UI advances like GG are supposed to make driving with technology safer, not more dangerous. Let's be real: we're only a few short years from on-windshield HUDs for navigation, driving metrics, etc.
On a race track this may be true, but when dealing with all the morons on the road, particularly those who aren't even distracted by a mobile, but are busy with makeup, shaving, brushing teeth, yelling at the driver ahead of them (through the windscreen, yet), picking nose, changing radio channels, having a twist of the neck to have a look at the crack-up in the next lane over, racing or simply not paying attention at all, you really do need your wits about you, not focusing on that 1 degree drop in oil temperature.
Perhaps the more appropriate question would be: Is Microsoft Losing?
The concept of Mature Company and all that entails seems to apply. Microsoft is no longer growing, the are re-aligning and consolidating, while trying to figure where they fit into the future. Up to a few years ago they saw themselves as the future.
I wonder how many North Koreans could even afford such a device.
According to TFA, it cost $200, two months' wages. Of course, that was at the hotel gift shop, and it's entirely possible that NK hotels are as good at gouging customers as hotels in other places, and that it might have been quite a bit cheaper from some other store.
As most NK peoples couldn't even afford the room, these are probably for sale to Chinese who go to NK on business and are stupid enough to buy one, when they could get something much better back home.
The funny thing, if MS just left the fundamental UI alone, or at least allowed someone to have the option of going back to the same UI they had in Windows 2000, they likely would be doing better, especially if the underlying new features and security items were touted.
OS X does this. Apple doesn't force a new UI down people's throats, but when it comes OS update time, people almost always update their Macs to the recent version.
Microsoft needs to go that route. State the cool features, such as better security with BitLocker, better networking, a new filesystem and LVM-type layer that is pretty close to ZFS in versatility, and in the next rev, sporting autotiering. Leave the UI alone so Jane Secretary can run her MS Word with as little disruption as possible.
Microsoft's approach is like the old one of the US automakers of years gone by, radically change the exterior of a car from year to year, requiring retooling, new sheet metal fab, light fixtures, mirrors, trim, etc., while what made the car a car changed very little. The car makers don't change design radically as much as they once did to keep costs down, some exterior parts are good for several years as opposed to one.
Windows would have millions of content and loyal users. And nobody would ever want to change. Microsofts corporate strategy is dependent on people buying new versions of their software. If something doesn't 'look' like it changed, then nothing 'was' changed to most people. If you are still on xp at this point, microsoft doesn't really care a whole lot about you, unless it can get you to buy a newer version of its os.
Microsoft's Windows strategy is not just selling their OS on new computers from OEMs, but to convince all users that they are really missing out on something great if they don't ditch the old version and upgrade to the new version.
The core problem is the way Microsoft does things within the OS, the constrain the user on how and where they store things. Savvy users can figure ways to put stuff where they like, but are often still stuck when it comes to inflexible software installs.
From the get-go I was a massive fan of *nix systems because I did my own configuration and installs and put stuff on logical drives where I wanted things. The OS was left on its own logical drive (usually a separate physical drive) in the event it died or was upgraded/rebuilt. Changes on the OS drive had minimal impact on software installed or where it was installed. Try that with Windows, from version to version.
Microsoft's "all the eggs in one basket" strategy may be fine if you don't buy a lot of software or run for 10 years on the same boot drive. But when you've got a considerable investment in software and the way you have things organized, the last thing you want is a load of change forced upon you. You can only upgrade so much with Windows (which often results in some sort of Frankenstein system, not quite as nice as a clean install.)
If the old mainframe manufactures, programmers and support had a wealth of experience in system configuration, security and deployment, Microsoft completely ignored as much as possible and their users all suffer in the end. Microsoft really have got very successful and rich off a succession of terrible strategies. They've counted so much on the "Microsoft Tax" as a revenue stream they had little incentive to make migration and consistency of the user experience a focal point. Now with Windows 8 it's the most obvious it has ever been. Steve Ballmer has been piloting his Titanic into the iceberg for so long he can't see the open seas around him and just keeps focusing on heading for that showdown in the North Atlantic.
It seems like the USPTO is doing a *slightly* better job of not granting these absurd and frivolous patents. Love to see if they keep up this kind of thing.
Whoa, there cowpoke. Let's not acknowledged them for ordinary powers of observation over one "dee-NIED!"
Now if they start making a habit of it, there may be cause to light one cupcake on fire in celebration.
I'm still waiting on the Dick Cheney/Halliburton no-bid-contract, because they were the only company (very mysteriously) prepared to be able to provide all services in Iraq. There's corruption. Manning is merely a cog in that giant mechanism.
I used to get by on the radiation from my CRT, but since LCD monitors I have to get my nutrition from bugs. Unfortunately, the internet is so full of bugs I'm considering going on a diet.
Most people have absolutely no idea what a 3 star restaurant is like. Most people don't live near one and wouldn't pay that much to have dinner even if they did.
I was stuck in a Financial District, may years ago, where the only restaurants were 3 star or better. I found I could eat just enough to not be hungry for about an hour, on my travel budget. When I got more adventurous I got out of there at night to a pizza place where I could stuff myself.
Still, I'm not impressed with very many restaurants these days -- a lot of it is presentation and atmosphere.
Slashdot Mirror
Ads posing as content. Samsung probably felt left out.
Keep in mind it wasn't Samsung, but their stupid, and probably former, marketer.
With that kind of lobbying money, I expect a bipartisan majority pushing this through quite quickly.
Depends... is there sufficient lobbying money opposing it. You know, shadowy patent trolls and such.
they call these 'dollar votes', those with the most dollars get the votes
UI advances like GG are supposed to make driving with technology safer, not more dangerous.
That's the theory, anyway; however, the reality is quite different.
Probably better to just ban driving by humans and let the car drive itself.
UI advances like GG are supposed to make driving with technology safer, not more dangerous. Let's be real: we're only a few short years from on-windshield HUDs for navigation, driving metrics, etc.
On a race track this may be true, but when dealing with all the morons on the road, particularly those who aren't even distracted by a mobile, but are busy with makeup, shaving, brushing teeth, yelling at the driver ahead of them (through the windscreen, yet), picking nose, changing radio channels, having a twist of the neck to have a look at the crack-up in the next lane over, racing or simply not paying attention at all, you really do need your wits about you, not focusing on that 1 degree drop in oil temperature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
Perhaps the more appropriate question would be: Is Microsoft Losing?
The concept of Mature Company and all that entails seems to apply. Microsoft is no longer growing, the are re-aligning and consolidating, while trying to figure where they fit into the future. Up to a few years ago they saw themselves as the future.
buggy whips at fifty paces
In Soviet Russia one year gets YOU!
I wonder how many North Koreans could even afford such a device.
According to TFA, it cost $200, two months' wages. Of course, that was at the hotel gift shop, and it's entirely possible that NK hotels are as good at gouging customers as hotels in other places, and that it might have been quite a bit cheaper from some other store.
As most NK peoples couldn't even afford the room, these are probably for sale to Chinese who go to NK on business and are stupid enough to buy one, when they could get something much better back home.
It turns you in.
I wonder how many North Koreans could even afford such a device.
And we'll call it Cloud Computing!
+1
The funny thing, if MS just left the fundamental UI alone, or at least allowed someone to have the option of going back to the same UI they had in Windows 2000, they likely would be doing better, especially if the underlying new features and security items were touted.
OS X does this. Apple doesn't force a new UI down people's throats, but when it comes OS update time, people almost always update their Macs to the recent version.
Microsoft needs to go that route. State the cool features, such as better security with BitLocker, better networking, a new filesystem and LVM-type layer that is pretty close to ZFS in versatility, and in the next rev, sporting autotiering. Leave the UI alone so Jane Secretary can run her MS Word with as little disruption as possible.
Microsoft's approach is like the old one of the US automakers of years gone by, radically change the exterior of a car from year to year, requiring retooling, new sheet metal fab, light fixtures, mirrors, trim, etc., while what made the car a car changed very little. The car makers don't change design radically as much as they once did to keep costs down, some exterior parts are good for several years as opposed to one.
It'll extend a robotic arm out a window, palm upward and feel for drops of rain.
Further enhancement will extend a wet digit out the window, digit pointed upward, to detect wind direction and velocity.
it done be amazin'!
Windows would have millions of content and loyal users. And nobody would ever want to change. Microsofts corporate strategy is dependent on people buying new versions of their software. If something doesn't 'look' like it changed, then nothing 'was' changed to most people. If you are still on xp at this point, microsoft doesn't really care a whole lot about you, unless it can get you to buy a newer version of its os.
Microsoft's Windows strategy is not just selling their OS on new computers from OEMs, but to convince all users that they are really missing out on something great if they don't ditch the old version and upgrade to the new version.
The core problem is the way Microsoft does things within the OS, the constrain the user on how and where they store things. Savvy users can figure ways to put stuff where they like, but are often still stuck when it comes to inflexible software installs.
From the get-go I was a massive fan of *nix systems because I did my own configuration and installs and put stuff on logical drives where I wanted things. The OS was left on its own logical drive (usually a separate physical drive) in the event it died or was upgraded/rebuilt. Changes on the OS drive had minimal impact on software installed or where it was installed. Try that with Windows, from version to version.
Microsoft's "all the eggs in one basket" strategy may be fine if you don't buy a lot of software or run for 10 years on the same boot drive. But when you've got a considerable investment in software and the way you have things organized, the last thing you want is a load of change forced upon you. You can only upgrade so much with Windows (which often results in some sort of Frankenstein system, not quite as nice as a clean install.)
If the old mainframe manufactures, programmers and support had a wealth of experience in system configuration, security and deployment, Microsoft completely ignored as much as possible and their users all suffer in the end. Microsoft really have got very successful and rich off a succession of terrible strategies. They've counted so much on the "Microsoft Tax" as a revenue stream they had little incentive to make migration and consistency of the user experience a focal point. Now with Windows 8 it's the most obvious it has ever been. Steve Ballmer has been piloting his Titanic into the iceberg for so long he can't see the open seas around him and just keeps focusing on heading for that showdown in the North Atlantic.
YAY!
that's all the text that is needed.
Disney has a trademark on Celebration, so watchit!
It seems like the USPTO is doing a *slightly* better job of not granting these absurd and frivolous patents. Love to see if they keep up this kind of thing.
Whoa, there cowpoke. Let's not acknowledged them for ordinary powers of observation over one "dee-NIED!"
Now if they start making a habit of it, there may be cause to light one cupcake on fire in celebration.
Because the Haliburton contracts were orders of magnitude higher then the solyandra contract?
Apparently the bigger you steal and the more blatant the act, the more the DoJ is blind to it.
I'm still waiting on the Dick Cheney/Halliburton no-bid-contract, because they were the only company (very mysteriously) prepared to be able to provide all services in Iraq. There's corruption. Manning is merely a cog in that giant mechanism.
I'll give it a try. I just ask that it be cooked well. Give me some tasty recipes.
Feh, just toss a handful of grasshoppers or locust into your blender and make a protein shake. Add chocolate to taste.
Nuff said.
Yet, people will pay more for a crab with all of its legs than one missing one or two. Go figure.
in many places in the world, they walk their dog. in some places in asia, they wok their dog.
It is believed among the first domesticated animal, raised for consumption were dogs.
Insects taste like shrimp, crab, or lobster. It's just the cultural bias that keeps people from eating them.
Psst, they're free if you know how to find the best habitat!
Ummmm wait for it, wait for it...TASTE!
SA has become a joke of a magazine.
Some bugs taste great. Ever have fried locust? Puts hamburgers to shame.
If it weren't form some weird stigma we could eat like ... uh ... even more pigs!
Where it's their source of protein, some people have no problems with eating big chewy beetles, grubs and worms.
omnivore nom nom nom
In Florida, the insects eat you.
Only if you don't bathe in DEET. Ha!
excuse me, I'm going to molt my skin now.
and we pay extra to eat them
Crawdads, too! Mudbugs!
I had some of these at Popeye's, like itty bitty lobsters.
Yummy, yummy bugs.
I used to get by on the radiation from my CRT, but since LCD monitors I have to get my nutrition from bugs. Unfortunately, the internet is so full of bugs I'm considering going on a diet.
Most people have absolutely no idea what a 3 star restaurant is like. Most people don't live near one and wouldn't pay that much to have dinner even if they did.
I was stuck in a Financial District, may years ago, where the only restaurants were 3 star or better. I found I could eat just enough to not be hungry for about an hour, on my travel budget. When I got more adventurous I got out of there at night to a pizza place where I could stuff myself.
Still, I'm not impressed with very many restaurants these days -- a lot of it is presentation and atmosphere.