On the other hand, the pollution from the car you drove for 20 years amounts to how much exactly? The conceptual problem with this approach is that we're thinking egocentrically while completely disregarding the indirect effects of our behavior.
I've been biking for 15 years regularly (and irregularly for 10 years before that) and had zero incidents but quite a few close calls, all due to motorists not paying attention to what's around them. But I admit I had zero incidents because I bike very, very carefully. I almost never go above 20 miles/hour (peak speeds, not averages). My average is around 8-10 miles/hour, depending on traffic (below 8 during rush hours, a bit above 10 if it's late in the night or crack of dawn).
I'm careful because there's always this risk of getting into a duel you can't win against a 5000 pounds metal, fast moving, hard object driven by some dude who texts, and that's a duel I can't win.
Yes, you risk more as a biker if you're not paying attention. So pay attention. Don't feel entitled to the same rights as a motorist, because although you do have them in theory, in practice they're not worth shit in case of a collision.
In Bucharest, most of the subway cars have been replaced with articulated ones. I love them. There's less noise, more space, easier way to access; you don't care where you get up, because you can move inside for the whole length of the train. You can tell someone to meet you in the subway and they can hop in without having to figure out which wagon you're in first. Also, during off-peak hours, if someone in a different wagon faints or has a health issue, you can move across to help them. There's no such thing as overcrowding anymore. There's less noise.
Wear and tear is a non-issue. It depends more on the materials used rather than time. Shitty materials used on non-articulated cars will wear faster than good materials used on articulated cars.
As for "if there is a problem with a single car, the whole train is unusable" - this is totally false. They're just as modular; maybe it takes 15 minutes more to detach one wagon, but that rarely, if ever, happens. It's been years since they were introduced and there were exactly 4 malfunctions that required a train to stop between stations, and they were all due to the underside of the cars, not the articulations.
Extending trains does not exist around here. They are all same length. It's actually helpful because you can wait for it anywhere you want, you don't have to run towards a side because the length is smaller.
"This was also a favorite time for scholars and poets to write uninterrupted, whereas still others visited neighbors, had sex, or engaged in petty crime."...Or all the above, at the same time:) Like visiting a neighbor to have sex with his wife and steal some silver in the process... and then write about it.
I never judge products based on who builds them. To me, software is like art. It doesn't matter whether the author was a drunk homosexual, all I care is whether the product has value.
You over-analyze, mate:) Just take the joke as a joke, rather than compare the syntax and structure to an established one and yell if they don't match.
Ah, finally unveiling your true opinions instead of simply parroting the party line...
> Working with hard data taught me to be objective and not take sides.
What the hell you do with thinking, except to reach conclusions (even that nothing can be concluded) *and* take a side?
Just reach conclusions. I don't say "this guy is right/wrong", but instead "the data is correct/incorrect" - or in this case "the data is current/obsolete". what I'm trying to do here is correct false conclusions which are based on obsolete (and debatable) data.
That's it for you. I was there and saw the same things. Gates was a predator (whether this was good or not for us consumers is debatable... I think it wasn't). Lotus WordPro was insanely better than M$ Word (e.g., it allowed correct nesting of tables); Word couldn't even use normal units so that one could foresee which size a table would have on paper. Instead, it used some mysterious units which never worked well. And yet, competitors failed and consumers were left which the substandard product that Word is.
Yeah well the same thing happened with the betacam versus VHS or blu-ray wars. Thing is, you don't measure a "good" product simply by its functionality and only that. There are literally hundreds of variables that weigh in, such as ease of buy, ease of installation, support availability, high volume discounts possibility, memory footprint, system requirements, initial user training, learning curve, marketing aggressiveness, compatibility, GUI, etc., etc.
Fun fact: a few years back I built a small automation application on-demand for a customer. There were two GUI options, out of which the second one had a hardcoded color scheme (meaning it didn't mimic the OS color scheme, whichever that was). At the same time, the GUI was optimized (less clicks to achieve tasks, more real estate used, etc). it was more functional that the first GUI. It got rejected by everyone because "it looked funny" (it kind of did). So there you have it, that's why functionality by itself is just a small part of the whole thing.
You got it backwards: Word requires a lot more training since they went from menu-based UI to a ribbon/toolbar-based one. Specially people who were good with Word suffer more, but even the newbies/dummies have a hard time -- because the ribbon still is far from being perfected. Just for comparison, I've seen Word users choosing Openoffice because the latter is more akin to the Word they always knew.
You can't be serious. I for one loved the ribbon, still do and I am sorry it took so long to have it in Outlook too. Yes, there was much backlash about the bloody ribbon. It's what people normally do when they're taken out of their comfort zones. I, as I was mentioning before, relied on data. How long would it take me to do *this* or *that* compared to previous version? Data said the ribbon allowed me to be more productive than the classic menus. On the other hand, Windows 8 Metro (or new UI or whatever's called now) caused a LOSS of productivity, even after getting used to it. More steps to achieve common tasks, it was as simple as that. I thought it was worth mentioning...
In the end, it depends on how ossified your way of working is. Yes, retraining is a bitch, but if afterwards you're better at doing whatever is it that you have to do, then it's a change for the better.
It's quick because it comes installed most of the times (particularly at work in most companies).
Citation needed. I worked for 6 global companies so far, none had Office preinstalled on their machines.
It's dirty, no doubt. But who wants dirty? People want clean and lean.
That is why I can't take fanatics seriously. Flinging poo around because they know the feeble minded can be influenced. Sorry, that doesn't fly f
Unlike Slashdot habit, I do read the articles. Also unlike the usual Slashdotter, I don't immediately burst into rage when I hear "Microsoft", I don't think Linux is God and Torvalds is its prophet. Working with hard data taught me to be objective and not take sides.
In light of the disclaimer / clarification above:
1. A 2013 article refers to a 2006 article for proof. The 2006 article is a claim of something that might have happened back in the early nineties, a single source coming from a dude's memories. It might be true, it might be spiced up. 2. The 2013 article tries to paint something black based on bits of information, filtered specifically to only show the bad part and ignore everything else (which might overbalance author's intention). That's bias right there. I dislike articles which take sides, because they manipulate objective information, and I loathe that.
Now, I have worked with both O/FSS content creation products and specialized ones. Word is neither. Word is aimed for the general population; people who need to quickly generate some text and format it so it doesn't look like shit. That's all. It's increasingly difficult to churn out professional content using Word, and for that task there's plenty better products out there, but the caveat is that they require much more training to achieve something.
TL;DR: Word is the quick and dirty hack that works well enough for most people. For everything else (I'd venture to say less than 10% of everything) - it's indeed not fitted.
With that in mind, Word must do anything BUT die. it should simply make its usage clear, so that people don't make stupid assumptions.
With a linear building of length L, the max distance between two offices is L. For a circular building, it is L/2.
You sure? The maximum distance between two offices in a filled circular building is equal to its diameter (L). If it's empty inside, it's pi*L/2 - which is larger than L.
You didn't get it anyway. and I didn't say the only thing you're entitled to is a salary. (I simply hate having to explain again, like i'm talking to children, so pay attention, please)
IF your employer avoids paying your training, then get it yourself and get out of there! It's as simple as that. The alternative is to suck it up, not get trained, and stay there forever, eventually losing your job to a machine.
Slashdot Mirror
I would consider all activities very, very safe, compared to the last one.
On the other hand, the pollution from the car you drove for 20 years amounts to how much exactly?
The conceptual problem with this approach is that we're thinking egocentrically while completely disregarding the indirect effects of our behavior.
I've been biking for 15 years regularly (and irregularly for 10 years before that) and had zero incidents but quite a few close calls, all due to motorists not paying attention to what's around them. But I admit I had zero incidents because I bike very, very carefully. I almost never go above 20 miles/hour (peak speeds, not averages). My average is around 8-10 miles/hour, depending on traffic (below 8 during rush hours, a bit above 10 if it's late in the night or crack of dawn).
I'm careful because there's always this risk of getting into a duel you can't win against a 5000 pounds metal, fast moving, hard object driven by some dude who texts, and that's a duel I can't win.
Yes, you risk more as a biker if you're not paying attention. So pay attention. Don't feel entitled to the same rights as a motorist, because although you do have them in theory, in practice they're not worth shit in case of a collision.
To that, I agree. It was a joke, though. Oh well :)
Many Terminal rows! Yeah! :)
Damn it, I was about to say the same thing...
In Bucharest, most of the subway cars have been replaced with articulated ones. I love them. There's less noise, more space, easier way to access; you don't care where you get up, because you can move inside for the whole length of the train. You can tell someone to meet you in the subway and they can hop in without having to figure out which wagon you're in first. Also, during off-peak hours, if someone in a different wagon faints or has a health issue, you can move across to help them. There's no such thing as overcrowding anymore. There's less noise.
Wear and tear is a non-issue. It depends more on the materials used rather than time. Shitty materials used on non-articulated cars will wear faster than good materials used on articulated cars.
As for "if there is a problem with a single car, the whole train is unusable" - this is totally false. They're just as modular; maybe it takes 15 minutes more to detach one wagon, but that rarely, if ever, happens. It's been years since they were introduced and there were exactly 4 malfunctions that required a train to stop between stations, and they were all due to the underside of the cars, not the articulations.
Extending trains does not exist around here. They are all same length. It's actually helpful because you can wait for it anywhere you want, you don't have to run towards a side because the length is smaller.
I love that feature on Android, though.
I thought one of the perks making a good salary is NOT having roommates anymore.
"This was also a favorite time for scholars and poets to write uninterrupted, whereas still others visited neighbors, had sex, or engaged in petty crime." ...Or all the above, at the same time :)
Like visiting a neighbor to have sex with his wife and steal some silver in the process... and then write about it.
Citation needed.
Getting something for free hardly qualifies as "business"...
I never judge products based on who builds them. To me, software is like art. It doesn't matter whether the author was a drunk homosexual, all I care is whether the product has value.
Valid for every country, everywhere. Even the "democratic" ones.
They didn't hate freedom back in 1908.
You over-analyze, mate :)
Just take the joke as a joke, rather than compare the syntax and structure to an established one and yell if they don't match.
In Soviet Russia, YOU destroy Meteor!
Ah, finally unveiling your true opinions instead of simply parroting the party line...
> Working with hard data taught me to be objective and not take sides.
What the hell you do with thinking, except to reach conclusions (even that nothing can be concluded) *and* take a side?
Just reach conclusions. I don't say "this guy is right/wrong", but instead "the data is correct/incorrect" - or in this case "the data is current/obsolete". what I'm trying to do here is correct false conclusions which are based on obsolete (and debatable) data.
That's it for you. I was there and saw the same things. Gates was a predator (whether this was good or not for us consumers is debatable... I think it wasn't). Lotus WordPro was insanely better than M$ Word (e.g., it allowed correct nesting of tables); Word couldn't even use normal units so that one could foresee which size a table would have on paper. Instead, it used some mysterious units which never worked well. And yet, competitors failed and consumers were left which the substandard product that Word is.
Yeah well the same thing happened with the betacam versus VHS or blu-ray wars.
Thing is, you don't measure a "good" product simply by its functionality and only that. There are literally hundreds of variables that weigh in, such as ease of buy, ease of installation, support availability, high volume discounts possibility, memory footprint, system requirements, initial user training, learning curve, marketing aggressiveness, compatibility, GUI, etc., etc.
Fun fact: a few years back I built a small automation application on-demand for a customer. There were two GUI options, out of which the second one had a hardcoded color scheme (meaning it didn't mimic the OS color scheme, whichever that was). At the same time, the GUI was optimized (less clicks to achieve tasks, more real estate used, etc). it was more functional that the first GUI.
It got rejected by everyone because "it looked funny" (it kind of did).
So there you have it, that's why functionality by itself is just a small part of the whole thing.
Regarding nested tables, yeah, everybody uses that. Please...
You got it backwards: Word requires a lot more training since they went from menu-based UI to a ribbon/toolbar-based one. Specially people who were good with Word suffer more, but even the newbies/dummies have a hard time -- because the ribbon still is far from being perfected. Just for comparison, I've seen Word users choosing Openoffice because the latter is more akin to the Word they always knew.
You can't be serious. I for one loved the ribbon, still do and I am sorry it took so long to have it in Outlook too.
Yes, there was much backlash about the bloody ribbon. It's what people normally do when they're taken out of their comfort zones. I, as I was mentioning before, relied on data. How long would it take me to do *this* or *that* compared to previous version? Data said the ribbon allowed me to be more productive than the classic menus.
On the other hand, Windows 8 Metro (or new UI or whatever's called now) caused a LOSS of productivity, even after getting used to it. More steps to achieve common tasks, it was as simple as that. I thought it was worth mentioning...
In the end, it depends on how ossified your way of working is. Yes, retraining is a bitch, but if afterwards you're better at doing whatever is it that you have to do, then it's a change for the better.
It's quick because it comes installed most of the times (particularly at work in most companies).
Citation needed. I worked for 6 global companies so far, none had Office preinstalled on their machines.
It's dirty, no doubt. But who wants dirty? People want clean and lean.
That is why I can't take fanatics seriously. Flinging poo around because they know the feeble minded can be influenced. Sorry, that doesn't fly f
The subtle Newspeak reference is in your rotten little head, AC.
There was a music band called war4peace, which I happen to like.
Moron.
Unlike Slashdot habit, I do read the articles. Also unlike the usual Slashdotter, I don't immediately burst into rage when I hear "Microsoft", I don't think Linux is God and Torvalds is its prophet. Working with hard data taught me to be objective and not take sides.
In light of the disclaimer / clarification above:
1. A 2013 article refers to a 2006 article for proof. The 2006 article is a claim of something that might have happened back in the early nineties, a single source coming from a dude's memories. It might be true, it might be spiced up.
2. The 2013 article tries to paint something black based on bits of information, filtered specifically to only show the bad part and ignore everything else (which might overbalance author's intention). That's bias right there. I dislike articles which take sides, because they manipulate objective information, and I loathe that.
Now, I have worked with both O/FSS content creation products and specialized ones. Word is neither. Word is aimed for the general population; people who need to quickly generate some text and format it so it doesn't look like shit. That's all. It's increasingly difficult to churn out professional content using Word, and for that task there's plenty better products out there, but the caveat is that they require much more training to achieve something.
TL;DR: Word is the quick and dirty hack that works well enough for most people. For everything else (I'd venture to say less than 10% of everything) - it's indeed not fitted.
With that in mind, Word must do anything BUT die. it should simply make its usage clear, so that people don't make stupid assumptions.
With a linear building of length L, the max distance between two offices is L. For a circular building, it is L/2.
You sure? The maximum distance between two offices in a filled circular building is equal to its diameter (L). If it's empty inside, it's pi*L/2 - which is larger than L.
I dismiss OLD informative articles because they're no longer up to date. It's as simple as that.
Yes, let's use articles from 2006 and 2008 to illustrate a state of things in 2013...
*shakes head in disbelief*
Have you ever considered changing your first name to "Kung"?
Nothing's really simple in life...
Yeah, be aggressive, it helps the conversation.
You didn't get it anyway. and I didn't say the only thing you're entitled to is a salary.
(I simply hate having to explain again, like i'm talking to children, so pay attention, please)
IF your employer avoids paying your training, then get it yourself and get out of there! It's as simple as that. The alternative is to suck it up, not get trained, and stay there forever, eventually losing your job to a machine.