Comment Re: Should of never got rid of other OS and outsor (Score 2) 97
Get raped, faggot.
I just paid my taxes. Next month, perhaps?
Get raped, faggot.
I just paid my taxes. Next month, perhaps?
Dealing with humans is harder than dealing with the kernel.
And yet, cars and airplanes and bicycles and a lot of other tools (some more complicated, some less) are still being engineered by engineers.
I don't see a link here, sorry.
Dealing how they interact with a computer is quite a bit different. It is an entire research subject.
Dealing with (some) corporate egg headed's wishes on how people should use a computer is that it's quite different.
Common People are using computers since the 80's. Some metaphors sucked a lot, some others was successful (and some, besides sucking). The break even point was simple: I work/play/whatever better now that did yesterday?
Cars use steering wheels and pedals since Ford's era, besides a lot of research on new ways to drive a car. Did you ever considered why?
GNOME 3's deployment could have gone better. It would have been better to allow people to parallel install both and let them move when they were comfortable
That would had helped a lot, indeed.
The design itself continues to be a successful work in progress. Next iteration, I will likely make sure that we don't do it this way.
Successful to whom? You see, people are not all alike.
Let me a bit more succinct. I'm saying that the people who were building Linux based desktops took a lot of their design from windows 95, amigaos, and various other desktops that were there before. All the examples you've stated doesn't invalidate what I said. We took our designs from someone else. The most popular ones are based on windows 95, GNOME and KDE.
Now I see.
Perhaps this happens because is considered BAD ENGINEERING creating something out of the blue just for the sake of it.
There's a good reason cars are still using steering wheels and pedals nowadays - people don't have to be trained and reissued a new driver's license when they sold the old model and buy a new one.
Any nowadays stereo are still using the same metaphors from decades ago (Play, Stop, Next, Previous, Volume Up and Down - even the Eject are still used), and the remote control from my new shining OLED TV has the same buttons my old, ultrasonic, mechanical remote control had (but granted, it has that buttons and a lot more).
Of course modern remote control are a lot more sophisticated and useful that hat old craps, but the basic metaphors are still there - the enhancements were introduced rationally, without breaking current usability.
Why? Because this is considered *GOOD ENGINEERING*.
Nopes. I just asking Linus to step up and LEAD a Desktop project.
The result will probably be not shiny and new and full of [insert your favorite insult here], but it will be usable, and it will works, and more importantly, it will get the job done without hassle - that what matters when the month ends and I have to pay my bills.
Why? What gives him the expertise to run a desktop project, exactly?
Because it's already proven that he is capable of handling successfully huge and complex open source projects.
Just because they are both software projects doesn't mean that he has the ability to lead a group of people working on UI and middleware projects.
Just because he never did it, doesn't mean that he doesn't have the skills neither. However, he's a proven open source leader that delivers solid artifacts, with a nice (but granted, far from perfect) historic of consistency between releases. I prefer to do not make comparisons with some other Open Source projects - there's no need for a jihad here.
I'm not hiring the guy to write code or specify usability requirements. But you can bet your arse I would hire him to lead a critical software project anytime (if I would be on such position, what can be a good idea to state now that I'm not).
I don't think he's remotely interested in running it.
I agree 100% with you here.
Perhaps when I run into him at some conference I'll ask him. Perhaps you can ask him?
Weirdly enough, this never crossed my mind. Perhaps linking this conversation to him?
In any case, I find it amusing that people think Linus is some kind of uber geek.
Me too. The guy is a god damned good engineer with a good leadership skills on Open Source projects. I don't see how his geekness can influence on it - but granted, I'm not entitled to say otherwise.
By the way, I'm not saying he's a polite, nice leader - au contraire, the man can be an ass when pissed on. But again, the guy stills delivers solid artifacts - thanks or besides his assness, I can't say.
Given the personal feedback he's given me, I know that his requirements are fairly modest compared to some.
Being that the(or one of them) reason you stated before that the Kernel is less complicated and easier to keep than a Desktop?
This would help a lot. First he should write a simple, simple, fast and Unix styled version of systemd. Then replace the network-manager with one that does not pull in half of the Gnome desktop. Then help writing a replacement for CUPS, that would actually work.
How the KDE folks are dealing with this issues?
And make a policy for not breaking compatibility with user on the GUI side (no, you can not suddenly move the window minimize/maximize/close/ -buttons to left side of window, or other insanities).
From my point of view, they can shove =P the buttons where they want. Just give-me the choice to move them back to where I want, and I'm happy.
I was using Snow Leopard, but when I needed Java 7 and there was no easy or official way for me to install it without upgrading I decided it was time to move on.
Not a bad move. Java 8 broke a lot of java applications on MacOS . Of course it's still possible to run it (it's Java, goddann!) but Oracle managed to break something important on the OS integration - I can launch some programs from Finder anymore, I need to open a terminal window and invoke the launching script from there.
However, this time it's Oracle's fault, not Apple's.
Apple is catering to the lowest common denominator (iPhone users) with OSX. They're not interested in returning control to power users because their proportion of the install base is so small and their requirements so large.
Yes, we can sit around and complain about how Snow Leopard is so great and how Apple is ruining newer OSes with watered down settings and crappy interfaces, or you can actually do something about it. I know what I did.
Well, I did something about it *AND* I will keep bitching about it. I'm not the type of guy that allows anyone to take my money without a fight.
MacOS are, still, be best tool for my job. The U.I. is sucking here and there, but I installed X11 and Windowmaker using Macports to deal with the exceptions.
(And the hardware are pretty good - I must give that to them)
Similar story here. Until they bring back scrollbars and the ability to own a copy of the OS on physical media I wont be going back to the Mac
You can copy the DMS into a Pen drive and install the thing from there. It works, I managed to install it on a VM.
You can even burn it on a DVD, I was told, but I didn't tried it.
why I can't use Expose? I was happy with it.
Good question since it still exists as Mission Control.
If it's there, it's very well hidden. I stil can't find a way to use Mission Control in the same way I used to use Expose.
From my point of view, isn't there.
Yes, an engineer which is great when you're dealing with computers. But a desktop is essentially dealing with humans which is a completely different problem set and I would say a lot harder. In GNOME, it takes an enormous time to get all the details right on a user interface. It is nothing like working with a kernel. It isn't as easy as you think it is.
Man, you really got over the line now. Are you dismissing LInus Torvalds because the "Kernel is not as complicated and easier"?
No one's saying that making Gnome 3 was easy. We were just saying that Gnome 3 was a nightmare - two completely different things,
Even the early desktops took all their designs from Windows 95, copying a lot of the look and feel because nobody was trained on how to write a user interface.
I really hope you are not one of the anthropologist that designed the Gnome 3.
The early desktops came from XFCE and OpenSTEP, that came from IBM's CDE and NeXT STEP - both initiatives predates Windows 95 by at least 1 year.
And no, neither CDE nor STEP have any ressembles on Windows 95.
Even today we're still messing around with the same design.
Wrong again, but not that much. MacOS is, as it was, very different from anything Microsoft did in the past or nowadays. At least, for while and on the Desktop.
I suppose you're just asking Linus Torvalds to re-engineer windows 95 interface, I suppose he could do that. But to do something new, and unique that requires an anthropologist.
Nopes. I just asking Linus to step up and LEAD a Desktop project.
The result will probably be not shiny and new and full of [insert your favorite insult here], but it will be usable, and it will works, and more importantly, it will get the job done without hassle - that what matters when the month ends and I have to pay my bills.
You guys no nothing about Linus or how he likes to use his desktop. It's funny how people export their dreams and ideas to one man like this.
I follow the guy on G+. I did read what he said about Gnome 3 at that time in first hand.
But you can read about it here.
The guy is not remotely qualified to write a desktop. Have you seen all the commands in git? The first round was a usability nightmare. Hell he himself would admit that.
Linus wrote Linux 0.99, a really little piece of crap compared to any usable UNIX kernel at that time. But yet, he managed to lead this project in a way that now Linux is probably the most used kernel (UNIX like or not) in the world. And the thing is really good (but granted, perhaps not the best).
Linus wrote git, a really piece of crap compared to any usable DCMS at that time. But yet, he managed to lead this project in a way that now git is probably the most used CMS (distributed or not) in the world. And the thing is really good (but granted, perhaps not the best).
Did this makes a ring sounds somewhere in your head? Or you need me to draw it to you?
The guy is a great engineer. Great engineers don't invent great things, they build great things - most of the time, using shitty things as experiments/prototypes/proofs of concepts in order to get the great thing done.
[...]Moving from Snow Leopard to Lion was my greatest mistake. Up to that point I had been a satisfied, kool-aid drinking, cash-spending Appletard.
I totally agree. I miss Snow Leopard very much. Lion was a piece of shit.
I'm currently using Mavericks, and I finally started to like Mac OS again - but I still miss Snow Leopard. Apple managed to dumb down the Mac OS X to a level that, frankly, offends me : why I can't use Expose? I was happy with it.
Because he needs a functional to develop the Kernel!
He used to use Gnome Desktop 2, and I prefer not to reproduce what he said when Gnome 3 was spilled out from the Gnome Foundation.
(and I totally agree with him)
So I recommend him to start his own Desktop project.
Seriously, I don't know of, now, any other Open Source leader capable of doing a decent Desktop. Torvalds finishes what he starts, and he finishes it vrey well (see git).
We had very good Desktops in the past, but nowadays things are just too shiny and too new and... too dumbed down to be useful to me: who knows me from other
I still love Linux - all my non desktop machines are Linux, no questions asked. But I just can't handle any of the present mainstream Desktops to use Linux again on my working box.
From the DOCX specs:
Microsoft has patents that may cover your implementations of the technologies described in the Open Specifications. Neither this notice nor Microsoft's delivery of the documentation grants any licenses under those or any other Microsoft patents. However, a given Open Specification may be covered by Microsoft Open Specification Promise or the Community Promise. If you would prefer a written license, or if the technologies described in the Open Specifications are not covered by the Open Specifications Promise or Community Promise, as applicable, patent licenses are available by contacting iplg@microsoft.com.
Why everybody just assumed that I'm criticizing Microsoft?
Ok, I'm criticizing Microsoft too, but not just them!
Yep. And then all that money that would be used to pay salaries that would be used on expenses locally, making the local economy work, will be redirected to Bill Gate's pockets.
Who in turn gave the vast bulk of his money to end disease, educate children, feed the world, etc.
Some people can live with the charity of the riches. Some other prefer to work hard to earn money, pay the taxes and then demanding proper health care and education.
I prefer to live with the second way of life.
I can live with that.
Considering Germany is a net exporter: I'm not sure "keeping the money local" is actually a need.
Perhaps not, I don't know. But would be wiser to avoid putting all their eggs on the USA's basket again.
When in a few years, when all our documents will be locked in a proprietary cloud (that anyone with the right influence will have access) or stored locally in a format that you must pay to read, remember 2004.
MS uses XML to save documents. Put them wherever you like.
Yeah. Right. You was embraced and extended.
Use of cloud storage is hardly unique to MS. Want me to start citing Linux distros doing it?
Yes.
A glitch on gtalk rendered me with my cellphone out of the cell network for weeks until the support from an app (that I was thinking was the culprid) help me to locate the problem.
A friend lose this documents because his account was terminated by mistake (other company, not related to the previous case).
There's privacy concerns everywhere.
So, yes. Cloud, no matter from whom, is going to be a nighmare.
And then all that money that would be used to pay salaries that would be used on expenses locally, making the local economy work, will be redirected to Bill Gate's pockets.
The chief idea behind this was to save money yet it resulted in a poor user experience with many complaints. Saving money by paying salaries to people to produce a product that results in many user complaints is not a good economic choice.
Agreed. But exporting jobs to an already incredibly rich country is even worser.
Tough decision.
when all our documents will be locked in a proprietary cloud
No, you have stored them on a server, in fact any sane organization already stores all their documents on a server. They are not "locked" there, you could equally store them locally if you want. Did you not know that?
Nice. Stop paying Office 365 and try to get your documents.
Storing your documents in the cloud, the way we're doing now (granted, it's not the only way), is like storing private data on Facebook. You can't expect integrity in the former in the same way you can't expect privacy in the latter.
You didn't knew that, right?
that anyone with the right influence will have access
So now it is a conspiracy? The defeatist has not heard of encryption? Or not storing sensitive data on a server you do not control? Anyone with the right influence could put a backdoor in the open source software too and they wouldnt have to go through Microsoft to get one put in Windows.
Microsoft software may not be a good choice but dont be so dimwitted as to think open source is some silver bullet that solves all the problems you pointed out.
You take it on the wrong side. =]
WHen you store your documents in the cloud, the software is irrelevant. Doesn't matter if you're using open ou closed source software, the server's owner can do whatever he wants and you'll never know.
Now... About that encryption thing....
Make sure your code does nothing gracefully.
