I agree with much of what you said, except for the Photoshop example. As someone who's had to use Photoshop and QuarkXPress on both platforms, the Mac wins, each time, hands-down. Those sorts of programs were designed for Macs, and somehow, the UI just doesn't "make" the jump.
> On the other hand, maybe Apple should've slapped > Microsoft down for Word 6 for Macintosh.:)
Man -- that was an abomination. But that came out when Apple was still the anemic illegitimate brother. MS could have said "okay fine, we'll pull the product" and Apple would have died away.
I'd rather that my widgets acted like my OS, and not my browser. I use a few OSs on a daily basis, and when I switch machines/platforms, I think in the context of the OS at the time, not the problem. That way I have to keep three contexts on hand (OS X, Linux, Windows), not fifteen (Mozilla, Office, IE,\ OmniWeb, [don't even talk to me about StarOffice]). It strikes me as the Correct way to do it. Once we have hideous hybrid widget sets showing up everywhere, the concept of your browser being consistent across platforms will get lost in the morass of just trying to get accustomed to your computer. Ick.
I'm hoping you're joking -- you're happy to have a shitty browser because someone just told you that your browser of choice wasn't actually meant to be a browser?
That's like learning that your oven was actually meant to be a clothes dryer and then accepting that it never actually cooked your dinner!
> The popularity of skinning applications such as
> media players and having reconfigurable menus
> and toolbars in applications is pretty strong
> evidence that people do not always want a
> standard user-interface.
And it's ghastly! I have to re-learn the MP3 player every time I use another computer. How dumb is that?
> Kai's Power things for instance
And it's a total headache to use. Who wants a graphics tool that takes over the whole interface? How pretentious can you be?
> An ex-colleague (I changed companies) often used > to say "Imagine if people complained that all
> houses were different... The toilet's in a
> different place in all of them!"
Better analogy: "Imagine if all of the stairs in the case had different gaps." We'd all fall down a lot.
> wheel works in Mail, Internet Explorer... but
> doesn't work in Finder (?), iTunes, etc.
The finder is Carbon. As Apple put it, "we eat our own dogfood." (i.e., developers should be comfortable with Carbon, we made the damn Finder in it.) Though, oddly, the scroll wheel does work in the Finder in 10.1. Just not other carbon apps.
Sorta. VI was supposed to be the "bridge" (before they took too many drugs and decided on "Generations.") VI was the first one where they all acknowledged that they were really old (though the audience laughingly noticed that in V). The shift in "man"/"one" was to complete the turnabout done in the movie -- Klingons are our friends, Kirk is at least close to retiring/dying, Enterprise A is to be decomissioned. Next!
C'mon! The doctor was delightful! Do you expect tricorders and healing-beams out of some quack who showed up from nowhere who happens to know a thing or two about Klingon anatomy? This guy isn't the tea-drinking oncological specialist from your local teching hospital, he's a guy who trades services for travel/etc., probably. Of course he'd use starfish!
"Warrior race" has a lot more play to it than "commie bastards." Particularly after glastnost =)
Bravo on the makeup comment. People get too involved trying to explain away real-world limitations that they forget to just enjoy the content. They seem to lose the message in the technology (now that sounds slightly familiar...)
I gues that's possible. But those must have been the most difficult part of the whole shebang. And the Federation has ships with one nacelle later (though that could be once they're more reliable). It just strikes me as the designers "reverse aging" the current ships and not thinking about how it would be done without preconceptions. (i.e., I think it'd be a hell of a lot uglier.)
Exactly. They're allowed to take advantage of better makeup and not be blamed. They should propogate it back to all "periods" in the show. It's not like it's a religion (where its in their best interest to promote continuity), it's a TV show.
You've clearly never interacted with the US military. They seem like a complete bunch of morons (and a few of them have Southern accents.) But they get the job done well and thoroughly. Face it, these are the people that we'd probably put in space in that application.
I don't think they meant to say that his dad was Z. Cochrane (note that his last name is Archer). His dad was one of the warp drive engineers. It takes a lot more than one person to build warp drive.
(Thinking about that, why did the ship have two nacelles? We've seen that ships can get by with one. It seems silly/wasteful/unrealistic that the first ship would have two.)
Slashdot Mirror
...or you could provide a reason...
(ask Britney)
Try OmniWeb. It makes websites look like works of art, and it's a joy to use. I can't even load up IE any more, it makes my head throb so much.
You encapsulated the other side of the argument: "Gnome is a 96.95% copy of the windows desktop." Ick!
I get the crappy desktop, and half the apps.
(Disclaimer: I don't want the crappy desktop or half the apps. I want the stability. I don't get so much of that with Gnome.)
I agree with much of what you said, except for the Photoshop example. As someone who's had to use Photoshop and QuarkXPress on both platforms, the Mac wins, each time, hands-down. Those sorts of programs were designed for Macs, and somehow, the UI just doesn't "make" the jump.
> On the other hand, maybe Apple should've slapped > Microsoft down for Word 6 for Macintosh. :)
Man -- that was an abomination. But that came out when Apple was still the anemic illegitimate brother. MS could have said "okay fine, we'll pull the product" and Apple would have died away.
I'd rather that my widgets acted like my OS, and not my browser. I use a few OSs on a daily basis, and when I switch machines/platforms, I think in the context of the OS at the time, not the problem. That way I have to keep three contexts on hand (OS X, Linux, Windows), not fifteen (Mozilla, Office, IE,\ OmniWeb, [don't even talk to me about StarOffice]). It strikes me as the Correct way to do it. Once we have hideous hybrid widget sets showing up everywhere, the concept of your browser being consistent across platforms will get lost in the morass of just trying to get accustomed to your computer. Ick.
I'm also pretty sure that mail/news are not part of a browser.
Hell, they're not even part of IE.
I'm hoping you're joking -- you're happy to have a shitty browser because someone just told you that your browser of choice wasn't actually meant to be a browser?
That's like learning that your oven was actually meant to be a clothes dryer and then accepting that it never actually cooked your dinner!
> The popularity of skinning applications such as
> media players and having reconfigurable menus
> and toolbars in applications is pretty strong
> evidence that people do not always want a
> standard user-interface.
And it's ghastly! I have to re-learn the MP3 player every time I use another computer. How dumb is that?
> Kai's Power things for instance
And it's a total headache to use. Who wants a graphics tool that takes over the whole interface? How pretentious can you be?
> An ex-colleague (I changed companies) often used > to say "Imagine if people complained that all
> houses were different... The toilet's in a
> different place in all of them!"
Better analogy: "Imagine if all of the stairs in the case had different gaps." We'd all fall down a lot.
> wheel works in Mail, Internet Explorer... but
> doesn't work in Finder (?), iTunes, etc.
The finder is Carbon. As Apple put it, "we eat our own dogfood." (i.e., developers should be comfortable with Carbon, we made the damn Finder in it.) Though, oddly, the scroll wheel does work in the Finder in 10.1. Just not other carbon apps.
White BG with grey lines that make it hard to tell a B from a 8
Not a problem.
Aliased fonts and small sizes
Fixed in 10.1
Big, candy-like buttons, that take up screen space
User-configurable.
no text on the docker without rolling over a icon
What would you prefer? A taskbar? If you can't recognize your apps, you should pack up and go home. If you need a reminder, it's there.
GUI controlls that rely on color, or position when using the graphite theme
Bzzt, wrong. There are graphics.
taking away customization from the start menu
Huh? It isn't windows. (Hint: there is no start menu!)
Pay closer attention next time.
I kinda thought it was a vulcan. (More interesting that way, IMO.)
Sorta. VI was supposed to be the "bridge" (before they took too many drugs and decided on "Generations.") VI was the first one where they all acknowledged that they were really old (though the audience laughingly noticed that in V). The shift in "man"/"one" was to complete the turnabout done in the movie -- Klingons are our friends, Kirk is at least close to retiring/dying, Enterprise A is to be decomissioned. Next!
Pickier yet... =)
Do they have mitochondrial DNA?
C'mon! The doctor was delightful! Do you expect tricorders and healing-beams out of some quack who showed up from nowhere who happens to know a thing or two about Klingon anatomy? This guy isn't the tea-drinking oncological specialist from your local teching hospital, he's a guy who trades services for travel/etc., probably. Of course he'd use starfish!
That happened here too. It looked like they switched to another satellite feed or some such thing.
"Warrior race" has a lot more play to it than "commie bastards." Particularly after glastnost =)
Bravo on the makeup comment. People get too involved trying to explain away real-world limitations that they forget to just enjoy the content. They seem to lose the message in the technology (now that sounds slightly familiar...)
I gues that's possible. But those must have been the most difficult part of the whole shebang. And the Federation has ships with one nacelle later (though that could be once they're more reliable). It just strikes me as the designers "reverse aging" the current ships and not thinking about how it would be done without preconceptions. (i.e., I think it'd be a hell of a lot uglier.)
She'd fall over!
And as we all know, star women are green.
I have some Dr. Pulaski pr0n I can send you if you give me your e-mail addy.
Exactly. They're allowed to take advantage of better makeup and not be blamed. They should propogate it back to all "periods" in the show. It's not like it's a religion (where its in their best interest to promote continuity), it's a TV show.
You've clearly never interacted with the US military. They seem like a complete bunch of morons (and a few of them have Southern accents.) But they get the job done well and thoroughly. Face it, these are the people that we'd probably put in space in that application.
I don't think they meant to say that his dad was Z. Cochrane (note that his last name is Archer). His dad was one of the warp drive engineers. It takes a lot more than one person to build warp drive.
(Thinking about that, why did the ship have two nacelles? We've seen that ships can get by with one. It seems silly/wasteful/unrealistic that the first ship would have two.)
Or maybe you care a little too much about a website.