The ribbon is change for the sense of complexity. Context sensitive menus allow you to add complexity to a product. Embeddable icons make sense. Compare the number of available icons in 2010 to those in 2000. Now imagine if this idea were taken further.
As far as more clicks for Windows 8. I don't think that's true, on the right hardware. Absolutely it is worse with Windows 7 hardware. Microsoft's biggest mistake, the same mistake they made with Vista is allowing Windows 7 machines to upgrade and allowing Windows 7 machines to be sold with Windows 8 OS. It should have been touch mandatory.
It may be impossible it may not. If it is impossible then they were wrong. That doesn't mean they were lacking innovation, those are two different axis. I agree they may very well fail, maybe are likely to fail. On the other hand, in all honesty I've used it on a small tablet and I've used it on a keyboard, mouse, large screen (though with a touch tablet to run the Metro GUI) and it works pretty darn well there too. The people it doesn't seem to work well for are people who have Windows 7 hardware.
First off Windows 8 isn't designed for a keyboard, mouse desktop system. For that sort of system you should have a digitizer with the 27" acting as a paired interface. Try that same setup but with the Surface Pro running Windows 8 to get a feel for how that should be working. Or try it with a Wacom.
But regardless, you are complaining you don't like it. That doesn't say anything one way or the other about innovation.
How is Metro a lack of innovation? They are the first major company to move towards ubiquitous computing. You may not like Metro but the ideas behind Metro are brave and complex (i.e. requiring innovation).
Microsoft has mainly focused on implementing in a way that reduces labor (i.e. simplicity of configuration and administration) and software costs as a business strategy. On the OS side and the compiler side of the house they are tremendously innovative, I don't think you can question their accomplishments there. I think there is a tendency not to consider things like the design of the Microsoft networking stack or the internal structures for C# compilers when talking about Microsoft.
Microsoft research is doing some amazing things. Also there is a lot of content from the research group on Channel 9. Microsoft's problem is that their userbase is conservative. But as a result of their research they could at will turn on the tap and have tremendous innovations pouring out.
For example Microsoft people (its open source but the contributors are mainly Microsoft) developed C-- which is a portable assembly language which has tail recursion, accurate garbage collection or efficient exception handling. I don't think anyone could follow how much this group does but from innovations in compilers, new systems for concurrency, new algorithms, computation biology.... it is frankly amazing. I only wish Microsoft was more aggressive in pushing their products to adopt more from their research team. Much as the slides talk about the problem Xerox had with Parc, Microsoft has the same problem.
At this point none. Originally Emacs. Which was very important to the 1980s and early 1990s free software movement. I think he was heavily involved with the early movements for GCC like the debugger and its ability to handle multiple languages especially COBOL.
MeeGo had a core problem. It was designed to fulfill two contradictory roles:
a) Be a modern phone OS b) Be a smooth migration path for Symbian applications.
During development of MeeGo (a) and (b) constantly conflicted. The N9 reflects that had Nokia picked path (a) and mostly ignored (b) they might very well have had an OS better than Android. But that was not the MeeGo project as it existed in Nokia at the time Elop killed it.
The share price when he took over reflected a successful MeeGo project about to go live which would convert a large chunk of the Symbian userbase. By the time Elop arrived that was known not to be true. Arguably the reason Elop was hired was because the board knew that wasn't true.
Life expectancy doubled 1949-1985 Food poverty fell from 270m in 1948 to 100m in 1985 to almost 0 today Rural real standard of living per capita has been rising 6.7% per annum. In urban areas 5.5% Clothing styles have changed as now everyone has adequate clothing for a generation and fashion drives consumer choice Square feet of living area per person is up about 50% and the quality of housing is much higher Education in the urban areas is readily available and in rural areas is now often readily available. As contrasted with a few generations ago where education was hard to get.
Why shouldn't the Chinese people think their government has their best interest at heart? They are seeing everyday evidence of their government working to make their lives better. As contrasted with the US where the government has pursued a stagnant wage policy for over a generation.
The Windows 8 interface is quite good on a tablet. It's quite good on a desktop with touch support. With just a keyboard and mouse you are better off with Windows 7.
This of course is the governments failure, some regulations should be in place to heavily fine and imprison executives for failures in essential infrastructure due to stupid decisions. There should be some serious penalties for taking stupid risks with essential infrastructure.
There are. But IT tends to have a rather expansive view of what "essential infrastructure" is. Essential infrastructure are things like drinkable water or not having gas lines explode. It isn't stuff like making sure the website is running.
I think one thing to take into account is this employer is being honest with their employees. That creates trust in other departments. It allows the employer to engage in activities which might look threatening and just say "we don't intend to replace you". I think it is a great thing they are being honest.
By being honest they are going to allow IT to plan the transition. They can have their IT workers who assist the transition receive nice severance while those who leave immediately don't. In other words they can create an environment where there isn't a backlash because people are being treated fairly.
Well the stock market can't be a rich man's club and be the funding source for most companies.
Frankly the market is far more rational today than it was 15 years till 2009 or so. Blackberry's discounted value of future dividends was low and the repricing reflected that.
I'm not even sure if they made that bad decisions. I'd almost argue they were just beat by being outplayed. There is stuff they did I disagree with, but ultimately I don't see huge mistakes. Maybe around 2005-6 when they could have planned for the future and didn't. I see a lot of small mistakes and errors in retrospect.
Maybe not. But Blackberry has been saying for 2 years they wanted a buyer and legitimately their strategy kinda sucked. I think you are right about the timing but there is no major conspiracy here.
There are some interesting possibilities with BlackBerry. I can imagine lots of small profitable business that one can get out of it. I don't see any reason it needs to die, it just needs to accept that it isn't going to be going toe-to-toe with Google or Apple anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
The ribbon is change for the sense of complexity. Context sensitive menus allow you to add complexity to a product. Embeddable icons make sense. Compare the number of available icons in 2010 to those in 2000. Now imagine if this idea were taken further.
As far as more clicks for Windows 8. I don't think that's true, on the right hardware. Absolutely it is worse with Windows 7 hardware. Microsoft's biggest mistake, the same mistake they made with Vista is allowing Windows 7 machines to upgrade and allowing Windows 7 machines to be sold with Windows 8 OS. It should have been touch mandatory.
It may be impossible it may not. If it is impossible then they were wrong. That doesn't mean they were lacking innovation, those are two different axis. I agree they may very well fail, maybe are likely to fail. On the other hand, in all honesty I've used it on a small tablet and I've used it on a keyboard, mouse, large screen (though with a touch tablet to run the Metro GUI) and it works pretty darn well there too. The people it doesn't seem to work well for are people who have Windows 7 hardware.
First off Windows 8 isn't designed for a keyboard, mouse desktop system. For that sort of system you should have a digitizer with the 27" acting as a paired interface. Try that same setup but with the Surface Pro running Windows 8 to get a feel for how that should be working. Or try it with a Wacom.
But regardless, you are complaining you don't like it. That doesn't say anything one way or the other about innovation.
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/5016f5926bb3f74e3c000002-618-/chart-of-the-day-microsofts-revenue-by-segment-july-2012.jpg
How is Metro a lack of innovation? They are the first major company to move towards ubiquitous computing. You may not like Metro but the ideas behind Metro are brave and complex (i.e. requiring innovation).
Microsoft has mainly focused on implementing in a way that reduces labor (i.e. simplicity of configuration and administration) and software costs as a business strategy. On the OS side and the compiler side of the house they are tremendously innovative, I don't think you can question their accomplishments there. I think there is a tendency not to consider things like the design of the Microsoft networking stack or the internal structures for C# compilers when talking about Microsoft.
Microsoft research is doing some amazing things. Also there is a lot of content from the research group on Channel 9. Microsoft's problem is that their userbase is conservative. But as a result of their research they could at will turn on the tap and have tremendous innovations pouring out.
For example Microsoft people (its open source but the contributors are mainly Microsoft) developed C-- which is a portable assembly language which has tail recursion, accurate garbage collection or efficient exception handling. I don't think anyone could follow how much this group does but from innovations in compilers, new systems for concurrency, new algorithms, computation biology.... it is frankly amazing. I only wish Microsoft was more aggressive in pushing their products to adopt more from their research team. Much as the slides talk about the problem Xerox had with Parc, Microsoft has the same problem.
At this point none. Originally Emacs. Which was very important to the 1980s and early 1990s free software movement. I think he was heavily involved with the early movements for GCC like the debugger and its ability to handle multiple languages especially COBOL.
MeeGo had a core problem. It was designed to fulfill two contradictory roles:
a) Be a modern phone OS
b) Be a smooth migration path for Symbian applications.
During development of MeeGo (a) and (b) constantly conflicted. The N9 reflects that had Nokia picked path (a) and mostly ignored (b) they might very well have had an OS better than Android. But that was not the MeeGo project as it existed in Nokia at the time Elop killed it.
They paid off Nokia's restructuring costs generated an extra two in cash beyond that and then another $7b. Yeah that was successful.
The share price when he took over reflected a successful MeeGo project about to go live which would convert a large chunk of the Symbian userbase. By the time Elop arrived that was known not to be true. Arguably the reason Elop was hired was because the board knew that wasn't true.
The original burning platform memo is worth a read. It was an acute analysis of Nokia's problems. http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/02/09/full-text-nokia-ceo-stephen-elops-burning-platform-memo/ All Elop did was state the obvious, that Nokia was in serious trouble.
As for moving away from Symbian... Nokia is a business. Business exist to make money. Anyone who takes about share and not profits is in lala land.
That may be true. I'll plead guilty to ignorance. But what do you think is a more fair description?
Life expectancy doubled 1949-1985
Food poverty fell from 270m in 1948 to 100m in 1985 to almost 0 today
Rural real standard of living per capita has been rising 6.7% per annum. In urban areas 5.5%
Clothing styles have changed as now everyone has adequate clothing for a generation and fashion drives consumer choice
Square feet of living area per person is up about 50% and the quality of housing is much higher
Education in the urban areas is readily available and in rural areas is now often readily available. As contrasted with a few generations ago where education was hard to get.
Why shouldn't the Chinese people think their government has their best interest at heart? They are seeing everyday evidence of their government working to make their lives better. As contrasted with the US where the government has pursued a stagnant wage policy for over a generation.
/. has been rather supportive of the surface pro. It is the surface they have been trashing.
Most ultrabooks at $1000 do have a Wacom digitizer screen. It is an incredible screen and that's what you are paying for.
The Windows 8 interface is quite good on a tablet. It's quite good on a desktop with touch support. With just a keyboard and mouse you are better off with Windows 7.
There are. But IT tends to have a rather expansive view of what "essential infrastructure" is. Essential infrastructure are things like drinkable water or not having gas lines explode. It isn't stuff like making sure the website is running.
I think one thing to take into account is this employer is being honest with their employees. That creates trust in other departments. It allows the employer to engage in activities which might look threatening and just say "we don't intend to replace you". I think it is a great thing they are being honest.
By being honest they are going to allow IT to plan the transition. They can have their IT workers who assist the transition receive nice severance while those who leave immediately don't. In other words they can create an environment where there isn't a backlash because people are being treated fairly.
It has the Android UI for application support.
Nope you can load apps however you want. BB has an Android runtime system.
Well the stock market can't be a rich man's club and be the funding source for most companies.
Frankly the market is far more rational today than it was 15 years till 2009 or so. Blackberry's discounted value of future dividends was low and the repricing reflected that.
I'm not even sure if they made that bad decisions. I'd almost argue they were just beat by being outplayed. There is stuff they did I disagree with, but ultimately I don't see huge mistakes. Maybe around 2005-6 when they could have planned for the future and didn't. I see a lot of small mistakes and errors in retrospect.
Maybe not. But Blackberry has been saying for 2 years they wanted a buyer and legitimately their strategy kinda sucked. I think you are right about the timing but there is no major conspiracy here.
There are some interesting possibilities with BlackBerry. I can imagine lots of small profitable business that one can get out of it. I don't see any reason it needs to die, it just needs to accept that it isn't going to be going toe-to-toe with Google or Apple anymore.