Like my Dad always told me, "find a job that will fund the things you actually want to do." I readily admit that my job is stupid and boring. But it pays for airplanes, so overall I'm satisfied.
I take it you don't know much about Raskin. He has real reasons to criticize "another Windows" as he puts it, reasons that go far beyond "we've used this same model for some time."
Yes, it is my job to pick the best tool for the job. And in order to do so, I need to draw on all available resources. Slashdot is one of those resources. I can either mull over the languages on my own or I can ask a bunch of people who use them to offer their unique perspectives. Which do you think is a better decision-making process?
I swear I'm not trying to start a flamewar with this, so please respond appropriately.
What advantage does PHP have over Perl?
At first, I rejected PHP because of its (apparent) preference for intermingling presentation and logic. As has been thoroughly discussed in another thread, separating the two is not only possible but recommended. That doesn't give PHP any points though -- it just removes a penalty.
Both languages have a wide range of libraries/modules to choose from (although I think the score here goes to Perl). Their syntax is nearly identical. They both run on lots of different platforms. PHP is pegged as a tool for making web sites, while Perl is a general-purpose scripting language that happens to be useful for web sites too.
So, make a business case for me. I manage a development team (I rose from the ranks so save your MBA jokes for another day) and I want to know why I should consider PHP over Perl.
I just installed the update and DNS is being a bit weird. I can look up hosts in any domain except my own. Dig is working just fine, and as far as I can tell dig and the system's resolver are sending the exact same network traffic. I'm wondering if our DNS is configured incorrectly.
The average person's IQ is about 100. These are the people sitting on their asses watching 'reality TV' 4 hours a day while periodically drooling on themselves.
Er, I saw it on BBC News before I saw it here. It's the #1 science story. It's right below the defeat of the Spanish government, and next to Putin's victory.
There's a fraction of a small percentage of people in this world who are capable of understanding all the parts of processor design.
Before we get into too much of a wank-fest, I'd like to point out that there is, in fact, a fraction of a small percentage of people in this world who care about all the parts of processor design. I'm sure there are quite a few people who are capable of understanding it, but they've chosen to apply their brains elsewhere.
Really, that doesn't even belong in a style manual. If all alert dialogs are supposed to have the same distance between their icon and text, the developer shouldn't be given a choice. The API should have a single function that displays an appropriately laid-out alert dialog.
But what I was trying to point out is that you cannot create a usable interface by adhering solely to stylistic guidelines. Your programs may look good, and they may look like all the other programs on the system, but consistency of appearance is only one part of making a usable program.
the amount of pixels between an alert icon and text message on a popup dialog box
That sort of thing belongs in a style manual, not a set of interface guidelines. It is important to have a consistent look across different programs (and part of that is establishing strict pixel-by-pixel layouts) but just putting all your icons the same distance from your text will not create a usable interface. Interface guidelines should be more along the lines of (all paraphrased from Raskin, 2000):
Check boxes can leave a user guessing what the alternative is; the best solution is often to use radio buttons instead
Any confirmation step that elicits a fixed response soon becomes useless; a more effective strategy is to allow users to undo erroneous commands
Having multiple ways to perform a single task shifts the user's attention from the task to choosing a method
When applying an action to an object, use noun-verb interaction rather than verb-noun (for example, select text then choose action, not vice versa)
Keep messages displayed until they are no longer needed, unless the user can apply the information immediately
Request user testing of your interface to see if people will use it as you predicted
I haven't read the Gnome HIG so I don't know what else it encompasses, but your comment struck me as a misunderstanding of what interface guidelines should be.
This is your opinion and you're entitled to it, but there are millions of people who either disagree with you or find the quality difference to be negligible.
I can only listen to it on approved devices which cost 10x as much as CD hardware.
Or you can burn a CD and listen to it on CD hardware.
I can only listen to it on computers that I have "registered" due to the DRM applied to the content.
You're right. And?
Now tell me again why I am supposed to care?
It's a new delivery mechanism that supports modern technology, and it's neatly packaged inside a decent music player. It has advantages and disadvantages. So do CDs. I don't give a rat's ass if you use the iTunes Music Store or not, but when you talk about it with such force ("to hell with iTunes"), it just makes you sound crotchety and old-fashioned.
I've read No Logo and I disagree. Branding is an important function. When you run out of toothpaste, do you perform a complete, rational analysis of all competing products? Somehow, I doubt it. I'll bet you just go out and get the same kind you had before. If Colgate consistently produces a product that you like, then why shouldn't you keep buying it? Likewise, I own a Honda Accord and I'm quite pleased with it. I can reasonably expect to be to just as pleased with another Honda if I choose to buy another one. If cars weren't branded, I'd have to tear them apart to make a purchasing decision. I will admit that it's deceitful and stupid when a brand tries to attach itself to a lifestyle, but I think you're ignorant of your own tendencies if you claim that branding is somehow inherently bad.
I think the scariest thing is that the general public, including most people around here, don't think twice about what flying without an engine really means. (Hint: It does not involve spiraling into the ground or a spectacular death. Not even in a helicopter.)
All that bluster is the equivalent of wearing a jacket with "RIAA" emblazoned on the back, FBI-style. An acronym and intimidating paperwork do not magically grant regulatory powers to an organization.
Except that the BSA is a private organization with no regulatory muscle or official backing. They don't have any authority to raid the Japanese government. (Or anyone else for that matter.)
I wouldn't call it a philosophy, really. Or a hissy fit, for that matter. The Mac gives developers tools to make life very easy for users. When a developer doesn't take advantage of those tools, they will alienate people simply by being different. It's not a philosophical issue, it's a matter of inconsistency and undue complexity. Nobody (well, nobody sane) looks down their nose at someone for not packaging their application like everyone else's, they just wonder why the developers chose to make things more difficult than they need to be.
Slashdot Mirror
Like my Dad always told me, "find a job that will fund the things you actually want to do." I readily admit that my job is stupid and boring. But it pays for airplanes, so overall I'm satisfied.
I take it you don't know much about Raskin. He has real reasons to criticize "another Windows" as he puts it, reasons that go far beyond "we've used this same model for some time."
Yes, it is my job to pick the best tool for the job. And in order to do so, I need to draw on all available resources. Slashdot is one of those resources. I can either mull over the languages on my own or I can ask a bunch of people who use them to offer their unique perspectives. Which do you think is a better decision-making process?
What advantage does PHP have over Perl?
At first, I rejected PHP because of its (apparent) preference for intermingling presentation and logic. As has been thoroughly discussed in another thread, separating the two is not only possible but recommended. That doesn't give PHP any points though -- it just removes a penalty.
Both languages have a wide range of libraries/modules to choose from (although I think the score here goes to Perl). Their syntax is nearly identical. They both run on lots of different platforms. PHP is pegged as a tool for making web sites, while Perl is a general-purpose scripting language that happens to be useful for web sites too.
So, make a business case for me. I manage a development team (I rose from the ranks so save your MBA jokes for another day) and I want to know why I should consider PHP over Perl.
My God, this is the first time in recorded history that zapping the PRAM actually solves a problem!
I just installed the update and DNS is being a bit weird. I can look up hosts in any domain except my own. Dig is working just fine, and as far as I can tell dig and the system's resolver are sending the exact same network traffic. I'm wondering if our DNS is configured incorrectly.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
Er, I saw it on BBC News before I saw it here. It's the #1 science story. It's right below the defeat of the Spanish government, and next to Putin's victory.
Before we get into too much of a wank-fest, I'd like to point out that there is, in fact, a fraction of a small percentage of people in this world who care about all the parts of processor design. I'm sure there are quite a few people who are capable of understanding it, but they've chosen to apply their brains elsewhere.
The difference, of course, is that this is actually lame. ;-)
That trick works even better if you hold down command-shift-option instead of just command.
There's a class browser built-in to Xcode. Select "Show Class Browser" from the Project menu, or press cmd-shift-c.
But what I was trying to point out is that you cannot create a usable interface by adhering solely to stylistic guidelines. Your programs may look good, and they may look like all the other programs on the system, but consistency of appearance is only one part of making a usable program.
That sort of thing belongs in a style manual, not a set of interface guidelines. It is important to have a consistent look across different programs (and part of that is establishing strict pixel-by-pixel layouts) but just putting all your icons the same distance from your text will not create a usable interface. Interface guidelines should be more along the lines of (all paraphrased from Raskin, 2000):
I haven't read the Gnome HIG so I don't know what else it encompasses, but your comment struck me as a misunderstanding of what interface guidelines should be.
I'd replace "bad equipment" with "average equipment." The rest is, of course, your opinion.
(By the way, thanks for not flaming. I'm always leery of expressing disagreement around here but you're quite sensible. :-)
This is your opinion and you're entitled to it, but there are millions of people who either disagree with you or find the quality difference to be negligible.
I can only listen to it on approved devices which cost 10x as much as CD hardware.
Or you can burn a CD and listen to it on CD hardware.
I can only listen to it on computers that I have "registered" due to the DRM applied to the content.
You're right. And?
Now tell me again why I am supposed to care?
It's a new delivery mechanism that supports modern technology, and it's neatly packaged inside a decent music player. It has advantages and disadvantages. So do CDs. I don't give a rat's ass if you use the iTunes Music Store or not, but when you talk about it with such force ("to hell with iTunes"), it just makes you sound crotchety and old-fashioned.
I've read No Logo and I disagree. Branding is an important function. When you run out of toothpaste, do you perform a complete, rational analysis of all competing products? Somehow, I doubt it. I'll bet you just go out and get the same kind you had before. If Colgate consistently produces a product that you like, then why shouldn't you keep buying it? Likewise, I own a Honda Accord and I'm quite pleased with it. I can reasonably expect to be to just as pleased with another Honda if I choose to buy another one. If cars weren't branded, I'd have to tear them apart to make a purchasing decision. I will admit that it's deceitful and stupid when a brand tries to attach itself to a lifestyle, but I think you're ignorant of your own tendencies if you claim that branding is somehow inherently bad.
Yeah, right.
You're a little behind the times friend. Nowadays it'd be the Aluminum Screen of Death. ;-)
I think the scariest thing is that the general public, including most people around here, don't think twice about what flying without an engine really means. (Hint: It does not involve spiraling into the ground or a spectacular death. Not even in a helicopter.)
I think once you're in a situation where glide ratio is key, you don't have much choice ;-)
A glide ratio of 17.7.
All that bluster is the equivalent of wearing a jacket with "RIAA" emblazoned on the back, FBI-style. An acronym and intimidating paperwork do not magically grant regulatory powers to an organization.
Except that the BSA is a private organization with no regulatory muscle or official backing. They don't have any authority to raid the Japanese government. (Or anyone else for that matter.)
I wouldn't call it a philosophy, really. Or a hissy fit, for that matter. The Mac gives developers tools to make life very easy for users. When a developer doesn't take advantage of those tools, they will alienate people simply by being different. It's not a philosophical issue, it's a matter of inconsistency and undue complexity. Nobody (well, nobody sane) looks down their nose at someone for not packaging their application like everyone else's, they just wonder why the developers chose to make things more difficult than they need to be.