Violent crime rate [aic.gov.au], meanwhile, has increased, mainly due to increase in assaults, and in particular of sexual assault.
Again, you are misrepresenting. We have a big problem with motorcycle gangs here who, among others, import guns ILLEGALLY. 1 million guns were destroyed in the two buybacks of 97 and 03, but since then about 1 million guns have been smuggled in illegally.
We have low gun homicide rate, but the main thing increasing it is actually *bikie gang wars*. That is not the same as in the U.S., where the "average person" can go on a rampage with a highly effective weapon. The stats are skewed by criminal organisations' use of guns here.
You take a simplistic slant on a complex issue just to make it look like you have an argument. You don't.
I'm sorry, but you've been lied to. The homicide rates [aic.gov.au] in Australia did not decline after their gun ban. Or rather, they declined (averaged), but at the same rate they were declining before. In fact, that brief spike that you see on the graph is right after the ban.
Australian here. Well *I'm* sorry, but you're being deceptive, or simply cannot interpret information intelligently. I assume you're referring to graphs like this on that page. Yes, gun homicide was in decline, but certainly would have reached a level average at some point if the buybacks of 96 and 03 didn't occur. Who knows, they may have gone up. Nobody knows, because that did not happen. What *did* happen, after the buybacks, was that gun crime *plummeted*.
So it had the desired effect, and you just can't get your little mind around that. You don't want to think about it, or present a balanced argument, because it doesn't suit your bias. Intentionally misrepresenting information to make a point is just sad.
You may want (or not) to look at the graph on this page. Per 100,000 population, the gun homicide rate in the U.S. is ~3.6. In Australia it's ~0.1. U.K & Norway are the only two lower countries.
If you support gun ownership, you support gun crime, simple as that. Gun are NOT knives. Guns have only ONE purpose. They are not made to cut your steak, or butter your bread. They are made to maim and kill people. Supporting guns is supporting what guns are for. Or can't you get your head around that either?
> The mass issue is fixed if we realize that the size of the universe is larger than the visible horizon.
Sigh, completely wrong.
1. Dark Matter (or some kind of "unseen gravity source") has to be present *within each galaxy* to stop galaxies flying apart because of their spin, which calculations based on their visible matter says they should do.
2. Dark Matter (or some kind of "unseen gravity source") has to be present between us and certain distant objects, because of the visible effect of "gravitational lensing" (ie. visible distortion of light) being caused by something we can't see.
There may be other examples of why DM is a thing, but those are the main two that pop to mind.
TL;DR it's a LOT more than just "adding up" the required matter in the universe.
> Because that's what they see in us: The computerized equivalent of plumbers and bricklayers.
That's ridiculous - a plumbing mistake doesn't lose a company millions of dollars or potentially kill people. If you come across an attitude like that, it's because you're working for an idiot. Devaluing developers is self-sabotage for a company, as sure as devaluing any other important employee category like legal or even marketing. Good managers know this.
The problem is with devs ourselves - unlike doctors and lawyers - yes even marketers - who are well aware they provide valuable skills to a company, we generally don't have the image and self-confidence to command respect. We have an IMAGE PROBLEM, that's all. Luckily we're not distrusted, like politicians and lawyers, but we're not taken seriously either.
> But I hated Windows 7 when I first started with it, it seemed that stuff (especially in Control Panel) had been moved around for no readily apparent reason
This. I have XP on my laptop and 7 on my PC. Not sure if 7 will run on the laptop - and don't care. Over a year of using 7 on the PC and I STILL don't like it. I don't like not being able to right-click on the top-left window icons. I have to click ALT-UP just (keys that are too far apart) to simply go up a folder. Network settings are a maze to navigate. Everything seems to take MORE clicks in 7 than in XP. It's several steps to just find my IP address, where it's 2 steps in XP.
I can't customise the Start menu. W. T. F. Yes I know I can TYPE stuff, but you need to know the name of the stuff you want to type - there are no tags or descriptors to look up when typing. It took me ages to find the screen-shot tool. Typed "screen", nope.. "shot", nope.. "grab", no.. "snap", no.. because it's called.. ffs now I've forgotten again, so I need to look for it in the Programs menu.... which means CLICKING EVERY FUCKING FOLDER to open it up. What a waste of time. In XP, it's a simple matter of moving over menu items, and I can REARRANGE them into easy to remember categories that suit me. As the Programs menu gets big in 7, I have to *scroll*, which is *more* effort, and less efficient, than just seeing a huge menu pop up like in XP. Except in XP I can tame it by rearranging stuff.
Windows Explorer in 7 has an ugly grey bar along the top, except - amazingly - they've finally though to add a "New Folder" button. I'm impressed at the thought that obviously went into the UI there. Oh wait.. I want to sort the file list by date, not name. How do I do that? Where's the option for it? Under the "Organise" button/menu thing? Nope. Try alt-v - yep that exposes the menu. A menu they thought it would be great to hide, except it's the one I want to use a lot. I can un-hide it, except now there is twice as much vertical space used up for no reason. But can I hide the extra grey bar which has buttons on it I won't ever use? Nope. What's this new UI element even called? It's not a "toolbar", nor is it a "menu bar". I don't know. MS doesn't know. It's just there to take up space. I just thank god it's not a freaking Ribbon.
I do like the new Task Manager. But there's apps for that on XP. I don't like the way window previews pop up in my face just when I'm doing alt-tabs. I just want to see the name of the program and the document it has open. How do I tell which document I want from 5 previews of a mass of text? Most of the time it's pointless and visually jarring. The simple XP task switcher with big icons and text underneath was quick and easy to interpret. In so many ways, Windows 7 makes me do MORE work, with my eyes and brain, for the most simple of tasks. When it comes to UI, I'll take practical and fast over pretty every day. For me, that's XP.
TL;DR - used Win 7 on another machine for over a year. Still prefer XP, which wins in simplicity, efficiency and not getting in my way.
as soon as I changed my youtube account to "new style" (or some shit like that) then BAM! I was as a google+ user.
They did that to me via YouTube and something else I can't remember. But in each case I bloody-mindedly went into the G+ profile settings and deleted the entire thing. You can delete your G+ profile and all associated data. My YouTube comments etc. for that account remained.
It's very intrusive, but hey we don't pay for all the nice things they give us, so I don't mind doing a bit of work to clean up after them.:)
Oh, and as for a "clean interface", what? First time I was forced to use the G+ thing, I wondered who created such a malformed monstrosity of a UI. There's hardly any consistency, panels pop in and out over your work area, navigating settings is like walking through an Escher painting. They're certainly competing with Facebook for most obfuscated functionality in a web application.
Generally speaking, when it collapses, it involves destroying a nearly infinite number of possibilities in an absolutely irreversible way. The collapse is complete. Its pretty much the definition of catastrophic.
Meh. Life is pretty much a slow motion catastrophic collapse of possibilities.
> You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?
Many people wouldn't see the difference between this and what we routinely do to insects and animals in labs.
In my mind (assuming we accept that animal lab experiments are essential research) the main difference I see is that this is aimed at kids and not adults - who have already taken ethics classes and are doing it for a "good reason". Kids WILL use this to experiment with other insects, that's just what kids do.
The word of generations of parents, who told their kids not to pull wings off flies, will be undone.
> Seems to be a somewhat self-limiting problem. Users will die off fairly rapidly.
That's a completely ridiculous thing to say. The users die off, but the *reasons why they started using* are still around, so there will always be more users.
> But if your kid doesn't understand the difference between fantasy and reality at 10 or 11 or 12 then there is a parenting problem or other general mental illness.
That's a deeply flawed argument, for the simple reason that kids (and adults too) routinely bring their fantasies into real-life play. Driving fast is a fantasy that "I can handle this" and "nothing bad will happen". And then there's all the YouTube videos of kids doing crazy stunts on skateboards, parkour, etc. with the classic teen fantasy of being indestructible.
If you look at human behaviour, it's pretty clear that fantasy and reality mix *all the time*. Ever fallen in love and thought you were "perfect" together, only to break up a few months later? Blame this on romance movies if you like (which would go against your point of view about games), but the fact is we all entertain fantasies about our futures and capabilities all the time.
Actually it is a great advance over hunting through some damn menu.
Then you're not customising your Start menu right. I can run any program I want in two key-presses - quicker then you can type WIN+notepad, I just type WIN+q+n ('q' for Quick menu, 'n' for Notepad). But then I still use XP, so I *can* customise my menus.
The numbers would be a bit lower if it didn't cost *more than double* in Aus as in the U.S.
A quick google says Tesco in the U.S. for US $38 (AU $40) and here at JB HiFi (one of our decent lower-cost home entertainment shops) for AU $89. Or, AU $98 at a more average shop.
This is a digital product, so someone somewhere is a right wanker.:/
Most Australians just use the simplified version (rank their choice #1, leave the rest blank)
Aussie here, I didn't know that! I always number them in order. Thinking about it, just putting "1" with no other choices isn't ideal.. I wish that counted as an invalid vote - I feel it only encourages laziness, simple-mindedness and lack of engagement. Making people put them in order (there's only a few, not that hard) should be the way it's always done IMO.
As somebody who spent a year living in the PRC, I went in wondering the same thing. But the fact of the matter is that their are so many homophones that they would need to invent a new language just to make it work.
Whereas, in English, there are words that sound the same, but their meanings differ depending on their spelling. There are numerous examples, their frequency is surprising, and I wonder if there is a reason for their continued occurrence.
In all likelihood, it's something that people won't be able to predict, just like the iPhone was.
If people could have predicted the iPhone, Apple wouldn't have caught the market by surprise. Of course the next "disruption" will be something we can't predict - that's what makes it a disruption.
That being said, in hindsight the iPhone was also a natural progression - we already had computer/phones - the stylus type, like the original Windows phone. My brother had one YEARS before the iPhone appeared. The problem was nobody took the market for such devices *seriously*. Jobs took a swing at it, because he thought the time was right. It took off, because of a LOT of things:
1. Most people into tech had WiFi routers. That was not previously the case. iPhone would NOT have worked without that (blessings be upon the CSIRO).
2. Most people were getting familiar with the Web and using web apps. Gmail, google apps, Steam, online banking, etc. The tech culture wasn't that evolved when the [Palm Pilot](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PalmPilot) was around over a *decade ago*.
Hand-held computing wasn't new. Mobiles phones wasn't new. But a bunch of other technologies came together to make the iPhone possible. Home wifi, internet culture, carriers with data plans, not to mention cheap labour and cheap server technology to make it all economically viable. Jobs was first to connected the dots and take the risk. Someone was bound to eventually.
The next "disruption" will also depend on someone connecting the dots of various emerging technologies and cultural changes. Sometimes it even happens despite itself, like the automobile (which wasn't originally intended for use by everybody on the planet) and Facebook (same).
Here's an alternate scenario: Gates concentrates more and more on wiping out disease and feeding the world. This enables the population to balloon out of all sustainability, wrecking the environment.
How about an alternate scenario based on facts not fantasy. Healthier children with longer life expectancy ALWAYS leads to LESS children per family. People have large families because a) lack of education, b) likelihood of child death, c) poverty. Sounds counter-intuitive, and yes more kids means more food to obtain, but it also means more security into the future, more hands to put to work. And it's been shown higher education also leads to smaller families.
This is all obvious if you read and look at the real world instead of inventing your own theories. Not to mention the questionable ethics of abandoning starving millions on the suspicion they're just going to "ruin everything for the rest of us". For shame.
I just hit th windows key and type acme sales 2010 and enter to find the documents.
Well, that just illustrates two major failings: 1. You don't, or soon won't, remember where you keep your files, and that's nothing to brag about. 2. In Windows 7 it's harder to set up shortcuts to important folders than it is to search, and that's nothing to brag about.
I don't need such hand-holding in XP. I know where shit is stored because I *file* things. Search is fine for idiots who save everything to My Documents or the desktop or simply have no friggin idea how computers and folders work. And of course that's as long as you remember what to type in.
In XP, I have my Start Menu arranged so all I do is hit THREE keys, sometimes TWO, for everything I want, and every folder I need to see. Want to run Photoshop? Win+Q+P. Done. "Q" stands for my "Quick Menu", under which is the "Photoshop" shortcut. I'll bet you $100 I can find and run shit at least twice as fast and easily as anyone using Windows 7.
OSs are increasingly being designed for stupid people - and that's nothing to brag about.
You mean the all so horrible instant search where I can start word and view files by subject in 1\9 of a second without a mouse? You couldn't pay me to go back to XP style start menu! Yuck.
Never needed it. Things like that are for people who don't know how to file things or download everything into My Documents or the desktop and then think typing into a box is a godsend. Of course, it all depends on whether you remember what to type.
The first time I ran Win 7, I wanted to do a screen capture. In vain, I typed "grab", "screen", "snap", "capture", "clip", "shot" and instantly remembered why I loved the ability to arrange the contents my Start menu in a way that was logical to ME, the user. Can you remember what the screen capture tool is called in Windows 7 or where to find it in the Start menu?
Sod having to type everything in. In XP, I have it arranged so all I do is hit THREE keys, sometimes TWO, for everything I want, because my menus are set out like that. Want to run Photoshop? Win+Q+P. Done. "Q" stands for my "Quick Menu", under which is the "Photoshop" shortcut. I'll bet you $100 I can find and run shit at least twice as fast and easily as *anyone* using Windows 7.
Slashdot Mirror
Violent crime rate [aic.gov.au], meanwhile, has increased, mainly due to increase in assaults, and in particular of sexual assault.
Again, you are misrepresenting. We have a big problem with motorcycle gangs here who, among others, import guns ILLEGALLY. 1 million guns were destroyed in the two buybacks of 97 and 03, but since then about 1 million guns have been smuggled in illegally.
We have low gun homicide rate, but the main thing increasing it is actually *bikie gang wars*. That is not the same as in the U.S., where the "average person" can go on a rampage with a highly effective weapon. The stats are skewed by criminal organisations' use of guns here.
You take a simplistic slant on a complex issue just to make it look like you have an argument. You don't.
I'm sorry, but you've been lied to. The homicide rates [aic.gov.au] in Australia did not decline after their gun ban. Or rather, they declined (averaged), but at the same rate they were declining before. In fact, that brief spike that you see on the graph is right after the ban.
Australian here. Well *I'm* sorry, but you're being deceptive, or simply cannot interpret information intelligently. I assume you're referring to graphs like this on that page. Yes, gun homicide was in decline, but certainly would have reached a level average at some point if the buybacks of 96 and 03 didn't occur. Who knows, they may have gone up. Nobody knows, because that did not happen. What *did* happen, after the buybacks, was that gun crime *plummeted*.
So it had the desired effect, and you just can't get your little mind around that. You don't want to think about it, or present a balanced argument, because it doesn't suit your bias. Intentionally misrepresenting information to make a point is just sad.
You may want (or not) to look at the graph on this page. Per 100,000 population, the gun homicide rate in the U.S. is ~3.6. In Australia it's ~0.1. U.K & Norway are the only two lower countries.
If you support gun ownership, you support gun crime, simple as that. Gun are NOT knives. Guns have only ONE purpose. They are not made to cut your steak, or butter your bread. They are made to maim and kill people. Supporting guns is supporting what guns are for. Or can't you get your head around that either?
> The mass issue is fixed if we realize that the size of the universe is larger than the visible horizon.
Sigh, completely wrong.
1. Dark Matter (or some kind of "unseen gravity source") has to be present *within each galaxy* to stop galaxies flying apart because of their spin, which calculations based on their visible matter says they should do.
2. Dark Matter (or some kind of "unseen gravity source") has to be present between us and certain distant objects, because of the visible effect of "gravitational lensing" (ie. visible distortion of light) being caused by something we can't see.
There may be other examples of why DM is a thing, but those are the main two that pop to mind.
TL;DR it's a LOT more than just "adding up" the required matter in the universe.
> Because that's what they see in us: The computerized equivalent of plumbers and bricklayers.
That's ridiculous - a plumbing mistake doesn't lose a company millions of dollars or potentially kill people. If you come across an attitude like that, it's because you're working for an idiot. Devaluing developers is self-sabotage for a company, as sure as devaluing any other important employee category like legal or even marketing. Good managers know this.
The problem is with devs ourselves - unlike doctors and lawyers - yes even marketers - who are well aware they provide valuable skills to a company, we generally don't have the image and self-confidence to command respect. We have an IMAGE PROBLEM, that's all. Luckily we're not distrusted, like politicians and lawyers, but we're not taken seriously either.
> I should also, really, think about my extraneous/incorrect comma usage.
Helpful
> But I hated Windows 7 when I first started with it, it seemed that stuff (especially in Control Panel) had been moved around for no readily apparent reason
This. I have XP on my laptop and 7 on my PC. Not sure if 7 will run on the laptop - and don't care. Over a year of using 7 on the PC and I STILL don't like it. I don't like not being able to right-click on the top-left window icons. I have to click ALT-UP just (keys that are too far apart) to simply go up a folder. Network settings are a maze to navigate. Everything seems to take MORE clicks in 7 than in XP. It's several steps to just find my IP address, where it's 2 steps in XP.
I can't customise the Start menu. W. T. F. Yes I know I can TYPE stuff, but you need to know the name of the stuff you want to type - there are no tags or descriptors to look up when typing. It took me ages to find the screen-shot tool. Typed "screen", nope.. "shot", nope.. "grab", no.. "snap", no.. because it's called.. ffs now I've forgotten again, so I need to look for it in the Programs menu.... which means CLICKING EVERY FUCKING FOLDER to open it up. What a waste of time. In XP, it's a simple matter of moving over menu items, and I can REARRANGE them into easy to remember categories that suit me. As the Programs menu gets big in 7, I have to *scroll*, which is *more* effort, and less efficient, than just seeing a huge menu pop up like in XP. Except in XP I can tame it by rearranging stuff.
Windows Explorer in 7 has an ugly grey bar along the top, except - amazingly - they've finally though to add a "New Folder" button. I'm impressed at the thought that obviously went into the UI there. Oh wait.. I want to sort the file list by date, not name. How do I do that? Where's the option for it? Under the "Organise" button/menu thing? Nope. Try alt-v - yep that exposes the menu. A menu they thought it would be great to hide, except it's the one I want to use a lot. I can un-hide it, except now there is twice as much vertical space used up for no reason. But can I hide the extra grey bar which has buttons on it I won't ever use? Nope. What's this new UI element even called? It's not a "toolbar", nor is it a "menu bar". I don't know. MS doesn't know. It's just there to take up space. I just thank god it's not a freaking Ribbon.
I do like the new Task Manager. But there's apps for that on XP. I don't like the way window previews pop up in my face just when I'm doing alt-tabs. I just want to see the name of the program and the document it has open. How do I tell which document I want from 5 previews of a mass of text? Most of the time it's pointless and visually jarring. The simple XP task switcher with big icons and text underneath was quick and easy to interpret. In so many ways, Windows 7 makes me do MORE work, with my eyes and brain, for the most simple of tasks. When it comes to UI, I'll take practical and fast over pretty every day. For me, that's XP.
TL;DR - used Win 7 on another machine for over a year. Still prefer XP, which wins in simplicity, efficiency and not getting in my way.
as soon as I changed my youtube account to "new style" (or some shit like that) then BAM! I was as a google+ user.
They did that to me via YouTube and something else I can't remember. But in each case I bloody-mindedly went into the G+ profile settings and deleted the entire thing. You can delete your G+ profile and all associated data. My YouTube comments etc. for that account remained.
It's very intrusive, but hey we don't pay for all the nice things they give us, so I don't mind doing a bit of work to clean up after them. :)
Oh, and as for a "clean interface", what? First time I was forced to use the G+ thing, I wondered who created such a malformed monstrosity of a UI. There's hardly any consistency, panels pop in and out over your work area, navigating settings is like walking through an Escher painting. They're certainly competing with Facebook for most obfuscated functionality in a web application.
Generally speaking, when it collapses, it involves destroying a nearly infinite number of possibilities in an absolutely irreversible way. The collapse is complete. Its pretty much the definition of catastrophic.
Meh. Life is pretty much a slow motion catastrophic collapse of possibilities.
> You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?
Many people wouldn't see the difference between this and what we routinely do to insects and animals in labs.
In my mind (assuming we accept that animal lab experiments are essential research) the main difference I see is that this is aimed at kids and not adults - who have already taken ethics classes and are doing it for a "good reason". Kids WILL use this to experiment with other insects, that's just what kids do.
The word of generations of parents, who told their kids not to pull wings off flies, will be undone.
> Seems to be a somewhat self-limiting problem. Users will die off fairly rapidly.
That's a completely ridiculous thing to say. The users die off, but the *reasons why they started using* are still around, so there will always be more users.
> But if your kid doesn't understand the difference between fantasy and reality at 10 or 11 or 12 then there is a parenting problem or other general mental illness.
That's a deeply flawed argument, for the simple reason that kids (and adults too) routinely bring their fantasies into real-life play. Driving fast is a fantasy that "I can handle this" and "nothing bad will happen". And then there's all the YouTube videos of kids doing crazy stunts on skateboards, parkour, etc. with the classic teen fantasy of being indestructible.
If you look at human behaviour, it's pretty clear that fantasy and reality mix *all the time*. Ever fallen in love and thought you were "perfect" together, only to break up a few months later? Blame this on romance movies if you like (which would go against your point of view about games), but the fact is we all entertain fantasies about our futures and capabilities all the time.
> So no I have to lift my hands from the keyboard to control stuff?
Not only that, they seem to think waving hands is in some way more efficient than a keyboard shortcut. It's a gimmick, nothing more.
Autohotkey makes life much easier than any of this stuff.
But they just can't kill the beast.
Welcome to the Hotel California.
Actually it is a great advance over hunting through some damn menu.
Then you're not customising your Start menu right. I can run any program I want in two key-presses - quicker then you can type WIN+notepad, I just type WIN+q+n ('q' for Quick menu, 'n' for Notepad). But then I still use XP, so I *can* customise my menus.
The numbers would be a bit lower if it didn't cost *more than double* in Aus as in the U.S.
A quick google says Tesco in the U.S. for US $38 (AU $40) and here at JB HiFi (one of our decent lower-cost home entertainment shops) for AU $89. Or, AU $98 at a more average shop.
This is a digital product, so someone somewhere is a right wanker. :/
This is fucking unreal. Thought crime to the fucking max man.
And nobody thinks to accuse the developer of the app for the "thought" in the first place.
Or the movie studios who regularly propagate, and profit from, the thought of bloody revenge for being unjustly treated.
Or politicians who consider dead children the price we pay for sucking up to the gun lobby.
Nope, it's some kid letting off steam with a computer game who gets all the attention. Why? Simple - it's EASIER than the above.
Most Australians just use the simplified version (rank their choice #1, leave the rest blank)
Aussie here, I didn't know that! I always number them in order. Thinking about it, just putting "1" with no other choices isn't ideal.. I wish that counted as an invalid vote - I feel it only encourages laziness, simple-mindedness and lack of engagement. Making people put them in order (there's only a few, not that hard) should be the way it's always done IMO.
In my experience, you get better government when there are more opinions at the table.
In your experience as... a government?
As somebody who spent a year living in the PRC, I went in wondering the same thing. But the fact of the matter is that their are so many homophones that they would need to invent a new language just to make it work.
Whereas, in English, there are words that sound the same, but their meanings differ depending on their spelling. There are numerous examples, their frequency is surprising, and I wonder if there is a reason for their continued occurrence.
In all likelihood, it's something that people won't be able to predict, just like the iPhone was.
If people could have predicted the iPhone, Apple wouldn't have caught the market by surprise. Of course the next "disruption" will be something we can't predict - that's what makes it a disruption.
That being said, in hindsight the iPhone was also a natural progression - we already had computer/phones - the stylus type, like the original Windows phone. My brother had one YEARS before the iPhone appeared. The problem was nobody took the market for such devices *seriously*. Jobs took a swing at it, because he thought the time was right. It took off, because of a LOT of things:
1. Most people into tech had WiFi routers. That was not previously the case. iPhone would NOT have worked without that (blessings be upon the CSIRO).
2. Most people were getting familiar with the Web and using web apps. Gmail, google apps, Steam, online banking, etc. The tech culture wasn't that evolved when the [Palm Pilot](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PalmPilot) was around over a *decade ago*.
Hand-held computing wasn't new. Mobiles phones wasn't new. But a bunch of other technologies came together to make the iPhone possible. Home wifi, internet culture, carriers with data plans, not to mention cheap labour and cheap server technology to make it all economically viable. Jobs was first to connected the dots and take the risk. Someone was bound to eventually.
The next "disruption" will also depend on someone connecting the dots of various emerging technologies and cultural changes. Sometimes it even happens despite itself, like the automobile (which wasn't originally intended for use by everybody on the planet) and Facebook (same).
... in addition to nobody actually wanting Windows 8, there won't be any apps for it.
Huh? Don't all existing Windows apps run on Win8?
Here's an alternate scenario: Gates concentrates more and more on wiping out disease and feeding the world. This enables the population to balloon out of all sustainability, wrecking the environment.
How about an alternate scenario based on facts not fantasy. Healthier children with longer life expectancy ALWAYS leads to LESS children per family. People have large families because a) lack of education, b) likelihood of child death, c) poverty. Sounds counter-intuitive, and yes more kids means more food to obtain, but it also means more security into the future, more hands to put to work. And it's been shown higher education also leads to smaller families.
This is all obvious if you read and look at the real world instead of inventing your own theories. Not to mention the questionable ethics of abandoning starving millions on the suspicion they're just going to "ruin everything for the rest of us". For shame.
I just hit th windows key and type acme sales 2010 and enter to find the documents.
Well, that just illustrates two major failings:
1. You don't, or soon won't, remember where you keep your files, and that's nothing to brag about.
2. In Windows 7 it's harder to set up shortcuts to important folders than it is to search, and that's nothing to brag about.
I don't need such hand-holding in XP. I know where shit is stored because I *file* things. Search is fine for idiots who save everything to My Documents or the desktop or simply have no friggin idea how computers and folders work. And of course that's as long as you remember what to type in.
In XP, I have my Start Menu arranged so all I do is hit THREE keys, sometimes TWO, for everything I want, and every folder I need to see. Want to run Photoshop? Win+Q+P. Done. "Q" stands for my "Quick Menu", under which is the "Photoshop" shortcut. I'll bet you $100 I can find and run shit at least twice as fast and easily as anyone using Windows 7.
OSs are increasingly being designed for stupid people - and that's nothing to brag about.
You mean the all so horrible instant search where I can start word and view files by subject in 1\9 of a second without a mouse? You couldn't pay me to go back to XP style start menu! Yuck.
Never needed it. Things like that are for people who don't know how to file things or download everything into My Documents or the desktop and then think typing into a box is a godsend. Of course, it all depends on whether you remember what to type.
The first time I ran Win 7, I wanted to do a screen capture. In vain, I typed "grab", "screen", "snap", "capture", "clip", "shot" and instantly remembered why I loved the ability to arrange the contents my Start menu in a way that was logical to ME, the user. Can you remember what the screen capture tool is called in Windows 7 or where to find it in the Start menu?
Sod having to type everything in. In XP, I have it arranged so all I do is hit THREE keys, sometimes TWO, for everything I want, because my menus are set out like that. Want to run Photoshop? Win+Q+P. Done. "Q" stands for my "Quick Menu", under which is the "Photoshop" shortcut. I'll bet you $100 I can find and run shit at least twice as fast and easily as *anyone* using Windows 7.
> Firefox is being run into the ground by idiots that want it to be Chrome
I can see Firefox's huge "Different By Design" mantra at the top of their site being either removed or becoming a running joke.