 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> YaST is not Linux. You can't blame Linux for the problems of some
> third-party software you are running in it.
Sure I can. :-) Especially since it's the installer for the version of
Linux I use. Yes, yes, I've heard all the arguments, many times, thanks.
My point is that this is symptomatic. I'm not saying "YaST sucks." I'm
saying that huge bunches of Linux stuff is not user friendly in a
variety of ways that anyone being *paid* to do the stuff would have
fixed long before releasing it. Since I work with both professional and
amateur operating systems, I find myself constantly stumbling over the
little things that annoy me. "Abort" buttons are also high on the list,
along with incomprehensible or useless error messages, along with things
reacting to the user very poorly when the machine is under load, to the
point where the display is downright deceptive.
I'll grant you that of the major OSen, Linux is the OS most likely to
improve, mind. :-)
> In the Windows case in question it was a core feature of Windows.
Err, not more so than, say, X. :-) There are many replacements for
Explorer. Not many people replace it on general-purpose desktop
machines, because there aren't that many flaws with it.
> And besides, if you don't like how YaST works, take the source and make
> it better. Attempt to do that with Windows core features...
... and you're fine. So? You just don't do it by patching source code
and recompiling, any more than you install new device drivers by
patching the kernel source.
You just write a plug-in for explorer, like (say) TortiseSVN uses, etc.
Indeed, I just saw someone somewhere complain that copying several files
at once thrashes the drive, and why don't OSes queue up the copies?
Followed by someone the next day posting code that patches into explorer
to do exactly that. It isn't difficult, if you're immersed in how the
system works. It's just that most programmers only have a very surface
understanding of how Windows works and what you can do with it.
> I always copypaste in the same way everywhere. I don't remember a
> program where it wouldn't work.
VI? I'll have to see if the middle mouse button works there to paste.
The fact that some programs use one paste buffer and others use another
is also annoying.
I'll grant it's more an issue of training fingers than anything.
> (Sure, it's not immediately obvious how it's done, I admit that...)
It always throws me also that some programs will do the copy as soon as
you highlight text. Or, if the text is still highlighted when you give
the program focus, it'll replace whatever's in the copy buffer with
whatever is highlighted.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> "Abort" buttons are also high on the list,
> along with incomprehensible or useless error messages, along with things
> reacting to the user very poorly when the machine is under load, to the
> point where the display is downright deceptive.
You can always demand a refund...
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote
>> Greg M. Johnson wrote:
>
>> > How can I autoskip in Windoze?
>
>> When it asks the first time if you want to clobber files with the same
>> name, and offers "Yes", "No", and "Yes to all", hold down the shift key
>> and click "No". I think it's the shift key.
>
> Correct. And it's a legitimate reason to berate MS. One would have thunk
> an OS would provide the very basic file management functions and options
> transparently. Similarly, the fact that up until Vista, a locked/missing
> file will abort the whole copy operation is also inexcusable.
I'm guessing it's a ploy dreamed up by finance: "Hey, if we hide some of the
slightly advanced features that folks might need to do their job, we can
then charge a little bit more for training!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> "Abort" buttons are also high on the list,
>> along with incomprehensible or useless error messages, along with things
>> reacting to the user very poorly when the machine is under load, to the
>> point where the display is downright deceptive.
>
> You can always demand a refund...
You're so cute sometimes.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> "Abort" buttons are also high on the list,
>> along with incomprehensible or useless error messages, along with things
>> reacting to the user very poorly when the machine is under load, to the
>> point where the display is downright deceptive.
>
> You can always demand a refund...
>
Or fix it yourself. It's open source after all. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:
> Or fix it yourself. It's open source after all. :)
While this sounds far-fetched to most, it sometimes is actually very
true.
For example, years ago, when mplayer was still in its infancy, I had
problems with video playback in a Sun Sparc machine: The red and blue
channels were swapped together. Something to do with a Sparc being
high-endian. Well, I took the source, searched for the place where the
pixels are written, and switched the red and blue channels. It worked.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Or fix it yourself. It's open source after all. :)
Yep. And I do that, when it would actually take less time to track down
and fix the bug than it would to just put up with it. That doesn't mean
it isn't a bug. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:21:40 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian <"ykgp at vtSPAM.edu"> wrote:
>> On a bare terminal, write it down on paper and save yourself the
>> trouble.
>
> Actually in a bare terminal you can run software which allows
> copy-pasting
> of text on the terminal (using cursor key combinations, etc). Not the
> handiest possible way, but perfectly possible.
Personally, I use ctrl+shift+c and ctrl+shift+v in a GNOME terminal
window...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 16:43:52 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> I'm
> saying that huge bunches of Linux stuff is not user friendly in a
> variety of ways that anyone being *paid* to do the stuff would have
> fixed long before releasing it.
I don't know that I'd agree with that. First, is there a bug in
bugzilla.novell.com about this issue?
Lots of seemingly simple things get overlooked in test cases for QA - no
matter what software vendor it is. If the test plan doesn't have pasted
text in it, but just entered text to see if it works, then I could see
that being non-working.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Personally, I use ctrl+shift+c and ctrl+shift+v in a GNOME terminal
> window...
That's a terminal emulator and thus not the same thing as a bare terminal.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
