El dom, 13-10-2002 a las 00:53, Igor Izyumin escribió:
> On Saturday 12 October 2002 10:06 pm, Lorne wrote:
> > ahem... look again my friend. It used to be one icon. I could click on tabs
> > from within and check it both ways. Now it is 4 different icons that you
> > have to execute one at a time
On Sunday 13 October 2002 03:53, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> What do you do that you need to install, remove, and update packages all at
> the same time? Typically, you need to either install, remove, or update
> the programs, not do all 3 at the same time. The old interface was
> incredibly confusing
Well each are welcome to our opinions. I guess I could ask the same question
about a word processor? What on earth would I need to write, delete and spell
correct all at the same time? I mean after all, it is MUCH less confusing to
use a seperate spell checker after I'm all done writing my lette
On Saturday 12 October 2002 10:06 pm, Lorne wrote:
> ahem... look again my friend. It used to be one icon. I could click on tabs
> from within and check it both ways. Now it is 4 different icons that you
> have to execute one at a time.
What do you do that you need to install, remove, and update p
ahem... look again my friend. It used to be one icon. I could click on tabs
from within and check it both ways. Now it is 4 different icons that you have
to execute one at a time.
On Saturday 12 October 2002 07:53 pm, Ron Stodden wrote:
> Mark Weaver wrote:
> > Piero Piutti wrote:
> >> I have j
Mark Weaver wrote:
Piero Piutti wrote:
I have just joined this mailinglist and I've noticed that one of the
hottest topics is the "new look" rpmdrake.
Honestly, and I'm not attempting to chastise or malign anyone here for
their opinions on this topic, but exactly is it thats so hard to use
As I am french, I apologize if I don't write using a very clean english.
I am system administrator, giving support to my users. I like dealing with the
OS in-deep, so I am one of those that really dislike GUIs. I always used rpm
as a command-line tool, reading man pages (that old troff !) in an
On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Mark Weaver wrote:
> Piero Piutti wrote:
>> I have just joined this mailinglist and I've noticed that one of the hottest
>> topics is the "new look" rpmdrake.
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> Now it is very uncomfortable to use (at opposite of its predecessor which
>> was 100% user-frien
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm going to jump in on this one too. It may be a similar product, but it is
NOT even close to being as clean and smooth as 8.2! Argue all you want, but
if you want honest straight forward opinions, the fact remains it isn't as
clean as it was. You
Piero Piutti wrote:
I have just joined this mailinglist and I've noticed that one of the hottest
topics is the "new look" rpmdrake.
My two cents about this topic...
I've been using MDK 8.2 since last June and I was so enthusiast about it that
I have switched all my daily tasks from Windows to
On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 08:29, Mark Weaver wrote:
> Dale Huckeby wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Todd Lyons wrote:
> >
> >
> >>David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 :
> >>
> >>
> >>>I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll
> >>>give that a try. Bu
msg.pgp
Description: PGP message
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
I tested RH 8.0 I got exactly the same conclusion.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Mark Weaver wrote:
> For my two cents, as both a programmer and an end-user, I love the way
> 9.0 handles package installation and uninstallation. My hat is off to
> the folks at Mandrake. I've seen RedHat 8.0 and as far as I
Dale Huckeby wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Todd Lyons wrote:
>
>
>>David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 :
>>
>>
>>>I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll
>>>give that a try. But I definitely agree with Toshiro; it's a major
>>>step *backwards
On Tuesday 08 October 2002 08:01 pm, Ron Stodden wrote:
> Praedor Tempus wrote:
> > Well, not too long ago (countable in months) I would have had no problem
> > installing 9.0 and then upgrading over the net to get the fixes. I had
> > DSL and life was good. Now I am stuck forever with a time-li
Praedor Tempus wrote:
> Well, not too long ago (countable in months) I would have had no problem
> installing 9.0 and then upgrading over the net to get the fixes. I had DSL
> and life was good. Now I am stuck forever with a time-limited (90 minutes)
> modem connection that ranges from a hig
The fault in this argument is that it assumes all customers are merely
end-users with little technical skills or appreciation. As a programmer my
dollar counts just as much as that from an "end-user". There is more than
one type of customer Mandrake must consider and there is nothing to
nece
On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 14:13, Piero Piutti wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 October 2002 20:50, Todd Lyons wrote:
>
> > Sounds possible, but will it run in the same amount of RAM or will it
> > require 3 times the RAM? This program runs fairly fast on an Athlon 1
> > Gig CPU with 384 Megs of RAM. Have you
Well, not too long ago (countable in months) I would have had no problem
installing 9.0 and then upgrading over the net to get the fixes. I had DSL
and life was good. Now I am stuck forever with a time-limited (90 minutes)
modem connection that ranges from a high of 44000 bps (early morning/l
D]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James Sparenberg
Sent: Wednesday, 9 October 2002 4:45 AM
To: Expert List
Subject: Re: [expert] rpmdrake 9.0, a step backwards :(
On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 11:44, Todd Lyons wrote:
> Dale Huckeby wrote on Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:51:24AM -0500 :
> >
>
On Tuesday 08 October 2002 20:50, Todd Lyons wrote:
> Sounds possible, but will it run in the same amount of RAM or will it
> require 3 times the RAM? This program runs fairly fast on an Athlon 1
> Gig CPU with 384 Megs of RAM. Have you tried it on a P2 333 with 128I
wanted to say that there i
On Tue, 2002-10-08 at 11:44, Todd Lyons wrote:
> Dale Huckeby wrote on Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:51:24AM -0500 :
> >
> > Is the end-user's convenience less important than the programmer's?
>
> The endu-user's convience IS first. Every step starts with "Open
> Mandrake Control Center and..."
>
> (The 8.2 version, by contrast, was a wreck, with controls all
> over the place).
That was what made it superb.
That you had ALL the possible controls for installing/removing/quering
packages in ONE place.
The new rpmdrake is so upsetting that I went back to Kpackage (even if all its
limitati
Silly Alastair Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
becomes daring and writes:
> I think the "problem" is that it's best driven by the MCC, unlike the old
> version; it's pretty clear what's happening when you click on Software
> Management. (The 8.2 version, by contrast, was a wreck, with controls all
>
> I wonder if the four icons should've been removed from Configuration |
> Packaging? Having two access points, which work differently, for the same
> function(s) is probably not a good idea.
Yeah, those 4 different icons in the KDE menu for something you could
previously do from within one sing
Piero Piutti wrote on Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 06:56:32PM +0200 :
>
> I wonder why - even with coding optimization being the main worry - wasn't it
> possible to gather the three parts of the "new style" rpmdrake in one single
> window, separating them with "tabs"?
Sounds possible, but will it run
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 10:03:04 -0500 Praedor Tempus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is an important point to consider, however. If one is intending to be a
> commercial vendor of software, one of the MAIN considerations has to be
> useability/ease-of-use. Ease of code maintenance or code effi
Praedor Tempus wrote:
> There seems to
> be some valid complaints about the revamping of rpmdrake from the user point
> of view, for instance. I don't know personally because I cancelled my 9.0
> order based on reviews online and comments in this list - I will wait for 9.1
> to give Mandrake
Dale Huckeby wrote on Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:51:24AM -0500 :
>
> Is the end-user's convenience less important than the programmer's?
The endu-user's convience IS first. Every step starts with "Open
Mandrake Control Center and..."
Blue skies... Todd
--
| MandrakeSoft USA
I have just joined this mailinglist and I've noticed that one of the hottest
topics is the "new look" rpmdrake.
My two cents about this topic...
I've been using MDK 8.2 since last June and I was so enthusiast about it that
I have switched all my daily tasks from Windows to Linux.
What made MDK
On Tuesday 08 October 2002 08:38 am, Todd Flinders wrote:
> Let's not forget the end users might also be programmers. As a programmer
> I appreciate the increased efficiency and better design. What if we want
> to tinker with the code? What I'm trying to say is that there's more than
> one angl
Let's not forget the end users might also be programmers. As a programmer I
appreciate the increased efficiency and better design. What if we want to
tinker with the code? What I'm trying to say is that there's more than one
angle to address. It's an evolving process. If there are ideas to
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Todd Lyons wrote:
> David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 :
>
> > I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll
> > give that a try. But I definitely agree with Toshiro; it's a major
> > step *backwards*. The rpmdrake that comes
> > > lets you configure your sources for rpmdrake. I hope you can at
> > > least appreciate that it would be a source of frustration. :-)
You still can configure the sources. To do so, just start from the Control
Center, select the Software Management icon on the left, then the
Software Sour
Quoting Todd Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Guntner wrote on Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 01:15:16PM -0700 :
> >
> > lets you configure your sources for rpmdrake. I hope you can at least
> > appreciate that it would be a source of frustration. :-)
>
> Yes. People resist change. We're all that wa
El lun, 07-10-2002 a las 18:56, Todd Lyons escribió:
> David Guntner wrote on Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 01:15:16PM -0700 :
> >
> > lets you configure your sources for rpmdrake. I hope you can at least
> > appreciate that it would be a source of frustration. :-)
>
> Yes. People resist change. We're
David Guntner wrote on Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 01:15:16PM -0700 :
>
> lets you configure your sources for rpmdrake. I hope you can at least
> appreciate that it would be a source of frustration. :-)
Yes. People resist change. We're all that way. If you feel you can
spare the time of 20 or 30 m
Todd Lyons grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
>
> David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 :
>
> > I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll
> > give that a try. But I definitely agree with Toshiro; it's a major
> > step *backwards*. The rpmdrake that c
David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 :
> I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll
> give that a try. But I definitely agree with Toshiro; it's a major
> step *backwards*. The rpmdrake that comes with 9.0 is amazingly
Instead of a seperately w
Quoting Rolf Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Toshiro wrote:
> > I can't
> > see the contents of the packages as I could in version 8.2.
>
> For the files list and changelog, right-click the right pane and select
>
> 'Maximum Information'.
I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the in
Toshiro wrote:
> I can't
> see the contents of the packages as I could in version 8.2.
For the files list and changelog, right-click the right pane and select
'Maximum Information'.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
What do you think about the new rpmdrake? In my opinion, the new version
is much worse than the previous one (8.2). I don't like to have 2
different programs for installing and removing packages; also, I can't
see the contents of the packages as I could in version 8.2.
Do you know if it's possibl
42 matches
Mail list logo
