You're welcome to join us and become a cord cutter too. We have cookies.
And Netflix.
After not having cable (or satellite) TV for about 15 years, when I have a chance to experience cable TV these days, I can't imagine paying for it. You have to watch shows when they are on, instead of when you want to? Every show is interrupted every 6 minutes for 3 minutes of commercials? I wouldn't want that if it were free.
The fact that English is an amalgam of Romance and Germanic languages is fascinating to me, just as it's fascinating how many of our words originally come from Greek (especially when you are talking about science).
In Mexico, "limon" seems to be used for both. I spent some time with some folks in Mexico City, and they offered me Lime Shebert, which was had the word "Limon" on the label.
The problem is Windows in the past 5 years (or more!) is that the primary changes being made to Windows is to serve Microsoft, not the user. No one asked for the massive changes that came with Windows 8. No one liked them. Microsoft was uncontrollably lusting after the 30% cut that Apple gets from everything sold through their store and tried to force Windows to work on that model, even though it never did and there was no way it ever could. On top of that, they decided that desktop computers (or laptops for that matter) were passe and that everyone in the world would be using Windows on a phone or tablet and made that the primary interface for Windows. These were both disastrous choices that only served Microsoft's purposes and had nothing to do with users. Then Windows 10 comes along which is nothing but a massive spyware operation, again to serve Microsoft's desires and not the users.
Microsoft was used to forcing anything they wanted on the user for a long time, and as they ran out of ways to monetize their software, they became more and more desperate to extract more value out of customers. Except now their competition is stiffer than ever.
I used to like Windows. I still want to like Windows, but Windows isn't a product any more. The users are the product.
This isn't just Microsoft. This is how everyone does it. Since the cost of providing updates has dropped to near zero, companies have no problems with "ship early and ship often" and let the customers be the beta testers.
In a century or two, there won't be software engineers. The software itself will do all that for us. Either that or software engineers will be back to using relays and vacuum tubes.
As a software developer, I'm fully aware of my limitations and take that into account when I do my work. I would imagine most developers do this. In my experience, if there's a buggy release, it's not the fault of developers or testers, but of management. Developers are constantly being asked to squeeze in one more feature, without being given the time to properly design it, and without the time for the testers to do their work. I've known quite a few testers in my day and they are generally very thorough people, and the best ones are downright amazing in their ability to find (and even diagnose) bugs. The limiting factor is almost always time (and similarly resources). The best developers and testers can't do amazing things if they aren't given the time and resources to do them properly, and we see this everywhere. Software releases, and as a result quality, are driven by people who are more concerned with getting the feature out, getting the item on the marketing list ticked off, and getting money from customers rather than that the feature is complete, useful and bug-free.
Can you imagine how today's software companies would function under the constraints of 20-30 years where you can't put out patches every month? Software came out less often, but it generally worked better. It had to, because there was no quick fix, as an update would require a massive distribution of CDs or even (gasp!) floppy disks. Sure, we had crappy software back then as well, but things have definitely not gotten better. Customers being beta testers went from being the exception to being the norm.
Yeah, one of the things they said when they switched us to an open-office layout was that everyone, up to an including the VP would be out in the open. Well, since my cubicle was next to the VPs office, I knew for a fact that he was only there maybe one day out of 10. Meanwhile, the new VP said, "Screw this and gave himself an office."
Te open office transition was as awful as 30 years of research demonstrates, but management finally heard and we're supposed to get cubicles in the next 3-4 months. I never thought I'd miss having a cubicle, but I do.
Are these the kinds of UX experts we had in the 80s and early 90s from companies like IBM and Microsoft that gave us CUI and largely standardized computer interfaces in a logical and consistent manner, or are these the "UX experts" of 2018 (also from Microsoft) that are art-school drop-outs who think pale grey text on a white background with so much whitespace that you can't fit more than 3 controls on the entire computer screen is a good idea, where you have to poke at every little piece of ornamentation because you can't tell what's chrome and what's actually a control?
The question is clearly not being posed for the technically-literate person, who knows how to find this information, but for the average user.
I'm guessing manuals aren't included for cost reasons (why else?) and the companies have concluded that few enough people complain that they can do it.
This is really funny, because this complaint could have been made any time in the past 5 years or so and still been perfectly relevant. Microsoft was at the forefront of usability and GUI design in the 90s (IMO) and they've pretty much abandoned everything they learned.
I can't bring myself to pay $15/month for a radio that only works in my vehicle, especially since there is advertising on almost every channel.
I can't bring myself to pay $15/month for a radio that's sub-AM quality and doesn't have a progressive rock channel. For $15/month, I (and the rest of my family) can stream anything I want from Google (Amazon has a similar service). And I can download stuff, so I don't have to use phone data when in the car, plus I can use it anywhere, not just in the car.
Sure there are a small handful of niche applications that maybe 0.00001% of the population actually use that don't work, but that's hardly "most people"
Yes, because only 0.00001% of the population plays games on their computers. And only 0.00001% of the population runs Microsoft Office. As bad as it is, people know Office and are used to it, and most don't want to learn something else. And only 0.00001% of the population run apps like Photoshop and other Adobe software.
I agree with you, there are alternatives, but to the average non-technical user, they usually aren't feasible.
I try to calmly explain this whenever I see this one. Or the many completely bogus astronomy ones that get passed around. It doesn't help much but it helps.
Besides we need to leave room for the real facts, like the fact that Hillary Clinton is clearly a lizard person. You can tell by the pixels.
I recall Windows 2000 being very solid, except Explorer was a buggy mess (some things never change). It also had the best-looking desktop environment of any version of Windows ever, and I'll fight anyone who says differently.
I was happy with XP and Windows 7, and I am not looking forward to the day that my employer has to move us on from Windows 7 to that eye-sore Windows 10 with its incredibly ugly and poorly-designed UI. I don't care how much better it might be under the hood (and it generally does seem to be OK), it's ugly as ass, and there's no way to improve it.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing, but if it's trading that for being a psychopathic politics-driven machine, it's not an improvement.
You're welcome to join us and become a cord cutter too. We have cookies.
And Netflix.
After not having cable (or satellite) TV for about 15 years, when I have a chance to experience cable TV these days, I can't imagine paying for it. You have to watch shows when they are on, instead of when you want to? Every show is interrupted every 6 minutes for 3 minutes of commercials? I wouldn't want that if it were free.
The fact that English is an amalgam of Romance and Germanic languages is fascinating to me, just as it's fascinating how many of our words originally come from Greek (especially when you are talking about science).
In Mexico, "limon" seems to be used for both. I spent some time with some folks in Mexico City, and they offered me Lime Shebert, which was had the word "Limon" on the label.
In short, Windows is not the product. The user is the product.
I thought the term "unpaid Beta Testers" meant the customers.
The problem is Windows in the past 5 years (or more!) is that the primary changes being made to Windows is to serve Microsoft, not the user. No one asked for the massive changes that came with Windows 8. No one liked them. Microsoft was uncontrollably lusting after the 30% cut that Apple gets from everything sold through their store and tried to force Windows to work on that model, even though it never did and there was no way it ever could. On top of that, they decided that desktop computers (or laptops for that matter) were passe and that everyone in the world would be using Windows on a phone or tablet and made that the primary interface for Windows. These were both disastrous choices that only served Microsoft's purposes and had nothing to do with users. Then Windows 10 comes along which is nothing but a massive spyware operation, again to serve Microsoft's desires and not the users.
Microsoft was used to forcing anything they wanted on the user for a long time, and as they ran out of ways to monetize their software, they became more and more desperate to extract more value out of customers. Except now their competition is stiffer than ever.
I used to like Windows. I still want to like Windows, but Windows isn't a product any more. The users are the product.
This isn't just Microsoft. This is how everyone does it. Since the cost of providing updates has dropped to near zero, companies have no problems with "ship early and ship often" and let the customers be the beta testers.
In a century or two, there won't be software engineers. The software itself will do all that for us. Either that or software engineers will be back to using relays and vacuum tubes.
As a software developer, I'm fully aware of my limitations and take that into account when I do my work. I would imagine most developers do this. In my experience, if there's a buggy release, it's not the fault of developers or testers, but of management. Developers are constantly being asked to squeeze in one more feature, without being given the time to properly design it, and without the time for the testers to do their work. I've known quite a few testers in my day and they are generally very thorough people, and the best ones are downright amazing in their ability to find (and even diagnose) bugs. The limiting factor is almost always time (and similarly resources). The best developers and testers can't do amazing things if they aren't given the time and resources to do them properly, and we see this everywhere. Software releases, and as a result quality, are driven by people who are more concerned with getting the feature out, getting the item on the marketing list ticked off, and getting money from customers rather than that the feature is complete, useful and bug-free.
Can you imagine how today's software companies would function under the constraints of 20-30 years where you can't put out patches every month? Software came out less often, but it generally worked better. It had to, because there was no quick fix, as an update would require a massive distribution of CDs or even (gasp!) floppy disks. Sure, we had crappy software back then as well, but things have definitely not gotten better. Customers being beta testers went from being the exception to being the norm.
You know, you have to take your meds every day. Once is not enough.
Yeah, one of the things they said when they switched us to an open-office layout was that everyone, up to an including the VP would be out in the open. Well, since my cubicle was next to the VPs office, I knew for a fact that he was only there maybe one day out of 10. Meanwhile, the new VP said, "Screw this and gave himself an office."
Te open office transition was as awful as 30 years of research demonstrates, but management finally heard and we're supposed to get cubicles in the next 3-4 months. I never thought I'd miss having a cubicle, but I do.
Dilbert is real.
No kidding. I quit my last job rather than work with Salesforce (after the company was acquired). That was not something I wanted anything to do with.
But where we get all those hilarious listicles with amusing examples of Japanglish, Chinglish and Koreanglish?
"UX experts"
Are these the kinds of UX experts we had in the 80s and early 90s from companies like IBM and Microsoft that gave us CUI and largely standardized computer interfaces in a logical and consistent manner, or are these the "UX experts" of 2018 (also from Microsoft) that are art-school drop-outs who think pale grey text on a white background with so much whitespace that you can't fit more than 3 controls on the entire computer screen is a good idea, where you have to poke at every little piece of ornamentation because you can't tell what's chrome and what's actually a control?
The question is clearly not being posed for the technically-literate person, who knows how to find this information, but for the average user.
I'm guessing manuals aren't included for cost reasons (why else?) and the companies have concluded that few enough people complain that they can do it.
I always say that my all code should be idiot-proofed because I'm one of the idiots. But I do generally write good code.
The problem with left-wing politics is that there isn't a clear line which says "we went too far" when you cross it.
That's a feature, not a bug.
I find myself strangely attracted to that idea, not because they're women but because it would throw the status-quo into turmoil.
Right now, the status quo is that things are in turmoil...
It occurred to me a while back that a feminist is someone who is only envious of men because she can't wave her dick in your face.
This is really funny, because this complaint could have been made any time in the past 5 years or so and still been perfectly relevant. Microsoft was at the forefront of usability and GUI design in the 90s (IMO) and they've pretty much abandoned everything they learned.
I can't bring myself to pay $15/month for a radio that only works in my vehicle, especially since there is advertising on almost every channel.
I can't bring myself to pay $15/month for a radio that's sub-AM quality and doesn't have a progressive rock channel. For $15/month, I (and the rest of my family) can stream anything I want from Google (Amazon has a similar service). And I can download stuff, so I don't have to use phone data when in the car, plus I can use it anywhere, not just in the car.
Sure there are a small handful of niche applications that maybe 0.00001% of the population actually use that don't work, but that's hardly "most people"
Yes, because only 0.00001% of the population plays games on their computers. And only 0.00001% of the population runs Microsoft Office. As bad as it is, people know Office and are used to it, and most don't want to learn something else. And only 0.00001% of the population run apps like Photoshop and other Adobe software.
I agree with you, there are alternatives, but to the average non-technical user, they usually aren't feasible.
I try to calmly explain this whenever I see this one. Or the many completely bogus astronomy ones that get passed around. It doesn't help much but it helps.
Besides we need to leave room for the real facts, like the fact that Hillary Clinton is clearly a lizard person. You can tell by the pixels.
I recall Windows 2000 being very solid, except Explorer was a buggy mess (some things never change). It also had the best-looking desktop environment of any version of Windows ever, and I'll fight anyone who says differently.
I was happy with XP and Windows 7, and I am not looking forward to the day that my employer has to move us on from Windows 7 to that eye-sore Windows 10 with its incredibly ugly and poorly-designed UI. I don't care how much better it might be under the hood (and it generally does seem to be OK), it's ugly as ass, and there's no way to improve it.