pulse wave
tidbits for your amusement.
8
Nov
Nov
8
Nov
Nov
Scantegrity
Hey! Ron Rivest talked about this voting approach at the CS colloquium at Cornell last year!
6
Nov
Nov
Even worse than that, while I obviously like to see Linux run on 1024 CPUs and 1000 hard drives, I loathe the fact that to implement that we have to kill performance on the desktop. What’s that? Kill performance? Yes, that’s what I mean.
If we numerically quantify it with all the known measurable quantities, performance is better than ever. Yet all it took was to start up an audio application and wonder why on earth if you breathed on it the audio would skip. Skip! Jigabazillion bagigamaherz of CPU and we couldn’t play audio?
Or click on a window and drag it across the screen and it would spit and stutter in starts and bursts. Or write one large file to disk and find that the mouse cursor would move and everything else on the desktop would be dead without refreshing for a minute.
I felt like crying.
Con Kolivas29
Oct
Oct
19
Oct
Oct
19
Oct
Oct
[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]
Free Energy - “Dream City”
My name is Mitchell London, and I’m new to the Tuneage gang (Tunegange?). First, a little about me: I have two solo dance moves. Exactly two - the “Reach Up at the Sky and Pull Down Fiercely” and the “Very Excited Stationary Jogger.” When I try to push the boundaries, incorporate a new move - something, say, lateral instead of vertical - I abandon it in less than four bars and retire to the corner of the party, head hung in shame.
Fortunately, there are a few songs out there that accommodate - nay, are meant for - my hyperkinetic prancing. “Dream City” is one. The opening power chords are a statement of purpose; they let the listener know exactly where Free Energy is coming from. 1974. If the forces of punk, rap, dance, or irony have ever registered on the Free Energy radar, they certainly don’t show it here. Instead, they dabble in the simplest expressions of joy - handclaps, “Wooooo woooo woooooo” bridge harmonies, lyrics about stars, Rhodes Piano chorus breakdowns. If you’re not jogging in place after that post-chorus snare hit or clutching at the empty sky during the sax solo, you’ve clicked the wrong play button.
18
Oct
Oct
16
Oct
Oct
Why don't Macs support multiple monitors?
Apple fail.
13
Oct
Oct
10/GUI
I like it. Simple and elegant. This actually reconciles a quandary I’ve been having about the state-of-the-art in window management until now…
In the beginning (when there was only the console), programs with a textual user interface DID take up the entire screen.
Then came along the GUI, and some folks at Xerox decided it was a good idea to splatter overlapping 2D windows all over the screen. This design served desktop systems for a long time without noteworthy modification.
And then the web happened. If we think of each web page we visit as a full application (which is not far from the truth these days), then the only “window management” that’s being done for web apps is simply to organize them into Firefox tabs. And users like this. In fact, they prefer tab organization over desktop window management — this turned out to be one of Firefox’s killer features back in the day.
But why? Why two different window management techniques for web apps vs desktop apps? If one style were superior to the other, then it should grow to occupy both roles. In the desktop GUI, “browser tabs” would be analogous to maximizing every window on your desktop and switching among them via the Windows taskbar. And in fact some people do use computers like this. The task of digging through a stack of overlapped windows is gone, and you maximize screen real-estate for each application you look at. The concept makes a lot of sense in retrospect; maybe window managers should have been designed like this from the start?
via vimeo.comPosted via web from Jeff Hui | Comment »
← Previous
Page 1 of 34
