You're all such a bunch of nerds, thinking that "fundamental operating system components" and "very good package management" have anything to do with the success of a *desktop* OS. Windows is proof that you only need to be just good enough to be the king.
Many distros = uncertainty for the average consumer. That's the bullet that sprays Linux' brains all over the floor in the desktop popularity war.
Of course, this all assumes that the desktop is the battle Linux wants to win, which I seriously doubt. It's strength seems to be in filling all the niches others can't.
Are Brits more open-minded than the rest of the world when it comes to choosing an OS?
That question might partly be answered by looking at the amount of advertising MS does in each country. In Australia, we get the odd MS ad, but they're pretty rare, while in the US it *seems* they spend a lot on advertising.
I do take your point that small increases in speed can have great affect on the certain types of work, including yours and mine, but those instances wouldn't form the bulk of the PC buying market, who probably consider Vista 'fast-enough' for what they do (and certainly not slow enough to warrant switching operating systems and enduring all the hassle that comes with it).
By general populace I mean those who don't know what the terms 'operating-system','engine', 'cross-platform', 'linux' or '3D Studio Max' mean in relation to a computer. Bless 'em.
For the record, I'm an Ubuntu man, and would love to see factors like this affecting people's computing habits, but Windows doesn't have to be the best technically. It just has to be 'good enough' to keep a majority of it's current user base. Witness the apathy shown with respect to security - most users just don't care enough to switch to something more secure, even when faced with something like identity or data theft. In fact, MS themselves basically had to remove all consumer channels to XP to get people on-board with the more secure Vista.
At what point does this start to make a difference in the market place?
It doesn't for the most part. Many users in the general populace don't buy Windows because it's fast. They freak out when they can't find the "My Documents" folder.
I'm just going to take a stab in the dark with your Pidgin problem since I experienced something similar.
I'd start Pidgin, it seem to do something by the looks of the hard drive light, and then nothing would appear on-screen.
Turns out the app had started in a minimised mode, and a little icon had actually appeared on my toolbar. I think it was the green circle.
Anyway, not sure if that's your problem but I hope it is that simple.
Actually, yeah - you're right. My righteous anger got the better of me there. I'll be clearer.
The instruction I vaguely noticed were instructions on *what* had to be done, not how to use a pencil and piece of paper. That's a system that leverages the users prior knowledge.
Anything you haven't done before is hard. Anything you've done earlier enough times, is easy.
Why don't the voting systems leverage previous knowledge? We know people can use a pen and paper. Something this important isn't the time to start messing around with novelty interfaces.
Yeah, it might take longer to count, but unless you fuck up more than 106,461 votes, you're doing better than the e-voting system.
If you need to write instructions for a process as simple as voting, you've frakked up the design of the system.
Why were users able to remove their card before a vote was registered?
That the US Supreme Court has made that distinction is quite interesting, and somewhat pertinent to the OP topic.
Here in Australia, a prominent photographer by the name of Bill Henson recently had a skirmish with the law over some photographs he took of a 13 year old girl. As far as I can tell, they were not depicting any sexual acts and were simply a series of nude photos. However, he was largely condemned by many members of the public and our own Prime Minister.
Whether this would have occurred if we had something like the Supreme Courts affirmations I can't be sure, but it was interesting to note that everyone was rather vague as to whether a law was broken. Had there been a clear-cut precedent ruling in place, maybe we would have all dismissed it straight away. As it is, the spectre of child-porn is still hovering over us and may have resulted in the Government reviving this filtering issue from the dead.
In fairness, Mozilla had/has access to an open specification, and a fat-and-lazy competitor who didn't follow that spec properly. In those instances, ANY open source project should thrive.
who needs a patriot act when you have camera's everywhere and anti gun laws that don't stop gun crime.
Their laws seem to do a pretty good job overall:
"The statistics tell us that there are roughly 1.35 gun related homicides per million in the UK and roughly 37.3 per million in the US. This would suggest that you are around 27 times more likely to be killed by a gun in the US."
I totally agree.
When the average user says that **insert vastly inferior OS here** is EASY-TO-USE, what they actually mean is that it is FAMILIAR.
With all the desktop customisation that goes on these days in Linux-land, it's no wonder there isn't a familiar desktop that users can get used to. Maybe it's time to start giving these users a REAL option by removing as many superfluous desktop options as we can.
I was just thinking the same thing, though I'd pitch it at $999.
Since you're just paying for packaging, go f'ing nuts with it and get it slick-as-hell and looking all exclusive (piano black with gold trimming and diamonds). At the current Linux adoption rates, you *ARE* using something that no-one else has, might as well pimp the hell out of it.
>> Having created over six versions of the same operating system, Microsoft should have been aware that there would be confusion.
They missed the important one: Windows vista Working Edition.
Your logic is based on historical job definitions, which is okay but fails to take into account the possibilities borne from merging the Web Developer and Web Designer role. It started a few years ago, but will be the way of the future : people who are able to effectively design a site AND build it. These people have training as designers (no, it's not some God-given talent or an extra chromosome) and who have also trained/learnt professional level HTML, CSS, JS and if they are truly dedicated to their craft, at least some knowledge of server-side development.
Web designers (by the definition you've given) are going to go the way of the dodo. If I understand you correctly, they aren't print designers so don't know how to get something ready for pre-press, and they don't know how to code.
As someone who delivers both graphic design and application development services to small-business, I propose you ask your boss just how serious he is about "punching up" the website. If he is serious, get a real designer. There are too many question regarding the design of a site that you probably haven't even thought to ask yet (I noted that there was no mention of your audience in your post, and this is probably the most important aspect of the design process). It will cost you, but if the designer knows what they are doing, and all the planets are in alignment, you should get the results your boss is after (whatever they are, again I see no mention in the post).
If he isn't too serious and just wants it done on a whim, save your $$$ and do as others here have suggested: get some professional off-the-shelf templates and maybe put them into a free CMS like Joomla or Drupal. Don't expect this to increase your customer usage (or do anything to your bottom-line) though as this type of largely superficial action brings no real benefit to your customers.
As an extra tip, if you do try to find a designer, try and find one who has an understanding of, or who practices, actual application development (they do exist). The synergy between the two aspects can reap much better rewards than having 2 seperate people, but make sure it isn't just a coder who knows Photoshop, or just a Photoshop jockey who knows a bit of PHP.
Slashdot Mirror
You're all such a bunch of nerds, thinking that "fundamental operating system components" and "very good package management" have anything to do with the success of a *desktop* OS. Windows is proof that you only need to be just good enough to be the king.
Many distros = uncertainty for the average consumer. That's the bullet that sprays Linux' brains all over the floor in the desktop popularity war.
Of course, this all assumes that the desktop is the battle Linux wants to win, which I seriously doubt. It's strength seems to be in filling all the niches others can't.
Are Brits more open-minded than the rest of the world when it comes to choosing an OS?
That question might partly be answered by looking at the amount of advertising MS does in each country. In Australia, we get the odd MS ad, but they're pretty rare, while in the US it *seems* they spend a lot on advertising.
Anyone want to chime in?
I do take your point that small increases in speed can have great affect on the certain types of work, including yours and mine, but those instances wouldn't form the bulk of the PC buying market, who probably consider Vista 'fast-enough' for what they do (and certainly not slow enough to warrant switching operating systems and enduring all the hassle that comes with it).
By general populace I mean those who don't know what the terms 'operating-system','engine', 'cross-platform', 'linux' or '3D Studio Max' mean in relation to a computer. Bless 'em.
For the record, I'm an Ubuntu man, and would love to see factors like this affecting people's computing habits, but Windows doesn't have to be the best technically. It just has to be 'good enough' to keep a majority of it's current user base. Witness the apathy shown with respect to security - most users just don't care enough to switch to something more secure, even when faced with something like identity or data theft. In fact, MS themselves basically had to remove all consumer channels to XP to get people on-board with the more secure Vista.
At what point does this start to make a difference in the market place?
It doesn't for the most part. Many users in the general populace don't buy Windows because it's fast. They freak out when they can't find the "My Documents" folder.
I'm just going to take a stab in the dark with your Pidgin problem since I experienced something similar. I'd start Pidgin, it seem to do something by the looks of the hard drive light, and then nothing would appear on-screen. Turns out the app had started in a minimised mode, and a little icon had actually appeared on my toolbar. I think it was the green circle. Anyway, not sure if that's your problem but I hope it is that simple.
Anything you haven't done before is hard. Anything you've done earlier enough times, is easy.
Why don't the voting systems leverage previous knowledge? We know people can use a pen and paper. Something this important isn't the time to start messing around with novelty interfaces. Yeah, it might take longer to count, but unless you fuck up more than 106,461 votes, you're doing better than the e-voting system.
If you need to write instructions for a process as simple as voting, you've frakked up the design of the system. Why were users able to remove their card before a vote was registered?
That the US Supreme Court has made that distinction is quite interesting, and somewhat pertinent to the OP topic.
Here in Australia, a prominent photographer by the name of Bill Henson recently had a skirmish with the law over some photographs he took of a 13 year old girl. As far as I can tell, they were not depicting any sexual acts and were simply a series of nude photos. However, he was largely condemned by many members of the public and our own Prime Minister.
Whether this would have occurred if we had something like the Supreme Courts affirmations I can't be sure, but it was interesting to note that everyone was rather vague as to whether a law was broken. Had there been a clear-cut precedent ruling in place, maybe we would have all dismissed it straight away. As it is, the spectre of child-porn is still hovering over us and may have resulted in the Government reviving this filtering issue from the dead.
In fairness, Mozilla had/has access to an open specification, and a fat-and-lazy competitor who didn't follow that spec properly. In those instances, ANY open source project should thrive.
Their laws seem to do a pretty good job overall:
"The statistics tell us that there are roughly 1.35 gun related homicides per million in the UK and roughly 37.3 per million in the US. This would suggest that you are around 27 times more likely to be killed by a gun in the US."
http://www.scribes-write.co.uk/article/20040421134346697.html
I totally agree. When the average user says that **insert vastly inferior OS here** is EASY-TO-USE, what they actually mean is that it is FAMILIAR. With all the desktop customisation that goes on these days in Linux-land, it's no wonder there isn't a familiar desktop that users can get used to. Maybe it's time to start giving these users a REAL option by removing as many superfluous desktop options as we can.
I was just thinking the same thing, though I'd pitch it at $999.
Since you're just paying for packaging, go f'ing nuts with it and get it slick-as-hell and looking all exclusive (piano black with gold trimming and diamonds). At the current Linux adoption rates, you *ARE* using something that no-one else has, might as well pimp the hell out of it.
>> Having created over six versions of the same operating system, Microsoft should have been aware that there would be confusion. They missed the important one: Windows vista Working Edition.
Your logic is based on historical job definitions, which is okay but fails to take into account the possibilities borne from merging the Web Developer and Web Designer role. It started a few years ago, but will be the way of the future : people who are able to effectively design a site AND build it. These people have training as designers (no, it's not some God-given talent or an extra chromosome) and who have also trained/learnt professional level HTML, CSS, JS and if they are truly dedicated to their craft, at least some knowledge of server-side development.
Web designers (by the definition you've given) are going to go the way of the dodo. If I understand you correctly, they aren't print designers so don't know how to get something ready for pre-press, and they don't know how to code.
As someone who delivers both graphic design and application development services to small-business, I propose you ask your boss just how serious he is about "punching up" the website. If he is serious, get a real designer. There are too many question regarding the design of a site that you probably haven't even thought to ask yet (I noted that there was no mention of your audience in your post, and this is probably the most important aspect of the design process). It will cost you, but if the designer knows what they are doing, and all the planets are in alignment, you should get the results your boss is after (whatever they are, again I see no mention in the post).
If he isn't too serious and just wants it done on a whim, save your $$$ and do as others here have suggested: get some professional off-the-shelf templates and maybe put them into a free CMS like Joomla or Drupal. Don't expect this to increase your customer usage (or do anything to your bottom-line) though as this type of largely superficial action brings no real benefit to your customers.
As an extra tip, if you do try to find a designer, try and find one who has an understanding of, or who practices, actual application development (they do exist). The synergy between the two aspects can reap much better rewards than having 2 seperate people, but make sure it isn't just a coder who knows Photoshop, or just a Photoshop jockey who knows a bit of PHP.
Good luck.