| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Recently posted commentsTiling WMPosted Feb 13, 2012 11:30 UTC (Mon) by Yenya (subscriber, #52846)In reply to: Tiling WM by jmalcolm Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
I stayed with sawfish when GNOME moved to Metacity and at that time did not allow me to configure things the way I wanted them to be (vertical maximization for terminals, automatic placement of some windows to particular virtual desktops, etc.). After moving to XFCE I have stayed with sawfish mostly because I did not want to spend more time configuring yet another WM.
Sawfish is still being developed, BTW.
In my configuration, there is no LISP code I have written (except the
Apart from that, I appreciate the extreme configurability - smart window matching, hot-keys, etc. Sawfish-ui is really easy to use, so I don't have to manually look for window names/properties to match, etc.
And I have found a theme which looks neat, but does not stand out enough to distract me. And the focused window is marked by changing the whole frame - not only the title bar, for example - so it can be found even when partially obscured.
JavaScript Semicolon Brain-DamagePosted Feb 13, 2012 11:24 UTC (Mon) by ldo (subscriber, #40946)Parent article: The Chromium Blog on the future of JavaScript
If they only allowed Python-style line continuations, I could forget the horror that is the JavaScript semicolon convention. Currently this will work:
a =
(
b
+
c
+
d
)
but I cannot do the equivalent of this Python layout:
TheItem.add_accelerator \
(
accel_signal = "activate",
accel_group = AccelGroup,
accel_key = ord(AccelKey),
accel_mods = gtk.gdk.CONTROL_MASK,
accel_flags = gtk.ACCEL_VISIBLE
)
Power User definitionPosted Feb 13, 2012 11:23 UTC (Mon) by drago01 (subscriber, #50715)In reply to: Power User definition by bronson Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
> people gravitating to hybrid cars
Well they are pretty much the same as "normal" cars from a drivers pov. i.e No need to learn new stuff; no need to adapt to changes which seems to be one of the primary reasons people hate changes so much.
> iPads
Tables are not any "changes" they are new toys / tools. People don't replace anything with tablets they just buy it as an additional device. And no comparing sales to traditional computers does not prove anything. Some people are claiming "tablets are replacing PCs" ... but most PCs are "good enough" for what they are used for so people rather spend their money on new shiny stuff rather then buying a new PC.
> smart phones
That's the only point that is true here but the marketing and media hype seems to be stronger then peoples resistance to changes.
How not to figure out why people use alternativesPosted Feb 13, 2012 11:07 UTC (Mon) by KotH (subscriber, #4660)In reply to: How not to figure out why people use alternatives by giraffedata Parent article: Tracking users
Gathering data and running statistical tools over it will not give you the understanding you seek. You will be just crunching numbers and find things which can be explained somehow... but how do you know that this is actually what is happening? Or to put it short: Corelation does not imply causality!
How not to figure out why people use alternativesPosted Feb 13, 2012 11:04 UTC (Mon) by KotH (subscriber, #4660)In reply to: How not to figure out why people use alternatives by KaiRo Parent article: Tracking users
There is an old and tried method for this: It's called market research. There are many companies that offer services in this field. Yes, it costs money, but a well devised market research will give you a lot better understanding of what is going on in the browser market than gathering some random numbers from people without understanding what those people are actually doing and why.
I'm actually horrified by the thought that an organisation dedicated to openess is considering gathering person related data without asking the people first instead of considering other ways... Not to talk about that such behaviour is illegal in most european countries (you are not allowed to gather person related information without prior consent and have to declare exactly what data is collected, when, who has access to it and how long it is stored)
Quotes of the weekPosted Feb 13, 2012 11:02 UTC (Mon) by etienne (subscriber, #25256)In reply to: Quotes of the week by ikm Parent article: Quotes of the week
I believe having a tab evey eight chars is still a very effective way to reduce the physical size of the kernel source file, one of the first compression system.
Maybe in the future we will have processor with so much layer 1 memory cache (or a way to reload a layer 1 cache line from main memory a gazillon times a second) that we will no more care, but that is not my computer right now.
Javascript for everyday usePosted Feb 13, 2012 10:56 UTC (Mon) by epa (subscriber, #39769)In reply to: Javascript for everyday use by robert_s Parent article: The Chromium Blog on the future of JavaScript
If you are programming for the local machine, rather than scripting Web pages, then you don't have to wait long for the new features. You can use them as soon as your preferred Javascript engine supports them.
"file it in the hope of it being inventive"Posted Feb 13, 2012 10:28 UTC (Mon) by pboddie (guest, #50784)In reply to: "file it in the hope of it being inventive" by SecretEuroPatentAgentMan Parent article: Jury rules that Eolas's "interactive web" patent is invalid (ars technica)
Firstly, I think you perhaps missed the connotations of the word "action" which I was using colloquially, as in "The ATM on Main Street is giving out free money: let's get a piece of that action!"
On the topic of whether something is perceived as being inventive, we are told over and over that patents reward people who, through their work, enabled something that otherwise wouldn't have been done. That brings up the issue of whether every little thing, while important to advancing the state of the art, is worthy of the granting of a monopoly as a reward to the person or organisation who decided to share their discovery with everyone else (through the patent bureaucracy).
If, indeed, every little thing gets its own patent and the smallest advance is considered "inventive", then it becomes a speculator's game in more than one sense: people try and do the least work for the benefit of a patent ("in the hope of it being inventive") and perhaps try and get as many as they can for the work they have done, seeking to have a solid obstacle in front of their competitors.
And as we all know, in fields where many people can be doing the same kind of work, I don't see how it can be ethical to grant a monopoly to people for something that could well be developed independently within those 18 months of secrecy, either.
Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application DesignPosted Feb 13, 2012 10:04 UTC (Mon) by bkor (guest, #27950)In reply to: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design by bronson Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
I find it awesomely funny that you summarize "we're working on it" as hand-waving. To me it means it is acknowledged to be a problem and they want to fix it... but you could also of course just complain on LWN. :P
Power User definitionPosted Feb 13, 2012 8:43 UTC (Mon) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359)In reply to: Power User definition by bronson Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
Good call.
I think the thing the people really don't like is the feeling that they aren't in control.
When things don't change, people can feel like they are in control because they don't won't it to change, and it doesn't.
When people make a deliberate decision to initiate or accept a change, then again they feel like they are in control (they may have been manipulated by clever advertising, but that isn't relevant - they *feel* like they are in control). So hybrid cars etc are easy to explain.
When someone decides to accept a software update and there are little changes, they might not like them but they can probably accept it because they chose to perform the update after all.
But when you accept an update and it causes big changes, then the effect seems out of proportion with the decision and you get a strong feeling that you are out of control. *That* is what people don't like. Ever.
So I recommend small continuous changes which are - where possible - selectable ("Would you like to try the new Frobnicator widget once(1), every time (Y) or not now (N)?[1/Y/N]").
I call this "Evolution, not revolution" - I bet no-one has heard of that idea before...
(sorry - no citation).
About the calculus for the projectPosted Feb 13, 2012 8:27 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: About the calculus for the project by nix Parent article: A tempest in a toybox
This is true. But I don't think Rob is calling all GPL zealots insane...? That's just a tiny subset.
About the calculus for the projectPosted Feb 13, 2012 8:18 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: About the calculus for the project by khim Parent article: A tempest in a toybox
> If it's goal is to conceal an infringement - then it's illegal.
That's obviously not its goal.
And, even if it were, it still wouldn't be illegal. If you disagree, please state your case law. Napster is only relevant as a trivial example of failing "significant non-infringing" and has nothing to do with software licensing.
Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application DesignPosted Feb 13, 2012 8:02 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design by bkor Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
It's pretty clear that "Don't bother" meant "Don't bother running Gnome 3", not "I'm not bothered by Gnome 3."
> I suggest to actually read the blog post and the answers given in the comments.
Do you suppose the "David F. Skoll" commenter there might be dskoll? Just a guess.
I read through a lot of the comments... People expressed some concerns about big desktops and multiple monitors, an area where Gnome 3 still suffers. The concerns were hand-waved away with "we're working on it" (paraphrased). Not very encouraging.
We'll see! Should be fun to watch.
Power User definitionPosted Feb 13, 2012 7:41 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: Power User definition by drag Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
> People don't like change. When people see change they don't like it. It doesn't matter if it's a improvement or not. They will bitch, always. ALWAYS.
> _ALWAYS_ > _EVERY_SINGLE_TIME_.
I call your bluff. You sound rather sure of yourself, and go on for great length, but your premise is flawed.
My evidence: people gravitating to hybrid cars, iPads, smart phones, etc. Heck, trade magazines and blogs are basically long homages to change. And people love it.
So, I guess I'm saying: [Citation Needed].
Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcementPosted Feb 13, 2012 3:27 UTC (Mon) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510)In reply to: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement by dlang Parent article: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement
if they settle then the terms probably won't be considered too unreasonable, but if you ask for terms that are too unreasonable, you run the potential for the target not settling and choosing to fight instead. The only party that really tried to fight was BestBuy, and they ended up accepting a settlement with SFC rather than continuing in court, after complaining about just these terms as "unreasonable" in their open court documents (they're available through Recap, if you care to look them up). What makes the SFC terms reasonable is that they don't come with financial damages, penalties, import prohibitions, and whatever terms the court would routinely impose upon the infringer to cure the infringement.
Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 releasedPosted Feb 13, 2012 3:02 UTC (Mon) by jmalcolm (subscriber, #8876)In reply to: Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released by corbet Parent article: Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released
I would rather you did not just dump it on this basis alone. That said, I do think that part of the value you could add would be to provide some minimal context (a link for example).
If you think it is newsworthy, I would like to hear about it.
Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application DesignPosted Feb 13, 2012 2:56 UTC (Mon) by jmalcolm (subscriber, #8876)In reply to: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design by slashdot Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
Reading this thread, I have been wanting to respond that I hardly ever maximize windows. Then I realized that I am reading this article in a maximized browser window. I am reading it on my laptop which is somewhat low resolution (1280 horizontal pixels and about 10 inches).
On my main desktop, I would never maximize the browser because it is 1920 pixels across and a 20" monitor. Typically, my browser is about the same size and dimensions as a A4/letter sheet of paper. This about half the width of the screen.
Thinking about it a little more, if a given window has to be 75% or more of the width of my screen to be usable then I might just maximize it. All this proves is the "maximized makes sense for small screens" argument (for me). I am a little surprised though about how big "small screens" turns out to be (for me at least).
Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcementPosted Feb 13, 2012 2:40 UTC (Mon) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246)In reply to: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement by mjg59 Parent article: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement
Ok, there's morality and then there's the legal copyright concept of moral rights. I think they're getting confused in this thread. The right of an author to dictate the terms of how their work gets published or distributed (regardless of whether the author has signed those rights over to someone else, in many cases), is that authors moral rights in the work. If we go upthread to jejb's comment: You have the moral right to dictate compliance terms as far as your copyrights run. If I, as a kernel copyright holder, start trying to dictate what compliance means in, say, busybox, without consulting the busybox copyright holders, I've exceeded my moral authority. I'm pretty sure jejb was referring to the legal concept I linked. What I'm not certain is whether jejb's entirely correct. If I, as an author, feel that the integrity of my work is violated when someone aggregates it with another work but violates that other work's license, am I exceeding my moral authority when I demand they stop distributing mine? Here in the US, the concept of moral rights is rather foreign. We don't really have a strong tradition of protecting moral rights here. But other countries do. In any case, the term "moral rights" is unfortunately confusing, since it's not exactly about morality in the more general case. It's a specific legal construct.
Tiling WMPosted Feb 13, 2012 2:40 UTC (Mon) by jmalcolm (subscriber, #8876)In reply to: Tiling WM by Yenya Parent article: Day: A New Approach to GNOME Application Design
Off-topic but do you mind me asking why you settled on Sawfish? At one time, it was the default window manager for GNOME but that is an archeological topic at this point.
Do you use any Sawfish specific features? Do you using rep (LISP) at all?
Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcementPosted Feb 13, 2012 2:38 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement by jake Parent article: Welte: Some comments on the heated debate on SFC / Busybox / Linux GPL enforcement
if they settle then the terms probably won't be considered too unreasonable, but if you ask for terms that are too unreasonable, you run the potential for the target not settling and choosing to fight instead.
At that point the terms go in front of a judge, and as we are seeing in the Oracle - Google litigation, the judge may tell you that your terms are completely unreasonable and throw them out (if you are lucky like Oracle is, the judge may tell you to try again)
|
|
||||||||||||