I've also bemoaned Schwab's password policy. I reacted by changing my login ID to something nonsensical which would be difficult to guess or to associate with anyone's identity, let alone mine.
I know of a guy who used to use rcs back in 2001 and he probably is today. He is one of those old-school UNIX guys who know literally everything about a UNIX system.
WAT. Are you trolling us, or are you that uninformed about VCS history? Giving you the benefit of the doubt, just learn and use git[1]. Yes, there are things about the UI that suck. But the underlying machinery and power it provides is unparalleled.
RCS, in short, is that horrible feet-killing pair of boots that made you think you hated <insert sport here>, when in fact it was just frustration with sub-par equipment.
[1] If you need to learn git, check out Scott Chacon's excellent Pro Git, available for free online at: http://www.git-scm.com/book
Ha! Fair enough. No, I didn't intend to troll. I've found RCS useful for ad hoc versioning of configuration files on systems without git or other version control systems. Wondering whether anyone still finds it useful. I reckon not!
I've recently installed RCS on a Windows host for versioning my .emacs file, and I rely on Emacs VC to drive the tool.
On Solaris hosts, including locked-down "production", I use SCCS to version my dot-files because it's available by default. For development I use SVN (old too by today's standards).
I don't advocate using these old tools over modern alternatives; however I find their simplicity in the above cases to be beneficial.
I used to use RCS, but these days I use mercurial. Pretty much any DVCS is going to be a "better RCS" than RCS (bzr, mercurial, git, fossil, monotone...). Even if you never need to pull/push.
rcs doesn't have .gitignore files and accidentally running commands on your top-level repo, so I could see why one would consider it. You don't really need atomic commits for this use case, so rcs is barely worse than the alternatives.
I can't say that I've ever had a problem with accidentally running commands in my top-level repo despite many years of running it under git and other VCS'es.
That said, using tools mentioned in this thread (esp. vcsh[1] and mr[2]) it's possible to have one's cake and eat it too w.r.t. using git for homedir version control without the worries of accidentally running VCS commands on your homedir. They also allow some real benefits, like the ability to use and deploy subsets of your rcfiles. For example, you could easily create profiles like: "server-side minimal core", "main personal system", "work box with employer-specific stuff".
He inspired me to start building my own wheels, to experiment more with 70s-era French steel frames, Raleigh 3-speeds, Raleigh 20s, flip-flop hubs, fixed 3-speed Sturmey-Archer hubs, and on and on. Wonderful man.
I tried OsmAnd. I needed to download a bunch of map data when I first installed it; but once it had downloaded some of the maps, I still couldn't view anything, it kept telling me that it was still downloading maps (I don't know why it couldn't display the ones it had already downloaded).
Once it had downloaded all of the maps and would show me something, I tried to get it to give me directions. I could not (and still cannot) figure out how to set a destination. I scroll to a place I want to go, touch the menu button, touch "show" or "follow", and get a message "please select a destination first". I long press on where I want to go, which pops up a bubble that shows my latitude and longitude (not, say, what businesses are there like Google Maps does), and try doing directions from the menu again. Nope, "please select a destination".
There is no search by address, or anything else. If I use Google Maps, I can usually type in the name of the place I'm trying to go, and it will find the address and from there find the route. Even being able to find the route from OsmAnd has eluded me.
Ah. Just now, as I tried it again, I found that I could long-press on a location, then touch the menu, touch "use location" (at the very bottom of the menu, almost off the screen, and which apparently means "use the location that I just long-pressed", not "use the location I'm at"), touch "destination", choose to either navigate or show the route, and then get told that it can't determine the route because the location is not available as I'm indoors without good GPS signal.
It needs some substantial work before it's actually usable. For instance, it needs a prominent search that will take the name of a business or an address and route me there with a minimal number of touches and decisions, and even if I'm indoors and don't have a good GPS signal.
I use mostly free software on the desktop, for my work. When I have time to sit down and debug something and figure out how it works, I'm willing to put up with a less than ideal interface; it's worth it that I have access to the source, that I can fix bugs when I find them, that I can get in touch with the original authors and pay them to fix a bug for me.
But when I'm trying to navigate to some new location on my phone on my vacation, I need something that just works. I don't have time to fiddle around with a lousy interface. I don't have time to look up the address of my destination elsewhere, then scroll around the map until I can find that address and go through a long press and several layers of menus before I can get directions to it.
What we really need is freedom preserving software that just works. It doesn't need to have every possible option and knob. It doesn't need to offer every feature under the sun. It just needs to make it easy for me to find where I'm going and tell me how to get there, without going through endless layers of menus and making me figure out where the destination is in the first place.
Agreed that OsmAnd's interface leaves much room for improvement. Even though I have successfully used its navigation function for specific addresses, I have also run into all the problems you outline. It does seem to get better with each new release.
It is as stated, Exploratory/experimental software.
I am not a formally educated sound engineer. So a lot of this is trial and error. The problem got very interesting very fast, and at the point where I established the signal combinator concept in SOUNDLAB, I knew I was beyond simple implementation and arrived at exploration. Because I truly can not fortell the implications of this approach. Thus this honest comment.
I like that he named Archy after Don Marquis' Archy and Mehitabel, the cockroach and alley cat duo. Archy the cockroach would spend hours throwing his body against the keys of a manual typewriter to convey his poetry about his muse Mehitabel, who in turn would throw herself repeatedly against the harsh world of alley-cat living with irrepressible gaiety. Two paragons of the struggle with interfaces!
