ELF loading
in [ASM]
|
From: santosh on 26 Aug 2007 12:30 Betov wrote: > Herbert Kleebauer <klee(a)unibwm.de> �crivait news:46D198E3.D80EAFC5 > @unibwm.de: > What would have been acceptable, when facing the bug, would have > been a Dialog, with a title saying: "Change PassWord:", an Edit- > control, and the required "Abort" and "OK" buttons. Period. There > is absolutely nothing intelligent with knowing the tips&tricks, > which are nothing but reflects of the programmers failure. > > OK, i cannot shout at volunteers free works, but, saying that > the actual mess is "intelligent" is the reverse of truth. I agree with your general statement there, but unfortunately, we have to work with what's existing. It makes one wish sometimes, to write your own OS, and begin from there, but then you don't like the hardware. Right, lets design and build our own hardware, then write an OS, ..., if we live long enough. :) Unfortunately you cant control everything in the world. Indeed the reverse is more closer to the truth. The great "collective" dictates everything about an individual's life, leaving nearly all individuals, brain-washed and playing in their own pet play-pens of occupation and ideology.
From: Betov on 26 Aug 2007 13:07 santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fas9qg$4kt$1(a)aioe.org: > I agree with your general statement there, but unfortunately, we have to > work with what's existing. Sure. I am just commenting on what exists. Did i said what I want? No. I have no particular wishes in matter of OS. Win32 (NT, 2000), without MicroSoft, would be perfect to me, and if Linux could work half of the same way, it would also please me completely. As i said previously, if the market presure can make Ubuntu a de-facto winner, and if this form of Linux goes on improving in the wishable usability direction, i will just have to say: Thanks, guys. Now, what irritates me, here, is with having programmers who feel happy of an unusable system, making their knowledges of some use, because, with a Click&Go system, any joe user could do as well as they can do. This is a so ridiculous elitism... Even saying that nowadays' Ubuntu is something for Joe-Users is ridiculous. It is not. By far, and there are still much progresses, on the surface, to be done before reaching this state. I just hope that, if they have money magically coming in their back, these progresses will be faster done than in the past 10 years. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 26 Aug 2007 13:51 santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fas8it$v8o$1(a)aioe.org: > To use a car, you need to learn to drive. To use a TV, you need to > learn the button. To use an oven, you need to learn baking, to use a > shaving set, you need to learn shaving, to use a can opener, you need > to learn a can opener, to use Windows, you need to learn Windows, ad > nauseum, .... To use an OS, one has to learn what a Mouse is, and how to use a keyboard. Learning the convention of a Command-Line: No. Not since the death of DOS, for sure. >> If a programmer is unable to write a correct user-interface, >> why on earth would he be able to write any Soft, at all? > > The UI is correct, merely _different_ > > Once again, keep in mind that UNIX evolved in the late 60s and early > 70s. At that time there were _no_ such thing as an "average Joe" user. > Only programmers and scientists used software. Linux, based itself on > UNIX, so has derived it's philosophy from UNIX. Right. In other words, a system that no joe user would have ever considered using. I am not interrested with Programmers' OSes. >> The purpose of an OS, is to _do_ the job. > > Yes. And the Linux kernel does it better than the Windows kernel, Jocking again, i suppose... >> Even if Ubuntu >> is called "User-Friendly", it is still at light-years from Windows, >> you like it or not, at this point of view. > > As I said desktops like KDE and GNOME have made basic usage as > friendly, IMHO, as for Windows. No. Also, if there exist *two*, one must be destroyed. >> The reality is >> that Linux is slow, unsecure, boring > > Yes KDE and GNOME _are_ slow. No question about that. But they are not > Linux itself. Linux is, strictly speaking, just the kernel. Together > with GNU's C library, compiler and fundamental utilities, it forms a > clean, lean OS. :)) Do you see how these words are absurd? > Addons like Apache, MySQL, KDE, GNOME, X server, Samba, Sendmail, > etc., may be better or worse than other alternatives. Generally they > are better, but, as you noticed, KDE and GNOME tend to be resource > hogs. But OTOH, they offer richer control over the GUI environment > than the default Windows shell, which, I think, is Explorer.exe. :)) Hopefully, MenuetOS does not have a graphical Interface, does it? :)) > It was not a bug. It was incorrect usage by the user. *sudo* asks for > _your_ password, _not_ the root password. You like it or not, this _is_ a bug. There is no difference in between root and the password, under Ubuntu. It was accepting the password at boot, and refusing it for any action requireing it. I had to re-boot in rescue mode, to change the password, for a simpler one, and then it was OK. There are not two passwords, here. I see two tracks for the bug hunt: 1) The first password i choosed was not pleasing the second stage, and a simpler one did it. 2) There might have been keyboard confusion (Azerty <> Querty), at the first boot. > Well go ahead then with DOS and Windows. Have you followed Microsoft's > strong recommendations and upgraded to the latest and greatest Windows > Vista? No. 2000 here, and i have absolutely no intention of buying anything else. 2000 works fine, and the only problem i have with it is that i am ashamed of having given money to MS for it, after having already given money for 95. So, do not put your finger where it hurts. :)) > You can setup associations for this in your file manager. Just create > a new association that any file with a '.exe' extension should be run > from the command-line by wine. Probably. Mind you, i searched for this, yesterday, and never found out how to do it. Today, even though i did *not* set it, this option installed itself, so that i can just double-click upon an icon for a run... How? Why? No idea. More than that, since this click-job works... the Application itself does no more work like it was used to. You know what? There is a Troll inside Linux, who hates me, and who plays bad jokes to me !!! :)) Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 26 Aug 2007 13:59 CodeMonk <jascwa(a)yahoo.com> �crivait news:LIhAi.45152$Lu.11260 @bignews8.bellsouth.net: > Betov wrote: > >> of a user to *learn* anything at all. The job of a user is, as its name >> says, to *use* a Software, and if a Software's final user has anything >> to *learn*, before usign the Soft, the programmer has failed. > > Careful !!! :) Even RosAsm's interface is less than intuitive, and > that's from a "final user" assembler programmer's perspective. Personaly, i do not think that i am a good "designer", but we (Ludwig and me) did our best with this, and, at my own taste, it _is_ intuitive enough. Now, RosAsm is not an OS. It is a Tool for *programmers* - what an OS should not be supposed to be -. So, admitting that RosAsm would be counter- intuitive, this would not make any excuse for an OS to also be counter-intuitive. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: santosh on 26 Aug 2007 14:00
Betov wrote: > santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fas9qg$4kt$1(a)aioe.org: > >> I agree with your general statement there, but unfortunately, we have > to >> work with what's existing. > > Sure. I am just commenting on what exists. Did i said what I > want? No. I have no particular wishes in matter of OS. Win32 > (NT, 2000), without MicroSoft, would be perfect to me, and > if Linux could work half of the same way, it would also please > me completely. As i said previously, if the market presure can > make Ubuntu a de-facto winner, and if this form of Linux goes > on improving in the wishable usability direction, i will just > have to say: Thanks, guys. > > Now, what irritates me, here, is with having programmers who > feel happy of an unusable system, making their knowledges of > some use, because, with a Click&Go system, any joe user could > do as well as they can do. This is a so ridiculous elitism... > > Even saying that nowadays' Ubuntu is something for Joe-Users > is ridiculous. It is not. By far, and there are still much > progresses, on the surface, to be done before reaching this > state. I just hope that, if they have money magically coming > in their back, these progresses will be faster done than in > the past 10 years. I agree. But the catch is the people who actually *improve* the usability of the software are programmers, so they will only improve the usability to the extent that they deem as necessary, particularly since, in FOSS, the programmers, as Herbert said, are unpaid by a company and hence, under no compulsion to produce the "easiest to use" software possible. Most FOSS volunteer programmers tend to focus on extending the power and featurefullness of the program than it's usability to a "dumb user". In some cases this is okay, even appropriate, (when the said program is _meant_ to be used only by computer literate people), but in other cases, not. One encouraging trend in that the current versions of KDE and GNOME are _much_ easier to use than their state around the late 1990s, which was when they started. I still have a circa 1998 edition of Mandrake Linux, IIRC, one of it's earliest releases - it's quite an experience to install it to a spare partition and compare it to the latest and greatest from Ubuntu and Co. :) |