Online Classes - Linux

This is a discussion on Online Classes - Linux ; "Rick" stated in post t_udnSnTZIP4chDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:10 AM: > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:52:54 -0700, Snit wrote: > >> "Rick" stated in post >> 7d6dnWt5QahgUhDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 6:56 AM: >> >> ... >>>> Perhaps you would like to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 298

Thread: Online Classes

  1. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSnTZIP4chDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:10 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:52:54 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Rick" stated in post
    >> 7d6dnWt5QahgUhDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 6:56 AM:
    >>
    >> ...
    >>>> Perhaps you would like to post links to his dishonesty in the same way
    >>>> he has to Rick agreeing that a fractured desktop is not so good for
    >>>> the user?
    >>>
    >>> Are you mentally deranged, too. I HAVE NOT agreed with Glxsser on
    >>> "fractured UI" rants. His saying I did does not make it true.

    >>
    >> Do you deny the following quotes as being yours:

    >
    > It appears to me that the quotes your attribute to me below are accurate.


    Not just accurate in being actual quotes but not altered in meaning by any
    form of dishonest or creative snipping - right?

    I want to make sure we have this on record... so check them carefully,
    please.

    >> Rick:
    >> I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.
    >>
    >> Rick:
    >> Actually my view is not so different from usability experts. It does
    >> enhance usability to have menus and controls in the same places
    >> across applications. The more uniform or consistent that is, the
    >> better for the user. I have said this many times before. I am not
    >> coming around to your point of view.
    >>
    >> Rick:
    >> I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across an
    >> interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.
    >>
    >> Snit:
    >> The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of KDE,
    >> Gnome and others...
    >> Rick:
    >> That's at least 3 UIs.
    >>
    >> Rick:
    >> Which UI would that be?
    >> Snit:
    >> The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of KDE,
    >> Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in the
    >> different distros in details, but they all share that trait...
    >> Rick:
    >> That's at least 4 UIs.
    >>
    >> Snit:
    >> If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact then point
    >> to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a UI with a fractured
    >> combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or otherwise is not quite
    >> inconsistent.
    >> Rick:
    >> Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.
    >>
    >> Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some of
    >> the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.
    >>
    >> OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    >> the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    >> "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    >> is not "better for the user".
    >>
    >> So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    >> with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    >> of desktop Linux?
    >>
    >> And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    >> am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    >> think is not fairly quoted.
    >>
    >> How many times do you want to play that same game?

    >
    > I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. I have not agreed with you.


    You did not answer the question.

    Nor will you.

    You can't.


    --
    God made me an atheist - who are you to question his authority?




  2. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnS7TZIMtcxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:07 AM:

    >>>> You agreed with him in the bits he quoted. What is wrong with you?
    >>>
    >>> No, I didn't agree with him. I have repeatedly told both I did not
    >>> agree, and why I did not agree.

    >>
    >> Yes. You have told us this. And maybe you indeed think you do not or did
    >> not. But the FACTS remain that you DID agree.

    >
    > NO I DID NOY.


    Do you deny the following quotes as being yours:

    Rick:
    I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.

    Rick:
    Actually my view is not so different from usability experts.
    It does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the
    same places across applications. The more uniform or
    consistent that is, the better for the user. I have said this
    many times before. I am not coming around to your point of
    view.

    Rick:
    I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across
    an interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.

    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro -
    a combo of KDE, Gnome and others...
    Rick:
    That's at least 3 UIs.

    Rick:
    Which UI would that be?
    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of
    KDE, Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in
    the different distros in details, but they all share that
    trait...
    Rick:
    That's at least 4 UIs.

    Snit:
    If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact
    then point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a
    UI with a fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or
    otherwise is not quite inconsistent.
    Rick:
    Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.

    Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some
    of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.

    OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    is not "better for the user".

    So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    of desktop Linux?

    And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    think is not fairly quoted.

    How many times do you want to play that same game?

    >> And he has posted you verbatim to prove you did.

    >
    > NO HE HAS NOT. He has posted quotes, and then said I agree with him, but
    > I do not. I have not.


    So you now say... but I have quoted your agreement.

    >> Now you might THINK you didn't but that is an
    >> entirely different kettle of fish.

    >
    > Who are you to tell me whether I agree with someone when I tell you I do
    > not?


    I have quoted your agreement.

    --
    I know how a jam jar feels...
    .... full of jam!


  3. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:32:22 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Rick" stated in post
    > t_udnS7TZIMtcxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:07 AM:
    >
    >>>>> You agreed with him in the bits he quoted. What is wrong with you?
    >>>>
    >>>> No, I didn't agree with him. I have repeatedly told both I did not
    >>>> agree, and why I did not agree.
    >>>
    >>> Yes. You have told us this. And maybe you indeed think you do not or
    >>> did not. But the FACTS remain that you DID agree.

    >>
    >> NO I DID NOT.

    >
    > Do you deny the following quotes as being yourssnip)


    Answered in another post.
    The quotes look like mine.
    Your conclusions are wrong.

    >
    > I have quoted your agreement.


    No, you didn't.

    --
    Rick

  4. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:27:38 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Rick" stated in post
    > t_udnSnTZIP4chDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:10 AM:
    >
    >> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:52:54 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Rick" stated in post
    >>> 7d6dnWt5QahgUhDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 6:56 AM:
    >>>
    >>> ...
    >>>>> Perhaps you would like to post links to his dishonesty in the same
    >>>>> way he has to Rick agreeing that a fractured desktop is not so good
    >>>>> for the user?
    >>>>
    >>>> Are you mentally deranged, too. I HAVE NOT agreed with Glxsser on
    >>>> "fractured UI" rants. His saying I did does not make it true.
    >>>
    >>> Do you deny the following quotes as being yours:

    >>
    >> It appears to me that the quotes your attribute to me below are
    >> accurate.

    >
    > Not just accurate in being actual quotes but not altered in meaning by
    > any form of dishonest or creative snipping - right?
    >
    > I want to make sure we have this on record... so check them carefully,
    > please.


    Are you brain damaged?
    It appears to me that the quotes your attribute to me below are accurate.
    Am I going to rummaging around to find the exact messages, with IDs? No.


    >
    >>> Rick:
    >>> I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.
    >>>
    >>> Rick:
    >>> Actually my view is not so different from usability experts. It
    >>> does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the same
    >>> places across applications. The more uniform or consistent that
    >>> is, the better for the user. I have said this many times before. I
    >>> am not coming around to your point of view.
    >>>
    >>> Rick:
    >>> I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across an
    >>> interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.
    >>>
    >>> Snit:
    >>> The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of KDE,
    >>> Gnome and others...
    >>> Rick:
    >>> That's at least 3 UIs.
    >>>
    >>> Rick:
    >>> Which UI would that be?
    >>> Snit:
    >>> The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of KDE,
    >>> Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in the
    >>> different distros in details, but they all share that trait...
    >>> Rick:
    >>> That's at least 4 UIs.
    >>>
    >>> Snit:
    >>> If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact then
    >>> point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a UI with a
    >>> fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or otherwise is not
    >>> quite inconsistent.
    >>> Rick:
    >>> Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.
    >>>
    >>> Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least
    >>> some of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of
    >>> desktop Linux.
    >>>
    >>> OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term*
    >>> "fractured"... but the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux
    >>> consists of, as *you* say, "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to
    >>> inconsistencies... which *you* say is not "better for the user".
    >>>
    >>> So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you
    >>> disagree with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the
    >>> user experience of desktop Linux?
    >>>
    >>> And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will
    >>> claim I am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say
    >>> which quote you think is not fairly quoted.
    >>>
    >>> How many times do you want to play that same game?

    >>
    >> I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. I have not agreed with you.

    >
    > You did not answer the question.


    What question?

    >
    > Nor will you.
    >
    > You can't.


    You should really get some therapy, Michael.

    --
    Rick

  5. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:12:19 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    >> Change the requirement.

    [...]
    > Mind boggling.
    >
    > If one could do that, why would we be discussing how best to meet the
    > damn requirement?



    What, really, is the requirement? That it's in a common format. Why?
    To make it easier for all involved. Take five minutes and find out if
    PDF is acceptable.


    -Thufir


  6. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:55:14 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:


    > Funny how the Linux loons are always talking about Microsoft wanting to
    > change the standards and how evil that is yet here they are trying to
    > change the standards so that their own miserable program will work in a
    > particular setting.



    That's a twisted view. Instead, if .doc were a standard then OO could
    read/write to that standard better and there'd be no issue.


    -Thufir

  7. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:17:04 -0700, Snit wrote:

    >> It's an absurd requirement.

    >
    > Your view of the requirement is not relevant. What is relevant is that
    > there are colleges that *do* require MS Word... and that OpenOffice,
    > clearly, will not do... and turning in files in PDF likely will not do
    > either.



    You're not disputing that it's an absurd requirement.


    -Thufir

  8. Re: Online Classes

    On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:03:21 GMT, thufir wrote:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:55:14 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Funny how the Linux loons are always talking about Microsoft wanting to
    >> change the standards and how evil that is yet here they are trying to
    >> change the standards so that their own miserable program will work in a
    >> particular setting.

    >
    >
    > That's a twisted view. Instead, if .doc were a standard then OO could
    > read/write to that standard better and there'd be no issue.
    >
    >
    > -Thufir


    ..doc *is* a defacto standard, much like round wheels on cars.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  9. Re: Online Classes

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Snit

    wrote
    on Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:44:30 -0700
    :
    > "RonB" stated in post
    > i6wik.4059$LF2.2536@newsfe09.iad on 7/25/08 7:38 PM:
    >
    >> Homer wrote:
    >>
    >>> They "require" that your WP be made by one particular vendor?
    >>>
    >>> Interesting.

    >>
    >> They probably require that his assignments be in Word format. Just use
    >> OpenOffice.

    >
    > This has been discussed: then you need to have a copy of MS Word (or the
    > reader) to verify that the document looks correct on Word. That is a
    > hassle, no matter how you slice it!
    >


    You'll need more than that; what fonts does the prof have in his system?

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Linux makes one use one's mind.
    Windows just messes with one's head.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  10. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSjTZIN9chDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:12 AM:

    ....
    >>> When I printed it out, the vertical height of the rows were different
    >>> in Word and Writer. I am not sure how/where Word did the formatting,
    >>> but I know neither had the row height set.

    >>
    >> One was printed single spaced. The other double.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> We can bicker over why or how OpenOffice does not work... but the fact
    >> is it did not work.

    >
    > You said it mangled the template. It did not mangle the template.


    As shown by the screen shots at the link it clearly did... as I have
    described.

    Why do you deny such easy to demonstrate facts?


    --
    If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
    Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)






  11. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSXTZINhbBDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:21 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:06:17 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Rick" stated in post
    >> 7d6dnWZ5Qah4ShDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 7:29 AM:
    >>
    >>>>> No he did not. He quoted me, and then said I agreed with him. I DO
    >>>>> NOT. I have repeatedly answered his posts and pointed out exactly
    >>>>> where I disagree with him.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You agreed with him in the bits he quoted. What is wrong with you?
    >>>
    >>> No, I didn't agree with him. I have repeatedly told both I did not
    >>> agree, and why I did not agree.

    >>
    >> Do you deny the following quotes as being yourssnip)

    >
    > Replied to in another post.
    > The quotes look like mine.
    > Your conclusion's are incorrect.
    >

    You, Rick, have acknowledged the following quotes from you are correct (or
    at least appear to be in your view):

    Rick:
    I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.

    Rick:
    Actually my view is not so different from usability experts.
    It does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the
    same places across applications. The more uniform or
    consistent that is, the better for the user. I have said this
    many times before. I am not coming around to your point of
    view.

    Rick:
    I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across
    an interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.

    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro -
    a combo of KDE, Gnome and others...
    Rick:
    That's at least 3 UIs.

    Rick:
    Which UI would that be?
    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of
    KDE, Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in
    the different distros in details, but they all share that
    trait...
    Rick:
    That's at least 4 UIs.

    Snit:
    If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact
    then point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a
    UI with a fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or
    otherwise is not quite inconsistent.
    Rick:
    Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.

    Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some
    of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.

    Yet you, Rick, deny agreeing with me.

    I can accept that you no longer agree with your above claims, but to deny
    them as you also have admitted they appear to be accurately yours is - well,
    another flip flop of yours.

    OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    is not "better for the user".

    So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    of desktop Linux?

    And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    think is not fairly quoted.

    How many times do you want to play that same game?



    --
    Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...21217782777472


  12. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSTTZIOsbxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:22 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:03:46 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Rick" stated in post
    >> 7d6dnWV5QaiUThDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 7:09 AM:
    >>
    >>>>> Are you mentally deranged, too. I HAVE NOT agreed with Glasser on
    >>>>> "fractured UI" rants. His saying I did does not make it true.
    >>>>
    >>>> But he quoted you verbatim where you did agree. Are you insane? How
    >>>> many more times must it be posted?
    >>>
    >>> No he did not. He quoted me, and then said I agreed with him. I DO NOT.
    >>> I have repeatedly answered his posts and pointed out exactly where I
    >>> disagree with him.

    >>
    >> Do you deny the following quotes as being yourssnip)

    >
    > Replied to in another post.
    > The quotes look like mine,
    > Your conclusions are incorrect.


    You, Rick, have acknowledged the following quotes from you are correct (or
    at least appear to be in your view):

    Rick:
    I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.

    Rick:
    Actually my view is not so different from usability experts.
    It does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the
    same places across applications. The more uniform or
    consistent that is, the better for the user. I have said this
    many times before. I am not coming around to your point of
    view.

    Rick:
    I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across
    an interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.

    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro -
    a combo of KDE, Gnome and others...
    Rick:
    That's at least 3 UIs.

    Rick:
    Which UI would that be?
    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of
    KDE, Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in
    the different distros in details, but they all share that
    trait...
    Rick:
    That's at least 4 UIs.

    Snit:
    If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact
    then point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a
    UI with a fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or
    otherwise is not quite inconsistent.
    Rick:
    Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.

    Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some
    of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.

    Yet you, Rick, deny agreeing with me.

    I can accept that you no longer agree with your above claims, but to deny
    them as you also have admitted they appear to be accurately yours is - well,
    another flip flop of yours.

    OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    is not "better for the user".

    So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    of desktop Linux?

    And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    think is not fairly quoted.

    How many times do you want to play that same game?


    --
    Picture of a tuna milkshake: http://snipurl.com/f34z
    Feel free to ask for the recipe.




  13. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSfTZIPubxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:23 AM:

    ....
    >>>> No. You most definitely have. Its quite hilarious.
    >>>
    >>> I have not. The requirement for the mic is still the requirement for
    >>> the mic.

    >>
    >> I noted why going against the MS Word requirement could be bad... even
    >> posted screen shots that proved my point.
    >>
    >> You are not able to show why using a non-USB mic could be bad.

    >
    > I don't care why.


    LOL! Not now... now that you have been told that there would be no problem
    with using a different one.

    Before you claimed it was merely an opinion that it was silly to require a
    *USB* mic.

    > Is it a class requirement or not?


    This has been covered repeatedly... if you cannot figure it out yet that is
    your problem. If you apologize for your going out of your way to tie your
    posts to my name *and* agree to no longer do so in the future I will help
    you understand such basic things.

    And in response Rick will dig through the thread and claim he was merely
    feigning ignorance.

    Completely predictable.

    >
    >
    >> You are not as good at supporting your claims as I am.

    >
    > What claims?


    Yours: specifically that it is merely an opinion that the *USB* mic
    requirement is silly... yet you cannot think of a single reason why it would
    not be silly... heck, you can no longer even figure out what the
    requirements stated!

    >> Not like this is
    >> news, but this is a great example.
    >>
    >> Will be fun to watch you deny it.




    --
    Picture of a tuna soda: http://snipurl.com/f351
    Feel free to ask for the recipe.




  14. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSbTZIMNaxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:40 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:32:22 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Rick" stated in post
    >> t_udnS7TZIMtcxDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:07 AM:
    >>
    >>>>>> You agreed with him in the bits he quoted. What is wrong with you?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No, I didn't agree with him. I have repeatedly told both I did not
    >>>>> agree, and why I did not agree.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes. You have told us this. And maybe you indeed think you do not or
    >>>> did not. But the FACTS remain that you DID agree.
    >>>
    >>> NO I DID NOT.

    >>
    >> Do you deny the following quotes as being yourssnip)

    >
    > Answered in another post.
    > The quotes look like mine.
    > Your conclusions are wrong.
    >
    >>
    >> I have quoted your agreement.

    >
    > No, you didn't.


    You, Rick, have acknowledged the following quotes from you are correct (or
    at least appear to be in your view):

    Rick:
    I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.

    Rick:
    Actually my view is not so different from usability experts.
    It does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the
    same places across applications. The more uniform or
    consistent that is, the better for the user. I have said this
    many times before. I am not coming around to your point of
    view.

    Rick:
    I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across
    an interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.

    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro -
    a combo of KDE, Gnome and others...
    Rick:
    That's at least 3 UIs.

    Rick:
    Which UI would that be?
    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of
    KDE, Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in
    the different distros in details, but they all share that
    trait...
    Rick:
    That's at least 4 UIs.

    Snit:
    If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact
    then point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a
    UI with a fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or
    otherwise is not quite inconsistent.
    Rick:
    Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.

    Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some
    of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.

    Yet you, Rick, deny agreeing with me.

    I can accept that you no longer agree with your above claims, but to deny
    them as you also have admitted they appear to be accurately yours is - well,
    another flip flop of yours.

    OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    is not "better for the user".

    So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    of desktop Linux?

    And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    think is not fairly quoted.

    How many times do you want to play that same game?


    --
    When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
    When God changes your mind, that's faith.
    When facts change your mind, that's science.


  15. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    t_udnSHTZIOOahDVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 9:42 AM:

    >>> I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU. I have not agreed with you.

    >>
    >> You did not answer the question.

    >
    > What question?
    >
    >>
    >> Nor will you.
    >>
    >> You can't.

    >
    > You should really get some therapy, Michael.


    You, Rick, have acknowledged the following quotes from you are correct (or
    at least appear to be in your view):

    Rick:
    I never said a consistent interface wasn't important.

    Rick:
    Actually my view is not so different from usability experts.
    It does enhance usability to have menus and controls in the
    same places across applications. The more uniform or
    consistent that is, the better for the user. I have said this
    many times before. I am not coming around to your point of
    view.

    Rick:
    I have repeatedly said I agree that that consistency across
    an interface lowers errors and increases efficiency of use.

    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro -
    a combo of KDE, Gnome and others...
    Rick:
    That's at least 3 UIs.

    Rick:
    Which UI would that be?
    Snit:
    The fractured UI present in every desktop distro - a combo of
    KDE, Gnome and others... there are differences, of course, in
    the different distros in details, but they all share that
    trait...
    Rick:
    That's at least 4 UIs.

    Snit:
    If you think it is merely an opinion and not a solid fact
    then point to the desktop Linux distro that does not have a
    UI with a fractured combo of KDE, Gnome, and others... or
    otherwise is not quite inconsistent.
    Rick:
    Your example is not one UI, it is a least 4 UIs.

    Whoever wrote the above *clearly* was agreeing with me about at least some
    of the facts and problems associated with the fractured UI of desktop Linux.

    Yet you, Rick, deny agreeing with me.

    I can accept that you no longer agree with your above claims, but to deny
    them as you also have admitted they appear to be accurately yours is - well,
    another flip flop of yours.

    OK, and of course, Rick, you will whine about the *term* "fractured"... but
    the fact is the user experience of desktop Linux consists of, as *you* say,
    "at least 4 UIs". This clearly leads to inconsistencies... which *you* say
    is not "better for the user".

    So just where - other than your semantic games - do you think you disagree
    with me in the facts and problems with the fracturing of the user experience
    of desktop Linux?

    And - predictably - you will run from that question, Rick. You will claim I
    am lying for merely quoting you... and then you will not say which quote you
    think is not fairly quoted.

    How many times do you want to play that same game?


    --
    Projects should really look to the whole Linux desktop and see how they can
    appeal to both sides.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  16. Re: Online Classes

    "thufir" stated in post
    5_mjk.141998$gc5.101123@pd7urf2no on 7/28/08 10:04 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:17:04 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >>> It's an absurd requirement.

    >>
    >> Your view of the requirement is not relevant. What is relevant is that
    >> there are colleges that *do* require MS Word... and that OpenOffice,
    >> clearly, will not do... and turning in files in PDF likely will not do
    >> either.

    >
    > You're not disputing that it's an absurd requirement.


    Correct... I have noted, however, that it is unwise to not follow the
    requirement because of a rather strong risk of lost time and even
    detrimental effects on grades.



    --
    I am one of only .3% of people who have avoided becoming a statistic.





  17. Re: Online Classes

    "thufir" stated in post
    ZTmjk.141992$gc5.54953@pd7urf2no on 7/28/08 9:57 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:12:19 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>> Change the requirement.

    > [...]
    >> Mind boggling.
    >>
    >> If one could do that, why would we be discussing how best to meet the
    >> damn requirement?

    >
    >
    > What, really, is the requirement? That it's in a common format. Why?
    > To make it easier for all involved. Take five minutes and find out if
    > PDF is acceptable.


    I have nothing against finding out if PDF is acceptable... I took your
    original statement to mean you could not think of a reason PDFs would not be
    acceptable.

    The OP could always ask if it would be acceptable;
    I don't see why not.

    In re-reading it, however, you could just have easily meant you could not
    see a reason why the OP should not *ask*... and I agree with that view.

    My sincere apologies - I made statements regarding your comments that
    appear, based on your explanations, to have been incorrect.


    --
    I think the Apple guys have a very good point when they say we should let
    designers lead the definition of the user experience.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  18. Re: Online Classes

    "thufir" stated in post
    VNgjk.98112$kx.20298@pd7urf3no on 7/28/08 3:01 AM:

    > On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 22:36:42 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >>>> You seem to have missed the part about the school/professor's
    >>>> requirements for formatting.
    >>>
    >>> Change the requirement.

    >>
    >> Ah, just call the school and tell them that their requirement for Word
    >> files is not going to work for you so they have to change the
    >> *requirement* to be PDF.

    >
    > For ****s sake, the first time I suggested this I specifically said to
    > *ask*.


    Your original statement:

    The OP could always ask if it would be acceptable;
    I don't see why not.

    I read that to mean you could not see a reason why it would not be
    acceptable... when it seems clear now you meant you could not see a reason
    to not ask.

    My apologies... sincerely.

    --
    Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
    conscientious stupidity. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.


  19. Re: Online Classes

    "Rick" stated in post
    7d6dnW95QajgJxDVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@supernews.com on 7/28/08 5:24 AM:

    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:12:19 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> thufir writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:33:58 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> You seem to have missed the part about the school/professor's
    >>>> requirements for formatting.
    >>>
    >>> Change the requirement.
    >>>
    >>> Elsewhere I suggest asking whether PDF would be acceptable, and remark
    >>> that Adobe Reader is a common program.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> -Thufir

    >>
    >> Mind boggling.
    >>
    >> If one could do that, why would we be discussing how best to meet the
    >> damn requirement?
    >>
    >> Get a clue.

    >
    > Students can always ask the teachers for exceptions to the rules. It is
    > done quite frequently. The answer is usually no, but not always.


    Correct - and I have no problem with students *asking*.



    --
    "In order to discover who you are, first learn who everybody else is. You're
    what's left." - Skip Hansen


  20. Re: Online Classes

    "Hadron" stated in post
    g6kema$9v9$1@registered.motzarella.org on 7/28/08 5:39 AM:

    > Rick writes:
    >
    >> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:12:19 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> thufir writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:33:58 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> You seem to have missed the part about the school/professor's
    >>>>> requirements for formatting.
    >>>>
    >>>> Change the requirement.
    >>>>
    >>>> Elsewhere I suggest asking whether PDF would be acceptable, and remark
    >>>> that Adobe Reader is a common program.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> -Thufir
    >>>
    >>> Mind boggling.
    >>>
    >>> If one could do that, why would we be discussing how best to meet the
    >>> damn requirement?
    >>>
    >>> Get a clue.

    >>
    >> Students can always ask the teachers for exceptions to the rules. It is
    >> done quite frequently. The answer is usually no, but not always.

    >
    > Yes of course one can always "ask". But what happened to yesterdays
    > mantra of "it's their requirements"?


    Rick is not consistent...


    --
    If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
    Roy Santoro, Psycho Proverb Zone (http://snipurl.com/BurdenOfProof)






+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast