Yeah, but this is the problem: Some shortcuts use the Control key, some shortcuts use the Alt key, some shortcuts use the Windows key. As a Mac user, I come to a Windows box and I'm thinking, "man, is copy control-C or is it alt-C?"
On the Macintosh, *all* shortcuts are performed by the Command key. It makes things a hell of a lot easier.
Ok, but are Linux users willing to pay *enough* to make it worth the support costs required for that platform? You've (perhaps) addressed one part of my argument while ignoring the other part. As a Mac user, I wouldn't want to see the cost of Mac Office go up so that Microsoft could open another huge call center or usability lab for Linux-only problems. And I'm sure Linux people won't want to pay $30 more for Office because of the support requirement, either.
There is plenty of interoperability. Maybe it isn't all polished and marketable as you would like, but there is interoperability galore in the form of starndard file formats, protocols, etc. Where interoperability is difficult, I doubt any OSS developers are particularly surprised.
Try this in three OSes, Macintosh OS X, Windows XP, and any Linux:
Create a new spreadsheet and fill a few cells with gibberish.
Select and copy those cells.
Now open up a paint program (a seperate paint program; going from AppleWorks SS to AppleWorks Paint doesn't count, nor does OpenOffice).
Paste in the cells from the spreadsheet.
On MacOS and Windows, you'll get an image of the cells that looks, on screen, exactly what they looked like in the spreadsheet program-- seamless copy and paste between different applications AND different data types.
In Linux, you'll get either nothing, or just the text of the cells with no formatting.
That's the type of interoperability people want. It's not complicated stuff, it's simply Copy&Paste functionality. If Linux figures the basics out, the stuff MacOS and Windows had sewn up in 1995, it'll rule the world.
No shit. If OSS coders actually recycled previously-written code, they could easily make an OS better than MacOS X in only a couple years. But it would take two things:
A willingness to toss out legacy crap, A willingness to share code.
And I don't see either of those things happening, at least not for a long while.
Think back to how much easier Windows became to use when application developers adopted the standard toolbar-- not only do the icons for "new," "open," "save," etc look alike in every application, but they're all in the same location on screen relative to each other.
Look at how much mileage Apple got out of their standard File and Edit menus-- I could open an application I've never seen before and be confident that Command-S would save the document and Command-Z would undo my last action without bothering to look in the menu for the shortcut keys.
Standardize how menus are laid out. Standardize toolbars, to the extent required. (i.e. just the ones dealing with files that ALL applications need.) Standardize on how to store image thumbnails for Open and Save dialogs. Standardize on whether to use a MDI interface or not. You know, the small stuff.
I think it makes less sense, in X11 or Windows, to have to wait for Word or OpenOffice to load it's bloated self all over again just because I closed the last document *before* opening a new one instead of opening the new one first.
But you're used to what you're used to. Both methods have benefits and drawbacks.
I'm not sure how it matters if it was a virus or aliens from outer space - you lost your thesis because you didn't have a backup when "something unexpected happened".
No joke. Plus the criticism that the parent's question is a pretty crappy interview question... what the hell do you expect him to answer? "No, you should never use Windows again! No soup for you!"
At what point in marketshare would Linux need on the client before Microsoft would start porting their applications over to it?
I ask this because it won't be long before the Linux client marketshare will be greater than the Macintosh...
Generally, Linux users don't pay for things. If they can't get it for free, they either pirate it anyway or use something else.
In addition, Linux requires ten times as much support as any other operating system. There's (generally) three versions of Macintosh to support (10.1, 10.2, 10.3), four versions of Windows to support (98, ME, 2000 Pro, XP)... and how many Linux distributions? A dozen? Two dozen? And each Linux distribution has how many versions still in common use?
I don't see much incentive for ANY for-profit corporation porting to Linux, except perhaps for "goodwill."
Yeah, but there's still no option to print maps in black-and-white for us people who only own laser printers. Do you know how HARD reading a giant "purple" line through a map of a cluttered city is when printed in greyscale?
No, that's ludicrous. If that was the case, "user" accounts (and file permissions in general) wouldn't exist in Windows XP.
Microsoft Windows creates admin users by default because a TON of Windows software (including software by large companies, like IBM and Adobe) don't have any QA done for normal user accounts. If Joe Bob tries to install Photoshop Elements and can't because of file permissions, he's liable to call Microsoft and blame Microsoft before blaming Adobe. Probably end up saying something like, "it's MY computer, why can't I use all my files?"
I forgive you for being blunt, but not for being wrong.
The only thing you can blame the OP for is confusing the word "releases" with "distributions," but he's entirely correct. I'm not even a Linux user, and there's, what, SuSE, Debian, Ubuntu, Redhat/Fedora, Slackware, and probably a half-dozen I'm missing. Of these, Fedora and SuSE are available in computer stores and the rest require downloads. Then when you get your distribution you have to pick a window manager-- do you want Gnome, KDE, or one of the more obscure ones?
Then to make issues worse, there are the scares that happen. I was going to try Linux (again[1]) awhile back, but then I read on Slashdot that one of those major distributions has a bug which wipes out your Windows partition when you install. But which one is it? I can't even remember anymore, but I think it's Fedora... in any case, a bug like that being in a shipping software product is enough to convince me not to try it.
Maybe when Linux has a bit more cohesion and a bit more QA applied to it, then I'll give it another go. But for the time-being... yuck. I'll stick to my Mac and Windows XP.
Oh, as for some background, I'm a software developer for MacOS and I wrote a good amount of code for a MUD (based on SMAUG... a buddy and I converted the C in SMAUG to C++ then added a SQLite back-end to it.) I might not be uber-hacker-man who can tell what a program's doing by looking at the blinking disk activity light, but by any realistic standard I'm an advanced user.
[1] I tried RedHat 6.2 and Corel Linux 1.0 when they were current.
RedHat didn't configure the ethernet card for DHCP by default, after begging a buddy I finally managed to get that fix. Then it didn't install a driver for my Soundblaster 128 card, despite saying on the website that it supported that exact card out-of-the-box. No QA with that product.
Corel worked with my sound card, at least, but still had problems with DHCP and I never did get my printer working right with it. I gave up with Corel decided to discontinue the product.
However, if you are careful with your machine and what you install, windows can be an incredibly productive work environment. IMNSHO, expert users can achieve common goals quicker with windows than linux because linux always needs hacking. It can do anything, but it always has a price. Windows is easy and consistent and I like that. The command line OTOH is extremely powerful and doesn't change like the GUI of the month. In the end, when the sh*t hits the fan, I reach for a windows box with putty installed.
You gotta get a MacOS X box, stat. If you think Windows is good because you don't have to tinker, MacOS X will blow your socks off.
The hospital I work at is required to run some insurance-related software for MediCare and MedicAid. It runs on Windows and requires a Windows server. There is no equilivant to this software for Macintosh (although I haven't checked Linux.)
Now that person might have just been dumb, but they also might have been making a good point.
This always comes up in these threads and it's always shot right back down.
Rebooting to play a game is stupid. Playing a game from a CD without the ability to add new drivers (for new mouses, keyboards, joysticks, sound cards, video cards-- all those things games require) is stupid. What if you buy a new video card? Do you have to now go out and buy Starcraft v.5.2 from a store? Oh, and what if I want to run my IM client in the background while I play? Or a print driver, maybe my gaming machine also drive my wife's printer. Or a voice communication program with a headset for those games that require teamwork. What if my HD is in a format the CD's OS doesn't understand, and so the CD's OS can't save games or use swap?
Rebooting your computer to play games made sense for Commodore-64 computers. Now it doesn't. Stop posting that idea unless you've thought through and solved ALL the problems posed above.
This idea always comes up in these threads and it's always just as stupid as the last time.
What if I want to run voice-com software with my game? Or keep my game running in Windowed mode with my IM client open in the background? What about drivers, is the game disk going to contain every driver in its OS install for every piece of hardware? What about disk partitions, when if the game disk only supports NTFS and I upgrade my main OS to "Ultra-FS" or something? Is the game useless then?
It's just a dumb idea. Nobody wants to reboot to run their games. Nobody wants to close out all their other applications to run their games. Drop it already.
Yeah, but the Mac also had great games that NEVER came out on the PC. Like Marathon and Marathon Infinity. Or Pathways into Darkness. Or Mission: Thunderbolt. Or Crystal Quest. And Myst, which came out on Mac years before it came out for any other platforms.
Anyway, most of the games you mentioned came out at the same time on Mac and PC... ports that are delayed more than 3-4 months sell crappy.
You had my attention until "relatively few bugs." America's Army is a very very buggy game, buddy, and that's all there is to it.
Frequently the game will say you joined the opposing team, allow you to choose a weapon slot in the opposing team and then, about.5 seconds before the match starts, put you back on your original team with a 'leftover' (crappy) weapon slot.
Frequently players who have passed the sniper training aren't allowed to use the sniper weapons for no apparent reason. A buddy of mine says that he can use sniper weapons on some maps/servers but not on others... for my account, I can't use them at all despite completing the training for them.
Often you'll see (in observer mode) players who are holding two weapons at the same time. Or RPG ammo that just kind of hovers behind the player. Or crouching players who are moving at the speed of running players.
Often you'll be kicked from servers for no reason (server crash maybe?). Or, the server will throw you to the main menu making it look like you're kicked when you're not.
In addition to all of this, the AA servers are configured strangely. Some maps have 'west coast' servers and some don't. Which means I can find a favorite map I love playing, but there are no lag-free servers running it.
You also have to remember that whether or not we build a NEW telescope, we're still have to spend at least a billion to de-orbit Hubble in one way or another. So you'd be looking at $1 billion for "Hubble-disposal" and another $2 billion to launch a replacement-- that's a lot more expensive than the (estimated) cost of just repairing Hubble and swapping out some better equipment in it.
Well, whatever the technical reasons, it's the year 2005: ANY program that allows me to type and input a non-trivial amount of text should have a red-underlining spellchecker as part of the package. It's just pathetic that so many Windows and Linux programs leave out this essential function, as do most IM clients regardless of platform.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the best way to ensure that something happens is to start a web-based petition against it.
Seriously, has any of these petitions EVER had ANY effect on ANYTHING? What a waste of time.
Yeah, but this is the problem: Some shortcuts use the Control key, some shortcuts use the Alt key, some shortcuts use the Windows key. As a Mac user, I come to a Windows box and I'm thinking, "man, is copy control-C or is it alt-C?"
On the Macintosh, *all* shortcuts are performed by the Command key. It makes things a hell of a lot easier.
Ok, but are Linux users willing to pay *enough* to make it worth the support costs required for that platform? You've (perhaps) addressed one part of my argument while ignoring the other part. As a Mac user, I wouldn't want to see the cost of Mac Office go up so that Microsoft could open another huge call center or usability lab for Linux-only problems. And I'm sure Linux people won't want to pay $30 more for Office because of the support requirement, either.
There is plenty of interoperability. Maybe it isn't all polished and marketable as you would like, but there is interoperability galore in the form of starndard file formats, protocols, etc. Where interoperability is difficult, I doubt any OSS developers are particularly surprised.
Try this in three OSes, Macintosh OS X, Windows XP, and any Linux:
Create a new spreadsheet and fill a few cells with gibberish.
Select and copy those cells.
Now open up a paint program (a seperate paint program; going from AppleWorks SS to AppleWorks Paint doesn't count, nor does OpenOffice).
Paste in the cells from the spreadsheet.
On MacOS and Windows, you'll get an image of the cells that looks, on screen, exactly what they looked like in the spreadsheet program-- seamless copy and paste between different applications AND different data types.
In Linux, you'll get either nothing, or just the text of the cells with no formatting.
That's the type of interoperability people want. It's not complicated stuff, it's simply Copy&Paste functionality. If Linux figures the basics out, the stuff MacOS and Windows had sewn up in 1995, it'll rule the world.
No shit. If OSS coders actually recycled previously-written code, they could easily make an OS better than MacOS X in only a couple years. But it would take two things:
A willingness to toss out legacy crap,
A willingness to share code.
And I don't see either of those things happening, at least not for a long while.
You can standardize on small things.
Think back to how much easier Windows became to use when application developers adopted the standard toolbar-- not only do the icons for "new," "open," "save," etc look alike in every application, but they're all in the same location on screen relative to each other.
Look at how much mileage Apple got out of their standard File and Edit menus-- I could open an application I've never seen before and be confident that Command-S would save the document and Command-Z would undo my last action without bothering to look in the menu for the shortcut keys.
Standardize how menus are laid out. Standardize toolbars, to the extent required. (i.e. just the ones dealing with files that ALL applications need.) Standardize on how to store image thumbnails for Open and Save dialogs. Standardize on whether to use a MDI interface or not. You know, the small stuff.
I think it makes less sense, in X11 or Windows, to have to wait for Word or OpenOffice to load it's bloated self all over again just because I closed the last document *before* opening a new one instead of opening the new one first.
But you're used to what you're used to. Both methods have benefits and drawbacks.
It could be worse. It could be Lotus Notes-- and that's an application with a huge corporation that should know better behind it.
It's amazing how a single year of using Lotus Notes suddenly changes your perspective on what a "bad" user interface is. Talk about lowering the bar.
I'm not sure how it matters if it was a virus or aliens from outer space - you lost your thesis because you didn't have a backup when "something unexpected happened".
No joke. Plus the criticism that the parent's question is a pretty crappy interview question... what the hell do you expect him to answer? "No, you should never use Windows again! No soup for you!"
Bill Gates has said that in ten years, there will only be two operating systems - Windows and Linux.
Source...?
At what point in marketshare would Linux need on the client before Microsoft would start porting their applications over to it?
I ask this because it won't be long before the Linux client marketshare will be greater than the Macintosh...
Generally, Linux users don't pay for things. If they can't get it for free, they either pirate it anyway or use something else.
In addition, Linux requires ten times as much support as any other operating system. There's (generally) three versions of Macintosh to support (10.1, 10.2, 10.3), four versions of Windows to support (98, ME, 2000 Pro, XP)... and how many Linux distributions? A dozen? Two dozen? And each Linux distribution has how many versions still in common use?
I don't see much incentive for ANY for-profit corporation porting to Linux, except perhaps for "goodwill."
Yeah, but there's still no option to print maps in black-and-white for us people who only own laser printers. Do you know how HARD reading a giant "purple" line through a map of a cluttered city is when printed in greyscale?
I'm replying to the parent of my post, who wrote:
The "some piece of software" is designed to work only with full admin rights because of the way MICROSOFT designed Windows in the first place!
Where he claimed that Microsoft designed Windows to have only full admin rights for all users. I was pointing out how stupid that assertion was.
No, that's ludicrous. If that was the case, "user" accounts (and file permissions in general) wouldn't exist in Windows XP.
Microsoft Windows creates admin users by default because a TON of Windows software (including software by large companies, like IBM and Adobe) don't have any QA done for normal user accounts. If Joe Bob tries to install Photoshop Elements and can't because of file permissions, he's liable to call Microsoft and blame Microsoft before blaming Adobe. Probably end up saying something like, "it's MY computer, why can't I use all my files?"
I forgive you for being blunt, but not for being wrong.
The only thing you can blame the OP for is confusing the word "releases" with "distributions," but he's entirely correct. I'm not even a Linux user, and there's, what, SuSE, Debian, Ubuntu, Redhat/Fedora, Slackware, and probably a half-dozen I'm missing. Of these, Fedora and SuSE are available in computer stores and the rest require downloads. Then when you get your distribution you have to pick a window manager-- do you want Gnome, KDE, or one of the more obscure ones?
Then to make issues worse, there are the scares that happen. I was going to try Linux (again[1]) awhile back, but then I read on Slashdot that one of those major distributions has a bug which wipes out your Windows partition when you install. But which one is it? I can't even remember anymore, but I think it's Fedora... in any case, a bug like that being in a shipping software product is enough to convince me not to try it.
Maybe when Linux has a bit more cohesion and a bit more QA applied to it, then I'll give it another go. But for the time-being... yuck. I'll stick to my Mac and Windows XP.
Oh, as for some background, I'm a software developer for MacOS and I wrote a good amount of code for a MUD (based on SMAUG... a buddy and I converted the C in SMAUG to C++ then added a SQLite back-end to it.) I might not be uber-hacker-man who can tell what a program's doing by looking at the blinking disk activity light, but by any realistic standard I'm an advanced user.
[1] I tried RedHat 6.2 and Corel Linux 1.0 when they were current.
RedHat didn't configure the ethernet card for DHCP by default, after begging a buddy I finally managed to get that fix. Then it didn't install a driver for my Soundblaster 128 card, despite saying on the website that it supported that exact card out-of-the-box. No QA with that product.
Corel worked with my sound card, at least, but still had problems with DHCP and I never did get my printer working right with it. I gave up with Corel decided to discontinue the product.
However, if you are careful with your machine and what you install, windows can be an incredibly productive work environment. IMNSHO, expert users can achieve common goals quicker with windows than linux because linux always needs hacking. It can do anything, but it always has a price. Windows is easy and consistent and I like that. The command line OTOH is extremely powerful and doesn't change like the GUI of the month. In the end, when the sh*t hits the fan, I reach for a windows box with putty installed.
You gotta get a MacOS X box, stat. If you think Windows is good because you don't have to tinker, MacOS X will blow your socks off.
The hospital I work at is required to run some insurance-related software for MediCare and MedicAid. It runs on Windows and requires a Windows server. There is no equilivant to this software for Macintosh (although I haven't checked Linux.)
Now that person might have just been dumb, but they also might have been making a good point.
Nothing about Family Guy is subtle. Sorry, I'm not buying it.
Futurama had subtle jokes, like when they used the X-Ray on Bender's head and the CPU inside was a 6502, that was subtle.
Tried it... it doesn't do red underlines. It also doesn't "auto-check" when I hit submit. No good.
This always comes up in these threads and it's always shot right back down.
Rebooting to play a game is stupid. Playing a game from a CD without the ability to add new drivers (for new mouses, keyboards, joysticks, sound cards, video cards-- all those things games require) is stupid. What if you buy a new video card? Do you have to now go out and buy Starcraft v.5.2 from a store? Oh, and what if I want to run my IM client in the background while I play? Or a print driver, maybe my gaming machine also drive my wife's printer. Or a voice communication program with a headset for those games that require teamwork. What if my HD is in a format the CD's OS doesn't understand, and so the CD's OS can't save games or use swap?
Rebooting your computer to play games made sense for Commodore-64 computers. Now it doesn't. Stop posting that idea unless you've thought through and solved ALL the problems posed above.
This idea always comes up in these threads and it's always just as stupid as the last time.
What if I want to run voice-com software with my game? Or keep my game running in Windowed mode with my IM client open in the background? What about drivers, is the game disk going to contain every driver in its OS install for every piece of hardware? What about disk partitions, when if the game disk only supports NTFS and I upgrade my main OS to "Ultra-FS" or something? Is the game useless then?
It's just a dumb idea. Nobody wants to reboot to run their games. Nobody wants to close out all their other applications to run their games. Drop it already.
Yeah, but the Mac also had great games that NEVER came out on the PC. Like Marathon and Marathon Infinity. Or Pathways into Darkness. Or Mission: Thunderbolt. Or Crystal Quest. And Myst, which came out on Mac years before it came out for any other platforms.
Anyway, most of the games you mentioned came out at the same time on Mac and PC... ports that are delayed more than 3-4 months sell crappy.
You had my attention until "relatively few bugs." America's Army is a very very buggy game, buddy, and that's all there is to it.
.5 seconds before the match starts, put you back on your original team with a 'leftover' (crappy) weapon slot.
Frequently the game will say you joined the opposing team, allow you to choose a weapon slot in the opposing team and then, about
Frequently players who have passed the sniper training aren't allowed to use the sniper weapons for no apparent reason. A buddy of mine says that he can use sniper weapons on some maps/servers but not on others... for my account, I can't use them at all despite completing the training for them.
Often you'll see (in observer mode) players who are holding two weapons at the same time. Or RPG ammo that just kind of hovers behind the player. Or crouching players who are moving at the speed of running players.
Often you'll be kicked from servers for no reason (server crash maybe?). Or, the server will throw you to the main menu making it look like you're kicked when you're not.
In addition to all of this, the AA servers are configured strangely. Some maps have 'west coast' servers and some don't. Which means I can find a favorite map I love playing, but there are no lag-free servers running it.
You also have to remember that whether or not we build a NEW telescope, we're still have to spend at least a billion to de-orbit Hubble in one way or another. So you'd be looking at $1 billion for "Hubble-disposal" and another $2 billion to launch a replacement-- that's a lot more expensive than the (estimated) cost of just repairing Hubble and swapping out some better equipment in it.
Well, whatever the technical reasons, it's the year 2005: ANY program that allows me to type and input a non-trivial amount of text should have a red-underlining spellchecker as part of the package. It's just pathetic that so many Windows and Linux programs leave out this essential function, as do most IM clients regardless of platform.