Linux-Advocacy Digest #981, Volume #34 Tue, 5 Jun 01 11:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: SourceForge hacked! (Tim Smith)
Re: SourceForge hacked! (Tim Smith)
Re: A Song for Aaron ("Edward Rosten")
Re: SourceForge hacked! ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications (LShaping)
Re: SourceForge hacked! (pip)
Re: What does XP stands for ??? ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: Chicken and egg problem ("Mike")
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (flatfish+++)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: SourceForge hacked!
Date: 5 Jun 2001 06:57:53 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 13:40:27 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Who said I had a qwerty keyboard?
You implied it.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: SourceForge hacked!
Date: 5 Jun 2001 06:55:56 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am not a troll. Apparently you cannot even read. Go back and reread
>the article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/19350.html
>
>What does it say? It says both SourceForge and Apache web servers were
>hacked. Apache.org runs Apache!
No, it does not say that. Try reading the fucking article instead of
just posting the link over and over. It might help of you went and
got a computer dictionary and looked up some terms, like "password",
that you apparently do not understand.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Song for Aaron
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:10:55 +0100
<snip>
LOL!
I'll second all of that :)
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s 15
d f pop 240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SourceForge hacked!
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:11:03 +0100
drsquare wrote:
> Standard qwerty keyboards are for queers. The layout on mine is far
> superior.
Your keyboard layout makes you feel spiritually and sexually secure?
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Anyone using MFC desperatly needs a nasal enigma.
-- David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:06:05 GMT
"Patrick Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>LShaping wrote:
>> Yup. Duh. But Microsoft still argued that it is not. Go figure.
>> <snip>
>> Whoever is guiding Microsoft's attorneys does not understand that it
>> is in a court of law.
>I can't believe that a crook with the resources that Microsoft has would
>obtain incompetent legal services. I'm sure they all sorts of stuff up
>their sleeves that nobody can even begin to suspect.
Incompetent legal services? An attorney argues whatever a client
(with enough money) wants the attorney to argue, like "Microsoft are
not a monopoly". The Microsoft/attorney conversation could be going
something like this.
Attorneys:
>Mr. Gates, we very much appreciate you wanting to pay our outrageous
>legal fees for the entire appeals process, but we think a settlement is in
>order.
Gates:
>Forget the settlement.
Attorneys:
>Yes sir.
Someday, I hope to read a story about the goings on between Microsoft
and its counsel. But maybe that story would violate the
attorney/client thing, I dunno, but it probably would be a great
story.
LShaping
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SourceForge hacked!
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:23:32 +0100
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
> drsquare wrote:
> > Standard qwerty keyboards are for queers. The layout on mine is far
> > superior.
>
> Your keyboard layout makes you feel spiritually and sexually secure?
Funny you should mention that. Maybe drsquare could look at
http://bbspot.com/News/2000/7/new_macs.html
for some more security in that dept.
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does XP stands for ???
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:23:43 +0100
Robert Morelli wrote:
> Of course, acronyms are often chosen prior to working out exactly
> what they stand for. You don't believe PASCAL, ADA, BASIC,
> etc. are all accidents, do you?
Minor quibble: Pascal and Ada are not acronyms. Those languages are
named after people. (I liked the rest of the message though. :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Anyone using MFC desperatly needs a nasal enigma.
-- David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:37:18 GMT
Said Philip Nicholls in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 27 May 2001
>On 24 May 2001 17:47:01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad
>Everett) wrote:
[...]
>>Can I setup Windows XP at home so that I can log into it via ssh and have
>>a server running that acts as a proxy web browser, allowing me to
>>browse the web from my machine at work over an encrypted channel and
>>bypassing the filters on my company's firewall? And do all this with
>>out-of-the-box free software?
>
>Can the average Joe or Jane off the street do this with your free
>software? Would the average Joe or Jane off the street even WANT to
>do any of this?
YES! That is the point, Philip. Of course they can. They don't have
to write the software themselves, for god's sake. They do have to read
and learn quite a bit, sure, but that didn't stop them from getting a PC
in the first place.
>The will, however, be able to install, configure and use Windows XP.
...and they will, indeed, curse it from the first moment on, while
remaining captive to monopoly crapware. They can re-install Windows XP;
in Linux, the most they'll have to learn is how to recompile a kernel, a
far less intrusive activity, from their point of view.
>>Can I use Windows XP to redirect it's output over an encrypted network
>>port so that I can run applications on my home machine from my machine
>>at work, complete with GUI features? And do all this with out-of-the-box
>>free software?
>
>Again, I don't think Windows XP is targetting people who would want to
>do this. Do you?
I know of no person using a PC that Windows XP is not targeting. Are
you saying MS doesn't want some people to buy XP?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:37:20 GMT
Said The Ghost In The Machine in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 27 May
[...]
>Such efforts tend to confuse me, as well, since I edit the
>underlying configuration files, and am never sure as to whether
>the GUI above me can handle my edits. :-)
If it does, the GUI is broke-dick. No question about it.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:37:22 GMT
Said The Ghost In The Machine in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 27 May
[...]
>>No ISP will use a s/390 for this, dimwit.
>>*No one* will use it for this, for that matter. That is beyond stupid.
>
>Why wouldn't they? An s/390, as I understand the hardware (I've
>never used it and know very little about it), is a powerful piece
>of medium-big iron that might run a back-end Java servlet connecting
>into an IBM database such as DB/2 (most likely), or some other database,
>*on the same box*. I'm not quite sure how many users it would
>serve, but it could probably serve quite a few -- bandwidth
>limitations, etc. permitting.
It is too powerful to ever be cost effective being used for the tasks
you've described. In theory, an ISP could run thousands of hosts on one
mainframe. Such an ISP would go out of business, though. It is not an
efficient way to spend money, that's all.
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:37:24 GMT
Said The Ghost In The Machine in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 27 May
[...]
>I'd have to look up the details, but as far as I'm concerned,
>applications can call it, therefore it's an API [*][....]
>
>[*] Not that I like the term; I'm never sure if "API" refers to
> an application calling the procedure interface, or providing it.
> Admittedly, prior to Windows, this wasn't really that much
> of a problem. :-)
That is the source of all this confusion. "API" refers to neither the
application calling the procedure, or provided it. It is the
hypothetical idea of something that is essentially the platonic object
from which both are "derived", if you can forgive the loaded term.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:39:14 GMT
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 02:28:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>Ah now wait a minute Flatfish.
>
>You've been telling people for months now that Linux is
>a peice of shit and won't even install on your machine.
You have me mixed up with someone else. I haven't had a problem
installing Linux on a machine since RedHat 5.0.
The Thinkpad is a bit of an exception because it is a weird one.
In fact I have said many times that Gates could learn a lot from a
Linux install and I have compared times on both Linux and Windows.
The Mandrake update (aka as System trasher 1.0) was another story.
The only problems I have with Linux relate to some hardware support,
lack of decent applications as well as a scattered mess of
distributions none of which does anything completely right.
Installing Linux in most cases is a breeze.
The fun begins configuring it.
>Now you've decided it's okay to say it works?
>What?
See above.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:42:25 GMT
On 05 Jun 2001 02:14:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>I have tried to set up *two* Windows users, over the phone, to install
>and configure Free Agent. Both failed miserably at the configure stage,
>and every Linux advocate knows why.
They must have been real idiots.
Setup.exe
1.Please Enter your Newserver Name.
2.Please enter your Pop server.
3. Please enter your name. ( Maybe this is the one they had trouble
with?)
4.Shall I go online and retrieve a list of groups?
That's real tough....
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:46:58 GMT
On 05 Jun 2001 02:19:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>Easily resolved.
>
>> or because the rpm won't work
>
>Most RPM's work, just like *most* InstallShield's for Windows work.
Until it screams of Library problems whith some programmer geekspeak
which for some reason doesn't even give you a clue as to what is
actually wrong. Usually something about lib.s0 or something like that
with an s0 extension.
>> he tries compiling from source
>
>Thats easily done,
>1/ run 'configure'
>2/ 'make'
>3/ 'make install'
Assuming the old etra "/" at the end of line 4666 in the config file
doesn't screw him.
>Three commands in a CLI, its easy as.
vs one click
>> and so forth.
>
>Of course, so get Linux pre-installed, and if you can't, write the
>Justice Department.
I asked the boys over at CompUSA and they don't have any Linux
pre-installs.
The ones I have found on the internet are way over priced expecially
considering the OS is supposed to be free.
>
>--
>Kind Regards
>Terry
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chicken and egg problem
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:56:22 GMT
"Gerald Meazell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<9ffak1$64t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$117
> >
> > Read it, very good article about how to get people to use new platforms.
> >
> According to this guy's logic, everyone should have moved to OS/2 by mid
'93.
> After all, it ran most of the existing software, hell, it even could run
C/PM
> programs **unchanged** and it preceeded Win95 by three years. So, why did
that
> not happen? IBM's botched marketing or an evil plot by Microsoft?
Whatever it
> was the fact it did not happen trashes the whole point of the argument.
My memory's pretty hazy here, but I spent a little time with OS/2 way back
then. One of my friends is still running OS/2, from somewhere around the
1994 time frame. Windows programs ran in a separate process, and as I recall
there was no easy way to cut and paste between Windows apps, much less
between Windows and OS/2 apps. The UI was just different enough to drive you
nuts after a while (am I in a Windows app or an OS/2 app?). Functionality
was an issue; not every Windows program would run under OS/2. As I recall,
the Windows subsystem had to be started before a Windows app would run.
Effectively, that meant waiting for Windows to boot, after already waiting
for OS/2 to boot.
In comparison, Win95 felt much different. Win16 programs ran transparently
next to Win32 programs, and the UI was the same for both.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:57:04 GMT
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:16:26 -0700, "Paolo Ciambotti"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Monday, I corner my coworker and ask if he still has the CD for the
>printer. He finally remembers to bring it in to me on Wednesday. I click
>"yes" on the next reboot, and it installs all kinds of crap that I don't
>need, but at least it installs the printer. I spend the next two evenings
>uninstalling shitware that keeps wanting to go to the printer manuf's
>website to check for new drivers. I refuse to setup Windoze networking
>for my dialup and I was tired of clicking "cancel" everytime that stupid
>thing woke up, which was constantly. Now I know why it was 4 megabytes.
I'll grant you the spyware crap though because it drives me up the
wall as well. FWIW msconfig is your friend for eliminating that
registration crap.
Also the CD usually comes with the printer.
>Total elapsed time to install a printer under Windoze.... six days.
>
>> Under Linux?
>
>I boot up RedHat, and get the message "new hardware was found; install
>now, install next time, install never?"* I choose "now". No reboot. No
>CD. Happily, all my apps are already setup to use the passthru postscript
>printer so I don't have to touch anything else. It all just works.
And if Linux didn't support your printer, which is quite common?
>Total elapsed time... 2 seconds.
>
>*it happened so quick I'm not sure that was the exact message, but it was
>pretty damned close.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:39 +0100
On 4 Jun 2001 22:42:50 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)) wrote:
>Robert Morelli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: and even inevitable that Linux will spell the destruction of
>: Microsoft there too, provided the Linux community
>: faces up to the challenges instead of just spouting
>: bullshit.
>
>I don't really care about microsoft. Why worry when I have a working system
>now for free and a great community?
Because if Linux dominated instead of Microsoft, Linux would be the
standard, which means its better supported etc....
>: So what do I think we need to do? If you write code, do
>: your homework and gain competence in everything,
>: including UI. If you use code, don't respect code with
>: shabby UI and shabby documentation. Expect Linux
>
>Why don't you take a project w/ a shabby ui and fix it instead of posting here?
Because he expects everything to be done for him, even when he's not
paying for it.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:42 +0100
On 4 Jun 2001 23:00:01 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)) wrote:
>Ayende Rahien (don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>: Unlikely, I don't like 9x very much.
>: On my system, it takes 4 keystrokes to reach my pictures folder, frex.
>
>How is this a gui if you are only using keystrokes? Or are you using
>keystrokes+mouse? If so, then this is the slowest way b/c switching takes
>time.
Since when does using a GUI automatically mean using a mouse? I'd
never touch a GUI if it didn't have keyboard shortcuts.
>: Ha? And what if I don't? How do I find out what I want to copy?
>: I've a directory with several thousands pictures, scattered in couple of
>: directories.
>: On Explorer, I can copy them based on their content, not so in the CLI.
>
>I'd like to learn how to do this.
You can get some dll from winfiles.com that makes the icons of
pictures an actual thumbnail of the picture itself. It's good if
you've got a fast computer and a small resolution.
>: > >> Add to that waiting period for Windows Explorer to launch and you have
>: > >> just taken quit a bit longer to do something in a GUI.
>: >
>: > >Explorer is very fast in loading, barely more than it takes to bring
>: CMD.EXE
>
>Bet I can get a cli faster.
I.e. 0 seconds if it's already there.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:43 +0100
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 04:06:00 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9fh3th$mdb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Ayende Rahien (don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>
>> : Unlikely, I don't like 9x very much.
>> : On my system, it takes 4 keystrokes to reach my pictures folder, frex.
>>
>> How is this a gui if you are only using keystrokes? Or are you using
>> keystrokes+mouse? If so, then this is the slowest way b/c switching takes
>> time.
>
>I use key strokes to control the GUI.
>GUI doesn't mean "no keyboard".
It does with a lot of programs.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:44 +0100
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 04:01:55 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9fh4ou$mdb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> So if you forget what the mouse is or what a menu is or which button to
>> click, how does gui help?
>>
>> What if you forget where your files are or what computer they are on?
>
>How will the CLI help me if I forgot to use the keyboard?
>All of the above are things which are basic, like learning to type and what
>is the command seperator in the shell you are using.
It seems pretty consistent to me
>If I forgot what a button to click, I'll read what that button say, or go to
>the help.
>The point is that once I know this, whenever I see this button, I would
>simply *recall* it, I wouldn't have to search for the knowledge.
But would you be able to remember all the keyboard shortcuts?
>> : There is a difference in the amount of effort involved.
>>
>> So laziness is better?
>
>Yes. Your application shouldn't force the user to be aware of the
>application, it should be as trasperent as possible.
Even if it lowers his productivity?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:45 +0100
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 00:36:35 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <9fh5ka$mdb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger) wrote:
>> I actually raced someone. I read the manual and he hunted through
>> random menus trying things, nothing was working. I found the right
>> command in the index and read the description. I _like_ reading a
>> paper manual. Much better use of a program, the reason why they have
>> clasesses to learn word.
>
>Bad example. They have classes to learn Word because it has a zillion
>features no one uses, and the features people actually do use are hidden
>deeply behind multiple nested menus and tabbed dialog boxes.
And when you DO want to use them, they're hidden away behind multiple
nested menus and tabbed dialog boxes, which take a month to navigate
with the keyboard.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:47 +0100
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 00:48:49 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, drsquare
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Compare that to a GUI, where you don't even get any options, you just
>> get what you're given, unless of course you want to go editing
>> shorcuts to put some arguments in, or using some shoddy built in
>> configuration tool. Personally, I like complete control over what I'm
>> doing with my command.
>
>I disagree. There's nothing inherent about either CLI or GUI that limits
>or proliferates options.
>
>A CL program can be written to do exactly one thing one way, or it can
>have ten man pages worth of options. Similarly, a command in a GUI
>application can do one hting with no options, or it can open a dialog
>box sporting half a dozen checkboxes, radio buttons, and text fields on
>each of several tabbed panes.
Yes, and that's nice and quick to use. Never mind typing "-t -y -e 45
-p 78", which takes a second, you can type "ctrl+tab, alt+t, space,
ctrl+tab, ctrl+tab, alt+y, space, ctrl+tab, alt+e, 45, ctrl+tab,
alt+p, 78"
>The advantage of a GUI is that it can even be programmed to make
>impossible combinations impossible, or warn you that you're about to
>destroy the universe.
You can have warnings in a CLI as a matter of fact.
>> >>If you find that difficult to do, then you should consider
>> >> selling your computer and taking up flower arranging.
>
>I think that the anti-GUI attitude illustrated by that snippet only
>damages the user community. It encourages programmers to disrespect
>their lay users.
The lay users deserve nothing but disrespect.
>> Why would I want to do that?
>
>If you're such a CLI expert that you don't need the manual (that you
>must refer to all the time to find unknown GUI commands) then you don't
>really need the docuentaiton, right?
And I suppose if you're such a GUI expert you will never be pressing
"F1" again to access help, especially with all those pop-up
descriptions over the icons. I wonder how you can access those without
the mouse...
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:49 +0100
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 00:56:12 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, drsquare
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Even if you want to change it but you can't?
>> >
>> >If a program has a nasty UI, then I would not want to use it. I might
>> >want to change it. I might want to use some other program instead.
>>
>> Even if you can change it? That doesn't make too much sense.
>
>Sure it does. If I want to get a project done, should I pick an
>application that's suited to what I'm doing, or pick a different one and
>spend all this time customizing it?
You'd rather use a program that forces you into a certain ui, than be
able to change it to your own specifications?
>> And suppose you're not happy with the basic UI? Suppose the
>> programmers have different preferences to yours?
>
>Programmers should learn their place. Programmers should learn to do
>user-testing. They should know something about UI design. Just as
>software engineering is more than knowing a few programming languages,
>UI design is more than just knowing the difference between a checkbox
>and a radio button.
You're saying the only decent UI is the one YOU specifically like? How
arrogant.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:50 +0100
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 01:01:05 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, drsquare
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> If someone likes slime-mold interfaces, who are we to deny them?
>> >
>> >You're missing the point...
>> >
>> >For one thing, you can't have a slime-mold interface on a CLI.
>>
>> Of course you can.
>
>You're missing the point...
>
>Of course you can have a slime-mold interface on a CLI. But what good
>would it do? It would be pretty to look at... But the slime mold
>contributes *nothing* to the usability and functionality of the CLI.
It makes it look nicer though, and that's what's important.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:51 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:04:53 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9fg0bg$s2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >> Not if they're using bash under cygwin.
>> > >
>> > > Cygwin on 9x sucks, period. And I like CMD's filename completion
>> > > betterthan I like bash.
>> >
>> > What's different?
>>
>> I can't get Bash's to work :-D
>How come? What environment is bash installed on?
>I usually just type in at least a few characters and then hit the tab
>key.
Or double tab to give you a list.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:03:51 +0100
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 03:58:36 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> Compare that to a GUI, where you don't even get any options, you just
>> get what you're given, unless of course you want to go editing
>> shorcuts to put some arguments in, or using some shoddy built in
>> configuration tool. Personally, I like complete control over what I'm
>> doing with my command.
>
>What options do you get on the CLI that aren't given you?
Arguments. Pipes. Redirection. Command history.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
