There's nothing about driving on a motorway/interstate highway that's the least bit aimed at the enthusiast. Automate those (mainly to stop the morons from cutting across 3 lanes to their exit at the last minute) to give all vehicles on them a higher average speed, and save the fun side roads for us fun-loving bikers and drivers.
Or more likely they're sick of the cabals that form. Wikipedia has lost lots of contributers over the past few years because of them, and will continue to do so unless these spergmeisters are kicked off the pages that they edit camp.
As usual, it's a couple of intractable morons that ruin it for the casual contributor.
That sounds like every little indie VB application I ever downloaded in my Windows days. "This program needs VB Runtime v3! Download it here." "This program needs VB Runtime v4! Download it here." And another long wait on my 33.6 modem. PITA
Honest question: Beyond "that's not the way it always has been", what is the problem with tabs on top?
I'll be the first to admit that I was very hesitant about putting tabs on the title bar, but after letting myself get used to it for a while I see a at least a couple distinct advantages. First the obvious, you gain some vertical screen space, which is always handy on modern widescreen monitors. Less obviously, you make it more clear that the UI elements at the top of the page are affecting the current tab. With tabs on top the URL bar, search bar, forward and back buttons all exist within the tab. With tabs on bottom you have a group of controls that exist at the browser level, which affect the current tab which seems more awkward to me. The effect is the impression that each tab has it's own URL bar, which is more accurate to how the browser behaves.
How many people were actually confused by the way Tabs were first implemented in FF or Safari? Tabs on top doesn't really solve any glaring UI issues as far as I can see, but adds to them. Looking at Chrome here in XP, the title bar is now smaller that the default theme = less area to "grab" onto the window. There's nowhere for the TITLE tag to be displayed once a few tabs are opened. I really doubt anyone was distraught that the UI controls weren't grouped with each tab before, since switching tabs also changed the URL display.
PS I can't stand searching from the address bar, and it only dumbs people down. I truly believe in usability, but the problem with the "use this field for everything" is that it's an innovation driven by companies who own search engines (Google, Microsoft) rather than users. IMO of course:)
And now, 12 years later, you still find pagers and cassette tapes even though they're less common, most TV is still 4:3, and people still use cheques for payment. And I still can't get broadband where I live. 1500/256 DSL or 0-15000/0-512 cable (averaging at 3 Mbps / 150 Mps) is the best I can get.
3Mbps? That is broadband.
PS every new TV show I watch is 16:9, so I don't know where you're coming from.
And in 2011 everyone who comes over to OS X from Windows bitches about folders/directories not sorting to the top, all because DOS did it and that got carried over.
I would tend to agree: Lucas is a great technologist (THX sound, ILM effects, starting Pixar), a man who had a great imagination and desire for story telling, but an absolutely lousy director. You need to connect with your actors to get great performances from them, and Lucas wasn't interested enough in that. There's a behind the scenes clip from "Star Wars" that takes place on the Death Star. The good guys finish the scene, Lucas yells "Cut!" and the actors ask how it was. Lucas says nothing for a while, then finally says it was OK. The actors sarcastically say "Finally! Thanks, George!" or similar.
Then look at the making of Episode 1 and some of the clips on Red Letter Media, especially about the casting of Anakin. George chooses a worse actor and everyone just agrees with him so they don't rock the boat. Then during filming, he provides barely any direction to the actors at all, which is why everyone except for Obi-Wan comes off so damn stiff. I think Ewan realized early on he wasn't going to get any feedback and just had fun with it.
I'm certainly willing to cut Lucas some slack on "Star Wars" due to studio pressure and his own relative inexperience, but he was never and actor's director and I doubt ever wanted to be.
Now back to the topic: Hooray for the little guy!:)
I seriously doubt the majority of people on the internet were clamoring for Firefox's horrendous Personas. That was simply a distraction from the mission of "making a great web browser."
It's possible to express unpopular, embarrassing, and taboo ideas without being anonymous. Problem is it just takes a heck of a lot more conviction to put your name behind these sorts of beliefs. The ability to be anonymous definitely empowers people to push the limits of what is appropriate.
I'd say that Failbook has proven this assumption wrong:)
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing about driving on a motorway/interstate highway that's the least bit aimed at the enthusiast. Automate those (mainly to stop the morons from cutting across 3 lanes to their exit at the last minute) to give all vehicles on them a higher average speed, and save the fun side roads for us fun-loving bikers and drivers.
Yeah, just look for the WYSIWYP* label!
*What You See Is What You Pee!
Ah, Doctor Rosenpenis, so glad to meet you again finally!
Or more likely they're sick of the cabals that form. Wikipedia has lost lots of contributers over the past few years because of them, and will continue to do so unless these spergmeisters are kicked off the pages that they edit camp.
As usual, it's a couple of intractable morons that ruin it for the casual contributor.
Feel free to go move in next to a metal processing plant.
Short for "gasoline," but your point is...?
That sounds like every little indie VB application I ever downloaded in my Windows days. "This program needs VB Runtime v3! Download it here." "This program needs VB Runtime v4! Download it here." And another long wait on my 33.6 modem. PITA
Guess what? You're a user.
Mandrake, you're a good officer, but your priorities are spot on save for one: whiskey.
Honest question: Beyond "that's not the way it always has been", what is the problem with tabs on top?
I'll be the first to admit that I was very hesitant about putting tabs on the title bar, but after letting myself get used to it for a while I see a at least a couple distinct advantages. First the obvious, you gain some vertical screen space, which is always handy on modern widescreen monitors. Less obviously, you make it more clear that the UI elements at the top of the page are affecting the current tab. With tabs on top the URL bar, search bar, forward and back buttons all exist within the tab. With tabs on bottom you have a group of controls that exist at the browser level, which affect the current tab which seems more awkward to me. The effect is the impression that each tab has it's own URL bar, which is more accurate to how the browser behaves.
How many people were actually confused by the way Tabs were first implemented in FF or Safari? Tabs on top doesn't really solve any glaring UI issues as far as I can see, but adds to them. Looking at Chrome here in XP, the title bar is now smaller that the default theme = less area to "grab" onto the window. There's nowhere for the TITLE tag to be displayed once a few tabs are opened. I really doubt anyone was distraught that the UI controls weren't grouped with each tab before, since switching tabs also changed the URL display.
PS I can't stand searching from the address bar, and it only dumbs people down. I truly believe in usability, but the problem with the "use this field for everything" is that it's an innovation driven by companies who own search engines (Google, Microsoft) rather than users. IMO of course :)
Dig *up*, stupid!
I knew about the Conan reboot, but was quite surprised at the "John Carter of Mars" trailer I saw last night before "Captain America."
There's lots of source material out there, it's just up to us to decide what we're willing to watch.
Mine Arizona! Say NO to imported Middle East sand!
Most people get some motion sickness trying to read books in cars, I know I do. Comics were fine.
And now, 12 years later, you still find pagers and cassette tapes even though they're less common, most TV is still 4:3, and people still use cheques for payment. And I still can't get broadband where I live. 1500/256 DSL or 0-15000/0-512 cable (averaging at 3 Mbps / 150 Mps) is the best I can get.
3Mbps? That is broadband.
PS every new TV show I watch is 16:9, so I don't know where you're coming from.
And in 2011 everyone who comes over to OS X from Windows bitches about folders/directories not sorting to the top, all because DOS did it and that got carried over.
I would tend to agree: Lucas is a great technologist (THX sound, ILM effects, starting Pixar), a man who had a great imagination and desire for story telling, but an absolutely lousy director. You need to connect with your actors to get great performances from them, and Lucas wasn't interested enough in that. There's a behind the scenes clip from "Star Wars" that takes place on the Death Star. The good guys finish the scene, Lucas yells "Cut!" and the actors ask how it was. Lucas says nothing for a while, then finally says it was OK. The actors sarcastically say "Finally! Thanks, George!" or similar.
Then look at the making of Episode 1 and some of the clips on Red Letter Media, especially about the casting of Anakin. George chooses a worse actor and everyone just agrees with him so they don't rock the boat. Then during filming, he provides barely any direction to the actors at all, which is why everyone except for Obi-Wan comes off so damn stiff. I think Ewan realized early on he wasn't going to get any feedback and just had fun with it.
I'm certainly willing to cut Lucas some slack on "Star Wars" due to studio pressure and his own relative inexperience, but he was never and actor's director and I doubt ever wanted to be.
Now back to the topic: Hooray for the little guy! :)
The choice to join is still yours. If you don't like it, don't join it, pure and simple.
I seriously doubt the majority of people on the internet were clamoring for Firefox's horrendous Personas. That was simply a distraction from the mission of "making a great web browser."
I voted for adding the mustard before I voted against it!
Fixed that for ya. Now for a real question.
What's the difference human beings and parasitic worms?
Only human beings need a lobby group to proclaim that they're not really parasitic worms?
It's possible to express unpopular, embarrassing, and taboo ideas without being anonymous. Problem is it just takes a heck of a lot more conviction to put your name behind these sorts of beliefs. The ability to be anonymous definitely empowers people to push the limits of what is appropriate.
I'd say that Failbook has proven this assumption wrong :)
Well, until my SuperEightMaps.com comes out...
Space aliens for gay marriage?
Dude, it hasn't been that since the very early 70s.
It's not the falling, which can be quite fun, it's the sudden stop at the end that really hurts.