|
Yea, maybe you should give 7zip a try. It was magical on Windows. I used to hate how my Sandisk USB stick would load all this "U3" bullshit when you mounted it on Windows and just take up space in general. Finally got rid of it though, loving thank God.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 18:26 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 01:11 |
|
|
You all should try using Citrix. It turns ALL of your favorite applications into focus stealing bastards. Microsoft Dynamics steals my focus a good 5 times while it is launching.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 19:42 |
|
|
Dyscrasia posted:You all should try using Citrix. It turns ALL of your favorite applications into focus stealing bastards. Microsoft Dynamics steals my focus a good 5 times while it is launching. Oh sweet God, Citrix. My mom's workplace uses this, and I've had to log onto her account before. Everything takes like forever and a day to load, and sometimes the servers have been so hosed up that you can't do anything. Printing? Pain in the rear end. Why should a short Word document take five minutes to spool? I can understand why they use Citrix, but damned if it isn't the most retarded setup I've ever seen.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 20:28 |
|
|
I get to use Citrix every day and it's wonky as hell. I remember locally saving files from a web page was "fun" to figure out. It doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between C$ and C: And yes good god is it slow, but I always assumed that was partially because of the hardware on the other end.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 20:48 |
|
|
albedoa posted:When you are saving files, you generally manage them as well. I don't understand these analogies you guys are coming up with. No interface should allow you to create a folder but not manipulate it afterwards. As it has already been stated, that just forces you to open up the file manager after you've already begun managing files. Can you explain why you have to rename it RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW OH GOD RIGHT NOW and can't save it in the folder then change folder name right afterward? Why that feature should be put in at the expense of dev time/complexity of code/more ways to accidentally gently caress up your file system? It takes, at most, 20 seconds to open explorer, navigate and rename a folder.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 21:03 |
|
|
Dyscrasia posted:Citrix taiyoko posted:Oh sweet God, Citrix. hyperborean posted:Citrix Hahaha, I just got promoted to Citrix sysadmin and will be starting after my CCA/CCEA training is done. 150 Citrix servers supporting waayyyyyy too many users. I've got 4 other experienced Citrix ninjas to help out, thank God. I can't wait!
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 22:44 |
|
|
inconsistent USB booting support between systems.
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2008 23:13 |
|
|
Casao posted:Can you explain why you have to rename it RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW OH GOD RIGHT NOW and can't save it in the folder then change folder name right afterward? Why that feature should be put in at the expense of dev time/complexity of code/more ways to accidentally gently caress up your file system? It takes, at most, 20 seconds to open explorer, navigate and rename a folder. Now, I'm personally willing to concede that there are Priorities when it comes to features in operating systems. But could you be willing to concede that the lack of such a convenience - and it is that, a convenience - is not an invalid complaint to make?
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 00:20 |
|
|
Casao posted:Can you explain why you have to rename it RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW OH GOD RIGHT NOW and can't save it in the folder then change folder name right afterward? Why that feature should be put in at the expense of dev time/complexity of code/more ways to accidentally gently caress up your file system? It takes, at most, 20 seconds to open explorer, navigate and rename a folder. Beaten, but twenty seconds is an eternity to do something as simple as renaming a file. Also, the chances of accidentally clicking "new folder" or mistyping the name are much much higher than those of screwing up your file system in any significant manner. Seriously, I've never heard of anyone managing to break something important via the save dialog, and having the ability to rename folders and stuff is a major convenience.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 00:46 |
|
|
quote != edit ...I was browsing the thread via the save dialog, my bad
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 00:47 |
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Twenty loving seconds just to do one simple thing to an item that was already right in front of you? Grab a stopwatch and hold your breath for twenty seconds. See how long that is. There are a million possible convinences. Being able to burn it to a cd, upload it to a website, put it into a .zip file, email the file to someone, save it AND automatically save a backup. But those aren't in there either. You have to choose where convinence gets in the way of the concept of saving. It's not a file management dialog, it's a save dialog. Yeah, it'd be nice to rename a folder if you mess up. But it starts to get obscene and no longer be about saving files after a certein point. It's just a disagreement about where that point lies.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 01:01 |
|
|
Casao posted:Can you explain why you have to rename it RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW OH GOD RIGHT NOW and can't save it in the folder then change folder name right afterward? Why that feature should be put in at the expense of dev time/complexity of code/more ways to accidentally gently caress up your file system? It takes, at most, 20 seconds to open explorer, navigate and rename a folder.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 01:04 |
|
|
About the Best Buy sales crap. I don't see the need to get around it. I don't state a preference upfront, but respond to yes/no questions with, "no, thank you," and all other non-billing questions are, "I'd prefer not to talk about that." Politely and with a smile. Works quickly every time, there's none of this "well if I say this then the salesguy will say that" business, and nobody comes out looking stupid. This goes for add-on sales in general.H2SO4 posted:Hahaha, I just got promoted to Citrix sysadmin and will be starting after my CCA/CCEA training is done. 150 Citrix servers supporting waayyyyyy too many users. I've got 4 other experienced Citrix ninjas to help out, thank God. For my own, my Ubuntu login screen got replaced with a Debian login screen, and I'm not sure what I did that made it do that, but I haven't had time to go figure it out. Oh, well.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 02:20 |
|
|
Casao posted:Can you explain why you have to rename it RIGHT NOW RIGHT NOW OH GOD RIGHT NOW and can't save it in the folder then change folder name right afterward? Why that feature should be put in at the expense of dev time/complexity of code/more ways to accidentally gently caress up your file system? It takes, at most, 20 seconds to open explorer, navigate and rename a folder. Operating systems are about making things more convenient, I doubt the implementors of the explorer save dialogs wasted dany time making it, and it makes a lot of people's lives easier.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 03:44 |
|
|
Casao posted:It's not a file management dialog, it's a save dialog. It's a save dialog, not a file system navigation dialog. You shouldn't even be able to navigate the folder hierarchy. You should already know where you want the file and type the path in manually. I'm sick of all this bloat in dialogs.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 04:36 |
|
|
Melonhead posted:It's a save dialog, not a file system navigation dialog. You shouldn't even be able to navigate the folder hierarchy. You should already know where you want the file and type the path in manually. I'm sick of all this bloat in dialogs. Yes, you certeinly proved me wrong. Don't I feel foolish. I rescind all my arguments on the subject 
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 04:50 |
|
|
MDDevice posted:This should be the default behavior in Windows, although it can be modified in the registry. Maybe many of you have had some program's install alter it in the past. It's worth a check. Then I checked my key (200000) against the default (200000). Wait, what? ~3.4 minutes?! This obviously does not work at all! I hate computers! 
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 05:40 |
|
|
Melonhead posted:It's a save dialog, not a file system navigation dialog. You shouldn't even be able to navigate the folder hierarchy. You should already know where you want the file and type the path in manually. I'm sick of all this bloat in dialogs. I'm sure users that can't even interpret menu levels will have no problem typing a full path, escaping special characters along the way. Really, it's a normal request. Some software installers do it too; they want you to pick the path to install to, but only list folders already existing when the dialog was opened.It doesn't allow you to create/rename a new folder from the same dialog, and more often than not the goddamn installer is fullscreen and steals focus constantly. Simply allowing you to rightclick -> "New folder" is considered bloat now? I guess I should've just hit "Quick install", what a stupid request. Edit: Now i'm not even sure if you're fakeposting or not  .
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 08:15 |
|
|
Fishstick posted:I'm sure users that can't even interpret menu levels will have no problem typing a full path, escaping special characters along the way. You seriously didn't see that as a fake post? I understand and appreciate that features are nice. I'm not even necessarily opposed to the ability to rename a folder or delete them or anything. But when you get down to it, it's not really a necessary feature. It's redundant.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 08:37 |
|
|
I've noticed lately that, while the (arche)typical Linux user response to any request for "how do I do <X>?" is "OMG RTFM NOOB ", the equivalent Mac user response is "Why the hell would you ever want to do <X>?  "(No, this is not meant as an attack on you, Casao, or anyone else in this thread) - I see this on this forum, and every other place I search when I'm confused by something in OSX. It's nearly a game now - if I see a thread here in SH/SC that has the Apple tag and a question in the title, chances are one of the first 5 replies is "Why would you want to do <X>?" (Right now there are few of those threads since (I guess) most of them are in the respective software/hardware threads) Again, this is not an "attack" on anyone, more something that's annoyed me for quite some time, but that I found nowhere to rant about - I need to get a blog
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 09:24 |
|
|
Casao posted:You seriously didn't see that as a fake post? Can you present a counter-argument to my argument that no dialogue should act like a file manager only up to a point where it is nothing like a file manager? I can't believe you invoked the CD burning analogy again. The "Save As..." dialogue does not for one moment pretend to be a CD burner. On the other hand, it acts as a file manager by allowing you to create a folder. It therefore should not limit you to that action only.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 11:31 |
|
|
I want a new IM status for Skype, MSN, AIM et al. It's somewhere between "Online" and "Do not disturb". I call it "Don't talk to me unless you've got something to say." I've got a couple of friends who IM me at least once a day when they're bored, saying "wassup?" and expecting entertainment like a funny youtube link. I hate having to break my flow of concentration to either respond to them or ignore them. I'd set my status to "Do not disturb", but that makes it sound like I only should be contacted in emergencies. I've yet to find a tactful way of saying "I hate it when you IM me and you've got nothing to say, please don't do that." It's a lot like when my girlfriend calls me up and asks "whaddaya doing?", and saying "something important, can you call back later" is going to end with her being pissed off because she just wants to talk rather than communicate. I call these types of phone calls "pings", because they contain no information other than to let her know you're alive and willing to talk back. A friend of mine found a unique solution to this with his girlfriend (now wife): he'd put a towel over his keyboard to muffle his typing, and continue doing whatever he was doing, and occasionally mutter "uhuh", and "yeah" to keep her thinking he was still listening. Never got caught.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 13:49 |
|
|
minato posted:I want a new IM status for Skype, MSN, AIM et al. It's somewhere between "Online" and "Do not disturb". I call it "Don't talk to me unless you've got something to say." I've got a couple of friends who IM me at least once a day when they're bored, saying "wassup?" and expecting entertainment like a funny youtube link. I hate having to break my flow of concentration to either respond to them or ignore them. I'd set my status to "Do not disturb", but that makes it sound like I only should be contacted in emergencies. ICQ has (had?) that. You had Online, Away, Busy and Do Not Disturb. Sounds like you want the Busy option. And another thing that pisses me off daily. Retarded group policies on corporate workstation builds. You know the ones I mean. Not allowed to right click on the taskbar or start menu. Not allowed to start task manager, not allowed to browse to C:\ in Explorer (but thankfully, you usually still can in Save dialogues. Thank god they work well as a file manager eh?), not allowed to run cmd.exe (but command.com is ok). Not allowed to change the system font size or resolution/refresh (This is illegal under UK Health&Safety and Disability laws. Doubly so if you left the refresh at 60Hz on a CRT that is 17" or higher). Not allowed to change the colour scheme (I fully understand this one, but it's still illegal). Not allowed to map network drives, meaning you have to call the helpdesk to get this done, and then the helpdesk moan that they're overworked (the command.com exploit usually fixes this). I swear these things are set by a two-person team that consists of that guy, the one who goes "oooh, that's a good idea" when presented with something he knows nothing about, and a security consultant who turned into the human equivalent of the curiosity sphere the day someone told him about gpedit.msc And I have a special place in hell for this clusterfuck of a situation that, while not daily, happens often enough that I want to punch someone: I am on site using an IT Administrators account, and I want to download the new version of the software we resell, an 80MB .exe file. So I use IE and download it. The corporate Firewall/AV product pops up it's own little web page that keeps me informed as to the download and checking process. This takes 3 hours. Finally it's done, and it passes the file on to IE, I get the standard IE Save dialogue. Then a popup tells me that filetype .exe is blocked by group policy and my download is deleted.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:20 |
|
|
 gently caress you apple for using your iTunes install base to push your lovely browser Edit: The box is checked by default
Syrinxx fucked around with this message at Apr 30, 2008 around 15:43 |
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:44 |
|
|
The vision discussion earlier in the thread reminded me that I hate being able to see the red, green and blue stripes in the image from an DLP projector. Which is what my school has as their standard in every classroom.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:48 |
|
|
CalamityKate posted:The vision discussion earlier in the thread reminded me that I hate being able to see the red, green and blue stripes in the image from an DLP projector. Which is what my school has as their standard in every classroom. Is that from a crappy projector or because they haven't bothered to calibrate the projectors?
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:50 |
|
|
HPL posted:Is that from a crappy projector or because they haven't bothered to calibrate the projectors? That's a good question- they're usually pretty good with tech setups so I would lean toward it being the hardware. Apparently after some googling of it, only some people are sensitive to it! So, I guess I should be mad at my own eyes.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:55 |
|
|
dorkanoid posted:I've noticed lately that, while the (arche)typical Linux user response to any request for "how do I do <X>?" is "OMG RTFM NOOB Similarly not an attack - because a huge proportion of Windows power users that switch to Mac or end up sitting at a Mac for some reason expect all of their little tricks to work exactly how Windows does them without first spending 5 minutes trying to do as the Romans do in an OS that has very different workflows. Many of us Mac users came over because we think Windows is a mess, precisely because of many of the things people bring up in these conversations. The last thing we want to see is OS X's interface slowly becoming one with the way Windows does things because a bunch of vocal people couldn't be hosed to learn different ways of doing things that they might actually find more efficient or pleasant in the long run. It's interesting that you compare this reaction to the Linux battle cry of RTFM, because the sentiment behind it really is the same: stop trying to use it like Windows. It's not Windows. It's not broken, you're just a newbie again and you're frustrated over it. Give it time, keep an open mind, and if after giving it an honest chance the way it is you still feel it could be done better another way, then we can discuss it without resorting to ad hominem accusations of laziness toward the developers. Leading straight into my thread contribution: when people assert that lack of their own pet features in a software package is not only a bug, but a sign of developer laziness because it would be "so easy" to add, completely overlooking or disregarding the idea that it might be like that on purpose. Whenever someone asserts that "not doing things my way" = "laziness", they come across sounding like this guy:  The corollary to this is when someone uses the well-polished mirror argument of, "The developer wants me to do it their way instead of mine. How arrogant! Of course their software should do things MY way!"
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 14:57 |
|
|
Karanth posted:Leading straight into my thread contribution: when people assert that lack of their own pet features in a software package is not only a bug, but a sign of developer laziness because it would be "so easy" to add, completely overlooking or disregarding the idea that it might be like that on purpose. Whenever someone asserts that "not doing things my way" = "laziness", they come across sounding like this guy: I bet you're in the "no 'send' button" pro-pidgin-devs crowd, aren't you?
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 15:06 |
|
|
albedoa posted:I can't believe you invoked the CD burning analogy again. The "Save As..." dialogue does not for one moment pretend to be a CD burner. But anyway, from within the "save as" dialog you can right click and "send to CD." from there it is an equal leap to adding "Write these files to CD" in somewhere as it is to delete, rename, etc. You can already burn a CD completely from the file manager without ever opening a dedicated CD burning program. If Save As is a file manager then let's manage some poo poo, huh? hahaha Now if everybody doesn't mind, we could get off of this topic. Some people want it, and some people don't see the need. Understood all around, OK? (dorkanoid, I'm not a Mac person, so I don't know what to tell you about your observation.) Otherwise we'll have strwrsxprt in here telling us about poo poo that he comes across daily that pisses him off, like stupid retarded arguments that go back and forth unproductively and incessantly 
nail fucked around with this message at Apr 30, 2008 around 15:59 |
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 15:51 |
|
|
Karanth posted:Similarly not an attack - because a huge proportion of Windows power users that switch to Mac or end up sitting at a Mac for some reason expect all of their little tricks to work exactly how Windows does them without first spending 5 minutes trying to do as the Romans do in an OS that has very different workflows. Many of us Mac users came over because we think Windows is a mess, precisely because of many of the things people bring up in these conversations. The last thing we want to see is OS X's interface slowly becoming one with the way Windows does things because a bunch of vocal people couldn't be hosed to learn different ways of doing things that they might actually find more efficient or pleasant in the long run. I can handle that it's different from Windows, and I can understand the question "Why do you want to do that?" in the sense "what are you trying to achieve" - one of the normal questions that trigger this is "How do I maximize the windows?" leading to a "Why do you want to maximize windows? We have huge screens! It's detrimental to productivity to run one and only one program in the foreground!" (Incidentally that's why I like TextMate on OSX - the "plus button" or whatever you call it actually maximizes)
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 16:09 |
|
|
Factor Mystic posted:I bet you're in the "no 'send' button" pro-pidgin-devs crowd, aren't you?  Pidgin is trying really, really hard to be Adium (which also has no send button) for non-Apple OSs. Adium has a great interface so I'm largely behind that idea. I'm not sold yet on the way they got rid of the manual resize for the text entry area in the latest version, but I like the auto-resizing and I'm trying to get used to it. Adium solved this issue by making the text box height = max(user_set_height, auto_resize_height) which I think would be a good compromise for Pidgin as well. I support the right of the disgruntled users to fork the project and turn it into the app they want, but I think they're being a little reactionary and silly about it. ("funpidgin"?? really?  ) Then again, the Pidgin devs are doing a pretty good job of coming across as dicks.dorkanoid posted:I can handle that it's different from Windows, and I can understand the question "Why do you want to do that?" in the sense "what are you trying to achieve" - one of the normal questions that trigger this is "How do I maximize the windows?" leading to a "Why do you want to maximize windows? We have huge screens! It's detrimental to productivity to run one and only one program in the foreground!" Developers are human. I'm not trying to pretend that they're gods on high bestowing their divine favor on the faithful in the form of their perfect software; there are way too many completely rear end programs to think that. I do find it hilarious when users think they know more about a piece of software or its internals than its developers, or that they are aware of other implications that "one tiny change" will have on the rest of the program and its associated workflow. I also think that both sides of the conversation should remain calm and civil when feature or interface requests are involved, and that if the user hasn't done his/her homework on the issue the developer should be able to politely brush them off without getting attacked for it - chances are he/she has already answered the question a hundred times before if the software is popular.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 16:58 |
|
|
hyperborean posted:I can't believe you ever thought that was serious instead of a completely facetious example of another "unnecessary" feature in a dialog, or that Casao and I are the same person. Right, I meant I can't believe Casao brought it up again even though we've already dismissed it as a horribly irrelevant example. quote:But anyway, from within the "save as" dialog you can right click and "send to CD." from there it is an equal leap to adding "Write these files to CD" in somewhere as it is to delete, rename, etc. You can already burn a CD completely from the file manager without ever opening a dedicated CD burning program. If Save As is a file manager then let's manage some poo poo, huh? hahaha We seem to be in agreement somehow. "Save As..." acts as a file manager by sending files to a special type of folder to be burned to a CD later, and the file manager acts as a CD burner from the beginning of the process to the finish. This is what I was saying.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 18:19 |
|
|
There's a simple, unobtrusive way to rename a file from dialogs in Windows: you click on the filename and it becomes an editable text box. It's a good idea, it's understandable, it doesn't add unnecessary clutter, and perhaps most importantly, there's no penalty to the user if it's done accidentally; the filename stays the same unless you start typing. Therefore, there's no good reasons that it shouldn't be part of the save dialog.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 22:20 |
|
|
Sharrow posted:You're saying iTunes exploits a privilege escalation vulnerability to install itself? What? That was about my reaction. I wasn't the one who personally tested this, but my company's architecture team set it up in their lab. A locked down, regular user account with no privileges whatsoever is able to successfully run the iTunes installer, which just incidentally installs 4 NT services that all run under the local system account. Upgrade to a version of java that closes the hole (and change nothing else), and the install fails. I haven't found anything about it on the web, either, but it is happening to us. It might just be that there aren't enough people out there running extremely locked down installs of windows, that have run into this (we've only seen maybe a dozen computers out of thousands).
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 22:29 |
|
|
albedoa posted:Can you present a counter-argument to my argument that no dialogue should act like a file manager only up to a point where it is nothing like a file manager? I can't believe you invoked the CD burning analogy again. The "Save As..." dialogue does not for one moment pretend to be a CD burner. On the other hand, it acts as a file manager by allowing you to create a folder. It therefore should not limit you to that action only. So you're saying it wouldn't be convinent to be able to save a file directly to CD if you were going to burn it anyway? It allows you to create a folder because that's fairly necessary for saving. Renaming and deleting folders/files aren't part of saving, they're file management.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 22:40 |
|
|
I'm going to use a lot of capital letters here because this has been pissing me off for ages. gently caress FLASH ADS. gently caress THEM. gently caress THEM SO HARD THEY SUFFER RECTAL PROLAPSE. gently caress websites that have two, three or EVEN MORE on a SINGLE PAGE, thus ensuring that those of us with older machines have our web browsers SLOW TO A loving CRAWL. But more than anything else, gently caress FLASH ADS THAT SOMEHOW PREVENT ME FROM SWITCHING TO ANOTHER TAB UNTIL THEIR ANIMATION IS DONE. I have no idea how this happens, but more times than I care to count, I have been browsing a website like 1UP or CNet, and I'll have several Firefox tabs open. I go to switch to another tab and OH NO I CAN'T BECAUSE APPARENTLY THIS FLASH BANNER HAS SOMETHING REALLY IMMENSELY IMPORTANT TO SHOW ME. So gently caress YOU, Flash ads and whoever makes them. gently caress you with swords and forks and branches and all manner of unpleasantly knobbly things.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 23:20 |
|
|
minato posted:I want a new IM status for Skype, MSN, AIM et al. It's somewhere between "Online" and "Do not disturb".
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 23:45 |
|
|
On the topic of Flash ads, they even manage to be annoying if you don't have flash installed. The current fad seems to be for ads that expand out over the bit you actually want to read, requiring you to hit a close button or something to get rid of them. So, on Konqueror, the flash remains opaque if you have flash isntalled, which is annoying as it covers the text completely, and on Firefox (where I don't have flash installed) the "Missing Plugin" box is opaque and covers the text completely.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 23:49 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 01:11 |
|
|
Rock Tumbler posted:But more than anything else, gently caress FLASH ADS THAT SOMEHOW PREVENT ME FROM SWITCHING TO ANOTHER TAB UNTIL THEIR ANIMATION IS DONE. I have no idea how this happens, but more times than I care to count, I have been browsing a website like 1UP or CNet, and I'll have several Firefox tabs open. I go to switch to another tab and OH NO I CAN'T BECAUSE APPARENTLY THIS FLASH BANNER HAS SOMETHING REALLY IMMENSELY IMPORTANT TO SHOW ME. If it's a keyboard shortcut, it's focus stealing. When you click in a flash object, your keyboard commands get captured by the flash object and not passed through to the browser. Which makes no goddamn sense because most flash objects don't need crap for inputs, and all they should need to do is rethrow the keyboard event if it's not needed. I guess that could make people accidentally lose focus of the object while playing a game, or most flash authors would just capture all keyboard events anyway and have them not do anything. But, seriously, youtube, you don't ever need to capture pagedown or shift+tab. Let me check something else. I'll be back in two seconds, I promise.
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2008 23:55 |
|
