The thing is that it is intended for me. I'm a coder. I'm a sysadmin. I have pretty tough software requirements. The problem is that I also care about aesthetics and about design. Technologically, Mozilla isn't so bad (save the fact that it feels shakey to use -- I have the feeling that it might just go away at a moment's notice), but when it comes to design and aesthetics, it really misses the boat, IMO. Oh well. My 2.
Ha! I almost fell out of my chair laughing at the "poor understanding by the authors" comment. A program's philosophy and reason shouldn't be explained to the user! This isn't a humanities class! A browser is a tool for getting information. It should be fluent and natural to use. I absolutely, 100% do not want to even think about the tools that the programmers used to create the UI. Furthermore, if I have to have an understanding of those tools to be able to deal with the non-standardness or funkiness of the browser, I will immediately go to the next browser available. And I did. The Mozilla UI is ghastly, and I don't care why. There are other, equally good, products out there which I'll happily use. Hehe. Thanks for a good laugh.
Huh? I think his comment is very professional. If it is indeed something more-than-is-apparent, then critical thinking (and not just big company wrong) will leave everyone in the best stead.
Re:the whole GUI thing is so 20th century
on
GUIs for Everyone
·
· Score: 2
I hate talking. I like silence. I want to be able to use my computer without my roommate hearing me say "play porn.file". I want to be able to type really quickly. I absolutely hate the idea of having an audio interface. I like looking at my two monitors on my Mac and watching the two terminal windows on the left monitor, typing here, meanwhile glancing at the two icons in the dock that tell me if I have new mail or ICQ messages. I don't want the computer talking to me or beeping at me or singing to me or any of that crap. The most useful thing I can think of would be a USB light that could replace the beep and not disturb the screen.
Re:Serious Question...
on
GUIs for Everyone
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The apps being mixed in the dock is a legacy of NeXT UI principles. They figured that with modern computers that preemptively multitask and with endless virtual memory (theoretically), the user shouldn't care or think about whether a program is running or not, he should simply use the right tool for the right job. There is even less of a difference between running and non-running apps (just a tiny grey ellipsis) in NEXTSTEP. I dig it, and I like the principal.
Correct. I've used Java apps. I have no need to write Java Cocoa apps, as I like ObjC. I may have used Java Cocoa apps written by others, but I don't know if I have or not.
Is the Sun implementation going to be Java Cocoa or honest-to-god Java?
I've done my homework. I use Java apps all the time. Their Quartz isn't the same as the rest of Mac OS X.
Also, we're talking about X, not Java. When one say Apple should implement X, that has nothing to do with Java, it's about Athena and QT and GTK and all of those other ghastly things.
I think you countered your own point. You were complaining that the unions had control of the economy, but then you pointed out that European cell technology is ahead of ours. You then said that that's what six weeks of vacation will get. Better cell technology. They seem to be the ones winning this game.
I agree -- I'm actually not an Amiga fan (really don't like the UI, but don't want to start a flamewar.
What bugs me is people modifying NeXT cube cases. They do awful things like put PC motherboards in them. One I saw had a plexiglass front, spray-painted silver, and with blue fluorescent lights. It was ghastly and they though they'd done the l33test thing possible. They'd really just destroyed a beautiful piece of history (that's still very useful as-is today!)
It gets the job done okay, but gosh. If you need X, XFree86 works fine. I'm quite certain that the people who either don't know what it is, or can't figure out how to install it don't really need it, and it would add a whole 'nother layer of bloat to the OS that's just not necessary for 95% of users.
And from Apple's viewpoint, putting X into OS X would be a ghastly, stupid move. Apple's best interest is served by people producing beautiful, consistent Quartz applications. If you give people an escape hatch to write cross-platform ugly-as-ass X apps, Mac OS X loses a whole lot of its sex appeal in one fell swoop. Half of the little program writers would abandon Quartz for X in a heartbeat, and the integrity of both the UI and the OS experience would go right down the toilet, and that would sink everything Apple has going for it.
Haha -- because the English language is usually more correctly rendered without the apostrophe. Far too often people write "their's" or "I have two hard drive's." You may think I'm kidding, but I'm not. Watch Slashdot. Look for apostrophes. About half of the time they're simply used incorrectly. It's a personal peeve, but it's legitimate, nonetheless, I believe.
I've had several Micropolis 4.3GB SCSI drives (the 3240AV, if I recall) and those are the most damned unreliable drives ever. They go into 'airplane mode' and sound like a prop plane about to take off.
Slashdot Mirror
Warning: If you buy these clothes you'll never have sex!
You mean your keyboard didn't melt? I thought it happened to everyone.
Beyond that, the article was posted in 1985! Sheesh.
You could put it in the attic/closet with the water heater and the rest of the plumbing.
It remains my opinion that if people simply didn't use the apostraphe at all, they'd be more likely to use it correctly than they currently do.
The thing is that it is intended for me. I'm a coder. I'm a sysadmin. I have pretty tough software requirements. The problem is that I also care about aesthetics and about design. Technologically, Mozilla isn't so bad (save the fact that it feels shakey to use -- I have the feeling that it might just go away at a moment's notice), but when it comes to design and aesthetics, it really misses the boat, IMO. Oh well. My 2.
In fact not. I hate it. I use a Mac and am quite pleased with Mac OS X. I use a NeXT and am even more pleased with NEXTSTEP. Very slick.
Ha! I almost fell out of my chair laughing at the "poor understanding by the authors" comment. A program's philosophy and reason shouldn't be explained to the user! This isn't a humanities class! A browser is a tool for getting information. It should be fluent and natural to use. I absolutely, 100% do not want to even think about the tools that the programmers used to create the UI. Furthermore, if I have to have an understanding of those tools to be able to deal with the non-standardness or funkiness of the browser, I will immediately go to the next browser available. And I did. The Mozilla UI is ghastly, and I don't care why. There are other, equally good, products out there which I'll happily use. Hehe. Thanks for a good laugh.
Huh? I think his comment is very professional. If it is indeed something more-than-is-apparent, then critical thinking (and not just big company wrong) will leave everyone in the best stead.
I hate talking. I like silence. I want to be able to use my computer without my roommate hearing me say "play porn.file". I want to be able to type really quickly. I absolutely hate the idea of having an audio interface. I like looking at my two monitors on my Mac and watching the two terminal windows on the left monitor, typing here, meanwhile glancing at the two icons in the dock that tell me if I have new mail or ICQ messages. I don't want the computer talking to me or beeping at me or singing to me or any of that crap. The most useful thing I can think of would be a USB light that could replace the beep and not disturb the screen.
The apps being mixed in the dock is a legacy of NeXT UI principles. They figured that with modern computers that preemptively multitask and with endless virtual memory (theoretically), the user shouldn't care or think about whether a program is running or not, he should simply use the right tool for the right job. There is even less of a difference between running and non-running apps (just a tiny grey ellipsis) in NEXTSTEP. I dig it, and I like the principal.
Correct. I've used Java apps. I have no need to write Java Cocoa apps, as I like ObjC. I may have used Java Cocoa apps written by others, but I don't know if I have or not.
Is the Sun implementation going to be Java Cocoa or honest-to-god Java?
I've done my homework. I use Java apps all the time. Their Quartz isn't the same as the rest of Mac OS X.
Also, we're talking about X, not Java. When one say Apple should implement X, that has nothing to do with Java, it's about Athena and QT and GTK and all of those other ghastly things.
I think you countered your own point. You were complaining that the unions had control of the economy, but then you pointed out that European cell technology is ahead of ours. You then said that that's what six weeks of vacation will get. Better cell technology. They seem to be the ones winning this game.
'Cause they get a certain number of guaranteed sales that they decide is worth more to secure than a variable number of consumer-market driven sales.
Big expansion box with a bell in it?
I agree -- I'm actually not an Amiga fan (really don't like the UI, but don't want to start a flamewar.
What bugs me is people modifying NeXT cube cases. They do awful things like put PC motherboards in them. One I saw had a plexiglass front, spray-painted silver, and with blue fluorescent lights. It was ghastly and they though they'd done the l33test thing possible. They'd really just destroyed a beautiful piece of history (that's still very useful as-is today!)
Because X is an awful, old standard?
It gets the job done okay, but gosh. If you need X, XFree86 works fine. I'm quite certain that the people who either don't know what it is, or can't figure out how to install it don't really need it, and it would add a whole 'nother layer of bloat to the OS that's just not necessary for 95% of users.
And from Apple's viewpoint, putting X into OS X would be a ghastly, stupid move. Apple's best interest is served by people producing beautiful, consistent Quartz applications. If you give people an escape hatch to write cross-platform ugly-as-ass X apps, Mac OS X loses a whole lot of its sex appeal in one fell swoop. Half of the little program writers would abandon Quartz for X in a heartbeat, and the integrity of both the UI and the OS experience would go right down the toilet, and that would sink everything Apple has going for it.
Zing!
Haha -- because the English language is usually more correctly rendered without the apostrophe. Far too often people write "their's" or "I have two hard drive's." You may think I'm kidding, but I'm not. Watch Slashdot. Look for apostrophes. About half of the time they're simply used incorrectly. It's a personal peeve, but it's legitimate, nonetheless, I believe.
Conner?
I've had several Micropolis 4.3GB SCSI drives (the 3240AV, if I recall) and those are the most damned unreliable drives ever. They go into 'airplane mode' and sound like a prop plane about to take off.
But you didn't. And it doesn't sound like you're going to the OSC.
Not to be a jerk, but it bugs me when people say things like "ooh, if I was there, they'd have seen!" It's mendacious.
At least now the FBI will know where to go.
Big fucking deal.
The idea is just silly. Makes me want to go patent the Redbook standard and sue the RIAA.