I would have to agree with Frogboy. McDonald's fries are solidly superior to Burger King's.
bakerstreet
Jafo: "only 'perhaps' motive is different..." The motive for uploading a screenshot is 'perhaps' to redistrbute the items therein? Really, even 1% of the time? Do developers themselves assume people are going to cut icons out and re-use them when they post screenshots of their software? Hardly. I am sure the original developers don't expect anyone to steal icons from the screensots they post. Nor do I when I post images of my destop. So screenshots have to be *a
You don't upload screenshots to distribute the contents of them for other people to use. If so, then by all means they need to go too. IF you say "well, if that is illegal, then that must be too..." it doesn't prove your point, it just drags something else into it. Do you want them dragged in? I can display a photo of my office for purposes of "illustration or clarification" and the trademarked logos and such therein are incidental. If I take the same trademarked logos
Since this isn't getting out of hand, I'll make one more note. The average person around the world thinks that the salaries of average americans are out of hand. The average millionaire probably thinks the income of the average billionaire is out of hand. Who's idea of wealthy are you gonna go by? If it were left to the average world citizen's standards, most of us would be paying high taxes. If the issue is how much money people make, then make a legal limit on income, inst
Jafo: a screenshot is not an icon, it is an image of icons amidst the rest of a desktop. Cars passing by a newscast are not cars, they are images of cars... incedental inclusion. The point of a screenshot is not to pass around icons. If your theory were correct, then people selling cars, comic books, computers, etc., could not display images of them, since the hood ornaments, logos, etc., are trademarked. I'm sorry but this screenshot thing seems a lot more like an excuse than a prec
P.S. "It's really easy to sit and point out 'copyright issues' and make wonderful judgements and determinations about all and sundry..." That statement is eating at me. actually, it *is* easy. Like we always say, if you didn't make it or have permission to use it, don't upload it. It works for us, but not for commercial apps? If software developers released icons as 'free use' shortcuts, they would offer them as such publically, wouldn't they? I have great doubts
grayhaze & mooshoo : If you look into any of the more 'intellectual' centers of UI discussion, you'll find that the review is a common opinion of skinning. Not unlike what real Graphic Designers think of those who buy themselves a copy of Photoshop and start calling themselves that. Most UI 'thinkers' will literally take a ruler and various 'laws' of UI design and tell you how good an interface is. Depending on the skins or themes the reviewer used, it could very well have been
"The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in
I wish I could read the article. No online version? People spend 100 million or more to make a movie and get reviews like "If you have the urge to go see this movie slap yourself and stay at home"... There is a pretty high standard for criminalizing a review. Were ther any totally false claims made? I wish I could read it. ** /me glances back at post #7...
"Freedom of the press wasn't meant to mean freedom to print whatever the hell you want regardless of proof or bias :-/" hrm. Honestly, though, a 'review' is kinda subjective by definition, wouldn't ya say? Go back and you'll find bad reviews for the greatest movies of all time. Is reviewing software any different? When people read a movie review, they understand that it is the opinion of the reviewer, and ignore it as they see fit. The productivity benefits of O
"blatant copyright theft?" Unfortunately, this is not all that inaccurate if you consider the use of icons here. The fact is, Icons are a 'work', and if you redistribute them, or use them to create a derivative icon or shortcut graphic, you have 'ripped'. We understand that distributing a re-colored version of, say, a copperdeck icon without permission would be ripping. Requesting such would be met with backhanded suggestions to contact the author. If the same person asks fo
Hey, hey, hey, let's try to be positive here people... -Bakerstreet ( ) ( amended title: President and CEO of roughly 40% of Bakerstreet's House, one-third of Bakerstreet's Yard, including the little strip on the other side of the sidewalk, and Bakerstreet's Car between the hours of 6pm and 7am, est, excluding radio administration )
If 5 is average, then 4 isn't bad, it is only one notch below. If a wallpaper is average people tend to give it a 7 or an 8, when in actuality it should be a 5. If people started at 5 and granted or denied points for quality, we wouldn't have such inflated scores, imho. Unless you are grading on the Bell curve, there is no reason there *has* to be 10s floating around... unless they deserve it. Anyway, I have heard that this board has taken a sarcastic, nasty turn lately, so ever
"my therory goes is that there would be more money in the hands of the rest of the population and easier to gewt another job paying a supirior wage" Defeating the tax cut would take money from the hands of public America, and would continue feeding a bloated, rotten bureaucracy, drowning in its own waste. "Public Service" has become a modern Works Progress Administration for those who want to live comfortably in the bowels of the aforementioned corpse. In rural Appalachia where
MrGupps: huh? I'm not sure what I said to mislead you. Did I say something about him being in conflict with shmoopy? I don't recall it if I did.
I'll say the same thing I normally say when faced with a wallpaper like this. Did you intend for it to look this way *before* you made it? Or at least to a reasonable degree? If you did, then don't let anyone tell you it is 'bad'. My *opinion* is that you were guided by filters, not the other way around. I'm a filter snob, mainly because I believe devoutly in purposefully creating every detail of something, even if it is abstract. Abstract doesn't mean random, and randomly-generate
I think the "stating that no-one uses DesktopX much anymore" thing is telling. There have been other Stardock 'discussions' at custo, haven't there? Regardless, I remember outraged people coming to skinz three years ago saying the same sorts of things. Custo has its particular 'tone'. They want it that way, or they would do something about it. I've said it before, but I think it is unreasonable for a site not to let people delete their accounts, or do it for them when requested. Yo
I suppose what I am saying is that you don't want any kind of *storage* here, beyond what they sections already allow. If you allow an empty webdirectory, you're gonna have to worry about what is put there.
I don't see any reason to have 'uploads'. The DA userpages allow you to link to items that already have a section there, like your desktop screenshot, DeviantID, featured item, etc., but there isn't really need in 'webspace' as it were. If you give people that they will leach for other uses. The userpage needs to be *about* WC, or at least on-topic. If the space is generically accessed and uploaded to, you're gonna have things here you don't want. Most people get that with their ho
Cibo Matto - Moonchild (Mouse on Mars Remix) g'nite all
SRV - Life by the Drop
White Zombie - I am Legend
China: “Once again the world was spinning in greased grooves.” (One of my favorite movies of all time. Not nearly as depressing as the book.)