Re: [Patch] A clipboard daemon for gnome-settings-daemon

[Hongli Lai <h lai chello nl>]

On Saturday 06 September 2003 14:18, Mario Vukelic wrote:
> I agree that the clipboard daemon is not at fault for mem usage here.
> However, I thought the whole point of the exercise is to get rid of the
> horribly outdated clipboard model that can only transfer text?

As opposed to popular belief, the X clipboard is *not* limited to text. In 
fact, you can put any data format in the clipboard. The clipboard owner 
offers a list of possible formats and the client can pick the best format out 
of that list. The only problem is that, for some reason, almost no 
application utilize this feature.


> And they know that when they copy data with Ctrl+C that it will consume
> more RAM?

They don't use the clipboard.


> This is your problem :) General users don't read computer books.

Back then I was a "general user" too.
So what have all those other learned from school? Do they think they learn for 
a few years and then never have to learn anything again?


> They should, but they don't.

Then why do we ever bother writing user manuals if nobody reads them?


> If you don't know how the internal combustion engine works you will
> never drive a car?

Wrong comparison. If you use a car you use the combustion engine indirectly, 
whether you like it or not. If you use a computer don't you have to use the 
clipboard. You can only use the clipboard if you know what it is.
A good comparison would be the bell on a bicycle. If you don't know what a 
bell is and what it is meant for then you will never use it. By the time you 
need it you already know what it is.


> You can use them what you consider good enough. General car users don't
> "know how to drive" compared to a professional racing driver. But it#s
> enough to go from A to B

The general computer users you are referring to are far and far worse than 
general car users. If those general computer users are general car users, 
then they don't know what a wheel is, don't know how to use the mirror inside 
the car, don't know how to accellerate, don't know how to active the screen 
wiper, don't know how to turn on the air conditioning, don't know how to fill 
the gas tank, etc.
That's just wrong. General car users know the basics about cars. If general 
computer users don't know the basics about computers then it's their problem.


> I don't think so. They don't care.

And I don't care about driving cars. But that doesn't mean it isn't a good 
idea to take driving lessons in order to know how to drive.
A lot of kids don't care about going to school. Does that mean they don't have 
to go to school?

Basics are things anybody *has* to know, regardless of whether they care or 
not.


> They have other things to do.

Not an excuse. It takes you at most a few days (or even one day) to understand 
the basics. Sure you don't have to be a guru, but unwillingness to spend a 
little time to learn the *basics* is just laziness.


> Read
> http://rinkworks.com/stupid/ and be enlightened. If you think these are
> made up, let me tell you a story happening to me last week. To prevent
> you saying "well, people in your company must be stupid", let me tell
> you that it's one of those mentioned as desireable here
> http://www.jobloop.co.uk/news/03092001.htm

More reason to give those people proper education. Don't adapt to world to 
idiots, adapt idiots to the world. Why do you think kids go to school? What 
do you think education is for?