Slashdot Mirror
BBC To Host Multi-OS Debate
Bananatree3 writes "BBC is currently seeking submissions from all you Microsoft Windows, Mac and Linux devotees "in 100 words or less, why you are such a supporter of your chosen operating system and what features you love about it". They will then select one user of each platform to go head to head in a debate that will be part of the BBC's Microsoft Vista launch coverage on January 30th."
QTFA: "We have received many entries and have now closed the call for submissions. We will be in touch with people shortly. Many thanks for taking part."
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Don't appply unless you're 20 something and remotely good looking. The BBC recently knee capped their tech presents to only pretty people who don't seem to care even remotely about tech.
It probably wouldn't make much difference in quality. The last 3 articles on technology I read on the BBC (years ago) were either riddled with misuse of certain words, left out some important and key details, misstated the implications of the story, and/or came up with a very strange and subjective conclusion that came out of the blue.
I've seen this happen elsewhere, so I stopped reading tech news from most places. I will not conjecture on why this is so.
Latewire
Newsflash: Communism doesn't work in practice. Competition is the biggest motivation for improvement; with only one OS, we'd have all the problems of a monopoly, but worse~
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
The BBC usually tries to prevent/control debates as much as possible. They used to have a system where people would send in emails to the "Have Your Say" page, and they would select the ones they liked. After lots of complaints of censorship, they changed over to a system where you could post instantly (like Slashdot). However, they quickly backtracked so that virtually all debates are "Fully Moderated". Much of the time perfectly valid comments are not published. Occasionally they do have "Reactively Moderated" discussions on trivial topics like the Oscars, but if anyone ever dares to criticise the BBC, the posts are removed very quickly.
For example, a while back the BBC had a "Have Your Say" topic on Google's participation in censorship in China. Some posters rightly pointed out that the BBC also censors things. These posts were removed at breakneck speed, but this prompted complaints at the new censorship. The BBC then started removing the new complaints, prompting even more complaints. Eventually they gave up and as you can see, the top rated posts are about the BBC's censorship, not China's. See here
When I complained to the BBC about this, I was told that posts about BBC Censorship were "off topic". So posts about the BBC's own censorship on a topic about China's Censorship are so wildly off-topic they have to be removed? People are becoming very tired of the BBCs censorship and sites like NewsSnifferhave started to appear. NewsSniffer automatically logs censored posts on the few open debates that are allowed to exist (It also logs the changes made to news reports)
Most people who were interested in real debate at the BBC never really used "Have Your Say" because of the BBC's control over the limited number of topics and the general low-probability of having your post accepted. Instead many people used the BBC Message Boards, which are sort of hidden away from public view. The busiest was probably the Today International board where people discussed the top news stories in more depth than was reported and covering many things the reporters were either ignorant of or chose to leave out. Unfortunately, the BBC has recently shut this down in favour of a system where the topics are picked by BBC Staff. Their excuse for this was budgetary concerns (they only get £4 Billion or so). Today's topical, controversial and cutting edge debates are 1. Do children need to learn Britishness at school?, 2. Are scientific terms like homo sapien out of date?, 3. Does affluence bring misery? (See for yourself http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbtoday/F5963509).
Considering the BBC's astronomical budget and the technology available, they could quite easily have a "Discuss" button underneath each news story which would take people to an open discussion. They'll never do it though. The BBC have opposed open debate at every turn.
It differs because no-one can reply to point out its mistakes, or mod it into the ground, however wrong it is. And because people are more likely to believe that it is The Truth.
Funny, to me your post feels less like criticism of Slashdot and more like criticism of the BBC. The BBC is a respected name, and employs professional journalists. If that counts for anything, they ought to be more than a match for the best posts on Slashdot rather than just level with the average ones.
Are they? I think I'll learn more from Slashdot, for all its faults. And I don't expect this vox pop to tell me anything I didn't know about different OSes. If anything, it may be more interesting for revealing how TV news presents the topic - what they focus on, if they make any mistakes, how much detail they think the public can take - than for the actual subject matter.
If you all Google Slashdot, will it Slashdot Google?
A lot of software exists for Windows that isn't likely to be ported soon. Windows emulation enables non-Windows users to run them anyway.
And why are so few Windows users concerned with Lunix or OS X emulation?Because open source software that originates on Linux have a tendency to become ported to Windows, while the reverse (closed source software that originates on Windows) does not exhibit the same trend. The closed source Windows programs requires involvement of the holder of the source code to be ported, while the open source Linux programs can be ported by anyone with experience in programming in both affected environments.
Actually they have.
I'm fully aware of issues with some of Apple's UI choices and both of those articles contain some real issues. That said, they are both fairly minor compared to the preponderance of long running, well known UI design snafus on Windows, many of which are duplicated on popular Linux distros. For example, While having dock items that are not constant in position along the edge of the screen means you can't easily train yourself to hit them on one axis, Fitt's law makes it simple to hit them on the other. Likewise for menus, placed at the top of the screen. Compared to menus placed at arbitrary locations within the screen, both of these are huge improvements. Add to that task bar and taskbar like elements that require the mouse to be slightly above the bottom of the screen and which are also moving targets and you have a clear win on that front for OS X. For that matter, look at Tog's article on the dock and try applying it to the Windows taskbar. Notice anything? Almost all his points apply as much or more to the taskbar.
That is one example. I could go on including one button mice for the default, dialogue boxes with "OK/Cancel" instead of actions, etc. etc. but I won't. Any reputable UI expert or even many books can walk you through what to do and what not to do as general rules, and most will use Windows as an example of what not to do.
I'm completely unconvinced that OS X does not beat Windows hands down in the usability department.