bullets made that horrible "ping" ricochet sound constantly throughout the film? At least the sound on guns is a bit better now.
Of course, swords are still terrible... no, you don't hear a "chaaaaang" sound when you move your sword through the air. Sorry.
Slashdot Mirror
But it would be more accurate to say the manufacturer was misleading you by saying that your card was the same as my card when it wasn't.
But it is the same. It does the exact same thing in Windows in the exact same way. That's like claiming that Apple's switching their OS from PPC to x86 makes it an entirely different OS that should go in a different box... no, it doesn't work that way in the real world. Maybe it does in fantasy-Linux-land, but in the real world nobody gives a crap what specific chips are soldiered on the board, just how it works.
Just checking the the ivtv supported hardware page there appears to be four different PVR-250s that they say will work. Is your card one of those? If you've tried to get it working recently or if your card is a different version from the ones they have listed maybe you could let them know so they can update the page.
It wouldn't do any good, because as I said before, the only way to tell if you have a "good" one or a "bad" one is to actually install it and IVTV and see if it works. Like I've been saying, all WinPVR 250s work the exact same in Windows regardless of whatever minor hardware change they made that the IVTV people couldn't cope with.
Anyway, it was like a year and a half ago. I don't even have my PC set up anymore.
(PS: For the third time this morning, the Submit button acts like the Preview button in Safari.)
Just recently, while formating a document in MS Word, I desperately wished to be able to select multiple sections at once.
You can do this in Word. I'm pretty sure you use the Control key when selecting, but it's been a long while since I've worked with it.
(PS: Yet again the Submit button acts like the Preview button in Safari. Ugh.)
P.S. Re-edit the post quickly because you forgot to insert br's.
1) Slashcode doesn't allow you to re-edit posts once they've been posted.
2) The post looks fine to me. Sure it's not your browser? Or maybe yet another Slashcode bug.
As a side note: don't you just hate it when manufacturers make different, mutually incompatible devices, and stick identical names on them? How are we supposed to know what we're buying, that way?
It doesn't matter, because (regardless of the sub-model of device) they all work flawlessly in Windows. The OS they're advertised to work with.
The problem is the Linux users who lied to me about their working, when at least one of the people who told me this KNEW that not all WinPVR 250 cards works. All the IVTV (the driver required) documentation also lies about this, even though you can find out the truth if you dig around in Google. Of course, the IVTV docs haven't been updated since (apparently) 2001 because all the directions are either incomplete or plain wrong, but still.
Anyway, it still sucks if _your_ device is not supported, even though the information you gathered before finding out indicated that it would be.
Yes it does. It also sucks that so many people wasted my time telling me my computer would make a perfect MythTV box with hardware I already owned when, as it turns out, this hardware doesn't work at all in Linux.
(PS: Yet again Slashcode has treated the Submit button as the Preview button in Safari. Fix this bug already! Christ.)
You're changing the debate. The post I was replying to basically says "a CLI is better for all users than a GUI". It didn't discuss which GUI is better than another. If WindowMaker is "nice" for you, then good... use it. As long as you're not a hypocrite saying a CLI is always better while, at the same time, using a GUI.
By the way "real virtual desktops"-- good oxymoron there.
Well, ok, but you'd still think they'd spend at least a few minutes checking out the technology that's been sitting idle (and exposed to weather) for ten thousand years and still works perfectly after all that time. Even if it was just spring-loaded holographic big-screen TVs.
Yes. One of the many things Windows does that is better for accessibility than Apple. Also, Windows has much better full keyboard access.
I wasn't making any statements about OS X being better or worse than Windows, I was just saying that if you use OS X, that utility is damned handy and it should be part of the OS.
ny filesystem manipulation?
ANY filesystem manipulation?
Like if I wanted to sort my digital images (with the helpful camera name IMG0030-IMG0090) based on which ones were pictures of my cat? That would be quicker with a CLI?
Come on, man. Think about these things for a few minutes before you post them. You'll look smarter.
Depends on the type of "expert." What if I'm an expert drafter? Or an expert artist (visual or musical)? Or, hell, even an expert accountant?
The only experts who really benefit from CLIs are experts who deal primarily in text.
But the most important thing to me is this: It's very easy to run a CLI in a GUI; it's impossible to run a GUI in a CLI. Therefore, all computers should come with a nice GUI by default and users can easily run Terminal.app (or whatever) if they want a CLI.
The other thing the GIMP fans regularly forget to mention is that Photoshop Elements (that does about 80-90% of what Photoshop proper does, and everything a typical home user will ever need Photoshop for) costs only $90. Or sometimes less. And, naturally, it's also about three times easier-to-use than GIMP is.
Usually, they're too busy rallying on about "GIMP is cheap and Photoshop is $600! Yada yada!" to mention the affordable Photoshop version.
It looks like a weird combination of OS X and Windows with a good dose of Quicksilver for good measure. (Quicksilver is a nifty Mac OS X app that lets you type in a few letters then "intelligently" finds what you were trying to do and presents it to you-- very much like the center pane on the first screenshot there.)
What is the "XP Desktop Menu?"
If you mean the Desktop toolbar (which usually resides on the taskbar and can become a menu if it holds more items than there is space), it simply contains every icon that you have on your desktop. So to add entries to it, you just add an icon to your desktop.
I have no clue if that's the answer you're after or not.
I love how everyone on Slashdot, a supposedly tech-oriented site, is such a luddite.
Look, why not let the desklets exist, and then you can just turn them off if you don't want them, ok? Why impose your view "this is useless" on the entire universe when you can, with the click of a button, just turn it off and work your own way?
Criminy. We see the same crap about Auto-Format in Word all the time. If you don't like it, just turn it the hell off.
* Mouse tracking across multiple, big displays is slow or inaccurate unless you've got the twitch muscles of a fifteen year old first-person gamer. I want trackers on top of each screen that can monitor where I'm looking and move the mouse cursor to that spot.
If you're on a Mac, this will save your life:
http://2point5fish.com/
It puts a nice big green target around your mouse so you can locate it more easily when you have lots of screen real estate.
This SHOULD be a standard OS feature, but for some moronic reason Apple chose to stick with the same 16-pixel tall mouse they used on 512x384 screens for 1600x1200 screens. I guess everyone at Apple has 20/15 vision.
So you don't hate ribbons, you hate change at all. That's fine, but don't pretend that it's some specific change you hate when you haven't even given it a chance.
You do realize that Windows doesn't represent every GUI in existence, right?
There was a hilarious bit about that on a Red Dwarf episode also.
"Logically, sir, there is only one way you could have opened that door... if Mechanoids could vomit, I'd be into my third bag by now!"
"We did it! Give me five!" "I can beat that. I can give you 15!" (holding up the severed hand)
Right. So we'll mandate that people acquire every possible piece of hardware on the planet before they're allowed to put together a Linux distribution.
... ok, snark aside, I understand what you're getting at, but there are two factors here:
That has nothing to do with what I said. What I said is that if the distribution claims to support a particular piece of hardware, they should QA their install process to make sure that particular piece of hardware works. I was assuming when I wrote that that the USB keyboard worked after the distro was installed but (as the original poster replied) it turns out I was wrong about that... so perhaps this statement is wrong and the distro doesn't support USB keyboards at all anyway, in which case you wouldn't expect them to work with the installer any more than the OS itself.
Because, you know, the Windows installer also supports all makes and models of SATA drive and SCSI controller that an installed Windows supports, without requiring such things as inserting driver disks and the like.
We're not talking about Windows, we're talking about a Linux distro. This sentence is entirely irrelevant. Why the hell do Linux users always have to bring Windows into everything? It's a sick obsession.
Maybe his keyboard isn't a real USB keyboard? I don't know if this is the case for keyboard, but I know there are standards for certain classes of USB hardware, and I would consider it perfectly acceptible if some OS supported devices that comply with the standard and not devices that didn't.
So it's an imaginary USB keyboard?
1) Why would someone build a USB keyboard that didn't support the USB standard and (therefore) required special drivers before it worked?
2) The term "real" here is very misleading. Obviously it's a real keyboard, it's made of plastic and sitting on the desk. What you mean is "standards-compliant" or something similar. And you're right, Linux can't reasonably support this type of keyboard if one exists. (And I doubt any exist.)
In that case, they're lying, and they deserve whatever liars deserve. I've personally never encountered this, but if you have, you have every right to be outraged.
The problem with my WinPVR 250 was that every person in Linux-ville assured me, over and over, that WinPVR 250s worked with Linux. It turns out the *truth* is that *some* WinPVR 250s work with Linux, and there's no way to tell (short of installing the hardware and trying out it) which ones do and which ones do not. As mine was way past it's return/exchange date, and there was no way to tell if another would work even if I did exchange it, it turns out that my WinPVR 250 does not work with Linux. Anybody claiming that WinPVR 250s work with Linux without mentioning that only some do is lying, IMO.
I've had other bad experiences, but they're pretty old and out-of-date. (RedHat 6.2 claiming to support my Soundblaster 128 then not producing any sound, for example. I think there were a couple others, but I'd have to go back and look at my notes.)
Bullshit.
If Linux supports the USB keyboard when it's fully installed, there's no reason that the installer shouldn't except the programmers of it didn't bother to do any sort of QA process what-so-ever.
If you go to (to use an example) Ubuntu's website, and check the specs, and it says right there in black and white "supports USB keyboards," then that means it should support USB keyboards all-around. If it doesn't, it should say "supports USB keyboards (PS/2 keyboard required for install)" or something that isn't as misleading.
I don't know what distros he tried, but I've encountered tons of examples of Linux distributions claiming to support things that they didn't actually support. The latest one was probably my WinPVR 250 card that numerous people claimed was supported in Linux, but which never worked despite installing the driver following the exact directions.
Gamers who think have a LOT more to fear from a possible Electronic Arts monopoly on game development than they do from a slight decrease in competition for console hardware. In fact, in most console generations there have only been two serious contenders and a few hanger-ons. Having three strong contenders is a rare thing, and losing one would just put us back to the status quo.
EA, meanwhile, has sewn up exclusive licenses for all the popular sports, and something like 75% of all video games sold are EA games. Think about that if you care about the gaming industry.
I don't get what Microsoft could possibly have to gain from buying Sony's gaming systems. They already have their own console which, frankly, is better in almost every way. They already support a HD format that's almost entirely incompatible with the one Sony supports. They'd basically be throwing 75% of the stuff bought from Sony out the window.
The only thing they need from Sony is Japanese developer support, and that wouldn't necessarily come along with the Playstation should they acquire it.
I could see Samsung or some other adventurous company buying it, maybe. But Microsoft, never.
I love it when people start the post with, basically: "I have no sense of aesthetics whatsoever" and then proceed to give aesthetic reviews of websites.
If you don't know it, and you admit you don't know it, why the heck should anybody keep reading the post? That's just goofy as hell.
What about the episode where they used the arrow or whatever to get *TELEPORTED* to a holodeck-chamber somewhere. How did they get back? Did the arrow activate it again to teleport them back? Why didn't they stick around to figure out the teleportation technology? Or at least take the teleporter with them?
That was just bad. They could have at least spent a couple lines of dialog giving a method of getting back to Kobol and why they couldn't bring the teleporter with them.
One of the big features of the original 1984 Macintosh was the brag that it had enough CPU power to do speech synthesis while updating the entire screen at the same time. It did a scrolling marque of the text it was reading aloud. When was Wargames made? I'm sure it was after 1984...
Could be worse. Remember around the time of Tora, Tora, Tora when bullets made that horrible "ping" ricochet sound constantly throughout the film? At least the sound on guns is a bit better now.
Of course, swords are still terrible... no, you don't hear a "chaaaaang" sound when you move your sword through the air. Sorry.