@antechinusNice try troll, but playing the "You're too PC card" won't work here.The bottom line is, you've revealed that you're incapable of expressing yourself in a complex manner. I have nothing against the phrase "tard" but the harsh and demeaning opinion it conveys will only cause people to dismiss you as someone who hates Linux with an irrational passion.You discredit yourself by being too emotionally invested in the issue. Your choice of words reveals that you're incapable of assessing the merits of Ubuntu logically.You're a fanboy and your choice of words reveals you as such.Now, if you'd used the term "retarded" in reference to the decision to use Ubuntu, and listed actual reasons why you think Ubuntu is pathetic and it's users fools, you would have gotten some respect with your comments.As it is, the best you can do is cheer about my bothering to respond to your trolling. No one else cares what you wrote. No one took you seriously.Rejecting Political Correctness is all well and good, but if you fail to express yourself in a useful manner, you might as well be typing out a string of racial slurs for all the consideration people will give you. This isn't about being politically correct, it's about displaying intelligence and an opinion worth listening to.If you express yourself poorly, it doesn't matter if you're politically correct or not. No one will take you seriously or care what you have to say.
@meatmcguffin***It's a Program/ document metaphor where every window is a document and not a self contained program. It saves on resources by running one instance of a program while viewing several documents in the program. It doesn't close when you close the windows because a window is not the program, only what you are using in that program.***If you are around initially to explain it to every new user, then I guess the process becomes "intuitive" after a while.I doubt that the Mac model saves any resources -- there are countless examples on non-Mac OS's in which only one instance of a program is open with multiple windows/documents, and a menu-bar appears on each window. Perhaps someone should do a test.***Also, please, please explain how it's innaccurate.***The model of dragging a drive (magnetic or optical) to the trash it is inaccurate, because one is not actually trashing the drive -- this action merely unmounts and/or ejects the drive. Doing the same action with a file trashes the file. It is easy to understand how some uninitiated and non-Mac users get fearful that they will jeopardize the contents of their firewire drives by dragging them to the trash before disconnecting them.***Fitt's law, look it up. It's faster to press the buttons on the menubar because a) you know it's always at the top of the screen b) as it's at the top of the screen, it gives the buttons infinite height and therefore you can't really miss them. You can flick the mouse to the top of the screen ten times faster than it takes to target an individual button floating around.***A lot of those who make reference to Fitts don't really understand usability, and often confuse speed with comprehension. My point was that OS X is not nearly as intuitive as it is "cracked-up" to be, which mostly falls under the usability topic of comprehension, not speed.***That's a wierd one but you can always right-click and choose eject, or click the eject symbol from the finder. I'm guessing you aren't aware that the trash changes to an eject sysmbol when you drag a removable drive though seeing as don't think youv'e used OS X in your life.***Again, if you are around to explain things then the process may become second nature after a while, but none of what you said is intuitive to the uninitiated, just from looking at the desktop. Also, how does one "right-click?"By the way, I have used OS X many times, and I just called a friend who has been an OS X user for about six years, and she had no idea what the "green bubble" on the windows did, until I had her click on it.***IT'S A f**kING ZOOM BUTTON.***Oh, it's a ZOOM button and not a MAXIMIZE button. Please pardon me. IT LOOKS LIKE A f**kING GREEN BUBBLE.Uninitiated user's POV: "I think that the green bubble is the one that makes the window go bigger, but I'm not sure, because I have never operated a computer. I am glad that I am not color-blind. Wait... a 'plus-sign' appears only after I finally move the pointer over the green button, but, does that mean it gets bigger or does it open another window? After watching my friends operate their Linux and Windows computers, I wonder why Mac doesn't use the same window button symbols -- I instantly understood those symbols. I thought Macs were supposed to be more intuitive.""Incidentally, the Linux and Windows buttons are bigger and easier to click, which is beneficial, according to my acquaintance who incessantly references a guy named Paul Fitts. In addition, most of these bigger, non-Mac buttons run along the top edge of the the screen when the window is maximized, which gives them 'infinite height' (as my zealous, Fitts-referencing acquaintance would put it). I would like to have the same infinite height benefit with my Mac window buttons, but: (1) the Mac window button 'bubbles' do not reach the edge of the window frame; (2) the program's menu prevents the window frame from reaching the top edge of the computer screen (some of my Linux friends can have both the program menu and window buttons along the screen's top edge, when the window is maximized); (3) and, when I click the green bubble, the window doesn't actually maximize!""Hold on -- my Mac friend says that I can change themes (I have an amazing selection of three themes!), so that the window buttons and their symbols are more intuitive and bigger. I wonder why my Mac friends never mention the zillions of themes/configurations/color-schemes available to Linux and Windows, when they dismiss Linux and Windows because they dislike their 'look.' At any rate, I still cannot fully maximize my windows to achieve the elusive 'infinite height' with the buttons."***It makes the window to the largest size it needs to be and no bigger...***And who determines how big my windows need to be? Steve Jobs?I want my "bigger" button maximize my window, Steve, thank you very much.
Why? Honestly, it adds nothing to any discussion and most everyone here has heard all the FUD from both camps before. Any chance digg users could grow up and stop caring about what OS other people use? Or what freaking game console? Or (God forbid) what idiotic political party someone else belongs to? Oh...wait for it....(in whiny fanboy voice: But THEY started it!)
macparrotMay 8, 2007
I know there's a real sentence there...somewhere...
halleyscometMay 8, 2007
@antechinusNice try troll, but playing the "You're too PC card" won't work here.The bottom line is, you've revealed that you're incapable of expressing yourself in a complex manner. I have nothing against the phrase "tard" but the harsh and demeaning opinion it conveys will only cause people to dismiss you as someone who hates Linux with an irrational passion.You discredit yourself by being too emotionally invested in the issue. Your choice of words reveals that you're incapable of assessing the merits of Ubuntu logically.You're a fanboy and your choice of words reveals you as such.Now, if you'd used the term "retarded" in reference to the decision to use Ubuntu, and listed actual reasons why you think Ubuntu is pathetic and it's users fools, you would have gotten some respect with your comments.As it is, the best you can do is cheer about my bothering to respond to your trolling. No one else cares what you wrote. No one took you seriously.Rejecting Political Correctness is all well and good, but if you fail to express yourself in a useful manner, you might as well be typing out a string of racial slurs for all the consideration people will give you. This isn't about being politically correct, it's about displaying intelligence and an opinion worth listening to.If you express yourself poorly, it doesn't matter if you're politically correct or not. No one will take you seriously or care what you have to say.
macfanboiMay 8, 2007
WAIT! Didn't the editor of PCWorld just quit because he wanted to run the "10 Things We Hate About Apple" article?!?!!!!
tupperbacharachMay 8, 2007
@meatmcguffin***It's a Program/ document metaphor where every window is a document and not a self contained program. It saves on resources by running one instance of a program while viewing several documents in the program. It doesn't close when you close the windows because a window is not the program, only what you are using in that program.***If you are around initially to explain it to every new user, then I guess the process becomes "intuitive" after a while.I doubt that the Mac model saves any resources -- there are countless examples on non-Mac OS's in which only one instance of a program is open with multiple windows/documents, and a menu-bar appears on each window. Perhaps someone should do a test.***Also, please, please explain how it's innaccurate.***The model of dragging a drive (magnetic or optical) to the trash it is inaccurate, because one is not actually trashing the drive -- this action merely unmounts and/or ejects the drive. Doing the same action with a file trashes the file. It is easy to understand how some uninitiated and non-Mac users get fearful that they will jeopardize the contents of their firewire drives by dragging them to the trash before disconnecting them.***Fitt's law, look it up. It's faster to press the buttons on the menubar because a) you know it's always at the top of the screen b) as it's at the top of the screen, it gives the buttons infinite height and therefore you can't really miss them. You can flick the mouse to the top of the screen ten times faster than it takes to target an individual button floating around.***A lot of those who make reference to Fitts don't really understand usability, and often confuse speed with comprehension. My point was that OS X is not nearly as intuitive as it is "cracked-up" to be, which mostly falls under the usability topic of comprehension, not speed.***That's a wierd one but you can always right-click and choose eject, or click the eject symbol from the finder. I'm guessing you aren't aware that the trash changes to an eject sysmbol when you drag a removable drive though seeing as don't think youv'e used OS X in your life.***Again, if you are around to explain things then the process may become second nature after a while, but none of what you said is intuitive to the uninitiated, just from looking at the desktop. Also, how does one "right-click?"By the way, I have used OS X many times, and I just called a friend who has been an OS X user for about six years, and she had no idea what the "green bubble" on the windows did, until I had her click on it.***IT'S A f**kING ZOOM BUTTON.***Oh, it's a ZOOM button and not a MAXIMIZE button. Please pardon me. IT LOOKS LIKE A f**kING GREEN BUBBLE.Uninitiated user's POV: "I think that the green bubble is the one that makes the window go bigger, but I'm not sure, because I have never operated a computer. I am glad that I am not color-blind. Wait... a 'plus-sign' appears only after I finally move the pointer over the green button, but, does that mean it gets bigger or does it open another window? After watching my friends operate their Linux and Windows computers, I wonder why Mac doesn't use the same window button symbols -- I instantly understood those symbols. I thought Macs were supposed to be more intuitive.""Incidentally, the Linux and Windows buttons are bigger and easier to click, which is beneficial, according to my acquaintance who incessantly references a guy named Paul Fitts. In addition, most of these bigger, non-Mac buttons run along the top edge of the the screen when the window is maximized, which gives them 'infinite height' (as my zealous, Fitts-referencing acquaintance would put it). I would like to have the same infinite height benefit with my Mac window buttons, but: (1) the Mac window button 'bubbles' do not reach the edge of the window frame; (2) the program's menu prevents the window frame from reaching the top edge of the computer screen (some of my Linux friends can have both the program menu and window buttons along the screen's top edge, when the window is maximized); (3) and, when I click the green bubble, the window doesn't actually maximize!""Hold on -- my Mac friend says that I can change themes (I have an amazing selection of three themes!), so that the window buttons and their symbols are more intuitive and bigger. I wonder why my Mac friends never mention the zillions of themes/configurations/color-schemes available to Linux and Windows, when they dismiss Linux and Windows because they dislike their 'look.' At any rate, I still cannot fully maximize my windows to achieve the elusive 'infinite height' with the buttons."***It makes the window to the largest size it needs to be and no bigger...***And who determines how big my windows need to be? Steve Jobs?I want my "bigger" button maximize my window, Steve, thank you very much.
macparrotMay 8, 2007
Why? Honestly, it adds nothing to any discussion and most everyone here has heard all the FUD from both camps before. Any chance digg users could grow up and stop caring about what OS other people use? Or what freaking game console? Or (God forbid) what idiotic political party someone else belongs to? Oh...wait for it....(in whiny fanboy voice: But THEY started it!)
aristotle0dudeMay 8, 2007
Message to all the windows fanboys: Grow the f**k up already.