Absolutely bang on. You've hit the nail on the head with that.
The menu has a simple structure which can be understood instantly and extrapolates indefinitely. Go to the word that seems most relevant -> then to a more relevant word ->... -> reach the exact word you were looking for. Once a user flips through a menu or two, finding any option - no matter how deep - only depends on whether the authors have made sensible organizational and linguistic choices.
The ribbon, as a wide rectangular region of varyingly sized/shaped/functional widgets - rather than a consistent tree of words - is a UI nightmare.
Because, y'know, a softly throbbing brand logo is far more likely to suggest that this is where I open and close files than, oh I don't konw, a maybe a funny little bar with text on it that says "File"!;-)
If you operate a business in the UK you might well see other examples of PDF use. The types of use that Adobe obviously wants to drive.
A whole variety of tax submissions are now provided as PDFs that start out as complex, interactive forms with a variety of UI widgets, listviews, pop-up help, self-calculating fields and such and - when submitted back to the tax overlords (from within Acrobat Reader, without any browser involved) - become cryptographically sealed, non-editable, printable records of the data collected.
It's weird to see PDF doing this kind of thing when my historic view of the format was very much as yours "it makes for reliable printing". And although I think I'dve preferred if PDF had stayed the (relatively) simple, bloat-free, built-for-printing format that once it was - begrudgingly - I must admit it's kinda cool to see these funky new features in action.
Marketing works like magic fairy dust that companies can sprinkle on their spokespeople so that whatever words they try to say, only praise for the company comes out.
They try to say "We were stupid and fscked this right up - boy howdy - yep - you got us. Whoops!".
But what you hear coming out of them is just a weird, squeaky weasel-voice shouting "Hooray for us!!!"
You could try making a macro of the necessary configuration changes to set things up the way your users want and then just email them the xlb file and tell them to run it after they install OOo.
If a macro command exists for the action, it ought to work.
Lots of folks love it. Bizarre isn't it? I've tried using it - honestly I have - but it just feels like a lot of hard work for no benefit I can find over the good old menu.
Word (and its ilk) have bucketloads of features most folks would agree. A logically laid out, branching menu structure allows you to quickly home in on and find the feature you want. Each entry from the bar right down to the items is a clearly worded unit of descriptive text. Seems really simple, reliable, usable and effective to me.
With the ribbon, you have to tab through each... er.. tab.. subribbon... (what do you call those anyway?)... and then browse a two dimensional region that contains irregularly sized controls of a wide variety of types, arranged in an irregular grid, looking for a heading, label, caption or tooltip in some unpredictable style that might hint that this is the droid you're looking for.
And yet lots of folks like it. Or so I'm told. I don't actually know any but then I don't know many folks who routinely use Office anymore anyway. But the anecdotal statement keeps arising again and again: lots of folks like it.
Point is, there won't be much local filesystem access. Read the blog post again.
The software architecture is simple â" Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, the web is the platform.
..and..
They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files
Google expect all your data to be stored on their servers. All. Local storage is only a convenience in that it can act as a buffer that keeps things running while your're on the subway or otherwise temporarily offline.
Most importantly..
For application developers, the web is the platform.
That's it right there. There is no "native Chrome app", and local filesystem access is meaningless when the whole user experience takes place on a webpage. There is only the web.
[disclaimer: I'm not claiming this is a good idea!;-) ]
Doesn't even really come down to the term "Operating System" for ol' Joe there does it? It'll be the choice of "A Windows Computer" or "A Google Computer". Most of the Joes out there have already had long enough to achieve a state of constant mild annoyance at their Windows Computer and so might well jump at the chance to try a Google Computer instead.
I'm certain it needs an Internet connection, yes, though really the PC that doesn't these days is a rare beastie.
I suspect that Gears ( http://gears.google.com/ ) or similar is to be used to allow DHTML applications delivered over the web to persist and function when the network connection is removed.
The scary thing - of course - is with the right marketing you could probably even do it and have some degree of success.
"Just as we were all starting to realise the empty, futility of Twitter, Facebook and MySpace - here comes 'Flibubu' - the new bright, sassy, color-based nano-blogging service that's got the whole Internet buzzing all over again!", Wired.com - sometime late in 2009.
Slashdot Mirror
with no obvious reading order
Absolutely bang on. You've hit the nail on the head with that.
The menu has a simple structure which can be understood instantly and extrapolates indefinitely. Go to the word that seems most relevant -> then to a more relevant word -> ... -> reach the exact word you were looking for. Once a user flips through a menu or two, finding any option - no matter how deep - only depends on whether the authors have made sensible organizational and linguistic choices.
The ribbon, as a wide rectangular region of varyingly sized/shaped/functional widgets - rather than a consistent tree of words - is a UI nightmare.
Because, y'know, a softly throbbing brand logo is far more likely to suggest that this is where I open and close files than, oh I don't konw, a maybe a funny little bar with text on it that says "File"! ;-)
If you operate a business in the UK you might well see other examples of PDF use. The types of use that Adobe obviously wants to drive.
A whole variety of tax submissions are now provided as PDFs that start out as complex, interactive forms with a variety of UI widgets, listviews, pop-up help, self-calculating fields and such and - when submitted back to the tax overlords (from within Acrobat Reader, without any browser involved) - become cryptographically sealed, non-editable, printable records of the data collected.
It's weird to see PDF doing this kind of thing when my historic view of the format was very much as yours "it makes for reliable printing". And although I think I'dve preferred if PDF had stayed the (relatively) simple, bloat-free, built-for-printing format that once it was - begrudgingly - I must admit it's kinda cool to see these funky new features in action.
Don't like to nitpick? What are you doing on Slashdot then? Keep up the good work, I say!
And whilst we're about it:
the only PC for sale to include an OLED
A PC with a single organic light-emitting diode? Of what interest is that?
"OLED" != "OLED Display"
Yay pedantry!
Hoho :-)
Has the news of the actual invention of transparent aluminum been sent on a repeating slingshot around the sun?
I sense there's gotta be something hyperbolic in here somewhere - possibly just the story coverage.
Latterly to be known as the "iHobo"
Dupe!
"Transparent Aluminum a Reality!"
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/18/0337213
From Tuesday October 18 2005.
This comment will load shortly. Please wait while we rehash the server.
(laser diode).robustness > ( (laser diode)+(frequency-doubling package of nonlinear crystals) ).robustness
Better?
Marketing works like magic fairy dust that companies can sprinkle on their spokespeople so that whatever words they try to say, only praise for the company comes out.
They try to say "We were stupid and fscked this right up - boy howdy - yep - you got us. Whoops!".
But what you hear coming out of them is just a weird, squeaky weasel-voice shouting "Hooray for us!!!"
A web browser should never, and I mean NEVER, need half a gig of memory
A word processing app should never come on more than one floppy disk.
Games should not be in 3D.
Computers do not need sound cards goshdarnit!
Gah... change!
Humans themselves allegedly burst spontaneously into flames at frequencies not drastically smaller than that :-D
Not quite time to splash out on that asbestos iPod sleeve just yet I think.
Wait - those little buds go up your nose? Damn - I've been doing it wrong!
You could try making a macro of the necessary configuration changes to set things up the way your users want and then just email them the xlb file and tell them to run it after they install OOo.
If a macro command exists for the action, it ought to work.
Lots of folks love it. Bizarre isn't it? I've tried using it - honestly I have - but it just feels like a lot of hard work for no benefit I can find over the good old menu.
Word (and its ilk) have bucketloads of features most folks would agree. A logically laid out, branching menu structure allows you to quickly home in on and find the feature you want. Each entry from the bar right down to the items is a clearly worded unit of descriptive text. Seems really simple, reliable, usable and effective to me.
With the ribbon, you have to tab through each ... er.. tab.. subribbon... (what do you call those anyway?)... and then browse a two dimensional region that contains irregularly sized controls of a wide variety of types, arranged in an irregular grid, looking for a heading, label, caption or tooltip in some unpredictable style that might hint that this is the droid you're looking for.
And yet lots of folks like it. Or so I'm told. I don't actually know any but then I don't know many folks who routinely use Office anymore anyway. But the anecdotal statement keeps arising again and again: lots of folks like it.
I must be too old :-D
So write it down and put it in your wallet with your credit card.
Unless - of course - you routinely tack your credit card to your cubicle wall. No? Didn't think so.
The Japanese Ministry of Agriculture will clearly have something to say about this!
Yesterday's blog post did mention ARM, yes.
Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips
I think Eric Cartman said it best when he was once heard to comment: "Da f***!?"
SatNav doesn't "speak to our modern anxieties about the road" - it speaks directions!
"Seriously guys... da f***!?"
Graphics:
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canvas_(HTML_element)
Filesystem access:
http://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/
http://gears.google.com/
Point is, there won't be much local filesystem access. Read the blog post again.
The software architecture is simple â" Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, the web is the platform.
..and..
They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files
Google expect all your data to be stored on their servers. All. Local storage is only a convenience in that it can act as a buffer that keeps things running while your're on the subway or otherwise temporarily offline.
Most importantly..
For application developers, the web is the platform.
That's it right there. There is no "native Chrome app", and local filesystem access is meaningless when the whole user experience takes place on a webpage. There is only the web.
[disclaimer: I'm not claiming this is a good idea! ;-) ]
Doesn't even really come down to the term "Operating System" for ol' Joe there does it? It'll be the choice of "A Windows Computer" or "A Google Computer". Most of the Joes out there have already had long enough to achieve a state of constant mild annoyance at their Windows Computer and so might well jump at the chance to try a Google Computer instead.
I wonder if Google will allow native development on Chrome OS?
TFA:
For application developers, the web is the platform.
Doesn't sound like it.
I'm certain it needs an Internet connection, yes, though really the PC that doesn't these days is a rare beastie.
I suspect that Gears ( http://gears.google.com/ ) or similar is to be used to allow DHTML applications delivered over the web to persist and function when the network connection is removed.
Said Andreessen, "Our secret plan is..." ...posted on a blog at NYtimes.com.
You're not doing it right!
The scary thing - of course - is with the right marketing you could probably even do it and have some degree of success.
"Just as we were all starting to realise the empty, futility of Twitter, Facebook and MySpace - here comes 'Flibubu' - the new bright, sassy, color-based nano-blogging service that's got the whole Internet buzzing all over again!", Wired.com - sometime late in 2009.