I'm not working in the design sector but common sense tells me that there are many aspects to a good design and function of the object designed is one. And if simpliciy in design puts restrictions on essential functions it's bad. If proliferation of features blurres the essential function it's bad too.
Another aspect is the level of proficiency of the intended user. A proficient user can make use of much more complex interfaces than an unexperienced user. Another aspect which is connected with proficiency is frequency of use. Another aspect is attitude of the user to the object and... and... and...
In my experience stupid trends are the problem and that holds true for the simplicity trend as well as a complexity trend. Because they distract the designer from thinking about the concrete case.
Maybe the only trend I would ascribe to is Keep It Appropriate!.
My point was - I have to admit I didn't made it very clear - that the advantage depents on various factors one is the cultural setting (being a pastoralist).
And so I thought/think that I don't agree with your response to my ancestor poster:
>>It's really simple, drinking milk or not really had no influence on human evolution. Humans that couldnt drink milk found something else to eat.
>Yeah, because 6000 years ago you could just go down to 7-11 and grab a burrito, right genius?
The people could have changed their way of living (their culture) but in this case they didn't. That's what we have to understand and that's not plain biology/evolution.
You are right that it's not that simple as your parent poster suggested but I felt you underestimated the agency of the people 6000 years ago. If you didn't, fine. Then let's go and bash the simplicity of your parent poster;-)
Guess which one dies first when famine hits, or the grain crop spoils?
The cow. (Then the goat.)
No, seriously. Getting rid of lactose intolerance was is only relevant for pastoralists. So it mainly happend in Central Asia (and probably spreading from there to Europe) and parts of Africa. The Chinese and Japanese for example did and do rather well with a majority of the population being intolerant to lactose.
If something is an advantage or not is highly dependent on the context. There is no absolute better/worse. Evolution is not a way to perfection.
I agree it won't happen - and in my opinion GoogleOS won't happen either.
But the article focuses more on MS's business strategies after Vista because producing OSes is getting less manageable, less profitable, not on the scenario of vanishing OSes as such.
But what I would think is more interesting:
How is the free software/open source community dealing with the changing landscape?
(Is e.g. Linux heading into the same problems as Windows?)
What is the future of free/open source software in a world with more and more advertisement financed, huge server based services?
Don't you think that the fact that all search engines are proprietary and closed source is as bad as the situation in the OS-sector before Linux?
To sum it up:
MS is searching new ways, but what are the visions of the FOSS community?
Islam like nearly every other religion has been used for very different aims. And such a simplified ahistorical statement like yours won't help a rational approach.
Please, don't try to fight stupidity with stupidities.
(And the role of Islam in Indian history is highly complex and Islam is an integral part of the Indian culture.)
The packages "beamer" and "prosper" are very good for presenations. And for reports, letters, articles or an occasional PhD thesis LaTeX is still far ahead of Word and OpenOffice.
But whatever you use exporting a presentation to pdf is always a good idea and I don't understand why not more people do it.
I always loved that turn in the HHGG. I still think it's a brilliant idea to think of the earth as a huge supercomputer to calculate the question to the answer "42" - and thus to actually formulate the question about life, the universe and everything - I think it's much more interesting than the Matrix version where the earth/reality just isn't the reality.
But that's the problem with any non-software or non-data (wikipedia) product. The open source account gets into trouble with hardware or other technical stuff because of the value of the material you have to use to build it.
You can have open source design or conception/planning, but I never heard of any sensible (or realistic) way of open source realisation of the product. (Actually open source makes no sense there for me. What's an open source factory? Community makes sense there, though.) But if an factory invests into building a car they have to sell it and that's different to Ubuntu/Suse/RedHat... that sell their DVDs, you can't download the car for free.
But I like the idea of a community planing cars (and other stuff). I would hope in the course of that someone would come up with a great idea how to realize it!
And come on, that is real hacker spirit. That's more geeky than linux and the squaring of MAKE Magazine.
You probably can't get closer to the reality.
BBC is reporting it too and there they say:
"Other scientists think it possible that gullies like this were caused not by water but by liquid carbon dioxide.
One of the reasons for favouring CO2 was that computer models of the Martian crust indicated water could exist only at depths of several kilometres. Liquid carbon dioxide, on the other hand, could persist much nearer the surface where temperatures can drop as low as -107C."
But for funding it just has to be water, that's science and that's sad.
(I don't blame them, I know game too, different league, same rules.)
Yahoo has many facets like this that you probably don't even realize.
Neither do I nor many others. So?
Maybe their facets aren't that interesting for most people...
...or they hide them in more facets
...or their products aren't that good
...or don't have the right timing
...or what ever.
Take it how you want, they are having a problem somewhere and not being a search company anymore might be one part of it.
The possible reasons mostly burn down to the fact that they fear they are losing control over their own language.
And to understand that you have to consider the history of these speech communities and the fact that another culture with rather different values takes power over their language by writing it down, thus creating a kind of standard, abstracting it from the social reality of the speakers etc. (For a very extreme example of refusal see this wonderful pdf-article.)
Wanting to have control over one's own lebenswelt is a very democratic, very American, very Bill-of-rights-ish attitude.
Doesn't mean that I support every decision of these speech communities, but a appreciate the attitude.
I think they overacted. A lot of speech communities of small and/or endangered languages do that in such cases. But mostly they can look back on a long and unpleasant history of exploitation by westerners, so their default assumption is: they're doing it to make profit out of it and probably on our expense.
Before you declare them stupid, greedy or what ever. Stop one minute and think: What was/is the reaction of the OSS/Linux-community to the Novell Microsoft deal? Huh?
I'm not saying that they are right, I'm just saying it might be sane.
Slashdot Mirror
Free as in beer?
No, free as in jazz!
Of course they have a point and not!
I'm not working in the design sector but common sense tells me that there are many aspects to a good design and function of the object designed is one. And if simpliciy in design puts restrictions on essential functions it's bad. If proliferation of features blurres the essential function it's bad too.
Another aspect is the level of proficiency of the intended user. A proficient user can make use of much more complex interfaces than an unexperienced user. Another aspect which is connected with proficiency is frequency of use. Another aspect is attitude of the user to the object and ... and ... and ...
In my experience stupid trends are the problem and that holds true for the simplicity trend as well as a complexity trend. Because they distract the designer from thinking about the concrete case.
Maybe the only trend I would ascribe to is Keep It Appropriate!.
and to facial toner.
And so I thought/think that I don't agree with your response to my ancestor poster:
The people could have changed their way of living (their culture) but in this case they didn't. That's what we have to understand and that's not plain biology/evolution.
You are right that it's not that simple as your parent poster suggested but I felt you underestimated the agency of the people 6000 years ago. If you didn't, fine. Then let's go and bash the simplicity of your parent poster ;-)
Yeah, thanks.
I think that is really the most likely scenario, but it will bring other, new problems.
How to convince someone to buy a modular update? Most users won't even understand what this partial update will be.
Can they combine their current business modell with a different production/release policy or have to change more?
I agree it won't happen - and in my opinion GoogleOS won't happen either. But the article focuses more on MS's business strategies after Vista because producing OSes is getting less manageable, less profitable, not on the scenario of vanishing OSes as such.
But what I would think is more interesting:
How is the free software/open source community dealing with the changing landscape?
(Is e.g. Linux heading into the same problems as Windows?)
What is the future of free/open source software in a world with more and more advertisement financed, huge server based services?
Don't you think that the fact that all search engines are proprietary and closed source is as bad as the situation in the OS-sector before Linux?
To sum it up:
MS is searching new ways, but what are the visions of the FOSS community?
Sorry but this is just wrong (and ignorant).
It is historically wrong. It is wrong nowadays.
Islam like nearly every other religion has been used for very different aims. And such a simplified ahistorical statement like yours won't help a rational approach.
Please, don't try to fight stupidity with stupidities.
(And the role of Islam in Indian history is highly complex and Islam is an integral part of the Indian culture.)
Yep, or use good ol' LaTeX.
The packages "beamer" and "prosper" are very good for presenations. And for reports, letters, articles or an occasional PhD thesis LaTeX is still far ahead of Word and OpenOffice.
But whatever you use exporting a presentation to pdf is always a good idea and I don't understand why not more people do it.
Dolorian is Finnish dark metal band from Oulu. So they probably should be assessed by bpm (beats per minute).
The Delorean or better De Lorean DMC-12 on the other hand might be better assessed by rpm. Cheers.
Yep, and the news will always report the international market price for french fries per barrel.
They forgot the earth in the server list!
I always loved that turn in the HHGG. I still think it's a brilliant idea to think of the earth as a huge supercomputer to calculate the question to the answer "42" - and thus to actually formulate the question about life, the universe and everything - I think it's much more interesting than the Matrix version where the earth/reality just isn't the reality.
So here it is:
PER LAPTOP INVOICE, 5 YEARS
No it's not. It's a dull attempt of a joke using a mouldy cliché.
But it's not racist, it's not related to "race", not even really to "nation". You could say it's jingoistic, but I would say it's just boring.
But that's the problem with any non-software or non-data (wikipedia) product. The open source account gets into trouble with hardware or other technical stuff because of the value of the material you have to use to build it.
You can have open source design or conception/planning, but I never heard of any sensible (or realistic) way of open source realisation of the product. (Actually open source makes no sense there for me. What's an open source factory? Community makes sense there, though.) But if an factory invests into building a car they have to sell it and that's different to Ubuntu/Suse/RedHat... that sell their DVDs, you can't download the car for free.
But I like the idea of a community planing cars (and other stuff). I would hope in the course of that someone would come up with a great idea how to realize it!
And come on, that is real hacker spirit. That's more geeky than linux and the squaring of MAKE Magazine.
Does that mean he is grounded for being naughty?
That's unfair. Obviously he did his homework.
Mee too, I really like it.
But will O'Reilly now publish "War Hacks: Warfare for geeks"?
(BTW I still recomment not to wage war, and do something meaningful. ;-)
FromTFA:
"Microsoft as an innovator is good for creating things behind the scenes but bad at bringing them to market."
Sums it up nicely.
You probably can't get closer to the reality. BBC is reporting it too and there they say:
"Other scientists think it possible that gullies like this were caused not by water but by liquid carbon dioxide.
One of the reasons for favouring CO2 was that computer models of the Martian crust indicated water could exist only at depths of several kilometres. Liquid carbon dioxide, on the other hand, could persist much nearer the surface where temperatures can drop as low as -107C."
But for funding it just has to be water, that's science and that's sad.
(I don't blame them, I know game too, different league, same rules.)
Yeah, and is it COOL?
One thing the iPod-thing teaches is if it works and is considered "cool" it sells.
And Apple has the image and the position to make such a thing "cool" (or whatever is the newest adjective in your particular corner of the globe).
Samsung is definitely not in that market position, let alone the name "Samsung i730" pfffff.
This is all so superficial but I think that's how it works.
1. right time
2. right image,
3. right campaign
4. no ???
5. Profit!
Neither do I nor many others. So?
Maybe their facets aren't that interesting for most people...
...or they hide them in more facets
...or their products aren't that good
...or don't have the right timing
...or what ever.
Take it how you want, they are having a problem somewhere and not being a search company anymore might be one part of it.
Maybe that's the proof that they only hire the smartest.
Seriously, what would they gain from a GoogleOS? Where would it fit in (inside Google Inc.)?
Most...resist...kill...stupid...sofware...tool
nuff said
The possible reasons mostly burn down to the fact that they fear they are losing control over their own language.
And to understand that you have to consider the history of these speech communities and the fact that another culture with rather different values takes power over their language by writing it down, thus creating a kind of standard, abstracting it from the social reality of the speakers etc. (For a very extreme example of refusal see this wonderful pdf-article.)
Wanting to have control over one's own lebenswelt is a very democratic, very American, very Bill-of-rights-ish attitude.
Doesn't mean that I support every decision of these speech communities, but a appreciate the attitude.
I think they overacted. A lot of speech communities of small and/or endangered languages do that in such cases. But mostly they can look back on a long and unpleasant history of exploitation by westerners, so their default assumption is: they're doing it to make profit out of it and probably on our expense.
Before you declare them stupid, greedy or what ever. Stop one minute and think: What was/is the reaction of the OSS/Linux-community to the Novell Microsoft deal? Huh?
I'm not saying that they are right, I'm just saying it might be sane.