ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment - Setup

This is a discussion on ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment - Setup ; There are currently a lot of refugees from the Windows/Mac worlds hanging around who want Linux to be just like them. What's the point? If you want Windows or Mac, USE them! Well, the point is that they want bargain ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

  1. ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    There are currently a lot of refugees from the Windows/Mac worlds
    hanging around who want Linux to be just like them.

    What's the point? If you want Windows or Mac, USE them!

    Well, the point is that they want bargain software and bargain
    technical support. That's all.

    They aren't interested in learning how computers work, and
    especially how Linux works.

    For them, KDE/Gnome are the logical choices for user interfaces.

    For real Linux runners, the command line is the only logical
    choice. This is where freedom and control are found.

    You can use the command line (CLI) in the X environment or out of
    it. You can run any graphical application that exists as well
    as the numerous, excellent, non-graphical applications that are
    available.

    You'll have to learn to touch type, but no one ever masters the
    computer without this skill.

    If your idea of running a computer is pointing and clicking while
    you stuff your face with junk food with the hand that isn't
    holding a plastic rodent, then KDE/Gnome are for you.

    (Not that I don't use a mouse, but I use it only when necessary.)

    The people who are addicted to artificial user interfaces like
    KDE and Gnome want you to believe these application suites are
    something magical, that they do things for you that you couldn't
    possibly do any other way.

    They are full of crap. KDE/Gnome are just collections of
    applications running in a GUI, a Graphical User Interface.

    I don't use them, and guess what? I have a collection of
    applications running in a GUI. The difference is that _I_
    chose what applications I run, not some technocratic geeks
    at KDE or Gnome. And I can run any graphical application
    in existence.

    And I am hardly alone. For many years, everyone running Linux
    ran it without anything like KDE/Gnome. They are obviously
    unnecessary. Except for people who don't want to learn Linux but
    want to let someone else do that for them.

    Is running Linux from the CLI difficult? No. Were you to begin
    from scratch, you could learn it faster than you could learn
    to use arcane, idiosyncratic, artificial interfaces like
    KDE/Gnome.

    When you are using the CLI, you are using a shell, a command
    interpreter. Modern shells are very sophisticated and you
    don't have to know much about them to use them effectively.

    But the technocrats and couch potatos want you to believe
    that they are mysterious and exceedingly difficult to learn
    and best left to geeks and gurus.

    Again, they are full of crap. I'm no guru. I'm just an
    ordinary Linux runner with a basic knowledge of bash
    and Linux.

    Here's MY version of ODE, the Other Desktop Environment,
    which runs in a GUI:

    When I log in on tty1 and run startx, my window manager,
    ratpoison, opens 10 full screen windows.

    These windows nothing but the applications running in them.
    No borders, no scroll bars, no icons. The only thing on
    the screen in one of the plain 'xterms' is the prompt:

    tomn@treeoflife:/etc$

    If I want to know the time and date, I hit 'Ctrl-t a' and
    a tiny window pops up in the corner with that information
    in it and lingers for a few seconds.

    'Ctrl-t w' gives me a similar window with a menu of the open
    windows with their numbers and titles. To change to one
    of those windows I just hit 'Ctrl-t N', where 'N' is the
    number. 'Ctrl-t t' will bring me back to the window I
    was at before.

    Instead of a bunch icons cluttering my screen used to call apps
    that I use regularly, I have those commands aliased to short
    strings. For example, if I want to bring up firefox I enter
    'ff'. And it opens in a new window of its own and the prompt
    is available for other commands.

    I have many of these short aliases and can bring up the
    list with the aliase 'al'.

    Creating aliases is easy is pie. You just put them in your
    bash rc file:

    alias ff='firefox'

    Not exactly rocket science.

    In another window my newsreader slrn is running, in another
    a datebook/calendar app, in another mutt, my mail client.
    In yet another window I have a simple script running that
    displays regularly updated system info. It just uses a
    utility called 'watch' to run other common utilities, that
    come with every Linux operating system, every 6 seconds.
    You could learn to write this script in ten minutes. And
    a thousand other useful ones like it. A basic script is
    just a list of commands.

    In that window I can see:

    How much swap and ram I am using at the moment.
    The current CPU load.
    What ports are open.
    What my IP is.
    What filesystems are mounted and info about them
    What active user processes are running and info about them

    In another window I have tethereal (a packet logger/sniffer)
    running, showing the activity on my Internet interface, eth0.
    Wvhat packets are coming and going and what kind and where they
    are from (port and IP) and where they are bound (port and IP).

    My 'xterms' (I actually use rxvt) all have scrollback buffers,
    so I can access the window's memory, what was there before, with
    Shift-PageUp/PageDown. No need for a scrollbar cluttering up the
    screen. No need to take my hand off the keyboard to use a mouse.

    I do use a mouse, of course, for graphical apps that require
    it and to cut and paste.

    If I need to work with the contents of two windows simultanously,
    I hit 'Ctrl-t s' and the screen splits in two horizontally and
    I switch between them with 'Ctrl-t Tab'. While in either window
    (frame) I can rotate the other open windows in them. 'Ctrl-t S'
    would split the screen vertically. To restore things to normal, I
    hit 'Ctrl-t Q' and the window (frame) I am currently in becomes
    the only one on the screen.

    I can create a new window with an 'xterm' running in it with
    'Ctrl-t c' and kill any window I'm in with 'Ctrl-t k'.

    I can run through the windows, forward and backwards, with
    'Ctrl-t n' and 'Ctrl-t p', respectively.

    Configuring the system and any apps you install is not
    difficult, They make it look like a bunch of magical
    woo-woo with those silly 'wizards', but it isn't. The
    information is readily available on the Web and then
    you have the knowledge and aren't dependent on some
    technocratic geeks.

    For example, someone here referred to a special 'widget'
    that KDE uses to configure DNS.

    Configuring DNS involves getting the addresses of your
    ISP's DNS servers (with or without KDE) and putting them
    in /etc/resolv.conf. Big woo.

    Here are some useful links:

    http://www.unixguide.net/linux/linuxshortcuts.shtml

    http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/docs/linux/ar01s03.html

    http://www.karakas-online.de/gnu-lin...s-summary.html

    http://www.luv.asn.au/overheads/bash.html

    http://www.physics.ubc.ca/mbelab/com...ux-intro/html/

    http://www.tldp.org

    http://www.linuxquestions.org/

    There are thousands of such sites, which ought to tell you that
    the people pushing KDE/Gnome are simply not telling you the whole
    story.

    What distro am I talking about? Doesn't matter. ODE is
    distro-independent.

    Tom


    --
    calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
    gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com



  2. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Tom Newton wrote:
    > There are currently a lot of refugees from the Windows/Mac worlds
    > hanging around who want Linux to be just like them.
    >

    Tom sweetie pie, isn't it about time that you woke up to the fact that
    Linux is good enough to be useful in more than one application.

    Those of us who use it as a server don't even have a screen attached to it.

    Nor possibly do thise using it as a mathematics engine, or a compile engine.

    Those who know what they want, can put any kind of GUI they like on it.

    Those who simply want something that's free, isn't microsoft, runs a
    word processor., spreadsheet, browser and email package,, but looks a
    lot like it, so its easy to migrate, but doesn't crash, are perfectly
    entitled to have it aren't they?

  3. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Tom Newton wrote:
    > There are currently a lot of refugees from the Windows/Mac worlds
    > hanging around who want Linux to be just like them.
    >
    > What's the point? If you want Windows or Mac, USE them!
    >
    > Well, the point is that they want bargain software and bargain
    > technical support. That's all.
    >
    > They aren't interested in learning how computers work, and
    > especially how Linux works.
    >
    > For them, KDE/Gnome are the logical choices for user interfaces.
    >
    > For real Linux runners, the command line is the only logical
    > choice. This is where freedom and control are found.
    >
    > You can use the command line (CLI) in the X environment or out of
    > it. You can run any graphical application that exists as well
    > as the numerous, excellent, non-graphical applications that are
    > available.
    >
    > You'll have to learn to touch type, but no one ever masters the
    > computer without this skill.
    >
    > If your idea of running a computer is pointing and clicking while
    > you stuff your face with junk food with the hand that isn't
    > holding a plastic rodent, then KDE/Gnome are for you.
    >
    > (Not that I don't use a mouse, but I use it only when necessary.)
    >
    > The people who are addicted to artificial user interfaces like
    > KDE and Gnome want you to believe these application suites are
    > something magical, that they do things for you that you couldn't
    > possibly do any other way.
    >
    > They are full of crap. KDE/Gnome are just collections of
    > applications running in a GUI, a Graphical User Interface.
    >
    > I don't use them, and guess what? I have a collection of
    > applications running in a GUI. The difference is that _I_
    > chose what applications I run, not some technocratic geeks
    > at KDE or Gnome. And I can run any graphical application
    > in existence.
    >
    > And I am hardly alone. For many years, everyone running Linux
    > ran it without anything like KDE/Gnome. They are obviously
    > unnecessary. Except for people who don't want to learn Linux but
    > want to let someone else do that for them.
    >
    > Is running Linux from the CLI difficult? No. Were you to begin
    > from scratch, you could learn it faster than you could learn
    > to use arcane, idiosyncratic, artificial interfaces like
    > KDE/Gnome.
    >
    > When you are using the CLI, you are using a shell, a command
    > interpreter. Modern shells are very sophisticated and you
    > don't have to know much about them to use them effectively.
    >
    > But the technocrats and couch potatos want you to believe
    > that they are mysterious and exceedingly difficult to learn
    > and best left to geeks and gurus.
    >
    > Again, they are full of crap. I'm no guru. I'm just an
    > ordinary Linux runner with a basic knowledge of bash
    > and Linux.
    >
    > Here's MY version of ODE, the Other Desktop Environment,
    > which runs in a GUI:
    >
    > When I log in on tty1 and run startx, my window manager,
    > ratpoison, opens 10 full screen windows.
    >
    > These windows nothing but the applications running in them.
    > No borders, no scroll bars, no icons. The only thing on
    > the screen in one of the plain 'xterms' is the prompt:
    >
    > tomn@treeoflife:/etc$
    >
    > If I want to know the time and date, I hit 'Ctrl-t a' and
    > a tiny window pops up in the corner with that information
    > in it and lingers for a few seconds.
    >
    > 'Ctrl-t w' gives me a similar window with a menu of the open
    > windows with their numbers and titles. To change to one
    > of those windows I just hit 'Ctrl-t N', where 'N' is the
    > number. 'Ctrl-t t' will bring me back to the window I
    > was at before.
    >
    > Instead of a bunch icons cluttering my screen used to call apps
    > that I use regularly, I have those commands aliased to short
    > strings. For example, if I want to bring up firefox I enter
    > 'ff'. And it opens in a new window of its own and the prompt
    > is available for other commands.
    >
    > I have many of these short aliases and can bring up the
    > list with the aliase 'al'.
    >
    > Creating aliases is easy is pie. You just put them in your
    > bash rc file:
    >
    > alias ff='firefox'
    >
    > Not exactly rocket science.
    >
    > In another window my newsreader slrn is running, in another
    > a datebook/calendar app, in another mutt, my mail client.
    > In yet another window I have a simple script running that
    > displays regularly updated system info. It just uses a
    > utility called 'watch' to run other common utilities, that
    > come with every Linux operating system, every 6 seconds.
    > You could learn to write this script in ten minutes. And
    > a thousand other useful ones like it. A basic script is
    > just a list of commands.
    >
    > In that window I can see:
    >
    > How much swap and ram I am using at the moment.
    > The current CPU load.
    > What ports are open.
    > What my IP is.
    > What filesystems are mounted and info about them
    > What active user processes are running and info about them
    >
    > In another window I have tethereal (a packet logger/sniffer)
    > running, showing the activity on my Internet interface, eth0.
    > Wvhat packets are coming and going and what kind and where they
    > are from (port and IP) and where they are bound (port and IP).
    >
    > My 'xterms' (I actually use rxvt) all have scrollback buffers,
    > so I can access the window's memory, what was there before, with
    > Shift-PageUp/PageDown. No need for a scrollbar cluttering up the
    > screen. No need to take my hand off the keyboard to use a mouse.
    >
    > I do use a mouse, of course, for graphical apps that require
    > it and to cut and paste.
    >
    > If I need to work with the contents of two windows simultanously,
    > I hit 'Ctrl-t s' and the screen splits in two horizontally and
    > I switch between them with 'Ctrl-t Tab'. While in either window
    > (frame) I can rotate the other open windows in them. 'Ctrl-t S'
    > would split the screen vertically. To restore things to normal, I
    > hit 'Ctrl-t Q' and the window (frame) I am currently in becomes
    > the only one on the screen.
    >
    > I can create a new window with an 'xterm' running in it with
    > 'Ctrl-t c' and kill any window I'm in with 'Ctrl-t k'.
    >
    > I can run through the windows, forward and backwards, with
    > 'Ctrl-t n' and 'Ctrl-t p', respectively.
    >
    > Configuring the system and any apps you install is not
    > difficult, They make it look like a bunch of magical
    > woo-woo with those silly 'wizards', but it isn't. The
    > information is readily available on the Web and then
    > you have the knowledge and aren't dependent on some
    > technocratic geeks.
    >
    > For example, someone here referred to a special 'widget'
    > that KDE uses to configure DNS.
    >
    > Configuring DNS involves getting the addresses of your
    > ISP's DNS servers (with or without KDE) and putting them
    > in /etc/resolv.conf. Big woo.
    >
    > Here are some useful links:
    >
    > http://www.unixguide.net/linux/linuxshortcuts.shtml
    >
    > http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/docs/linux/ar01s03.html
    >
    > http://www.karakas-online.de/gnu-lin...s-summary.html
    >
    > http://www.luv.asn.au/overheads/bash.html
    >
    > http://www.physics.ubc.ca/mbelab/com...ux-intro/html/
    >
    > http://www.tldp.org
    >
    > http://www.linuxquestions.org/
    >
    > There are thousands of such sites, which ought to tell you that
    > the people pushing KDE/Gnome are simply not telling you the whole
    > story.
    >
    > What distro am I talking about? Doesn't matter. ODE is
    > distro-independent.
    >
    > Tom
    >
    >


    Nerd. Nuff said.

    Mandelbrot

  4. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 03:26:38 +0800, Mandelbrot wrote:
    > Tom Newton wrote:


    a load of ****.

    > Nerd. Nuff said.


    Do you have some psychological problem which causes you to quote all that
    ****?


  5. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On 2008-03-02, Tom Newton wrote:

    http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...g=r&as_epq=&as
    _oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=+Mandelbrot+%3Cdu
    asen%40suabc.net%3E&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_
    miny=1981&as_maxd=2&as_maxm=3&as_maxy=2008&safe=off

    One post ever for: Mandelbrot

    Stinking troll. And no, I don't have to open your posts to
    extract the From: header.

    I won't be reading your posts or any responses to them

    Regardless of which name you are hiding behind at the
    moment, drooling on your keyboard and imagining that
    are devilishly clever.

    Anyone who takes your **** posts seriously is a feeb
    who is of no use to me and has no power to harm me.

    Like you.

    After thousands of posts that myself and anyone else
    with a lick of sense has ignored, I'd think you'd
    comprehend that simple fact.

    A moron would.

    Tom

    --
    calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
    gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com


  6. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Mandelbrot wrote:
    > Tom Newton wrote:


    >> For example, someone here referred to a special 'widget'
    >> that KDE uses to configure DNS.
    >> Configuring DNS involves getting the addresses of your
    >> ISP's DNS servers (with or without KDE) and putting them
    >> in /etc/resolv.conf. Big woo.


    Mandelbrot, he's not just a nerd. He's an idiot.

    You see, he's misquoting or misinterpreting me. I pointed out how useful it is
    to have a GUI to configure DNS, when I was refuting his claims that everyone
    should do everything from the CLI and only idiots benefit from GUI's. I said
    *nothing* about resolv.conf, that's for a DNS *client*. I referred to a
    server. Since the largest DNS domain I've had my fists directly into was
    13,000 active machines, I'd like to think that I have some clue. And doing
    that sucker by text-editing manual hand was a bear and a half, especially
    until someone (me!) wrote some sanity checkers to avoid common errors.

    Since then, Webmin has gotten sophisticated enough to do it handily, and I'm
    quite grateful for it.

  7. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 19:12:25 +0100, Tom Newton wrote:



    > What distro am I talking about? Doesn't matter. ODE is
    > distro-independent.


    LOL, I see "Tom Newton" is now over here hawking "his" ODE bull****. He's
    been laughed out of the Slackware newsgroup as a lunatic who babbles
    insane crap. For those of you who don't know, "Tom Newton" is the asshole
    formerly known as "Alan Connor", perhaps the biggest dickhead and Usenet
    netkook of all time.

    He is best ignored, and laughed at.


    --
    "Tom N" ("Tom Newton") - the latest nymshift of "Alan Connor".
    Read more about the netkook Alan Connor here:
    http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/fga.shtml
    Email him: calhobbit@gmail.com or simpleman.s43@gmail.com

  8. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    > Tom Newton wrote:
    >> There are currently a lot of refugees from the Windows/Mac worlds
    >> hanging around who want Linux to be just like them.
    >>

    > Tom sweetie pie, isn't it about time that you woke up to the fact that
    > Linux is good enough to be useful in more than one application.
    >
    > Those of us who use it as a server don't even have a screen attached to it.
    >
    > Nor possibly do thise using it as a mathematics engine, or a compile
    > engine.
    >
    > Those who know what they want, can put any kind of GUI they like on it.
    >
    > Those who simply want something that's free, isn't microsoft, runs a
    > word processor., spreadsheet, browser and email package,, but looks a
    > lot like it, so its easy to migrate, but doesn't crash, are perfectly
    > entitled to have it aren't they?


    That describes me, as well as some whom 'Tom' would rather see gone from
    'his' universe. I lived through 10+ years of DOS before Windoze bullied
    its way into the de-facto standard, and now I choose to learn Linux,
    even though the learning curve reminds me of DOS in 1984. It can be
    done, just not in a few days. I am using Ubuntu 7.10 right now as my
    main Linux, but also learning SUSE, Debian, and whatever else I can get
    my hands on.

    GIVE THE GUY A BREAK!!!!

    This is a movement, not a closed club.

    newton,
    You don't even get a capital 'n' from me, as you are an insignificant
    asshole compared to the rest of the community.
    Nurture the newbies, don't drive them away....
    Linux, any flavor, does not need assholes, Windows has plenty.

    Bill Baka
    Hardware engineer, forced to use Windows at work, Linux at home.

  9. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Dan C wrote:
    > On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 19:12:25 +0100, Tom Newton wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >> What distro am I talking about? Doesn't matter. ODE is
    >> distro-independent.

    >
    > LOL, I see "Tom Newton" is now over here hawking "his" ODE bull****. He's
    > been laughed out of the Slackware newsgroup as a lunatic who babbles
    > insane crap. For those of you who don't know, "Tom Newton" is the asshole
    > formerly known as "Alan Connor", perhaps the biggest dickhead and Usenet
    > netkook of all time.
    >
    > He is best ignored, and laughed at.
    >
    >

    That makes sense since I just ragged on him and his asshole elitist web
    non-etiquette posts.
    Bill Baka

  10. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    +-------------+
    | DO NOT FEED |
    | THE TROLL |
    +-------------+
    |
    |
    |
    _______L______

  11. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On 2008-03-02, Tom Newton wrote:
    ....
    > You'll have to learn to touch type, but no one ever masters the
    > computer without this skill.


    It's not at all necessary; I (and many others I know) never
    learned to touch type.


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, author |
    Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any,
    A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the
    2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence

  12. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On 2008-03-05, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2008-03-02, Tom Newton wrote:
    > ...
    >> You'll have to learn to touch type, but no one ever masters the
    >> computer without this skill.

    >
    > It's not at all necessary; I (and many others I know) never
    > learned to touch type.


    Hello Chris. That might not be the right choice of words. Maybe I
    should have said: Type well.

    You wrote a book, google tells me. You know how to type well, even
    if you had a lot of help in that area:

    http://www.amazon.com/Shell-Scriptin.../dp/1590594711

    (looks interesting)

    But the fact is, the vast majority of computer experts can touch
    type. KDE even includes an app among their suite of apps to help people
    learn to do that. KTouch:

    http://docs.kde.org/kde3/en/kdeedu/ktouch/learning.html

    It's a very good idea. You may be able to get the job done, but
    you'd be more efficient if you could touch type, and you'd
    enjoy your computer work more.

    Note that the last thing that the corporations behind KDE/Gnome want is
    for the average user to become an expert, which would lead them to
    abandon those bloated, artificial interfaces, so it must be even
    more basic that I thought.

    Or perhaps they just included it for the convenience of the
    office drones of the future...

    The newbies should note that you don't need to install KDE to use
    KTouch (or any other so-called "K" application). Just the kdelibs.

    Tom

    --
    calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
    gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com


  13. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Tom Newton wrote:

    > But the fact is, the vast majority of computer experts can touch
    > type.


    Utter bollocks.

    I cant. And I am as much a computer expert as anyone.

    My wife, who is a the babes that bawl when it comes to computers, can.

    When I ran a computer company, only *one* of the engineers was a touch
    typist.

    Whereas most of the admin staff were.

    I have come to know you as a pesron with an axe to grind, but only now
    as a complete liar as well.

    I am afraid. reluctantly, its plonk time.

    Bye.


  14. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    The Natural Philosopher (a@b.c) writes:
    > Tom Newton wrote:
    >
    >> But the fact is, the vast majority of computer experts can touch
    >> type.

    >
    > Utter bollocks.
    >
    > I cant. And I am as much a computer expert as anyone.
    >
    > My wife, who is a the babes that bawl when it comes to computers, can.
    >
    > When I ran a computer company, only *one* of the engineers was a touch
    > typist.
    >
    > Whereas most of the admin staff were.
    >

    The comment seems to be based on misunderstanding, at least.

    Touch typing, and I've done it since 1975, is about rapid entry of text.
    Even dealing with numbers or punctuation tends to slow you down.

    But computers are a different matter. In the first place, much of the time
    most people are using the keyboard to control things, not typing things in.
    When I was a kid, the book about touch typing never said anything about the
    function keys or the alt or ctrl keys, yet using a computer generally requires
    using those, and even if you are actually typing away, the use of such throw
    your typing off. You also have to take your hand off the keyboard often
    to use the mouse; one of the neat things about Linux is that you can use
    the mouse to cut and paste from the text console.

    In almost thirty years of having having computers, I sure don't use touch
    typing when I've entered programs or written them. It's more of a start
    stop process, burdened by all those number and punctuation keys. Yes, I
    must have an advantage in knowing touch typing, since I know where the keys
    are, but I am not really touch typing at those times, and I spend a lot of
    time getting my fingers back on the home keys.

    Now, I have just been touch typing, because there are a few paragraphs of
    text that I've just had to type straight through. But that's because I
    was actually typing, rather than pressing keys to do something.

    Michael

  15. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    On 2008-03-06, Michael Black wrote:
    > The Natural Philosopher (a@b.c) writes:
    >> Tom Newton wrote:
    >>
    >>> But the fact is, the vast majority of computer experts can touch
    >>> type.

    >>
    >> I cant. And I am as much a computer expert as anyone.
    >>

    > The comment seems to be based on misunderstanding, at least.


    Well, on the part of ''Tom'', it's based on trolling. But for the rest
    of us, I think touch typing can have two connotations.

    The first is simply "typing without looking at the keyboard", which is
    what I often assume. I do this all the time, even when coding.

    The second is ''real'' touch-typing, putting your fingers on the home
    row and using the ''correct'' fingers to hit the keys (e.g., left pinky
    hits Q). I don't do this, and never have. For example, I use the left
    ring finger to hit a, and use left pinky to hit shift to do A; in
    general my pinkies hit the ''extra'' keys like shift. But I'm not
    looking at the keyboard when I do this.

    Anyway, to refute ''Tom's'' point one more time, I know many an expert
    sysadmin who type with two fingers, and look straight down at the
    keyboard when typing. They manage to type very fast, but they don't
    look at their screen while typing unless they're playing Warcraft.

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  16. Re: ODE -- The Other Desktop Environment

    Keith Keller wrote:
    > On 2008-03-06, Michael Black wrote:
    >> The Natural Philosopher (a@b.c) writes:
    >>> Tom Newton wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> But the fact is, the vast majority of computer experts can touch
    >>>> type.
    >>> I cant. And I am as much a computer expert as anyone.
    >>>

    >> The comment seems to be based on misunderstanding, at least.

    >
    > Well, on the part of ''Tom'', it's based on trolling. But for the rest
    > of us, I think touch typing can have two connotations.
    >
    > The first is simply "typing without looking at the keyboard", which is
    > what I often assume. I do this all the time, even when coding.
    >
    > The second is ''real'' touch-typing, putting your fingers on the home
    > row and using the ''correct'' fingers to hit the keys (e.g., left pinky
    > hits Q). I don't do this, and never have. For example, I use the left
    > ring finger to hit a, and use left pinky to hit shift to do A; in
    > general my pinkies hit the ''extra'' keys like shift. But I'm not
    > looking at the keyboard when I do this.
    >
    > Anyway, to refute ''Tom's'' point one more time, I know many an expert
    > sysadmin who type with two fingers, and look straight down at the
    > keyboard when typing. They manage to type very fast, but they don't
    > look at their screen while typing unless they're playing Warcraft.
    >
    > --keith
    >

    I have a slightly different take on this.
    When I was in high school I knew I wanted to go into electronics and it
    seemed to me at the time that someone in that field would have to type
    reports.
    So, in my senior year (1965-1966) I took a typing class and learned to
    type about 45 WPM at that point. We at least had electrics to learn on.
    My other motivation was that the class was all girls except for me. The
    jocks looked down on me as some sort of wimp, but I had more female
    friends and phone numbers than they could count. The first computer I
    ever saw and got to play with was a mainframe in 1978. By that time I
    had been typing reports and even whole documents at work on an IBM
    Selectric and could go about 60 WPM. Now I can do about 100 WPM if I get
    into a chat situation and the person on the other end is trying to blow
    me away. That doesn't do me a lot of good here since I have to think
    about what i want to say, and programming is even more thinking.

    And, finally, I have seen good programmers using 2 fingers.
    Lousy typists but great understanding of the language (C).

    2 cents mode off.
    Bill Baka

+ Reply to Thread