Managing Your Dead Tree Library | Linux Journal
This is actually a brilliant idea. I should try this on an empty weekend or something.
This is actually a brilliant idea. I should try this on an empty weekend or something.
When it comes to basically all Ubuntu Twitter apps, there is no benefit, but plenty of drawback. There is no benefit whatsoever in using Gwibber except that it aggregates from multiple sources. But it doesn’t even do that particularly well. The fact that Person A writing on Person B’s wall looks, in Gwibber, to simply be a status update makes it more or less worthless. The fact that trying to view a twitpic picture requires opening a browser anyway, kinda defeats the purpose anyway.
There is plenty of benefit. I can see what's going on in the twitter/dent-verse without going to those sites. I don't have to keep a browser window/set of tabs for only those sites. I can send thoughts quickly to all my accounts without going to each site or to ping.fm.
Re: twitpic; yes, this functionality is in the latest daily build. Re: facebook wall-to-wall; how should this be fixed? Digging up old posts with sub-posts? I'm not sure how this would work. Anyway, you can always click on the time-stamp link and see what's going on. This is what I do for Facebook.
I use Gwibber so I don't have to go to the web interface to get basic functionality. Adding in the ability to subscribe to users and all sorts of other things would make the program too heavy, in my opinion.
Gwibber isn't perfect, but really, are any other programs perfect?
New consortium focuses on infotainment software (by Terry Costlow) [...] Consortium members feel that Linux is a solid software base for their adaptable software. That could mark a turning point for the open-source operating system, which has gotten much interest from the auto industry, but so far seen little in production. [...]Emphasis mine. This is a brilliant move by automakers. By reducing their dependence on Microsoft, they can use an open alternative that will fit their needs. If they don't like it, their software engineers can edit the code to their liking, something they cannot do with closed-source software. If people run Linux on their cars, they may see the things it can do. I saw this in the magazine I picked up at the SAE World Congress and my mouth dropped open. It is amazing that automakers are considering it. I'm thinking it would cost less than having software specially written by a software house. Even though it will be specially written, there will be a base for expansion, and users may also be able to modify the source code for their cars. This is an exciting development that pulls two of my interests together: cars and Linux.