Windows 7 .... incomplete and inconsistent.
Terry Porter
hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
available thru your package manager.
Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
begin[quote}
Win 7 Tip: ISO Disc Image Burning Is Built Right In
Windows 7's ISO burning feature isn't all that useful for a majority of
people, but for the small percentage who do need it, it's phenomenal.
Just double click any .ISO image file (which are used to disseminate DVDs of
operating systems on the internet, for example) and a utility will pop up,
allowing you to burn a disc to your optical drive.
For more sophisticated ISO types that people who regularly Torrent stuff
would be familiar with, you'll still have to use other apps like Nero; but
for easy Windows 7/Linux OS image burning, this works just fine.
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/01/win_7_tip_iso_disc_image_burning_is_built_right_in-2.html
end quote}
Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
applications.
begin{quote}
Win 7 Tip: Where the Hell is Add/Remove Programs?
It's gone! If you've used Vista, you'd be familiar with the fact that
Add/Remove Programs is now called Programs and Features, but if you're
migrating up from Windows XP, you'd be super confused.
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/01/win_7_tip_where_the_hell_is_addremove_programs-2.html
end quote}
--
If we wish to reduce our ignorance, there are people we will
indeed listen to. Trolls are not among those people, as trolls, more or
less by definition, *promote* ignorance.
Kelsey Bjarnason, C.O.L.A. 2008
Sinister Midget
This is what the Seinfeld commercials were hinting at, I presume. They
were supposed to introduce the world to comedy, MS-style, readying
everyone for the eventual release of Vista 7, CODENAME: Mojave.
--
All things are possible. Except making Windows secure.
Erik Funkenbusch
> One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
> hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
> available thru your package manager.
Umm.. ok.
> Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
> UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
on their web site. I'd guess less than 10% of people would ever even use
it, much less know what an ISO is.
So how exactly is that an "everyday application that people need"? What
people?
> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
> applications.
Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
Yeah, a single consistent package manager with many names, different
commands, and different ways of handling things.
Do you even think before you write this shit?
Rob Schwenk
Can't you even comprehend what was written before replying?
Hint: 'consistent package manager for your distro'
Linux package management is and has been for years better than anything
available for Windows.
The Lost Packet
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:49:48 +1100, Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
>> hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
>> available thru your package manager.
>
> Umm.. ok.
>
>> Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
>> UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
>
> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
> on their web site.
Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
have liked the opportunity to save myself Ł48 on Nero 6 Deluxe edition
and maybe go get a pizza instead.
> I'd guess less than 10% of people would ever even use
> it, much less know what an ISO is.
>
> So how exactly is that an "everyday application that people need"? What
> people?
>
People who want to burn CDs for their car stereos? DVDs for the in-car
player? What, are you willing to put a retail disc in a car drive? SUCKER!
Bear in mind also that a lot of archivists are now storing on magnetics,
full resolution media in .iso form for direct image burning. We like
that one-click-and-ten-minutes-later-it's-on-the-disc feeling. It's even
more important now blueray is the mainstream commercial video format.
Those discs are still bloody expensive. Hard drives, less so.
>> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
>> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
>> applications.
>
> Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
> Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
>
> Yeah, a single consistent package manager with many names, different
> commands, and different ways of handling things.
>
> Do you even think before you write this shit?
the only real difference in package handling is where the repository is
and what form the binaries take (precompiled blobs a la gentoo or
singular blobs like MacOS .dmg packages or Redhat RPM). You can mix and
match and use whatever package manager you want to. YaST with Debian.
Synaptic with gentoo. Go for it. It's called customising your own build.
Of course, with Windows you don't get that freedom from having to store
fifty different CDs for your packages or having to use the disc for
every fucking game you want to play.
Erik Funkenbusch
Even on the same distro there are several different package management
tools. How do you not know this?
Red hat has rpm, synaptic, something called "the package management tool"
that provides a subset of packages (designed to not overwhelm the user),
etc..
Suse has YaST (text or gui) and rpm.
Debian has Apt, dpkg, rpm, alien, etc...
It's all over the place.
Erik Funkenbusch
>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>> on their web site.
>
> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
> if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
> have liked the opportunity to save myself Ł48 on Nero 6 Deluxe edition
> and maybe go get a pizza instead.
http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm
While i guess it's no longer on Microsoft's site, the author is a Microsoft
employee and he maintains it on his own site.
> People who want to burn CDs for their car stereos?
Windows Media Player does that.
> DVDs for the in-car player?
You don't use an ISO burner for that.
> Bear in mind also that a lot of archivists are now storing on magnetics,
> full resolution media in .iso form for direct image burning. We like
> that one-click-and-ten-minutes-later-it's-on-the-disc feeling. It's even
> more important now blueray is the mainstream commercial video format.
> Those discs are still bloody expensive. Hard drives, less so.
"archivists"? Is that what you call hoarding more material than you could
possibly ever use?
Even so, everything you've mentioned is a very tiny percentage of the
computer using population. Very tiny.
> the only real difference in package handling is where the repository is
> and what form the binaries take (precompiled blobs a la gentoo or
> singular blobs like MacOS .dmg packages or Redhat RPM). You can mix and
> match and use whatever package manager you want to. YaST with Debian.
> Synaptic with gentoo. Go for it. It's called customising your own build.
> Of course, with Windows you don't get that freedom from having to store
> fifty different CDs for your packages or having to use the disc for
> every fucking game you want to play.
You've just contradicted everything terry was trying to claim.
Good job.
The Lost Packet
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 09:02:10 +0000, The Lost Packet wrote:
>
>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>> on their web site.
>> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
>> if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
>> have liked the opportunity to save myself Ł48 on Nero 6 Deluxe edition
>> and maybe go get a pizza instead.
>
> http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm
>
> While i guess it's no longer on Microsoft's site, the author is a Microsoft
> employee and he maintains it on his own site.
>
I never saw that on Microsoft's site. Ever. Get a Wayback link showing this.
>> People who want to burn CDs for their car stereos?
>
> Windows Media Player does that.
>
Not in my experience - discs burned by WMP are generally undreadable in
Sony or Kenwood kit.
>> DVDs for the in-car player?
>
> You don't use an ISO burner for that.
>
Really? What the fuck /do/ *I* use to burn DVD ISO images then? Needle
and a lighter? As for mastering the image, it's Kino all the way.
>> Bear in mind also that a lot of archivists are now storing on magnetics,
>> full resolution media in .iso form for direct image burning. We like
>> that one-click-and-ten-minutes-later-it's-on-the-disc feeling. It's even
>> more important now blueray is the mainstream commercial video format.
>> Those discs are still bloody expensive. Hard drives, less so.
>
> "archivists"? Is that what you call hoarding more material than you could
> possibly ever use?
>
No, it's what I call digitising an obsolete format (eg VHS/minicassette)
so it may be enjoyed far into my twilight years and by my descendants,
and anyone else who wishes to view the material, nay unto blindness
and/or death. This, in case it went over your head at the speed of dark,
also gets around the shelf life of laminated magnetic tape media.
> Even so, everything you've mentioned is a very tiny percentage of the
> computer using population. Very tiny.
>
Nonsense. The demand for analogue-to-digital format shifting is
increasing all the time. As it gets easier to do, more people are doing
it. The demand is such that people are using software such as Pinnacle
to capture and digitise their wedding videos, right through their
recordings from TV and their 30 feet of Star Trek videos...
>> the only real difference in package handling is where the repository is
>> and what form the binaries take (precompiled blobs a la gentoo or
>> singular blobs like MacOS .dmg packages or Redhat RPM). You can mix and
>> match and use whatever package manager you want to. YaST with Debian.
>> Synaptic with gentoo. Go for it. It's called customising your own build.
>> Of course, with Windows you don't get that freedom from having to store
>> fifty different CDs for your packages or having to use the disc for
>> every fucking game you want to play.
>
> You've just contradicted everything terry was trying to claim.
>
I wouldn't say that. In fact, I call bullshit. Where exactly did I
contradict Terry? The simple fact of the matter is that no matter the
form of the packages or the manager, in the end the binary is the same -
do the developers have to rewrite the software for every distribution?
No - this is why Alien works. This is why the package managers are
interchangeable. This is why there's choice.
> Good job.
whatever.
The Lost Packet
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 08:58:33 +0000 (UTC), Rob Schwenk wrote:
>
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:49:48 +1100, Terry Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
>>>> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
>>>> applications.
>>> Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
>>> Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
>>>
>>> Yeah, a single consistent package manager with many names, different
>>> commands, and different ways of handling things.
>>>
>>> Do you even think before you write this shit?
>> Can't you even comprehend what was written before replying?
>>
>> Hint: 'consistent package manager for your distro'
>>
>> Linux package management is and has been for years better than anything
>> available for Windows.
>
> Even on the same distro there are several different package management
> tools. How do you not know this?
>
All happily interchangeable and cohabitable.
> Red hat has rpm, synaptic, something called "the package management tool"
> that provides a subset of packages (designed to not overwhelm the user),
> etc..
>
> Suse has YaST (text or gui) and rpm.
>
> Debian has Apt, dpkg, rpm, alien, etc...
>
> It's all over the place.
Pedant #1: Alien isn't a package manager, it's a binary conversion tool.
Pedant #2: most, if not all, package managers are interchangeable
between distributions. For example, I use Yum on all my Linux boxen, but
they're not all SuSE. Took a little shoehorning to get Yum to run on my
RH cluster, but it's there because it's what I prefer.
7
wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft Appil Department of Marketing:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:49:48 +1100, Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
>> hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
>> available thru your package manager.
>
> Umm.. ok.
>
>> Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
>> UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
>
> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner?
If you don't know why become such a pretentious WINDUMMY asking what?
> Windows
> has had CD and DVD burning for a long time,
Nope. You are hallucinating.
And it never worked - if you ran other apps, you are doomed
to write crap on your CD.
> and a free ISO burner was
> avaialble
> on their web site.
Thats why you are hallucinating. There is nothing on the
install CD and no dekstop links were installed for the burner
at install time.
> I'd guess less than 10% of people would ever even use
> it, much less know what an ISO is.
Prove it. Nearly every Linux install begins life as an ISO.
Millions of people use it under Linux.
Every Linux user who has ever done an install uses ISO files.
> So how exactly is that an "everyday application that people need"? What
> people?
If you don't know why become such a pretentious WINDUMMY asking what?
>> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the
>> consistent package manager for your distro that allows install and
>> removal of applications.
>
> Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
> Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
Wrong. You don't use Linux and speak like a windummy.
Learn to use it for 100 days before foaming.
> Yeah, a single consistent package manager with many names, different
> commands, and different ways of handling things.
Wrong again. You don't use Linux and speak like a windummy.
Learn to use it for 100 days before foaming.
> Do you even think before you write this shit?
You don't know anything about Linux to write shit.
Why become such a pretentious WINDUMMY?
Hadron
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:49:48 +1100, Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>>> One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
>>> hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
>>> available thru your package manager.
>>
>> Umm.. ok.
>>
>>> Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
>>> UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
>>
>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner?
>> Windows has had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO
>> burner was avaialble on their web site.
>
> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this
> utility, if it exists (which would completely negate the need for
> Nero). I would have liked the opportunity to save myself £48 on Nero 6
Run that last paragraph past me once more please....
Hadron
>
> Debian has Apt, dpkg, rpm, alien, etc...
>
synaptic, aptitude
And there is in fighting as to which of apt-get V aptitude should be
used.
Don Zeigler
>> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
>> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
>> applications.
>
> Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
> Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
Uh - hey, stupid, read what you quoted above. Do you even do that before you
post your crap in rebuttal? "Consistent package manager for *your* distro".
Dumb moron.
--
Back Up My Hard Drive? I Can't Find The Reverse Switch!
Regards,
[dmz]
Owner and proprietor, Trollus Amongus, LLC
Snit
20090125145743...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>>> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
>>> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
>>> applications.
>>
>> Yes, a single consistent package manager.. and it's called Yum, or
>> Synaptic, or Alien or Kpackage or emerge or dpkg or ...
>
> Uh - hey, stupid, read what you quoted above. Do you even do that before you
> post your crap in rebuttal? "Consistent package manager for *your* distro".
>
> Dumb moron.
The package managers on desktop Linux are excellent, at least overall. But
the problems come from:
1) The packages that the package managers work with are *not* consistent.
This is consistent in *all* desktop distros I have seen.
2) If you want software not in the repositories things get messy.
George Barca
>One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
>hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
>available thru your package manager.
Very true.
I also like the way Ubuntu groups the packages in a separate menu
item according to function so new users can see the popular ones
that they might be interested in.
>Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
>UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
Well this is a good thing because now more users, mostly Windows
users will know what an ISO file is. I can't believe the number
of people who have no clue what that is and routinely burn the
file to disk incorrectly.
>begin[quote}
>Win 7 Tip: ISO Disc Image Burning Is Built Right In
>
>Windows 7's ISO burning feature isn't all that useful for a majority of
>people, but for the small percentage who do need it, it's phenomenal.
They ignore the point that most preloaded machines come with some
kind of burning application that includes this already. At least
the ones I have used. Generally a light version of Nero or
RecordNow!
>
>begin{quote}
>Win 7 Tip: Where the Hell is Add/Remove Programs?
>
>It's gone! If you've used Vista, you'd be familiar with the fact that
>Add/Remove Programs is now called Programs and Features, but if you're
>migrating up from Windows XP, you'd be super confused.
>
>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/01/win_7_tip_where_the_hell_is_addremove_programs-2.html
>end quote}
I admit being lost the first time I used Vista but the same thing
happened when I went from Windows 3.1 to Windows95 which were
also quite different. I spent a lot of time with Vista searching
the net to learn how to turn things off (UAC) and customize Vista
to be more like XP but still retain the smooth look. It did take
a while and I can see where people would be confused but once
it's set up it's quite easy. Change is never an easy thing for
some people, like me.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
George Barca
<cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>The package managers on desktop Linux are excellent, at least overall. But
>the problems come from:
Overall they do a very good job.
>1) The packages that the package managers work with are *not* consistent.
>This is consistent in *all* desktop distros I have seen.
Within a particular distribution they are consist ant but between
distributions some different package managers are used so that
could be considered not inconsistent. Something like RPM vs APT
for example.
>2) If you want software not in the repositories things get messy.
This is one reason why new users should choose a distribution
that has a lot of support like Ubuntu or Suse.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Don Zeigler
> 1) The packages that the package managers work with are *not* consistent.
> This is consistent in *all* desktop distros I have seen.
That is true, but the OP was referring to consistency of program installation
in a particular distro, not consistency across package managers.
--
Armadillo: A mouse built to government specs.
Snit
"George Barca" <georgeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 08:23:23 -0700, Snit
> <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>
>> The package managers on desktop Linux are excellent, at least overall. But
>> the problems come from:
>
> Overall they do a very good job.
>
>> 1) The packages that the package managers work with are *not* consistent.
>> This is consistent in *all* desktop distros I have seen.
> Within a particular distribution they are consist ant but between
> distributions some different package managers are used so that
> could be considered not inconsistent. Something like RPM vs APT
> for example.
The repositories are filled with inconsistent software. That was my point.
>> 2) If you want software not in the repositories things get messy.
> This is one reason why new users should choose a distribution
> that has a lot of support like Ubuntu or Suse.
No doubt - Ubuntu is my distro of choice. But, still, you are dependent on
the repositories and the repositories are filled with inconsistent software.
Hardly ideal.
Snit
20090125162148...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> 1) The packages that the package managers work with are *not* consistent.
>> This is consistent in *all* desktop distros I have seen.
>
> That is true, but the OP was referring to consistency of program installation
> in a particular distro, not consistency across package managers.
I am in reference to the programs in the repositories. Sure, the
installation process is excellent - no argument here - assuming the package
is in the repository. Quite consistent, too.
But then you use the software... and that is where you run into
inconsistencies.
Sinister Midget
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 09:02:10 +0000, The Lost Packet wrote:
>
>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>> on their web site.
>>
>> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
>> if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
Really? Somebody in this thread said this:
>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>> on their web site.
Must be that guy I see running around redefining things all of the
time. This time having an ISO burner "on their web site" evidently
means they have an ISO burner "somewhere else" in at least one earth
language.
I'd ask you to interpret these things for us, but we seem to have a
problem with you sticking to one set of definitions yourself.
--
I still miss Windows, but my aim is getting better.
Don Zeigler
> But then you use the software... and that is where you run into
> inconsistencies.
There's inconsistency in Windows-based applications, too.
--
Bacteria: The rear entrance to a cafeteria.
Erik Funkenbusch
> On 2009-01-25, Erik Funkenbusch <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> claimed:
>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 09:02:10 +0000, The Lost Packet wrote:
>>
>>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>>> on their web site.
>>>
>>> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
>>> if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
>>> have liked the opportunity to save myself Ł48 on Nero 6 Deluxe edition
>>> and maybe go get a pizza instead.
>>
>> http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm
>
> Really? Somebody in this thread said this:
>
>>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>>> on their web site.
>
> Must be that guy I see running around redefining things all of the
> time. This time having an ISO burner "on their web site" evidently
> means they have an ISO burner "somewhere else" in at least one earth
> language.
>
> I'd ask you to interpret these things for us, but we seem to have a
> problem with you sticking to one set of definitions yourself.
It must be really difficult to look at yourself in the morning when you do
these kinds of snip jobs.
Let me restore the part that you snipped:
"While i guess it's no longer on Microsoft's site, the author is a
Microsoft employee and he maintains it on his own site."
Why did you snip this, then act as if I didn't say it?
It's that kind of intellectual dishonesty that makes you a duche bag.
Snit
20090125170306....@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> But then you use the software... and that is where you run into
>> inconsistencies.
>
> There's inconsistency in Windows-based applications, too.
Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
here... and it is far from perfect.
Don Zeigler
> Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
> here... and it is far from perfect.
So, why the ongoing debate about the significance of a consistent user
interface? Minor quirks and differences here and there aren't enough to impact
a user's productivity or efficiency. A person adapts.
--
Time is what keeps things from happening all at once
Snit
20090125173249....@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
>> here... and it is far from perfect.
>
> So, why the ongoing debate about the significance of a consistent user
> interface? Minor quirks and differences here and there aren't enough to impact
> a user's productivity or efficiency. A person adapts.
I would *love* to see you try to support this. I have shown studies and
talked in depth about why this is not true... do you have *any* support?
Any at all?
Peter Köhlmann
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
>> here... and it is far from perfect.
>
> So, why the ongoing debate about the significance of a consistent user
> interface? Minor quirks and differences here and there aren't enough to
> impact a user's productivity or efficiency. A person adapts.
Snot Michael Glasser, the most incompetent "IT teacher" of all time will
naturally ask for proof.
Then he will snip it or declare it as irrelevant
So just killfile that dishonest scumbag and be done with it
--
"I don't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member."
-- Groucho Marx
Snit
497ca550$0$31342$9b4e...@newsspool4.arcor-online.net, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter.k...@arcor.de> wrote:
> Don Zeigler wrote:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
>>> here... and it is far from perfect.
>>
>> So, why the ongoing debate about the significance of a consistent user
>> interface? Minor quirks and differences here and there aren't enough to
>> impact a user's productivity or efficiency. A person adapts.
>
> Snot Michael Glasser, the most incompetent "IT teacher" of all time will
> naturally ask for proof.
Well, I did ask for support. How *evil*! LOL!
> Then he will snip it or declare it as irrelevant
Well, if the only evidence is "uh, I think so" then I will not how weak the
evidence is. Of course.
> So just killfile that dishonest scumbag and be done with it
LOL, poor Peter... so amazingly pissed that he cannot support the point
either.
George Barca
In theory consistency is important for productivity but there is
far more to it. For example most people expect to see a
cut/copy/paste function when right clicking after highlighting
text and become confused when it's not there as is true with some
applications. That would confuse a new user say using a computer
in a library that was not his own machine. It would limit
productivity up to the point where he discovers where those
functions are and adapts at which point the consistency factor is
no longer important. Also of interest is that consistency and a
poor or good interface are different things. What I am trying to
say is that the consistency factor is more important to new users
of either particular software or a particular machine with that
software on it. Like others have said the Mac sets the standard.
Windows is a close second and Linux depending on how you view all
of this is third. The reason I say this is because Linux offers
different interfaces on purpose, like gnome and kde for example.
They are not consistent with each other yet only a few minutes
spent with either is more than enough to become familiar with
them. I have enough faith in the public at large to think that
they will be able to work around the minor inconsistencies.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Sinister Midget
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 10:47:27 -0600, Sinister Midget wrote:
>
>> On 2009-01-25, Erik Funkenbusch <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> claimed:
>>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 09:02:10 +0000, The Lost Packet wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>>>> on their web site.
>>>>
>>>> Hang on... where? This is the FIRST TIME I've heard about this utility,
>>>> if it exists (which would completely negate the need for Nero). I would
>>>
>>> http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm
>>
>> Really? Somebody in this thread said this:
>>
>>>>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner? Windows has
>>>>> had CD and DVD burning for a long time, and a free ISO burner was avaialble
>>>>> on their web site.
>>
>> Must be that guy I see running around redefining things all of the
>> time. This time having an ISO burner "on their web site" evidently
>> means they have an ISO burner "somewhere else" in at least one earth
>> language.
>>
>> I'd ask you to interpret these things for us, but we seem to have a
>> problem with you sticking to one set of definitions yourself.
>
> It must be really difficult to look at yourself in the morning when you do
> these kinds of snip jobs.
I shave, brush my teeth, everything. Not once have I ever caught myself
trying to slice my throat or making faces at me in front of my back.
It's pretty easy for me to look at such a handsome face, too.
> Let me restore the part that you snipped:
>
> "While i guess it's no longer on Microsoft's site, the author is a
> Microsoft employee and he maintains it on his own site."
>
> Why did you snip this, then act as if I didn't say it?
I snipped it because I didn't read that much of it.
I know this is going to floor you, but I don't hang on every word and
letter you put into the ethos the same way you follow Roy around and
gripe about the things he writes. I go on until I can't take any more
boringness, and my eyes start to droop. The alternative is to go to
sleep, wake up and try to remember what I was doing before I dozed off.
So I sometimes snip boring things hidden inside other boring things.
However, claiming it was _once_ on MICROS~1's web site doesn't prove it
was *ever* on MICROS~1's web site, as you claim(ed) it was. Since
you're the only one I've ever known to claim this, I find the claim
highly suspect.
Over the years I've seen lots and lots and lots of people asking about
burning ISOs (mostly linux) from other Windope users. Yet your mention
in this thread is the first time I've seen anyone make mention of it.
I'd think if the monopolists had it on their site all along, at least
one post would have been made that caught my eye in all of those years
stating that it could be found there.
I truly hope you don't mind that I don't take your word for it. But
I've learned *from* you not to trust anything said *by* you without
evidence. Do you have any?
> It's that kind of intellectual dishonesty that makes you a duche bag.
I got bored and cut off the boring part you had hidden in the boring
part I didn't read. Sue me.
--
"[Microsoft's] products just aren't engineered for security."
-- Brian Valentine
Senior Vice President, Windows Development
Microsoft Corporation
Snit
"George Barca" <georgeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 10:39:54 -0700, Snit
> <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> On 1/25/09 10:32 AM, in article
>> 20090125173249....@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
>> <sit...@this.computer> wrote:
>>
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sure... though not to the extent. OS X, really, is the gold standard
>>>> here... and it is far from perfect.
>>>
>>> So, why the ongoing debate about the significance of a consistent user
>>> interface? Minor quirks and differences here and there aren't enough to
>>> impact
>>> a user's productivity or efficiency. A person adapts.
>>
>> I would *love* to see you try to support this. I have shown studies and
>> talked in depth about why this is not true... do you have *any* support?
>> Any at all?
>
> In theory consistency is important for productivity but there is
> far more to it.
Of course... but in practice it is important and there is a lot to it there,
too!
> For example most people expect to see a
> cut/copy/paste function when right clicking after highlighting
> text and become confused when it's not there as is true with some
> applications. That would confuse a new user say using a computer
> in a library that was not his own machine. It would limit
> productivity up to the point where he discovers where those
> functions are and adapts at which point the consistency factor is
> no longer important.
What makes you think it would no longer be important? As experienced users
find these consistent things from program to program they become more
efficient. If they find inconsistencies they stop even looking.
> Also of interest is that consistency and a poor or good interface are
> different things.
Oh, no doubt that consistency is not the only goal in UI design!
> What I am trying to say is that the consistency factor is
> more important to new users of either particular software or a particular
> machine with that software on it.
Why do you think it is more important to new users? I have pointed to
studies that actually show the opposite: that while it is important for new
users, consistency helps build efficiencies with experienced users. Add to
that: if there is consistency the developers can build on that - adding
features to save/print dialogs, windows, etc. Some examples of this, from
OS X, are PDF services and proxy icons.
> Like others have said the Mac sets the standard. Windows is a close second and
> Linux depending on how you view all of this is third. The reason I say this is
> because Linux offers different interfaces on purpose, like gnome and kde for
> example. They are not consistent with each other yet only a few minutes spent
> with either is more than enough to become familiar with them.
The question is not one of familiarity... I am talking about efficiency,
reduction of errors, developer benefits in adding features, etc.
> I have enough
> faith in the public at large to think that they will be able to work around
> the minor inconsistencies.
I, on the other hand, think people will continue to react like humans. :)
Don Zeigler
> I would *love* to see you try to support this. I have shown studies and
> talked in depth about why this is not true... do you have *any* support?
> Any at all?
>
Just my own experience, personally and working with others in a Windows-based
production environment. And do you have to adapt such a snotty tone right off
the bat?
Now, do those studies of yours show any significant productivity losses due to
inconsistency? I mean, something other than nanoseconds lost per year?
--
Be true to your teeth and they won't be false to you.
Jerry McBride
> One of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is you don't have to
> hunt for the kind of everyday applications that people need. They are all
> available thru your package manager.
>
> Windows 7 *now* has a free ISO burner built in, WOW! AWESOME,
> UNBELIEVABLE!!! ..... Linux is so DOOMED!
>
> begin[quote}
> Win 7 Tip: ISO Disc Image Burning Is Built Right In
>
> Windows 7's ISO burning feature isn't all that useful for a majority of
> people, but for the small percentage who do need it, it's phenomenal.
>
> Just double click any .ISO image file (which are used to disseminate DVDs
> of operating systems on the internet, for example) and a utility will pop
> up, allowing you to burn a disc to your optical drive.
>
> For more sophisticated ISO types that people who regularly Torrent stuff
> would be familiar with, you'll still have to use other apps like Nero; but
> for easy Windows 7/Linux OS image burning, this works just fine.
>
>
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/01/win_7_tip_iso_disc_image_burning_is_built_right_in-2.html
> end quote}
>
And this is INNOVATION? hehehahahahaa
> Another of the benefits of GNU/Linux compared to Windows is the consistent
> package manager for your distro that allows install and removal of
> applications.
>
> begin{quote}
> Win 7 Tip: Where the Hell is Add/Remove Programs?
>
> It's gone! If you've used Vista, you'd be familiar with the fact that
> Add/Remove Programs is now called Programs and Features, but if you're
> migrating up from Windows XP, you'd be super confused.
>
>
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/01/win_7_tip_where_the_hell_is_addremove_programs-2.html
> end quote}
>
>
>
And they want HOW MUCH for this log???
--
*****************************************************************************
From the desk of:
Jerome D. McBride
14:54:43 up 39 days, 21:00, 5 users, load average: 0.27, 0.10, 0.02
*****************************************************************************
Snit
20090125184136...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> I would *love* to see you try to support this. I have shown studies and
>> talked in depth about why this is not true... do you have *any* support?
>> Any at all?
>>
>
> Just my own experience, personally and working with others in a Windows-based
> production environment. And do you have to adapt such a snotty tone right off
> the bat?
You act like this is the first time you have made such claims.
And the first time your support has been, essentially, you have not noticed
otherwise.
> Now, do those studies of yours show any significant productivity losses due to
> inconsistency? I mean, something other than nanoseconds lost per year?
Of course. And keep in mind, it is not just studies... it is *every* expert
opinion anyone has been able to point to.
Snit RonB
Hadron Rick
Tim Smith Gregory Shearman
KDE docs Peter Köhlmann
Gnome docs JEDIDIAH
OpenOffice docs El Tux
Firefox docs vs. chrisv
Screen shots 7
Videos Linonut
Tim Berners-Lee William Poaster
Peer Reviewed Studies [1]
Shuttleworth, Mark
UI Experts [2]
Common sense
Bloggers
Jim Zemlin
[1] Including, but not limited to the ones referenced here:
Carole A George, "Usability testing and design of a
library website: an iterative approach" 2005
Cheul Rhee, et. al., "Web interface consistency in
e-learning. Online Information Review" Social
Science Module database" 2006
John W Satzinger, Lorne Olfman "User Interface Consistency
Across End-User Applications: The Effects on Mental
Models" 1998
R. Chimera, łThe Carm Group: Designing GUIs for
Usability˛ 1996.
R. Chimera and B. Shneiderman, łUser Interface Consistency:
An Evaluation of Original and Revised Versions for a
Videodisk Library˛ 1993
[2] Including, but not limited to:
Richard Chimera of the Human-Computer Interaction
Laboratory at the University of Maryland and ASU, etc.
<http://sci.asu.edu/directory/page.php?profile=575>
Jakob Nielsen: <http://www.useit.com/>
Rick Oppedisano, published in Usabilities Professionals Association
http://snipurl.com/oppedisano
Henry P. Ledgard in The Case Against User Interface Consistency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_User_Access
George Barca
<cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
It would not be important to that particular user because he
knows how to find what he needs at this point.
I'm talking about a specific inconsistency, in this case CNP.
>> Also of interest is that consistency and a poor or good interface are
>> different things.
>
>Oh, no doubt that consistency is not the only goal in UI design!
>
>> What I am trying to say is that the consistency factor is
>> more important to new users of either particular software or a particular
>> machine with that software on it.
>
>Why do you think it is more important to new users?
New users of that software or machine, not new users in general
Suppose you are used to Word and know that F7 refreshes the
screen. Now you go to the local library and happen to use one of
those machines and you go to refresh the screen and F7 doesn't
work because that machine is running Wordperfect or Open Office.
At that point now you know so it's not important any more.
> I have pointed to
>studies that actually show the opposite: that while it is important for new
>users, consistency helps build efficiencies with experienced users. Add to
>that: if there is consistency the developers can build on that - adding
>features to save/print dialogs, windows, etc. Some examples of this, from
>OS X, are PDF services and proxy icons.
I'm taking a single case as an example and a new user to that
case but not necessarily a new user in total.
>> Like others have said the Mac sets the standard. Windows is a close second and
>> Linux depending on how you view all of this is third. The reason I say this is
>> because Linux offers different interfaces on purpose, like gnome and kde for
>> example. They are not consistent with each other yet only a few minutes spent
>> with either is more than enough to become familiar with them.
>
>The question is not one of familiarity... I am talking about efficiency,
>reduction of errors, developer benefits in adding features, etc.
>
>> I have enough
>> faith in the public at large to think that they will be able to work around
>> the minor inconsistencies.
>
>I, on the other hand, think people will continue to react like humans. :)
Using my case so now you know that F5 does refresh.
Time lost?
A couple of seconds?
Minor inconsistencies like this aren't really a problem for most
people.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Don Zeigler
> Of course. And keep in mind, it is not just studies... it is *every* expert
> opinion anyone has been able to point to.
A bunch of gobbeltygook. Show me something that proves these inconsistencies
are significant enough to cost a company real money.
Snit
20090125205336...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Of course. And keep in mind, it is not just studies... it is *every* expert
>> opinion anyone has been able to point to.
>
> A bunch of gobbeltygook. Show me something that proves these inconsistencies
> are significant enough to cost a company real money.
Been there, done that. In addition to the studies I, personally, have been
a part of, I have noted the following, which includes some of the studies I
have referenced in the past (I note five, specifically, below):
George Barca
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
>Snit wrote:
>
>> Of course. And keep in mind, it is not just studies... it is *every* expert
>> opinion anyone has been able to point to.
>
>A bunch of gobbeltygook. Show me something that proves these inconsistencies
>are significant enough to cost a company real money.
Especially these days where programs are pretty much consist ant
and the little oddities are easy to work around.
I would agree with him maybe 15 years ago if a person was trying
to move from say the DOS version of Autocad to the Windows
version. That would take some serious time. Even from Wordperfect
5.1 DOS to a Windows version of Wordperfect would be difficult at
first. Those days are pretty much history now and it's difficult
to find a modern application that is so far different that it
could be considered a UI nightmare from the competition.
I suppose you could say Gimp vs Photoshop however people using
either of those programs are most likely professionals and will
take the time to learn the differences if they need to move
between the two.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Snit
"George Barca" <georgeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>> Of course... but in practice it is important and there is a lot to it there,
>> too!
>>
>>> For example most people expect to see a
>>> cut/copy/paste function when right clicking after highlighting
>>> text and become confused when it's not there as is true with some
>>> applications. That would confuse a new user say using a computer
>>> in a library that was not his own machine. It would limit
>>> productivity up to the point where he discovers where those
>>> functions are and adapts at which point the consistency factor is
>>> no longer important.
>>
>> What makes you think it would no longer be important? As experienced users
>> find these consistent things from program to program they become more
>> efficient. If they find inconsistencies they stop even looking.
>
> It would not be important to that particular user because he
> knows how to find what he needs at this point.
> I'm talking about a specific inconsistency, in this case CNP.
The problem is not just that people cannot find what they are looking for...
though, I suppose, that might be the case sometimes, too.
>>> Also of interest is that consistency and a poor or good interface are
>>> different things.
>>
>> Oh, no doubt that consistency is not the only goal in UI design!
>>
>>> What I am trying to say is that the consistency factor is
>>> more important to new users of either particular software or a particular
>>> machine with that software on it.
>>
>> Why do you think it is more important to new users?
>
> New users of that software or machine, not new users in general
> Suppose you are used to Word and know that F7 refreshes the
> screen. Now you go to the local library and happen to use one of
> those machines and you go to refresh the screen and F7 doesn't
> work because that machine is running Wordperfect or Open Office.
>
> At that point now you know so it's not important any more.
Oh, if the whole machine is consistent, sure... but what if it is not. What
it each program handles these things differently. Now, instead of learning
common hot keys once, you learn them for each program... or, more likely,
for a small subset of programs. And what if different programs have
different color selectors - now when you select a color a save a swatch in
one program it is not saved for the next, and if you are looking for, say,
CMYK, you *know* it is available if the color selectors are consistent (or,
if you need one that is not available you can have it added - consistency
breeds easier addition of universal features). Same idea with spell/grammar
checkers. Same thing with Save dialogs - if you know that there are PDF
services available in (essentially) all programs, then it becomes worthwhile
to create a script that allows you to attach a named attachment to an email
(I use that example because it is real world to me).
How about consistent window dressings? Not just in looks, but in behavior.
I know that on OS X (almost) all programs will have a proxy icon and a
saved-status indicator. The fact that these are consistent makes them much
more beneficial.
On and on. Consistency allows for greater consistency both from the user's
end and from work the developers can create for users.
>> I have pointed to studies that actually show the opposite: that while it is
>> important for new users, consistency helps build efficiencies with
>> experienced users. Add to that: if there is consistency the developers can
>> build on that - adding features to save/print dialogs, windows, etc. Some
>> examples of this, from OS X, are PDF services and proxy icons.
>>
> I'm taking a single case as an example and a new user to that case but not
> necessarily a new user in total.
I am looking at users in general: new and experienced.
>>> Like others have said the Mac sets the standard. Windows is a close second
>>> and Linux depending on how you view all of this is third. The reason I say
>>> this is because Linux offers different interfaces on purpose, like gnome and
>>> kde for example. They are not consistent with each other yet only a few
>>> minutes spent with either is more than enough to become familiar with them.
>>>
>> The question is not one of familiarity... I am talking about efficiency,
>> reduction of errors, developer benefits in adding features, etc.
>>
>>> I have enough faith in the public at large to think that they will be able
>>> to work around the minor inconsistencies.
>>>
>> I, on the other hand, think people will continue to react like humans. :)
>
> Using my case so now you know that F5 does refresh.
> Time lost?
> A couple of seconds?
> Minor inconsistencies like this aren't really a problem for most
> people.
From watching people in my own studies I know that a *lot* more time is lost
than this. By save dialogs not being consistent, for example, people lose
work. We are creatures of habit - it is not because a dialog or button was
not labeled in a way it could not be understood, but they were not
consistent (and often not well designed). Many other examples.
> George Barca
> georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Snit
"George Barca" <georgeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:53:38 +0000 (UTC), Don Zeigler
> <sit...@this.computer> wrote:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> Of course. And keep in mind, it is not just studies... it is *every* expert
>>> opinion anyone has been able to point to.
>>
>> A bunch of gobbeltygook. Show me something that proves these inconsistencies
>> are significant enough to cost a company real money.
>
> Especially these days where programs are pretty much consist ant
> and the little oddities are easy to work around.
> I would agree with him maybe 15 years ago if a person was trying
> to move from say the DOS version of Autocad to the Windows
> version. That would take some serious time. Even from Wordperfect
> 5.1 DOS to a Windows version of Wordperfect would be difficult at
> first. Those days are pretty much history now and it's difficult
> to find a modern application that is so far different that it
> could be considered a UI nightmare from the competition.
Here are some of the inconsistencies (and other oddities) I have documented
in a relatively recent versions of desktop Linux:
From PCLOS:
Poorly done menus
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-menu.pdf>
Poorly done dialogs:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
Mouse pointers that do not do as they say:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
Even Ubuntu has its share of quirks - though it is clearly done much better:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/ubuntu-menu.pdf>
And the more recent one showing copy and paste oddities and weird text
behavior on selection:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/copy-paste.mov>
It is not like such examples are hard to find - or are not obvious.
> I suppose you could say Gimp vs Photoshop however people using
> either of those programs are most likely professionals and will
> take the time to learn the differences if they need to move
> between the two.
It is not a question of learning the difference... no doubt people can use,
for example, any of the different Save dialogs I show in my above links.
Still leads to lost work, frustration, and lost time.
Don Zeigler
> Been there, done that. In addition to the studies I, personally, have been
> a part of, I have noted the following, which includes some of the studies I
> have referenced in the past (I note five, specifically, below):
[snip]
I didn't see anything there indicating these inconsistencies are significant
enough to cost a company real money.
Now, how about in the studies you personally have been a part of?
--
WORK HARDER!... Millions on Welfare depend on YOU!
George Barca
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
>Snit wrote:
>
>> Been there, done that. In addition to the studies I, personally, have been
>> a part of, I have noted the following, which includes some of the studies I
>> have referenced in the past (I note five, specifically, below):
>
>[snip]
>
>I didn't see anything there indicating these inconsistencies are significant
>enough to cost a company real money.
>
>Now, how about in the studies you personally have been a part of?
I think some of what he is talking about is poor interface
design. We have all seen dialog boxes with cut off text,
depending upon the resolution of the monitor. We have all seen
oddball close boxes where save is in the middle, cancel on the
left and abort or something otherwise odd on the right.
It's not a biggie in my opinion.
Now if the top line items were changed from File, Edit, Help etc
to say Disk, Change, Instructions, that would be a bit odd.
George Barca
georgeb...@geeeeemale.com
Snit
"George Barca" <georgeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
I would say that UI design is about a lot more than just consistency - no
doubt. But if you *have* a consistent basis you are likely to have that
basis be one that works to get rid of cut off text, oddball save as dialogs,
etc. And, of course, once you get *that* stuff sorted out you can start
adding the non-obvious features that are of most benefit if they are
(essentially) in all programs.
Snit
20090125222044...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Been there, done that. In addition to the studies I, personally, have been
>> a part of, I have noted the following, which includes some of the studies I
>> have referenced in the past (I note five, specifically, below):
>
> [snip]
>
> I didn't see anything there indicating these inconsistencies are significant
> enough to cost a company real money.
Really? Looking at just the abstracts and just the first three studies I
referenced I see:
Carole A George, "Usability testing and design of a library website: an
iterative approach" 2005
-----
Testing indicated that color and graphics attract attention;
font, labels, and placement increase visibility; chunking and
leading with keywords increase readability; and consistency
increases usability.
-----
Cheul Rhee, Junghoon Moon, Youngchan Choe. Online Information Review.
Bradford: 2006.
-----
The purpose of this research is to examine the effects of
interface consistency on the learning performance of skilled
and novice computer users who are studying with Web-based
e-learning systems. A literature review was conducted, and an
experiment was set up to collect data on learning performance
with respect to interface consistency and e-learning systems.
Statistical methods were applied. Skilled students made more
errors than novices when using a physically inconsistent
e-learning system. The learning satisfaction level of those
skilled with computers was lower than that of novices using
such a system. Conceptually consistent systems facilitated
skilled students' learning satisfaction.
-----
John W Satzinger, Lorne Olfman. Journal of Management Information Systems.
Armonk: Spring 1998.
-----
Consistent user interfaces across applications are thought to
facilitate transfer of learning because a user can draw on
existing knowledge when using a new application. ... This
study tested whether the consistency of the user interface
across applications affects mental-model development when a
user learns and uses multiple applications. ... As
hypothesized, inconsistent action language syntax across
applications resulted in more user actions to complete tasks.
-----
You might want to actually look at the information you claimed you did not
see any evidence in. :)
> Now, how about in the studies you personally have been a part of?
We looked at dialog design (save, mostly, but also others), menu design,
mouse pointers, and other variables. Consistency clearly was a benefit...
inconsistency was clearly a detriment.
Don Zeigler
> You might want to actually look at the information you claimed you did not
> see any evidence in. :)
Numbers, man, numbers. Just reporting the fuckups is meaningless unless said
fuckups actually cost a business real money. Looking at the stuff you
provided, these errors are no more significant than me misspelling a word and
have to correct it.
--
What's a 6.9? 69 interrupted by a period.
Snit
20090126020511...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> You might want to actually look at the information you claimed you did not
>> see any evidence in. :)
>
> Numbers, man, numbers. Just reporting the fuckups is meaningless unless said
> fuckups actually cost a business real money. Looking at the stuff you
> provided, these errors are no more significant than me misspelling a word and
> have to correct it.
Hey, nice dodge of the fact that you clearly did not read the very info you
claimed did not support what it clearly supported!
If you have a specific project where you are looking to balance the cost of
building consistency with other factors then so be it... but in the general
context what dollar figure are you even asking for?
You clearly have gotten confused.
Don Zeigler
> Hey, nice dodge of the fact that you clearly did not read the very info you
> claimed did not support what it clearly supported!
This is why people don't attempt to have a civil conversation with you. You're
an obnoxious prick.
I asked you to provide some evidence that these inconsistencies actually cost
someone money, and you didn't do it. Instead, you resorted to your usual tired
tactics.
Any decent company is going to factor in a certain number of mistakes when
examining their production processes. You have failed to prove that an
inconsistent UI is more likely to cause problems than plain old human
screwups.
--
Circular Definition: see Definition, Circular.
Snit
20090126030149...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Hey, nice dodge of the fact that you clearly did not read the very info you
>> claimed did not support what it clearly supported!
>
> This is why people don't attempt to have a civil conversation with you. You're
> an obnoxious prick.
>
> I asked you to provide some evidence that these inconsistencies actually cost
> someone money, and you didn't do it. Instead, you resorted to your usual tired
> tactics.
>
> Any decent company is going to factor in a certain number of mistakes when
> examining their production processes. You have failed to prove that an
> inconsistent UI is more likely to cause problems than plain old human
> screwups.
Poor, poor Don... you ask for support, run when it is offered, and then you
whine. Oh, and snip and deny.
How sad. At least you make it clear you know your view is something you
cannot support. Nor counter the support I showed you.
How long until you panic and start lying about me calling you?
Don Zeigler
> How
[snip]
And Snit once again tries to deflect and obfuscate, because he can't answer
the question, or support his claim.
--
Incontinence Hotline, please hold.
Presidental Web server
> Snit wrote:
>
>> How
>
> [snip]
>
> And Snit once again tries to deflect and obfuscate, because he can't answer
> the question, or support his claim.
>
You know, he does seem to own you, since you're yapping like a little dog.
<PLANK> -- that's a soft logical <PLONK>.
Snit
20090126032900...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> How
>
> [snip]
>
> And Snit once again tries to deflect and obfuscate, because he can't answer
> the question, or support his claim.
Read what you snipped in this thread and please stop lying. Seriously: the
discussion was about UI consistency... and you freaked out, snipped, lied,
and started spewing accusations.
All because you disagree with the established research, and common sense...
and cannot defend your views.
How pathetic.
Snit
20090126032900...@this.domain.or.that, "Don Zeigler"
<sit...@this.computer> wrote:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> How
>
> [snip]
>
> And Snit once again tries to deflect and obfuscate, because he can't answer
> the question, or support his claim.
I added your name to the folks on the right... sadly you could not defend
your view better than any of the others in your little group.
Snit RonB
Hadron Rick
Tim Smith Gregory Shearman
KDE docs Peter Köhlmann
Gnome docs JEDIDIAH
OpenOffice docs El Tux
Firefox docs vs. chrisv
Screen shots 7
Videos Linonut
Tim Berners-Lee William Poaster
Peer Reviewed Studies [1] Don Zeigler
Shuttleworth, Mark
UI Experts [2]
Common sense
Bloggers
Jim Zemlin
[1] Including, but not limited to the ones referenced here:
Carole A George, "Usability testing and design of a
library website: an iterative approach" 2005
Snit
_PWdneF6Jr5OsuDU...@earthlink.com, "Presidental Web server"
<Presid...@Web.server> wrote:
Don plays the same silly game of snip, run, and lash out that so many other
trolls play.
It is boring.
High Plains Thumper
Rather hypocritical, would you not say, "Terry's Web Server"
nymshifter?
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
[quote] 1.4 The Charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy. The charter
of comp.os.linux.advocacy is: For discussion of the benefits of
Linux compared to other operating systems. [/quote]
That is soft logical.
--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green
Erik Funkenbusch
>> Even on the same distro there are several different package management
>> tools. How do you not know this?
>
> All happily interchangeable and cohabitable.
And ignoring Terry's point. He claimed that Linux doesn't have "confusion"
about different package managers because you only have a single package
manager that is always consistent.
That's obviosuly false, and you are glad it's false.
That's the point. Terry doesn't think before he posts his bullshit
comments.
>> It's all over the place.
>
> Pedant #1: Alien isn't a package manager, it's a binary conversion tool.
For package management.
> Pedant #2: most, if not all, package managers are interchangeable
> between distributions. For example, I use Yum on all my Linux boxen, but
> they're not all SuSE. Took a little shoehorning to get Yum to run on my
> RH cluster, but it's there because it's what I prefer.
Doesn't change the fact they all have different names, interfaces,
commands, quicks, etc... in other words, they're not consistent with each
other.
Erik Funkenbusch
>> So, what percentage of people do you think need an ISO burner?
>
> If you don't know why become such a pretentious WINDUMMY asking what?
Is that supposed to be english?
>> Windows
>> has had CD and DVD burning for a long time,
>
> Nope. You are hallucinating.
You are, actually.
> And it never worked - if you ran other apps, you are doomed
> to write crap on your CD.
Wait, now you admit it does, but "it never worked"? Did it, or didn't it?
And if it didn't, how could it have never worked?
More of that patented COLA double-think.
>> and a free ISO burner was avaialble on their web site.
>
> Thats why you are hallucinating. There is nothing on the
> install CD and no dekstop links were installed for the burner
> at install time.
You really don't understand the difference between CD and ISO burning?
Hint: One burns an image file, the other burns into a CDFS or UDF format.
>> I'd guess less than 10% of people would ever even use
>> it, much less know what an ISO is.
>
> Prove it. Nearly every Linux install begins life as an ISO.
> Millions of people use it under Linux.
> Every Linux user who has ever done an install uses ISO files.
That's an odd claim. That would mean nobody has ever bought a commercial
distro, or been given a CD by a friend. They all had to downlaod and burn
it eh? This even ignores the fact that you don't have to burn an ISO to
install it, which I would guess a very large number of people do.
[more childish comments deleted]
Hadron
Erik, Erik.
Peter and Liarmutt (amongst others), have already stroked their beards
and, along with Gregory Shearman, explained how "consistency" is not
important. Apparently (according to Peter) "consistency" is only for
"retards".
So now you know.
Peter Köhlmann
You might try to provide a Msg-ID for that, liar Hadron Snot Quark
--
The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
Snit
497d6dab$0$30233$9b4e...@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 1/26/09 1:00 AM:
>>
>> Erik, Erik.
>>
>> Peter and Liarmutt (amongst others), have already stroked their beards
>> and, along with Gregory Shearman, explained how "consistency" is not
>> important. Apparently (according to Peter) "consistency" is only for
>> "retards".
>>
>> So now you know.
>
> You might try to provide a Msg-ID for that, liar Hadron Snot Quark
You repeatedly told me how unimportant it is and how only stupid people
would be confused by inconsistencies.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Peter Köhlmann
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:10:04 +0000, The Lost Packet wrote:
>
>>> Even on the same distro there are several different package management
>>> tools. How do you not know this?
>>
>> All happily interchangeable and cohabitable.
>
> And ignoring Terry's point. He claimed that Linux doesn't have
> "confusion" about different package managers because you only have a
> single package manager that is always consistent.
>
> That's obviosuly false, and you are glad it's false.
>
> That's the point. Terry doesn't think before he posts his bullshit
> comments.
Well, let see: SuSE has different package managers. There is YaST, rpm,
zypper, KPackage
And it does not matter. A newby will stick to YaST only, as it not only
provides him with a very powerful package manager, but also a
comprehensive setup-tool for just about everything
He does not *need* any of the others.
But those have their place too: run RPM in case you have a rpm-package
already downloaded or know the URLfor it. You can also use KPacke for that
easily, if you prefer a GUI
Use zypper if you want to install some RPM from one of the configured
Repos, including the dependencies, without going through a GUI
The point is: Those different package managers all update the rpm-database,
so no matter which one you chose, the setup-info is consistent
They provide *choice* for someone more versed in the system, without having
him to need the full fledged YaST
And your claim that those package managers are "inconsistent" can only come
from a clueless nimwit like you, Erik Funkenbusch. Your "knowledge" about
linux was out of date ten years ago.
>>> It's all over the place.
>>
>> Pedant #1: Alien isn't a package manager, it's a binary conversion tool.
>
> For package management.
No. To convert between different package file formats. It does *not*
install anything, you clueless twit
>> Pedant #2: most, if not all, package managers are interchangeable
>> between distributions. For example, I use Yum on all my Linux boxen, but
>> they're not all SuSE. Took a little shoehorning to get Yum to run on my
>> RH cluster, but it's there because it's what I prefer.
>
> Doesn't change the fact they all have different names, interfaces,
> commands, quicks, etc... in other words, they're not consistent with each
> other.
If they had all the same names, how would you run them? Idiot
And why are they "inconsistent"? They have different uses, they don't exist
to be a replacement for each other. They exist to provide different tools
for different needs. And, for SuSE as example, only YaST would be needed
as a comprehensive tool.
But that would remove choice for people who know the system better. And
*those* give a flying fart about your idiotic needs
chrisv
>On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:12:27 -0700, Snit
><cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
Having fun, feeding the worthless Shit troll? Do you really think
you're going to "convince" him of anything?
DFS
> Snit wrote:
>
>> *every* expert opinion anyone has been able to point to.
>
> inconsistencies are significant enough to cost a company real money.
gobbeltygook = gobbledygook
Time is real money -> Linux crapware wastes time -> Linux wastes real money.
Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
Now use the Gnome screenshot to take a screenshot that shows the expanded
menus - similar to what you might do when creating documentation. Get back
to us when you figure it out.
Snit
7:08 AM:
If he disagrees with me and can use logic and rationality to support his
ideas he sure might... but most in COLA sink to name calling. Like you did,
above.
Oh well... it is the best you can do. You simply are not good at supporting
your views.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
Don repeatedly snipped all the evidence he could not offer a reasoned
respond to and then insisted it did not exist. He is, simply, a liar.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Don Zeigler
> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
> Now use the Gnome screenshot to take a screenshot that shows the expanded
> menus - similar to what you might do when creating documentation. Get back
> to us when you figure it out.
>
Who's "us", fucknozzle?
--
It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.
Sinister Midget
> DFS wrote:
>
>> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
>> Now use the Gnome screenshot to take a screenshot that shows the expanded
>> menus - similar to what you might do when creating documentation. Get back
>> to us when you figure it out.
>>
> Who's "us", fucknozzle?
If the dipshit knew anything.......
Here's one in KDE. Good enough?
http://s511.photobucket.com/albums/s358/sinister_midget/?action=view¤t=menushot.jpg
Doofie needs to move along. When he isn't exposing his insanity, he's
exposing his stupidity and/or complete ignorance.
--
Windows is not a virus. Viruses do something.
Snit
on 1/25/09 9:48 PM:
> Presidental Web server wrote:
>> Don Zeigler wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> How
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> And Snit once again tries to deflect and obfuscate, because
>>> he can't answer the question, or support his claim.
>>
>> You know, he does seem to own you, since you're yapping like a
>> little dog.
>>
>> <PLANK> -- that's a soft logical <PLONK>.
>
> Rather hypocritical, would you not say, "Terry's Web Server"
> nymshifter?
>
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
>
> [quote] 1.4 The Charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy. The charter
> of comp.os.linux.advocacy is: For discussion of the benefits of
> Linux compared to other operating systems. [/quote]
>
> That is soft logical.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
[quote] 1.4 The Charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy. The charter
of comp.os.linux.advocacy is: For discussion of the benefits of
Linux compared to other operating systems. [/quote]
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
DFS
> On 2009-01-26, Don Zeigler <sit...@this.computer> claimed:
>> DFS wrote:
>>
>>> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say
>>> Internet). Now use the Gnome screenshot to take a screenshot that
>>> shows the expanded menus - similar to what you might do when
>>> creating documentation. Get back to us when you figure it out.
>>>
>> Who's "us", fucknozzle?
>
> If the dipshit knew anything.......
>
> Here's one in KDE. Good enough?
Did I stutter, fool? I said Gnome.
DFS
> DFS wrote:
>
>> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say
>> Internet). Now use the Gnome screenshot to take a screenshot that
>> shows the expanded menus - similar to what you might do when
>> creating documentation. Get back to us when you figure it out.
>>
> Who's "us", fucknozzle?
Us is us, shithead.
I see you got sick of Linux wasting your time trying to do the basics.
Don Zeigler
> I see you got sick of Linux wasting your time trying to do the basics.
>
What are you raving about?
--
WORK HARDER!... Millions on Welfare depend on YOU!
DFS
> DFS wrote:
>
>> I see you got sick of Linux wasting your time trying to do the
>> basics.
>>
>
> What are you raving about?
Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
Now use the Gnome screenshot application to take a screenshot that shows the
Don Zeigler
> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
> Now use the Gnome screenshot application to take a screenshot that shows the
> expanded menus - similar to what you might do when creating documentation.
>
> Get back to us when you figure it out.
Why am I obligated to take a screenshot for you, fool?
--
It has been discovered that research causes cancer in laboratory rats.
The Lost Packet
> DFS wrote:
>
>> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say Internet).
>> Now use the Gnome screenshot application to take a screenshot that shows the
>> expanded menus - similar to what you might do when creating documentation.
>>
>> Get back to us when you figure it out.
>
> Why am I obligated to take a screenshot for you, fool?
go on, post it in this ng just to piss all over his metered dialup. Go
on, I don't mind, I got 50meg to play with >:]
DFS
> DFS wrote:
>
>> Open Gnome, click the Applications menu and expand a submenu (say
>> Internet). Now use the Gnome screenshot application to take a
>> screenshot that shows the expanded menus - similar to what you might
>> do when creating documentation.
>>
>> Get back to us when you figure it out.
>
> Why am I obligated to take a screenshot for you, fool?
You're not obligated to do anything, moron (except continue to lie about
your office migrations to Linux - the cola idiots will be severely
disappointed if you reveal the truth).
You asked "Show me something that proves these inconsistencies are
significant enough to cost a company real money" and that Gnome screenshot
exercise will show you exactly how.
High Plains Thumper
> "George Barca" wrote:
>> Don Zeigler wrote:
>>> Snit wrote:
>>>
>>>> it is *every* expert opinion anyone has been able to
>>>> point to.
>>>
>>> these inconsistencies are significant enough to cost a
>>
>> Especially these days where programs are pretty much consist
>> ant and the little oddities are easy to work around. I would
>> agree with him maybe 15 years ago if a person was trying to
>> move from say the DOS version of Autocad to the Windows
>> version. That would take some serious time. Even from
>> Wordperfect 5.1 DOS to a Windows version of Wordperfect
>> would be difficult at first. Those days are pretty much
>> history now and it's difficult to find a modern application
>> that is so far different that it could be considered a UI
>> nightmare from the competition.
>
> Here are some of the inconsistencies (and other oddities) I
> have documented in a relatively recent versions of desktop
> Linux:
>
> From PCLOS:
>
> Poorly done menus
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-menu.pdf>
Very nit picky, making a mountain out of a mole hill. "Exit"
versus "Quit"? You're kidding.
> Poorly done dialogs:
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
Dialogs cut off? There is a slider bar at the bottom, and one
can resize the dialogue box. Looks like you resized the dialogue
box to suit your anti-Linux agenda.
> Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
You moved and dragged the task bar, aligned vertical with the
side of the screen. That is freedom and for you it is a problem?
Buttons cut off by default? I did what you did by shinking the
window. FireFox shows ">>", which shows the remainder of that
favourites toolbar menu, not as you show.
> Mouse pointers that do not do as they say:
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
In this case, file window dialogue box did not stretch, but all
text items are visible, fully functional. Windows XP does the
same. This is okay for Microsoft software but not okay for
Linux? Who are you kidding?
> Even Ubuntu has its share of quirks - though it is clearly
> done much better:
>
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/ubuntu-menu.pdf>
What is unusal about individual expression of how menus are set
up in applications? I see the same thing with Windows software.
Adobe's menu items differ from Corel's, differ from Ulead.
> And the more recent one showing copy and paste oddities and
> weird text behavior on selection:
>
> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/copy-paste.mov>
>
> It is not like such examples are hard to find - or are not
> obvious.
Oh, really? I just copied in FireFox, pasted in gedit, it works
fine. This is with Ubuntu 8.04 LTS and FireFox 3.0.5. Here it
is again, same text you highlighted:
[paste]
Prescott Computer Guy is a family run business located in
Prescott, Arizona. My wife, Anne, does most of the "behind the
scenes" work and I, Michael, get to do the fun part: working with
the public and playing with fun toys. Don't tell her, but I think
I get the better end of the deal!
[/paste]
Altered video wizardry? There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu copy
and paste.
>> I suppose you could say Gimp vs Photoshop however people
>> using either of those programs are most likely professionals
>> and will take the time to learn the differences if they need
>> to move between the two.
>
> It is not a question of learning the difference... no doubt
> people can use, for example, any of the different Save dialogs
> I show in my above links. Still leads to lost work,
> frustration, and lost time.
No, rather it is another example of Snit moving the goal posts,
creating problems that do not exist except for an invention of
his own mind.
Snit
on 1/29/09 6:15 AM:
Kidding? It is right there in the screen shots! Granted, liars such as
Peter Köhlmann claim I forged those screenshots - but who believes a word he
says?
And Exit vs. Quit is not the only thing I list... but assume it was. That
is still an inconsistency that in no way benefits the user. Why have it?
What value is there to it? None.
But it is not just the term used. It is the icon - or lack thereof... also,
and this clearly diminished efficiency, the hot keys are not consistent.
And what about underlined shortcuts? Again - having them be inconsistent
reduces their value. Clearly.
>> Poorly done dialogs:
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
>
> Dialogs cut off?
Yes. As shown.
> There is a slider bar at the bottom, and one can resize the dialogue box.
Not in question.
> Looks like you resized the dialogue box to suit your anti-Linux agenda.
Nope. That was the size it came up with after a standard install. But to
try to defend Linux and its clear UI problems you lie about me. Why?
Seriously, why not just be honest?
>> Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
>
> You moved and dragged the task bar, aligned vertical with the
> side of the screen.
I did no such thing. Again: why do you make up stories about me? It is
absurd. I opened the folder and took a screen shot. I did *no* resizing.
None.
> That is freedom and for you it is a problem?
The fact that *by default* things are done so poorly clearly is a problem -
enough of a problem that when you are faced with it, instead of talking
about the problem you make up stories about the person who took the screen
shot.
Clearly you do not believe your BS excuses... if you did you would not feel
the need to sink to such silly tactics.
> Buttons cut off by default? I did what you did by shinking the
> window. FireFox shows ">>", which shows the remainder of that
> favourites toolbar menu, not as you show.
Again: I am showing the defaults. No buttons added. No resizing.
I will note that the hard to read text was from my mousing over it and the
mouse pointer did not show... and that is not noted.
>> Mouse pointers that do not do as they say:
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
>
> In this case, file window dialogue box did not stretch, but all
> text items are visible, fully functional. Windows XP does the
> same. This is okay for Microsoft software but not okay for
> Linux? Who are you kidding?
Interesting how your defense of Linux is not to even say it is doing what it
should... but to claim - with no support - that Windows does the same thing.
Even if it did, which you have not shown, so what?
>> Even Ubuntu has its share of quirks - though it is clearly
>> done much better:
>>
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/ubuntu-menu.pdf>
>
> What is unusal about individual expression of how menus are set
> up in applications? I see the same thing with Windows software.
In Windows the standard is File > Exit for any program with menus. Do not
fool yourself into thinking Windows is like Ubuntu in this regard... and do
not pretend that if it was as messed up that this would be an excuse for
Linux.
As far as an "individual expression", you act like this is some beneficial
artistic *choice*. It is not. It is haphazard lack of design - and proof
that the claim that if you stick to Gnome you will have consistency.
Why not have the system give the *user* choice? That is what I advocate
for: giving the user choice. Why not let the user decide what the menu item
should be called and what hot key is to be used?
Right now OS X has the most consistent UI, but it also has the greatest
lock-in (though you can change settings). Linux is in the unique position
to have a potential OS X and Windows lack: it can grow to offer user
*choice* that neither of the others can have based on the need to brand
their UI... something that benefits the companies but not, neccesarily, the
users.
Imagine having a config utility that let *you* pick for *your* system:
* Names of standard dialog items
* Hot keys for standard dialog items (though you would want defaults
that programmers could know not to use)
* What icons to use for standard menu items
* What print dialog to use
* What save dialog to use
* What font to use in standard dialogs (and others?)
Etc. Of course, each distro could set up their own defaults, but the *user*
would be in control of their own system and not subjected to the mish-mash
of competing and arbitrarily inconsistent ideas by programmers who are
clearly not following standards well... and even when they do they are not
following the same set of standards.
Choice for the user... it is a wonderful thing. Why argue against me on
this?
> Adobe's menu items differ from Corel's, differ from Ulead.
Show screen shots. I do not have products from each of those.
>> And the more recent one showing copy and paste oddities and
>> weird text behavior on selection:
>>
>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/copy-paste.mov>
>>
>> It is not like such examples are hard to find - or are not
>> obvious.
>
> Oh, really? I just copied in FireFox, pasted in gedit, it works
> fine. This is with Ubuntu 8.04 LTS and FireFox 3.0.5. Here it
> is again, same text you highlighted:
>
> [paste]
> Prescott Computer Guy is a family run business located in
> Prescott, Arizona. My wife, Anne, does most of the "behind the
> scenes" work and I, Michael, get to do the fun part: working with
> the public and playing with fun toys. Don't tell her, but I think
> I get the better end of the deal!
> [/paste]
>
> Altered video wizardry? There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu copy
> and paste.
Might be fixed in newer versions... but to suggest I altered the video is
just absurd. I did no such thing. Also notice that as I select the text it
moves a bit.
Frankly I want to see video evidence to support your claims... you have
already shown you are willing to lie about me to try to defend Linux. Why
would you not lie about that?
>>> I suppose you could say Gimp vs Photoshop however people
>>> using either of those programs are most likely professionals
>>> and will take the time to learn the differences if they need
>>> to move between the two.
>>
>> It is not a question of learning the difference... no doubt
>> people can use, for example, any of the different Save dialogs
>> I show in my above links. Still leads to lost work,
>> frustration, and lost time.
>
> No, rather it is another example of Snit moving the goal posts,
> creating problems that do not exist except for an invention of
> his own mind.
What goal post do you think I moved?
None.
You simply made that up because not even you believe your claims.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper stated:
No it isn't.
>> Granted, liars
Disagree.
>> such as Peter Köhlmann claim I forged those screenshots
I agree with Peter.
>> - but who believes a word he says?
Everyone but Snit (and a few others like Hadron).
> And Exit vs. Quit is not the only thing I list... but assume
> it was. That is still an inconsistency that in no way
> benefits the user. Why have it? What value is there to it?
> None.
It is obvious to everyone but Snit (and a few others like Hadron).
> But it is not just the term used. It is the icon - or lack
> thereof...
Can be turned on of off in Gnome.
> also, and this clearly diminished efficiency, the hot keys are
> not consistent.
How many use hot keys? Most navigate through menus. Standard
hot keys such as <Ctrl><C> for copy, <Ctrl><X> for cut, <Ctrl><V>
for paste, <Ctrl><Print Screen> for screen bit map copy are
consistent. For OpenOffice, <Ctrl><I> is to toggle italics,
<Ctrl><B> for bold, <Ctrl><U> for underline is the same for
Microsoft Office.
Gnome has choice for others.
> And what about underlined shortcuts? Again - having them be
> inconsistent reduces their value. Clearly.
>
>>> Poorly done dialogs:
>>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
>>
>> Dialogs cut off?
>
> Yes. As shown.
>
>> There is a slider bar at the bottom, and one can resize the
>> dialogue box.
>
> Not in question.
>
>> Looks like you resized the dialogue box to suit your
>> anti-Linux agenda.
>
> Nope. That was the size it came up with after a standard
> install. But to try to defend Linux and its clear UI problems
> you lie about me. Why?
Lie about you? Is it always about you? Why is it only you
that experiences these so-called problems whilst the rest of us
don't?
> Seriously, why not just be honest?
I am, why can't you?
>>> Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
>>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
>>
>> You moved and dragged the task bar, aligned vertical with
>> the side of the screen.
>
> I did no such thing.
You obviously do not know what you are looking at. That task bar
you moved belongs to Gnome. Hold down left mouse button on task
bar, it can me moved to the 4 sides of the screen - top, bottom,
left, right. You moved it.
> Again: why do you make up stories about me?
No stories, apparently you do not know what you are doing.
> It is absurd.
No absurdity, you don't know what you are doing.
> I opened the folder and took a screen shot. I did *no*
> resizing. None.
Why is it only you that seems to have this problem?
>> That is freedom and for you it is a problem?
>
> The fact that *by default* things are done so poorly
No, by default everything works fine.
> clearly is a problem -
No, it is not clear, it works fine.
> enough of a problem
No enough, there is no problem.
> that when you are faced with it,
No facing, I haven't seen it yet.
> instead of talking about the problem
What problem?
> you make up stories
No, I stated my observations. There are no stories, except your
stories.
> about the person who took the screen shot.
No stories, understand?
> Clearly you
Yes.
> do not believe
In Snit's alleged examples.
> your BS excuses...
No excuse.
> if you did
Did what?
> you would not feel
Feel what?
> the need to sink
I'm not sunk, I'm still standing.
> to such silly tactics.
For Snit? Yes.
>> Buttons cut off by default? I did what you did by shinking
>> the window. FireFox shows ">>", which shows the remainder
>> of that favourites toolbar menu, not as you show.
>
> Again: I am showing the defaults.
Mine has never defaulted to that, not in the past several years
and versions I've used. Why does it only happen to you?
> No buttons added.
I mentioned nothing about that.
> No resizing.
Oh, really?
> I will note that the hard to read text
Really? Seems fine to me.
> was from my mousing over it
Mouse pointer works fine.
> and the mouse pointer did not show...
Only on your version?
> and that is not noted.
I haven't noticed that.
>>> Mouse pointers that do not do as they say:
>>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
>>
>> In this case, file window dialogue box did not stretch, but
>> all text items are visible, fully functional. Windows XP
>> does the same. This is okay for Microsoft software but not
>> okay for Linux? Who are you kidding?
>
> Interesting how your defense of Linux is not to even say it is
> doing what it should... but to claim - with no support - that
> Windows does the same thing. Even if it did, which you have
> not shown, so what?
Why should I? Is it like your claim that by not showing your
quotes invalidates other's testimonies?
>>> Even Ubuntu has its share of quirks - though it is clearly
>>> done much better:
>>>
>>> <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/ubuntu-menu.pdf>
>>
>> What is unusual about individual expression of how menus are
>> set up in applications? I see the same thing with Windows
>> software.
>
> In Windows the standard is File > Exit for any program with
> menus.
Depends on the software programmer and their choice of words.
> Do not fool yourself
I am not fooled.
> into thinking Windows is like Ubuntu in this regard...
"Quit" does the same thing as "Exit". Windows applications do
not quit like Ubuntu applications?
> and do not pretend
Who's pretending? It is certainly not I.
> that if it was as messed up
You assume; no, it is not messed up.
> that this would be an excuse for Linux.
No excuse, Ubuntu works fine and so does its apps.
Oh, and what is the difference between "Exit" and "Quit"? Who
would get confused between "Exit" and "Quit"? They are
synonymously the same.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exit%5B3%5D
Main Entry: 3 exit
Function: verb
Date: 1607
transitive verb
2 : to cause (a computer program or routine) to cease running
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quit%5B2%5D
Main Entry: 2 quit
Function: verb
Date: 13th century
transitive verb
2: to set free: relieve, release
4 a: to depart from or out of b: to leave the company of c: give
up 1 <quit a job> d: give up 2 <quit smoking>
"Exit" a programme? "Quit" a Programme?
They are both synonymous.
> As far as an "individual expression", you act
No acting.
> like this is some beneficial artistic *choice*.
And?
> It is not.
Why?
> It is haphazard lack of design
Really? So use of "Quit" instead of "Exit" is haphazard?
> - and proof that the claim
Whose claim?
> that if you stick to Gnome
I like Gnome. Used to use KDE, but I have grown to like Gnome.
You don't like it?
> you will have consistency.
There is nothing wrong with Gnome.
> Why not have the system give the *user* choice?
What choice? Using "Quit" instead of "Exit"?
> That is what I advocate for:
Not clear.
> giving the user choice.
Choice over what? Creativity is defined by using supposed
defacto "Exit" over similar "Quit"?
> Why not let the user decide what the menu item should be
> called
Windows doesn't do that. Apple doesn't do that. Linux doesn't
do that. Why should they?
> and what hot key is to be used?
But you were calling for consistency. Now you are calling for
inconsistency. Which is it?
> Right now OS X has the most consistent UI, but it also has the
> greatest lock-in (though you can change settings).
And, Microsoft has no lock-in?
> Linux is in the unique position to have a potential OS X and
> Windows lack: it can grow to offer user *choice* that neither
> of the others can have based on the need to brand their UI...
> something that benefits the companies but not, neccesarily,
> the users.
But you are referring not to Linux, but the X-Windows GUI's, of
which there are several popular ones. X-Windows managers allow
optional selection during log-in, of KDE, Gnome, XFCE and a few
others. User already has choice.
> Imagine having a config utility that let *you* pick for *your*
> system:
See above.
> * Names of standard dialog items * Hot keys for standard
> dialog items (though you would want defaults that programmers
> could know not to use) * What icons to use for standard menu
> items * What print dialog to use * What save dialog to use *
> What font to use in standard dialogs (and others?)
In Gnome:
System > Preferences > Appearance.
Change hot keys:
Open "Interface" Tab:
[quote]
Menus and Toolbars
[ ] Show icons in menus
[ ] Editable menu shortcut keys
Tool bar button lables: [Text below items ] v
[Text beside items]
[Icons only ]
[Text only ]
[/quote]
Open "Fonts" Tab:
[quote]
Application font: [select] (default - Sans)
Document font: [select] (default - Sans)
Desktop font: [select] (default - DejaVu Sans Condensed)
Window title font [select] (default - Sans Bold)
Fixed width font [select] (default - Monospace)
[/quote]
Rendering
( ) Monochome (*) Best shapes
( ) Best contrast ( ) subpixel smoothing (LCDs)
Open "Visual Effects" Tab:
[quote]
(*) None: Provides a simple desktop environment without any effects
( ) Normal: Provides improved usability and good balance between
attractiveness and moderate performance requirements.
( ) Extra: Provides more aesthetically pleasing set of effects.
Requires faster graphics card.
[/quote]
> Etc. Of course, each distro could set up their own defaults,
> but the *user* would
is
> be in control
is
> of their own system and not subjected
Not currently
> to the mish-mash of competing and arbitrarily inconsistent
> ideas
Oh really?
> by programmers
What programmers?
> who are clearly
Vague.
> not following standards well...
Says who?
> and even when they do they are not following the same set of
> standards.
Says who?
> Choice for the user... it is a wonderful thing. Why argue
> against me on this?
[snip]
Snit
on 1/29/09 8:28 PM:
My goodness you can go on and on and on... accusing me of altering things
for a screen shot - when I did not, and denying that menus are inconsistent
in a PDF where it is *very* clear they are.
Do you want to try to respond again, this time honestly?
From PCLOS:
Poorly done menus
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-menu.pdf>
Poorly done dialogs:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
Mouse pointers that do not do as they say:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
Even Ubuntu has its share of quirks - though it is clearly done much better:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/ubuntu-menu.pdf>
And the more recent one showing copy and paste oddities and weird text
behavior on selection:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/copy-paste.mov>
It is not like such examples are hard to find - or are not obvious. How
could anyone who has used Linux and either Windows or OS X not have such
things be apparent to them - especially someone who considers themselves
knowledgeable about computers?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
High Plains Thumper
>
> My goodness you can go on and on and on... accusing me of
> altering things for a screen shot - when I did not, and denying
> that menus are inconsistent in a PDF where it is *very* clear
> they are.
>
> Do you want to try to respond again, this time honestly?
>
> From PCLOS:
[snip Snit's repetitive non-sense]
Yup, Snit just proved once again why it is simply not worth
responding to him, as also confirmed by these most recent
additions to the List of Poster Quotes regarding the Snit
(Michael Glasser) Circus of Pathological lies:
121- RonB: "Snit is a crank fixated on one issue, who's thing is
twisting your words so he can win an argument against a straw
man. That's enough to killfile him." 1 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usenet.kooks/msg/ce8550d4cc5b1b42
122- Sermo Malifer
Snit: "Why do so many people in COLA argue *against* me..."
Sermo Malifer: "Because you're a narcissistic troll who posts
trash just to get people talking about you." 21 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5ddf14f502e9b3f1
123- cc (COLA): "Snit posts all the time. You don't have to dig
up months old articles where he brings up years old topics. Just
respond to a current message." 22 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5a712e3312ba9f8a
124- Homer (COLA):
HPT: "Snit in a period of 2 minutes has copied a post of mine,
posting the same following message over and over, in false
pretense as a Linux advocate."
Homer: "That kind of behaviour is not normal, to say the least.
I don't mean this as a personal insult, but I'm perfectly serious
when I say 'Snit' (Michael Glasser) is obviously mentally ill,
and needs help. I was going to suggest that someone alerts his
wife to the problem, but I have to assume she's already aware of
his condition, if she is in fact still living with him. It's
possible, I suppose, that he's already undergoing counselling
and/or on medication, but if he is then it doesn't seem to be
helping much. Maybe he just missed his 'meds' today (again, I
mean that sincerely). 26 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e061874ea94e9ce8
125- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to
honest and honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is
the biggest liar in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to
prove Snit was using sock puppets and he still is. Snit can not
give up his socks puppets and shills. They are the only ones who
ever support him." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5b52494d96d12229
126-libcrushersmith: "Snit also thinks Dan Rather still anchors
CBS News and that Gitmo terrorists are innocent! Any time Snit
is cornered, he changes the subject and will never admit he's
wrong." 28 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/fbc516717f3b7ccf
127- The Lost Packet: "well, he's found a seat in my killbin, I
can't be doing with him." 27 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/2007526a552b3322
Snit
on 1/29/09 9:44 PM:
...
>> My goodness you can go on and on and on... accusing me of
>> altering things for a screen shot - when I did not, and denying
>> that menus are inconsistent in a PDF where it is *very* clear
>> they are.
>>
>> Do you want to try to respond again, this time honestly?
>>
>> From PCLOS:
>
> [snip Snit's repetitive non-sense]
>
> Yup, Snit just proved once again why it is simply not worth
> responding to him,
I call you out on your BS. And you hate it.
Oh well.
You accused me of all sorts of things, denied clear evidence, and otherwise
made a fool of yourself. Here, again:
Snit:
Poorly done menus
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-menu.pdf>
HPT
Very nit picky, making a mountain out of a mole hill.
"Exit" versus "Quit"? You're kidding.
Snit:
Kidding? It is right there in the screen shots!
HPT:
No it isn't.
And then you spewed such BS as:
Snit:
Granted, liars such as Peter Köhlmann claim I forged
those screenshots
HPT:
I agree with Peter.
You could not defend Linux so you just accused me of forging the
screenshots. How pathetic. And this gem from you:
Snit:
Poorly done and Inconsistent dialogs:
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
HPT:
You moved and dragged the task bar, aligned vertical with
the side of the screen.
Snit:
I did no such thing.
HPT:
You obviously do not know what you are looking at. That task
bar you moved belongs to Gnome. Hold down left mouse button
on task bar, it can me moved to the 4 sides of the screen -
top, bottom, left, right. You moved it.
Again you have no defense for the errors I documented... so you just lied
and claimed I did things I did not do.
You repeatedly tried to defend Linux by insisting Windows had the same
errors... but failed to document them.
On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
RonB
wrote:
> On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
Looking in the mirror again...
Snit's Anthem -- Rewrite
(sung to the tune of "Am I Not Pretty Enough" - Kasey Chambers)
Linux ain't pretty enough
The UI is "oh so broken"
And I lie too much
Leave no FUD unspoken
But I just make you laugh
Should I lie much harder?
Why do you see right through me?
I piss, I moan, I sit on my ass and groan,
I troll, I FUD, I fill this place with crud,
I twist, I turn, and always fail to learn,
I lie as hard as I can
Linux ain't pretty enough
The UI is "oh so broken"
And I lie too much
Leave no FUD unspoken
But I just make you laugh
Should I lie much harder?
Why do you see right through me?
I stand, I fall, I find it hard to crawl,
I snot, I drool, and slobber like a fool,
I bitch, I whine, I repeat the same old lines,
I lie as hard as I can
Linux ain't pretty enough
The UI is "oh so broken"
And I lie too much
I leave no FUD unspoken
But I just make you laugh
Should I lie much harder?
Why do you see right through me?
Why do you see... why do you see... why do you see right through me?
Why do you see... why do you see... why do you see right through me?
Why do you see... why do you see... why do you see right through me?
Why do you see... why do you see... why do you see right through me?
--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
Snit
PM:
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 23:25:36 -0600, Snit <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
>
> Looking in the mirror again...
You are getting repetitive. And boring.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
RonB
wrote:
> You are getting repetitive. And boring.
So I'm becoming more like you?
High Plains Thumper
> Again you have no defense for the errors I documented... so you just lied
> and claimed I did things I did not do.
>
> You repeatedly tried to defend Linux by insisting Windows had the same
> errors... but failed to document them.
>
> On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
Snit (Michael Glasser) is just another attention seeking and prolific
lying troll. See what these 127 posters have to say about Snit:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/813dee9005743e80
17- ed: "snit, you continually amaze me with how much of a liar and
loser you are. you may notice a semi-regular pattern with me where i
stop responding to your posts for stretches at a time, then start up
responding as if you were a normal person. i suppose it's tough for
the magnitude of your 'loserdom' to stick, so it loses some of it's
sharpness when i stop responding to you. you almost always start
responding back in a semi normal way, but inevitably degenerate. it's
once again that time. i can only ask that you pass my condolences to
your wife and unborn child for having to put up with such a dishonest
fool as yourself. (well, if your wife is a loser as well, just pass
those condolences to the rug-rat to be; if not, double condolences to
her). "
18- Edwin: "You've got to be out of your mind, Snit. You're the worst
troll this group has ever seen. You're a liar and a forger, and you've
almost destroyed this group single-handedly. For you to post a list of
out of context arguments, and lies, and forgeries about your enemies
labled as a "peace effort" has to be one of the craziest stunts you've
pulled. It's all about your sick need for attention, your need to be
center stage at all times. You'd publicly eat dog turd if you thought
it would make people look at you."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/37e4a720619642a0
31- Jeff Hoppe: "This is a Macintosh Advocacy newsgroup. Not a 12-step
recovery plan. Your medical problems or conditions won't help me
achieve a greater understanding of my Mac. In fact, it detracts from
it and those kinds of discussions have no place in a newsgroup such as
this."
50- Mark Kent (cola): "The problem with someone like Mr Glasser is the
same as it is with Mr Wong, even if he were to be honest now, it would
be impossible to determine where the honesty starts and the usual
dishonesty ends. In my primary school, one of the teachers was very
keen on proverbs, and I recall her going over the "cry wolf" story. Mr
Glasser could "cry wolf" over and over now, and I would not come to
help him with his sheep, because I do not know any way of determining
if he's ever telling the truth, or indeed, if he ever has."
77- Rick (cola): "Snit, you are a liar. And an ignorant one. You trash
people that are trying their level best to cope with a horrendous
situation. And you do it without the slightest idea of what is going
on."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/fcad2955ac5cb03b
116- S'mee (Keith, rec.motorcycles): "Liar...forger and worthless. You
must be related to our resident racist troll, he lies as much as you."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ab08c00330c8b58d
125- Edward Stanfield: "Snit thinks the rules that apply to honest and
honorable people apply to him. That is absurd. He is the biggest
liar in Usenet history. Mackay posted the email to prove Snit was
using sock puppets and he still is. Snit can not give up his socks
puppets and shills. They are the only ones who ever support him." 28
Jan 2009
--
HPT
Snit
5:34 AM:
> Snit wrote:
>
>> Again you have no defense for the errors I documented... so you just lied
>> and claimed I did things I did not do.
>>
>> You repeatedly tried to defend Linux by insisting Windows had the same
>> errors... but failed to document them.
>>
>> On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
>
> Snit (Michael Glasser) is just another attention seeking and prolific
> lying troll.
You are pathetic! You keep posting the same trolling BS over and over...
why?
And have you ever figured out how to copy and paste?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Wally
"Snit" <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> High Plains Thumper stated in post
> bdbad4fd-3bbf-42d3...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com on 2/5/09
> 5:34 AM:
>
>> Snit wrote:
>>
>>> Again you have no defense for the errors I documented... so you just lied
>>> and claimed I did things I did not do.
>>>
>>> You repeatedly tried to defend Linux by insisting Windows had the same
>>> errors... but failed to document them.
>>>
>>> On and on... you are incapable of being honest.
>>
>> Snit (Michael Glasser) is just another attention seeking and prolific
>> lying troll.
>
> You are pathetic! You keep posting the same trolling BS over and over...
> why?
Says the king of repetitive cut'n'paste! LOL
> And have you ever figured out how to copy and paste?
When are you going to figure out when not to?
Snit
You sure beg for my attention a lot.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chance Furlong
Snit <cs...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Wally stated in post C5B22428.119BD%Wa...@wally.world.net on 2/6/09 1:30 AM:
> >
> > Says the king of repetitive cut'n'paste! LOL
> >
> > When are you going to figure out when not to?
> >
> You sure beg for my attention a lot.
You sure beg for Wally's attention a lot.
--
God made me a furry, who am I to question His authority?
High Plains Thumper
> "Snit" wrote:
>> High Plains Thumper stated:
>>
>>> Snit (Michael Glasser) is just another attention seeking
>>> and prolific lying troll.
>>
>> You are pathetic! You keep posting the same trolling BS
>> over and over... why?
>
> Says the king of repetitive cut'n'paste! LOL
>
>> And have you ever figured out how to copy and paste?
>
> When are you going to figure out when not to?
It's just another Snit Glasser lie, same trolling BS over and
over. We need not ask why.
From the Snit Circus of Pathological Lies compilation of how Snit
posts the same thing over and over and over:
124- Homer (COLA):
HPT: "Snit in a period of 2 minutes has copied a post of mine,
posting the same following message over and over, in false
pretense as a Linux advocate."
Homer: "That kind of behaviour is not normal, to say the least.
I don't mean this as a personal insult, but I'm perfectly serious
when I say 'Snit' (Michael Glasser) is obviously mentally ill,
and needs help. I was going to suggest that someone alerts his
wife to the problem, but I have to assume she's already aware of
his condition, if she is in fact still living with him. It's
possible, I suppose, that he's already undergoing counselling
and/or on medication, but if he is then it doesn't seem to be
helping much. Maybe he just missed his 'meds' today (again, I
mean that sincerely). 26 Jan 2009
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e061874ea94e9ce8
--
MuahMan
>
> --
> HPT
> Quando omni flunkus moritati
> (If all else fails, play dead)
> - "Red" Green
Fuck Snit! I PROMISE i will throw a party for Wintel geniuses and
Mactards alike the day this annoying fuck dies!!!
Wally
7cb95a9a-f1b0-4972...@r41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, "MuahMan"
<mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yer right! .... a BYO party! :-(