16 Nov
2013
16 Nov
'13
1:43 p.m.
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features and reliability,
while R14 is not there yet.
By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost all I can see is
that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14 in working conditions. Sometimes
Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some
themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new
set of feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from
using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything
works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It wolud have been a very good ground for improving TDE on
top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE,
but it seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single check-box
in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to
modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new
''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything
under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not
better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at
things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion...
Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
16 Nov
16 Nov
8:23 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet.
By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work
completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would
benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It wolud have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this
trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated
''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be
better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just
under the hood.
Just one man's opinion...
Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded
components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed
without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just
because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be
stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep
in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern
services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes,
TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all,
to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting
USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to
make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
17 Nov
17 Nov
2:02 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet.
By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work
completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would
benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It would have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this
trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated
''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be
better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just
under the hood.
Just one man's opinion...
Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded
components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed
without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just
because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be
stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep
in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern
services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes,
TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all,
to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting
USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to
make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
4:17 a.m.
New subject: "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 09:02:37PM -0500, Alexandre Couture wrote:
[Alexandre continues:]
> ...
> I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more
> attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would
> certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new
> ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing
> everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated
> ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that
> TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at
> things that are not just under the hood.
But with all the renaming issues (which does not
improve TDE
at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would
have been better used for things that are not under the hood
only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era,
but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for
the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better
(Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some
things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from
the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets
could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details
could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over
the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has
already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its
appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't
means that it has removed features to MATE or that their
website is unusable.
My preference is just the opposite. I want UI windows to look
as simple as possible, so they don't distract the eye and brain
from their contents, which is what's important. I want window
frames to be of settable thickness, and to have settable colors
for the frame and top ("handle") of 1. the selected window, and
2. all the other windows. Plus the usual widgets for min/max
etc. That's _all_.
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
It doesn't matter whether TDE is "appealing" to new users or not.
New users don't know what's good for them. Hopefully they will
eventually learn from explanations in the TDE website and forums,
and other discussion areas with experienced Linux users.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get in the way of
perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_.
That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE
left that does it.
Non-thinkers can waste their time and money on MS-Windows or a Mac,
or on some other Linux DE like KDE4 which provides over 100 bling
adjustments, but has made multiple virtual desktops -- the most
important Linux feature for thinking and working -- _unusable_
(because the desktop names are not readable in the desktop-pager
buttons). I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website,
Ruby, etc., each with programs running in it appropriate to its
specific work, and konsoles/mcs in it pointing at relevant
directories for that work. This enables me to totally switch
contexts with a single trackball click. KDE4 is utterly unable
to do this.
There is no reason to "modernize" a UI except to give it more
actual and _needed_ functionality. If people want to see something
pretty on their computer screen, they can display a picture or video
in a window or in the background. It should not be part of the
window structure or UI in general, because that would distract the
eye and the mind during the execution of _every_ task.
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users --
choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences.
If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could
actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to
sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind.
It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
5 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On 11/16/13, Mark S Bilk <mark(a)cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 09:02:37PM -0500, Alexandre
Couture wrote:
[Alexandre continues:]
Not to be rude, but Here Here.
I agree entirely. I use baghira for my theme. Colourful, well defined,
straight to the point, yet simple. I doesn't get in the way or distracts from
the work I'm doing.
I agree with Mark in that thinkers use FOSS. To compete with CSS is a mistake.
I build computers and teach peopl to use them for a living. I can tell you my
student base is clearly divided by thinkers and blingers. Mac and MS are for
blingers who care about looks and nonesense like facebook. There's way too
much blingOSs to compete with even if we wanted to. Thinkers are the future.
The BlingOS fade will come crashing down because it's hollow. It's pointless
to pursue it.
I work on my computer, but I also play, watch movies. My home theatre system
is a GNU Linux box connected to a modern LCD TV. I don't bother using the
Telli's OS because it's all bling and little function. FOSS can do anything,
so long as it isn't dumbed down. I recommend people see the film Idiocracy
(2006). My point in suggesting it, will become clear as you see it.
Thank you for your time,
Kate Draven
> ...
> I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more
> attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would
> certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new
> ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing
> everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated
> ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that
> TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at
> things that are not just under the hood.
But with all the renaming issues (which does not
improve TDE
at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would
have been better used for things that are not under the hood
only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era,
but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for
the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better
(Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some
things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from
the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets
could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details
could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over
the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has
already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its
appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't
means that it has removed features to MATE or that their
website is unusable.
My preference is just the opposite. I want UI windows to look
as simple as possible, so they don't distract the eye and brain
from their contents, which is what's important. I want window
frames to be of settable thickness, and to have settable colors
for the frame and top ("handle") of 1. the selected window, and
2. all the other windows. Plus the usual widgets for min/max
etc. That's _all_.
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
It doesn't matter whether TDE is "appealing" to new users or not.
New users don't know what's good for them. Hopefully they will
eventually learn from explanations in the TDE website and forums,
and other discussion areas with experienced Linux users.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get in the way of
perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_.
That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE
left that does it.
Non-thinkers can waste their time and money on MS-Windows or a Mac,
or on some other Linux DE like KDE4 which provides over 100 bling
adjustments, but has made multiple virtual desktops -- the most
important Linux feature for thinking and working -- _unusable_
(because the desktop names are not readable in the desktop-pager
buttons). I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website,
Ruby, etc., each with programs running in it appropriate to its
specific work, and konsoles/mcs in it pointing at relevant
directories for that work. This enables me to totally switch
contexts with a single trackball click. KDE4 is utterly unable
to do this.
There is no reason to "modernize" a UI except to give it more
actual and _needed_ functionality. If people want to see something
pretty on their computer screen, they can display a picture or video
in a window or in the background. It should not be part of the
window structure or UI in general, because that would distract the
eye and the mind during the execution of _every_ task.
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users --
choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences.
If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could
actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to
sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind.
It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
5:17 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers,
Glen
2:12 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
From: glen(a)exemail.com.au
To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100
Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of
TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that
you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone
in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other
humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when
they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see
further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form
of human beings.
My two cents ;)
-Alexandre
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers,
Glen
2:55 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
<snip a lot of stuff :-) >
There is nothing wrong with a little bling, or updated "modern" looks, just so
long as they are not forced on the user and don't interfere with
well-established good work habits.
In other words, bling should be optional for those who want some.
Some like strictly utilitarian, never-changing work environments so they don't
have to think about how to do things with the computer. It is all second
nature, and the user can get on with his work.
Others like things a little more "interesting" and get bored seeing the same
old thing day in and day out. Some people like to constantly experiment with
different ways of doing things.
It's all good as long as it's just appearances and the underlying
functionality is intact and those who wish to can continue working as they
have been without having to undo anything. That is, once again, the bling
should be optional.
And individual. Anyone who wants to trick out his or her desktop can do so
now. Those who don't want any of that should not have to undo anything.
I personally have a fairly staid desktop. Different desktop images for each
virtual desktop, usually a pretty picture of a pretty woman (nothing X-rated,
but they sometimes make my daughter roll her eyes :), with weather and system
monitor on desktop 1.
I don't get on my computer to admire a desktop.
There's no need to argue about anything here. TDE allows prettyfying already.
Different themes, different icons. Whatever.
Can't we all just get along? :-)
Andy
4:25 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
said Andy:
| <snip a lot of stuff :-) >
and snip even more . . .
| Some like strictly utilitarian, never-changing work environments so they
| don't have to think about how to do things with the computer. It is all
| second nature, and the user can get on with his work.
way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, we had dos and nice little front
ends/file managers such as powermenu; we had applications (and could even
use, yes, graphics, though at the time if you had 1024x768x256, you were
uptown). we wished our machines were a little faster, but hey . . .
and now we have fast machines, but execution isn't any faster -- i can open
windows 6 for dos in a dos emulator, including loading the emulator
itself, in less time than it takes the current version of word for windows
to open in windows (or, to be fair, the word processor in libreoffice to
open under a modern linux distribution). what have we gained? an ability
to admire the appearance of our words, though i think that something has
been lost in our approach to what those words actually are. i know that
when i was using word/dos or textmaker i felt far more connected to the
words i was writing.
indeed, if i had a single wish for the linux desktop, it would be for the
creation of a usable text-based desktop and suite of applications, along
with the ability to switch between that desktop and TDE readily. the
applications might well apply what ibm used to call "cua" for "common user
access" -- consistency among menus, which linux terminal applications most
definitely do not enjoy. that this late in the game there's no linux
equivalent even of the old dos "edit" application is troubling. terminal
applications and a linux equivalent of desqview (anybody here old enough
to remember *that*?) would be great.
there was outrage 20 years ago with OS/2 and the outrageous demand that
computers running it had at least 8 megs of memory. today, a *video card*
with 8 megs of memory is called low-end, if you can find one at all. lord.
my point is, i guess, that we were able to do a lot with an 8088, 640k and
no graphics; we were able to do more with a 386, OS/2 and 8 megs. today,
with processors orders of magnitude faster and a thousand times as much
memory, we're still doing the same things in the same way at the same
speed. even "lightweight" systems are enormous. and as GUIs go -- DEC gave
us GEM, which ran just fine on any 8088 that had a VGA card, in 1988. and
on a 286 it would task switch and on a 386 would multitask. and we're
still talking a meg of memory here, not multiple gigs. the
multitasking, "cooperative," as in windows 3.x, rather than OS/2's more
robust pre-emptive architecture, but still.
what do we have now for our trouble? bling.
sorry -- letting off steam here. it's just that the increase of speed and
power of machines has done little but allow programmers and programming
languages to become sloppy. object-oriented programming has failed to live
up to its promise.
sure ain't what we expected!
here endeth the rant (which is not aimed at TDE folk at all -- more at the
KDE4.x craporama and its philosophical equivalents).
--
dep
The shortest distance between you and playing great acoustic guitar:
the great new instructional DVDs from Marjorie Thompson,
available at www.MarjorieThompson.com
4:48 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:25 AM, dep <dep(a)drippingwithirony.com> wrote:
what do we have now for our trouble? bling.
One of the reasons I am so glad that the Linux kernel and GNU tools
are used so widely, is that the people programming for phones, for
watches, for supercomputers, personal systems, are all working on what
is in essence a common code base.
The power-saving techniques of the battery-dependent are used by the
massive data-center-filling mega-blasters because power bills matter.
Even egotistical temper tantrums yield improvements to the central
kernel functions. (scheduler)
It would be nice if that same glorious lovingly hand optimized
attention was spent making the GUI code tighter, faster, cleaner. But
no, because there is no one GUI.
Like the automobile, each GUI programmer, each GUI style, each GUI
model-year, they change and fiddle and make things oh so very pretty
without concern for such trivial matters as actually getting work
done. So while you can find the Austen Mini of GUIs if you try, you're
much more likely to see huge tailfins and fancy radiator caps that
don't actually do anything to get the work done.
Bling. Bloat. Idle distractions.
sorry -- letting off steam here. it's just that
the increase of speed and
power of machines has done little but allow programmers and programming
languages to become sloppy. object-oriented programming has failed to live
up to its promise.
sure ain't what we expected!
Well said.
That apparent waste of resources is also why games have gotten more
and more graphical, more and more focused on "frames per second", and
less about actual game play.
What was done on two 5.25" floppy disks with StarFlight was
spectacular. What those programmers packed into such a small space
should serve to humble the people who call themselves "programmers"
today, the same way taking a helicopter to the top of Mt. Everest
cannot compare to the pioneers who walked the whole way.
The speed of hardware has eliminated any motivation to optimize the
user's interface.
here endeth the rant (which is not aimed at TDE folk
at all -- more at the
KDE4.x craporama and its philosophical equivalents).
--
dep
Curt-
3:13 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Am Sonntag, 17. November 2013 schrieb Alexandre Couture:
OMG ... "please fix the batteries of my toy for me, you inferior beeing"
nik
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with
the NSA.
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp
Einnehmerstraße 14
A-4810 Gmunden
Tel.: +43 650 82 11 724
email: office(a)klepp.biz
From:
glen(a)exemail.com.au
To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100
Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of
TDE
Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say
yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would
not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways.
Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping
some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial
ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they
cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they
automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
My two cents ;)
-Alexandre If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or
2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't
mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers,
Glen 
3:59 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:12:07 Alexandre Couture wrote:
Alexandre,
You really need to be ready to be criticised if you ask for people's
opinions. No-one came across to me as rude, except just possibly
yourself for this constant carping on the look of Trinity, and thus
criticism of the developers.
Most of us are here because we like functionality and dislike bling.
Have bling yourself if you want it. But stop trying to force it on
the rest of us.
You have over time made it clear that you do not really like Trinity,
since you want to destroy one of its greatest assets - it prefers
functionality to bling. Last time you brought this up it was
suggested to you that you should do your own fork. That would seem a
very good option. You could then have it as blingy as you like, with
you yourself doing the work.
Meanwhile, give yourself a treat for Christmas. Buy a new computer,
install PCLinuxOS with KDE4, Gnome3 and your own fork of Trinity and
bask in the bling.
Have a look some time at Knoppix-Adriane. Such things are needed.
Whilst Trinity is not specifically aimed at the disabled, it is very
disabled-friendly because it is so configurable. Once you have
filled the world with bling, where are we to go??
My 2p
Lisi
From:
glen(a)exemail.com.au
To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100
Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look
of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you
cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a
thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude,
hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk
to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good
relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most
superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are
superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the
surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid
form of human beings. If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or
2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't
mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers,
Glen 
7:41 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:12:07 Alexandre Couture wrote:
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of
all, you cannot
say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker,
you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and
unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans
beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
You would be wise to bear that last comment in mind !
People who says that they are not superficial are the
most
superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are
superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the
surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid
form of human beings.
My two cents ;)
-Alexandre
Your attack towards the criticism of your post doesn't do you any
favors !
--
Best Regards:
Baron
7:44 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Alexandre Couture wrote:
the post didn't seem rude to me, just blunt in an American and
Australian style of writing -- admittedly, it can seem rude to others.
but the reference to 'thinkers' was inept but I doubt it was meant to
imply that _you_ are not a thinker!
I would rather say that the Trinity interface is "really good for
thinkers," "designed for thinkers," and without prejudice to people
with other preferences, it can be recommended as such.
(as an aside, I don't see the problem though in calling oneself a
'thinker'. it's not like boasting of one's humility! and it would be a
blunder if I thought saying I'm not superficial is saying something
deep otherwise no problem in it.)
anyway the OP can speak for himself but I hope we don't let this spoil
good relations.
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
I am also interested in suggestions that enhance function.
and yes, it is time for another contribution.
F.
--
Felmon Davis
Deja Fu: The feeling that you have been kicked in the head like this
before.
From: glen(a)exemail.com.au
To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100
Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of
TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you
cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a
thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude,
hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to
other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good
relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most
superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are
superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the
surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid
form of human beings.
My two cents ;)
-Alexandre
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers,
Glen
9:12 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis wrote:
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change?
I am also interested in suggestions that enhance
function.
So you want the look to change, but TDE to remain functional?? That
is interesting. I think that in the end bling and functionality make
poor companions because they appeal to different people on the whole.
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality, and the designers
of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works. (In
my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen
sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)
Lisi
9:35 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On 11/17/2013 03:12 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality,
and the designers
of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works.
(In
my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen
sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)<
Can we agree that bling needs to be subordinate to
functionality/interface/workflow?
It's not that TDE doesn't have any bling -- it's that it's bling isn't
the latest set of flavors of bling.
...That and that we still have a desktop instead of pretending every
device is a telephone or pad.
...And what used to be considered a CPU and RAM intensive environment
has, over time, mimicked other systems once considered to be bloated --
like Multics, which is insanely tiny by today's standards.
First and foremost,/I believe/ we need to not break people's workflow or
settings. I'm all in favor of expanding the range of possible visual
styles.
We've always been heavily tweakable. I could appreciate adding some
carefully considered additional features and options that don't impart
my workflow or force me to make aesthetic changes I don't want.
We're old school and heavily customizable. These would be
counterproductive to change as they are our 'why.'
We should feature what TDE is, not run from it.
James Gholston
10:27 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Lisi Reisz wrote:
I also concur with _your_ remarks except I know nothing about cookers
and I've got no altar in my kitchen.
F.
--
Felmon Davis
Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing. -- Emerson
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis
wrote:
I was addressing Alexandre about Glen's remarks. the 'his' refers to
Glen's remarks, not Alexandre's.
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion
though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change? I am also
interested in suggestions that enhance function.
So you want the look to change, but TDE to remain functional?? That
is interesting. I think that in the end bling and functionality make
poor companions because they appeal to different people on the whole.
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality, and the designers
of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works. (In
my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen
sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)
10:33 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sunday 17 November 2013 22:27:36 Felmon Davis wrote:
From:
Felmon Davis <davisf(a)union.edu>
To:
trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date:
Today 22:27:36
Now:
17:31
Afternoon
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Lisi Reisz wrote:
That's what I thought. But you said "the OP"*, so I drew attention to
it so that you could clarify it - for me and for others!!
Lisi
*
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis
wrote:
I was addressing Alexandre about Glen's remarks. the 'his' refers
to Glen's remarks, not Alexandre's. that said, I wholly concur with his opinion
though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change? anyway the OP can speak for himself but I hope we
don't let this
spoil good relations.
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
18 Nov
18 Nov
12:01 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 09:12:07AM -0500, Alexandre Couture wrote:
...
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all,
you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker.
Actually, you can, if you have sufficient understanding of
thinking and consciousness, and if you can observe and think
about your own mind and its functioning. Here's my summary
of the process:
Critical Thinking
1 Hold your own mind and thinking processes as objects of
your thinking. Gurdjieff called this "self-observation".
2 Realize that what you think is true is actually a _model_
of reality, which may be inaccurate in many ways.
3 Realize that you can _change_ that model to make it more
accurate.
4 Access all the sources of information that you can find.
This is essential because many sources are full of
untruths (some of which may be self-serving).
5 Understand and apply the Principle of Non-Contradiction:
An assertion and its negative cannot both be true.
6 Compare the information in the sources you access with
your current model of reality, and use the Principle of
Non-Contradiction to determine the truth and falsehood of
the information in those sources and in your current model.
7 Update your model of reality so it contains the most
accurate information you've found in the comparisons.
8 Goto step 1.
There are more versions here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or
write
to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways.
I began by saying, "My preference is just the opposite."
Not my "demands", or "the truth". I don't think I was
"rude", etc.
Are you a misfit?
Some have said so. I tell the truth as clearly as I can,
which sometimes gets me chased out of nine villages. 8^)
How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping
some
mutual trust and good relations?
By avoiding expressions of personal hostility, by using basic
politeness where it doesn't compromise the truth, and by
talking about ideas, not people (unless the ideas _involve_
people).
"Great minds discuss ideas;
average minds discuss events;
small minds discuss people."
-- Eleanor Roosevelt
Mark
17 Nov
17 Nov
3:15 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
<SNIP>
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users --
choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences.
If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could
actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to
sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind.
It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
Well said, Mark. I despise Win 7/8 for the reasons you mention. I'm
just forced to use them. The ONLY thing that TDE could change is
support in the kicker for larger icons (to make it more Xandros
looking).
--
Bro. Michael Henry
Associate Pastor
Monticello Christian Church
Be kinder than necessary. Everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.
You never know when a moment and a few sincere words can have an
impact on a life for a life
3:28 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Mark S Bilk <mark(a)cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005,
that's fine.
I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and
NO MORE.
Back in the ancient days of yore, when graphics cards didn't do their
own processing and swap space was critically important to running more
than one program at a time, the idea behind the GUI was to improve the
user's access to the applications.
It is the applications that are important. Is my purpose to wander
through the customization lists and options? Or is it to read my
email, to use "The Tao Of Programming", in the way which astonishes
least?
In my opinion the KDE team more than a decade ago found a good balance
between bling and getting out of the way. In the years that have
passed, the system resources required to run more and more bling have
become trivial. Yet that balance exists not because of computing
resources, but because the more bling there is, the more of my mind is
taken up perceiving that bling, rather than doing what I am here to
do.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get
in the way of
perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_.
That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE
left that does it.
Xfce is doing quite well in that regard. Yet there is something clunky
about it. Trinity still feels like it "gets out of the way" better for
me.
I run Xfce on two laptops for my kids, for disk space reasons. Using
the Thunar file manager makes me long for the effectiveness of
Konqueror.
I was reminded of this recently when I wanted to access files in a
different machine, and simply typed "fish://server/" in Konqueror and
it just worked. No games, no tweaks, no fiddles. Simple functionality.
I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website,
Ruby, etc.
Yet the first thing I do is turn off such "Workspaces". I learned UNIX
with olvwm and multiple desktops, and it just doesn't fit how I use it
today.
I do have multiple tabs open in Konsole, each with a different
purpose, so maybe we're not quite so different after all. :^)
If that's true, then
"improving"/"modernizing" its UI could
actually result in a loss of users.
As the KDE team did when abandoning KDE3, for example? :^)
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean
to tread on
anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to
sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind.
It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
My first Linux was Debian in 1995, I started using KDE in 2000. It
does seem that the flash-bang-bling appeals to those who, politely
put, have the time to waste on it.
Many thanks to Pearson and the TDE team for keeping alive this
excellent balance between bling and simplicity. Time, I guess, to make
another donation.
Curt-
7:40 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
--snipping just everything----
..and try to bring it to this point:
I was to abandon KDE totally as I saw what the KDE4 had made of it:
ALL the things I hate about Windows, was copied in there (at least that was my first
impression). So TDE is the only chance to keep alive what I loved with KDE3 (BECAUSE it is
al the things mentioned by others, NOT dispite).
Another note to that: my mom is 70+ (and a PC newbe since years) try to tell HER that KDE4
is the next KDE3 and she will tell you, that she more likely thinks these are totally
different Computers.
Change happens, I know, but that dosen't mean it's allways good!
So if you like fancy TDE just isn't the right pass for you..
8:11 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
--snipping just everything----
I'm using TDE because it's the last UI which is so configurable and is
so easily configurable. In many modern desktops, developers literally
tell you "don't touch our UI". Sometimes they add silently "but buy a
new hardware" as for example Firefox radical UI cuts in their newest
invention (will be introduced to stable in few months) make it unusable
in small notebooks, in which you need a match to right-click.
I'm not against improving UI, but I think the first rule sould never be
making it as developer think will be good, because developer has one
method of working with computer and users have different. The main
principle should be to offer new things as an option. Then users will
choose what is best for them, their workflows and their hardware.
Another example: I'm always working with files. TDE allows
me to rename a file with two clicks (rename in-place option). In most
modern desktop environments developers removed this option, as they
think that programs for batch renaming are better. As today (and it
won't change so quickly) these programs won't rename a photo according
to object in the picture.
Marek W.
6:02 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
Hi
everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability,
features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet.
By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ ,
almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working
very hard to just keep
R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok
doesn't start, sometimes
desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some
themes doesn't work
completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set
of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot
see why an user would
benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the
stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in
3.5.13.2. It would
have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top
of it. All of this
trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE,
but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere,
not even for a
single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me,
maybe I would need
some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive
to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly
have more
popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside''
on top of an outdated car is not
good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping
the old outdated
''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be
better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just
under the hood.
Just one man's opinion...
Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded
components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed
without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just
because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be
stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep
in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern
services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes,
TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all,
to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting
USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to
make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
6:05 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
Hi
everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability,
features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet.
By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ ,
almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working
very hard to just keep
R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok
doesn't start, sometimes
desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some
themes doesn't work
completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new
set
of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot
see why an user would
benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the
stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in
3.5.13.2. It would
have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top
of it. All of this
trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE,
but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere,
not even for a
single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me,
maybe I would need
some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive
to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly
have more
popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside''
on top of an outdated car is not
good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping
the old outdated
''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be
better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just
under the hood.
Just one man's opinion...
Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded
components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed
without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just
because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will
be
stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also
keep
in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern
services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those
changes,
TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at
all,
to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and
mounting
USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to
make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
2:50 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
On Sunday 17 of November 2013 07:02:46 Timothy Pearson wrote:
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways
please let us know, I
know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for
the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) or just for the
sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought
behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Tim
I personally use gui style HighColor Classic (I think the standard of KDE2).
Styles Plastic and Keramik are too modern for me :)
If a "modern-look" was meant in the sense of inclusion of other gui style -
such as Baghira, in that it should not be a problem.
If a "modern-look" was meant in the manner of changing gui usability, it is
necessary to have a reason to do it a lot better than "to new version looks
different". Just as Tim says.
Slavek
4:06 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:50:45 Slávek Banko wrote:
If a "modern-look" was meant in the manner
of changing gui
usability, it is necessary to have a reason to do it a lot better
than "to new version looks different". Just as Tim says.
Thank you too, Slávek. I really appreciate your work helping to keep
Trinity the marvellous distro it is.
So three cheers for all the developers; Tim, you, and all the others.
\o/ \o/ \o/
Lisi
4:01 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
On Sunday 17 November 2013 06:02:46 Timothy Pearson wrote:
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways
please let us
know, I know at least I am open to this! However, we will not
change TDE just for the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather
ugly IMHO) -
hear! hear!
or just for the sake of change--the proposed
modification needs to have some solid thought behind it as to how
it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Great! Thank you, Tim.
Lisi
1:57 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
If you have a galaxy S3, make sure you have Mass Storage drivers
installed on the phone. for some reason Samsung keeps disabling it on
their phones. My S4 is only mountable through their crapware on
windows. This might not be a trinity speceific problem.
On 17 November 2013 07:55, Paul Cartwright <pbcartwright(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/16/2013 03:23 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded
components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed
without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just
because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be
stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep
in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern
services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes,
TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all,
to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting
USB flash drives.
I am using trinity 4:14 and I am having problems mounting my Samsung phone &
tablet. I have a Samsung Galaxy S3, and when I plug it in I get thewindow to
open in a New Window, and the header shows Samsung Elextronics GT-1910, when
it is an SCH-1535. When I click Open in WIndow, it opens a Konq window with
this in the Location:
system:/media/Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd GT-I9100 Phone [Galaxy S II],
GT-P7500 [Galaxy Tab 10.1]
with 2 folders showing Store_0010001 and store_0020002 and an about.txt file
and a summary.txt file. The summary file has this at the top:
Manufacturer: SAMSUNG Electronics Co. Ltd.
Model: SCH-I535
Version: V1.0
Serial Number: blanked, it is my serial no..
Vendor Extension ID: 0x6 (1.0)
Vendor Extension Description: microsoft.com: 1.0; microsoft.com/WMPPD: 11.0;
microsoft.com/WMPPD: 10.0; microsoft.com/WMDRMPD:10.1;
microsoft.com/playready:1.10; samsung.com/kies:2.0
here are some of the trinity packages installed..
dpkg -l|grep trinity
ii kamera-trinity
4:14.0.0-r235-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr11 amd64 digital camera io_slave
for Konqueror
ii kappfinder-trinity
4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 non-KDE application
finder for KDE
ii kate-trinity
4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 advanced text editor for
KDE
ii kcontrol-trinity
4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 control center for KDE
ii kdesktop-trinity
4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr
--
Paul Cartwright
Registered Linux User #367800 and new counter #561587
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To
unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail:
trinity-users-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web
archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to
top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
3:38 p.m.
New subject: [trinity-users] Concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
On 11/17/2013 08:57 AM, Calvin Morrison wrote:
If you have a galaxy S3, make sure you have Mass
Storage drivers
installed on the phone. for some reason Samsung keeps disabling it on
their phones. My S4 is only mountable through their crapware on
windows. This might not be a trinity speceific problem.
it works fine in XFCE, just
not trinity..
--
Paul Cartwright
Registered Linux User #367800 and new counter #561587
3823
days inactive
3825
days old
30 comments
19 participants
participants (19)
-
Alexandre Couture -
Andy -
Baron -
Calvin Morrison -
Curt Howland -
dep -
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp -
Felmon Davis -
Frank Lienhard -
Glen Cunningham -
iadest＠o2.pl -
James Gholston -
Kate Draven -
Lisi Reisz -
Mark S Bilk -
Michael Henry -
Paul Cartwright -
Slávek Banko -
Timothy Pearson