You mentioned at a talk that you gave in a university that you didn't think everyone should be a programmer. At the time, I agreed, however, I'm starting to notice that a lot of people with not technical knowledge still expect computers to work for them. When I hear this, I'm reminded of a time when Microsoft tried to write a program that programmed for the user (it didn't work out so well, since it was very limited). As technology starts to be present everywhere, do you think people will have to become savvy or not use it? An intro (CS101) course, even if the student never applies it, can still de-mystify a lot of the tech world.
Well, for me, normal in high school was doing java using Eclipse. I actually, don't think Eclipse was that bad (it gives you what you need, even if it's somewhat cluttered and unnecessary) and even liked it before I got into the terminal stuff. What was bad was how dependent were were on it. I didn't have to use the command line until college. On the first day of college CS, typing "javac" into the command prompt was mentioned and it actually came as a shock. On top of it, in high school and college, we started on Windows whereas now I'm of the opinion that Windows is the one OS you really SHOULDN'T be programming on. But that's beside the point. What high school did teach me was a basic introduction to java and that's all I can ask for. The more important thing it taught me was a respect for computers by a wonderful teacher who cared about her students and imparting knowledge on us. In the long run, I think that's a LOT more important any actual method.
As a Linux noob, how do I learn what all of those words mean? The only one I even vaguely recognize is TCP and i don't even know what that is. Until someone responds, I'll be at Google.
Bull. Fucking. Shit. No way. First off, if talented cs people are in India / China / Eastern Europe, they deserve the jobs. Anything else is just inefficient economically, and impossible practically. Who is Microsoft going to hire? That psychology/english/politics major from the US? No, they need engineers. And the engineers just aren't coming from the US. Second, "slavery licenses" is grossly misused here. Microsoft pays 100K starting salary to virtually every developer, from what I understand. Even if they paid, what, 50% less, that's still a good salary. I find it offensive that you consider a 100 K job "slavery". Go to India / China. See how that is. To boot, Microsoft is right in both things they've said. Someone DOES need to back US education. Have you seen the state of it, or are you living under a rock? It's a miracle public-schooled Americans can write their own names. Hell, it's proof God exists (ok, I went too far on that one, but backspace is for wimps). Also, companies DO need more engineers. Even Microsoft is running a shortage. I have no data on Google, but given the number of startups and the increasing role of technology, the problem can't really get better. Meanwhile, what you're proposing is that we leave the tech industry stranded, and let the education system crumble. The only thing I don't like about Microsoft's idea is that they aren't investing this money themselves, but other than that, they couldn't be more on that ball here.
What you're saying can be misinterpreted as "Because this hasn't reached perfection, it should not be allowed to progress." That's not true at all. Google's cars are already a shit-ton better than probably 30% (if not far more) of all drivers on US roads today. YES they should be allowed to progress. Yes there will be issues, but that's ok, because it's still better than what we have now, and it looks like people are being responsible. The quote even states that drivers are still legally required in the cars. How then, will that 100 car pile up you speak of result in the manufacturer being sued out of existence? It will be sad, true, and someone will be sued, but the manufacturer will just say "There were as many drivers in the car then as ever in the past. The driver could have taken over and didn't."
Exactly. Why switch when you don't have to? I'm currently running XP and I'm a Steam user. Why haven't I made the switch? Maybe I'm too dumb to install 7? Possibly; but most likely, I'm too lazy. Steam runs on XP. I want Steam. Done. How much effort would it take to stick to XP? 0. How much effort would it take to upgrade to 7? Not 0! What benefit would I get from the upgrade? Exactly 0. My other machines already run 7 so if there is some magic application that only works there (I have yet to find one), I can just run it there. I would also like to point out that the same probably is true with gamers; they use Win7 because it came with the box. I use XP because it came with the box. It's that simple in my eyes. How many Steam users do you think took their dad's old Windows XP machine and put Windows 7 on it? Sure, there may be some, but I doubt it's 70%. These businesses won't upgrade until 2014 when MS stops patching XP, or when the computers break, and they get new ones pre-loaded with Win7.
What this guy said. Any REAL action is going to take a lot of work on your part and give you no real benefit. Meanwhile, if you just game the system, you win! That's why we love the system. In the meantime, keep an eye out for a new job. Couldn't hurt.
If you're so smart but you can't figure out that getting a degree for partying and minimum tuition (oh, it exists) is a good move, you aren't so smart. Sure, some exceptions that can't afford a degree but it's moot. "I'm smart but I never attended college" is almost always spoken by someone who turns out to be dumb
We have gotten to the point where Samsung is insisting Android is crap while Apple is insisting it is every bit as good as their technology. Could an actual flying pig be more than a week away?
Oh, they're GETTING that big:) . And I for one welcome our Linux-using, geeky overlords! There was actually a book/paper about how Google is becoming more like a country with each year.
"...can be educationally detrimental, with most youth losing about two months of grade-level equivalency in math computational skills"
These students never had the skills to begin with. Public school in America is so largely a waste of time. We would learn the same over-simplified crap day in and day out, year after year. 3rd grade we learned how to multiply. 4th grade we learned how to multiply. 5th grade we learned how to multiply. In 9th grade, there were still those of us who couldn't multiply. The problem isn't that schools don't have enough time to teach - it's that they aren't teaching period. Giving them more time would, if anything, harm students by wasting more of their time. Over summer vacation, I could read literature books that I knew we would never get to in class, learn vim, take an internship, or write (usually, all of the above). Public school has already gotten so bad that if I ever have kids, I am strongly considering either sending them to private school or home-schooling them with the aid of tutors. But letting them spend MORE time in public school than I did? Never.
Off-topic, something I have noticed as a successful strategy is to home school your kids from 1st to 8th grade, and then send them to public school. This is both so they can get formal credit and because high school attracts better professors so that it is almost worth it.
Well yeah, google doesn't owe them anything - their services are largely free. What, you think that Google Search has some obligation to give me something back? Isn't that what the fantastic search was? Extend that to other Google services. Free email, chat, social network, maps, videos, etc, etc, etc, ETC ETCETC! Isn't that worth a few ads? Couldn't you... I don't know, NOT click on the ads? Can we just... grow up and accept that nothing is completely free? You say that, but you still complain about it. What do you propose as an alternative? Some services charge you and you complain about the cost. Google rolls in for free (money-wise), but with ads, and people complain about the ads. Let me guess, if Google just got rid of all tracking and ads, you would complain that Larry Page isn't giving you foot massage? And if he gave you one, you would complain it didn't have a happy ending?
My thoughts exactly. This doesn't seem to merit the title of "the next evolution in GUI". It seems to be prettier. I gaped when I saw that image of iCal, but I wouldn't call it "innovation"; it's just turning the slider for "pretty" way higher than anyone else. To answer the original question, I would say "No," skeuomorphic designs aren't making technology accessible, they're just making what we already had more visually aesthetic. Which, I suppose, you could argue makes less tech-saavy people use it more, but I don't know of anything that supports this.
They really should have called the Smart Tutors the "Samsung Smart Guy". Psst: it's from Conan! On a serious not, I understand that two wrongs don't make a right, but after the whole rounded corners thing, I don't see how this is wrong.
Poorly phrased and you are already being torn a new one for it, but overall correct IMO. There are far worse things than videos and such. On top of it, there are other jobs. If he was truly not qualified enough to do anything better than this, he had some sort of karma-punishment coming, and perhaps this was a bit harsh, but that's life. On top of _that_, he could have just done like every other real American and half-assed his job.
The point is, when you find yourself watching these types of videos for a living, odds are you messed up at some point. Not Google.
While I agree with what you've said, as a programmer, I must ask you to never ever say "just made it work" again. We get enough of that shit from management.:)
Those boot times were in the 20's. Can someone please explain this? My computers boot in... 2-4 seconds. Anything beyond 10 and I start considering reinstalling the OS. In the 20's, I start thinking I bought the wrong computer. What on earth were they testin this on?
Most Americans think that evolution is controversial, that Algebra is too hard for them, that FOX is informative, and that the Earth revolves around Oprah. Indeed, nothing strange here. Move along.
I'm still a linux noob but isn't the beauty of linux that you can create your own distros? Yes, it does create the problem that there are a lot of distros running around, but if there is demand, there should be supply. I don't think there is anything wrong with Valve making their own distro, if there is the demand for it. But in this case, it seems impractical. Not only would they need to convert Windows/Mac users to Linux, they would need to convert Linux users to their special distro. This is bound to turn some people off, which Valve probably can't afford at this stage. Ubuntu is so popular and user-friendly that it's "good enough" right now.
Really? I'm not offended or anything but my experience with Windows / Linux has been the exact same as what you said, but with the words "Linux" and "Windows" reversed. From the moment I popped that disk into my computer, everything worked. Sure, I had to look some stuff up, but Ask Ubuntu helped with that in moments, much better than msdn or general googling for Windows. What I've found is that while Windows tends to work, when it doesn't, you're screwed. Ubuntu encounters a lot of small kinks right and left but since you have access to everything with the command line, you can fix it. This may just be due to the types of problems I encounter. Each to his own I suppose.
They don't try to make better products, they just try to kill the competition. I see ads for their crap with cool songs, a lizard, and neat apps everywhere but the actual thing doesn't work. Even they can't work it right, as shown by several demos they have done. They seem to recognize it but instead of dealing with it, they just try to eliminate everyone else. Linux has a MUCH better programming environment than anything Microsoft can offer. Even its overall usability (I use Ubuntu) is more intuitive. So Microsoft tries this shit. It's not secure and it's not user-friendly. It's just meant to make Linux harder to install. And I can't support a company that takes this approach. Fuck them. It's a good thing their company is dying. Hopefully more OEMs see this and start offering Linux PC's, but I kind of doubt it.
Slashdot Mirror
You mentioned at a talk that you gave in a university that you didn't think everyone should be a programmer. At the time, I agreed, however, I'm starting to notice that a lot of people with not technical knowledge still expect computers to work for them. When I hear this, I'm reminded of a time when Microsoft tried to write a program that programmed for the user (it didn't work out so well, since it was very limited). As technology starts to be present everywhere, do you think people will have to become savvy or not use it? An intro (CS101) course, even if the student never applies it, can still de-mystify a lot of the tech world.
Well, for me, normal in high school was doing java using Eclipse. I actually, don't think Eclipse was that bad (it gives you what you need, even if it's somewhat cluttered and unnecessary) and even liked it before I got into the terminal stuff. What was bad was how dependent were were on it. I didn't have to use the command line until college. On the first day of college CS, typing "javac" into the command prompt was mentioned and it actually came as a shock. On top of it, in high school and college, we started on Windows whereas now I'm of the opinion that Windows is the one OS you really SHOULDN'T be programming on. But that's beside the point. What high school did teach me was a basic introduction to java and that's all I can ask for. The more important thing it taught me was a respect for computers by a wonderful teacher who cared about her students and imparting knowledge on us. In the long run, I think that's a LOT more important any actual method.
As a Linux noob, how do I learn what all of those words mean? The only one I even vaguely recognize is TCP and i don't even know what that is. Until someone responds, I'll be at Google.
Bull. Fucking. Shit. No way. First off, if talented cs people are in India / China / Eastern Europe, they deserve the jobs. Anything else is just inefficient economically, and impossible practically. Who is Microsoft going to hire? That psychology/english/politics major from the US? No, they need engineers. And the engineers just aren't coming from the US. Second, "slavery licenses" is grossly misused here. Microsoft pays 100K starting salary to virtually every developer, from what I understand. Even if they paid, what, 50% less, that's still a good salary. I find it offensive that you consider a 100 K job "slavery". Go to India / China. See how that is. To boot, Microsoft is right in both things they've said. Someone DOES need to back US education. Have you seen the state of it, or are you living under a rock? It's a miracle public-schooled Americans can write their own names. Hell, it's proof God exists (ok, I went too far on that one, but backspace is for wimps). Also, companies DO need more engineers. Even Microsoft is running a shortage. I have no data on Google, but given the number of startups and the increasing role of technology, the problem can't really get better. Meanwhile, what you're proposing is that we leave the tech industry stranded, and let the education system crumble. The only thing I don't like about Microsoft's idea is that they aren't investing this money themselves, but other than that, they couldn't be more on that ball here.
What you're saying can be misinterpreted as "Because this hasn't reached perfection, it should not be allowed to progress." That's not true at all. Google's cars are already a shit-ton better than probably 30% (if not far more) of all drivers on US roads today. YES they should be allowed to progress. Yes there will be issues, but that's ok, because it's still better than what we have now, and it looks like people are being responsible. The quote even states that drivers are still legally required in the cars. How then, will that 100 car pile up you speak of result in the manufacturer being sued out of existence? It will be sad, true, and someone will be sued, but the manufacturer will just say "There were as many drivers in the car then as ever in the past. The driver could have taken over and didn't."
Exactly. Why switch when you don't have to? I'm currently running XP and I'm a Steam user. Why haven't I made the switch? Maybe I'm too dumb to install 7? Possibly; but most likely, I'm too lazy. Steam runs on XP. I want Steam. Done. How much effort would it take to stick to XP? 0. How much effort would it take to upgrade to 7? Not 0! What benefit would I get from the upgrade? Exactly 0. My other machines already run 7 so if there is some magic application that only works there (I have yet to find one), I can just run it there. I would also like to point out that the same probably is true with gamers; they use Win7 because it came with the box. I use XP because it came with the box. It's that simple in my eyes. How many Steam users do you think took their dad's old Windows XP machine and put Windows 7 on it? Sure, there may be some, but I doubt it's 70%. These businesses won't upgrade until 2014 when MS stops patching XP, or when the computers break, and they get new ones pre-loaded with Win7.
What this guy said. Any REAL action is going to take a lot of work on your part and give you no real benefit. Meanwhile, if you just game the system, you win! That's why we love the system. In the meantime, keep an eye out for a new job. Couldn't hurt.
If you're so smart but you can't figure out that getting a degree for partying and minimum tuition (oh, it exists) is a good move, you aren't so smart. Sure, some exceptions that can't afford a degree but it's moot. "I'm smart but I never attended college" is almost always spoken by someone who turns out to be dumb
Wake up and smell the Firefox/Safari/Chrome grandma!
This is so pefect for Computer Science courses! Someone might actually look up from their laptop at the lecture slides if this gets mentioned!
We have gotten to the point where Samsung is insisting Android is crap while Apple is insisting it is every bit as good as their technology. Could an actual flying pig be more than a week away?
Oh, they're GETTING that big :) . And I for one welcome our Linux-using, geeky overlords! There was actually a book/paper about how Google is becoming more like a country with each year.
"...can be educationally detrimental, with most youth losing about two months of grade-level equivalency in math computational skills" These students never had the skills to begin with. Public school in America is so largely a waste of time. We would learn the same over-simplified crap day in and day out, year after year. 3rd grade we learned how to multiply. 4th grade we learned how to multiply. 5th grade we learned how to multiply. In 9th grade, there were still those of us who couldn't multiply. The problem isn't that schools don't have enough time to teach - it's that they aren't teaching period. Giving them more time would, if anything, harm students by wasting more of their time. Over summer vacation, I could read literature books that I knew we would never get to in class, learn vim, take an internship, or write (usually, all of the above). Public school has already gotten so bad that if I ever have kids, I am strongly considering either sending them to private school or home-schooling them with the aid of tutors. But letting them spend MORE time in public school than I did? Never. Off-topic, something I have noticed as a successful strategy is to home school your kids from 1st to 8th grade, and then send them to public school. This is both so they can get formal credit and because high school attracts better professors so that it is almost worth it.
Well yeah, google doesn't owe them anything - their services are largely free. What, you think that Google Search has some obligation to give me something back? Isn't that what the fantastic search was? Extend that to other Google services. Free email, chat, social network, maps, videos, etc, etc, etc, ETC ETCETC! Isn't that worth a few ads? Couldn't you... I don't know, NOT click on the ads? Can we just... grow up and accept that nothing is completely free? You say that, but you still complain about it. What do you propose as an alternative? Some services charge you and you complain about the cost. Google rolls in for free (money-wise), but with ads, and people complain about the ads. Let me guess, if Google just got rid of all tracking and ads, you would complain that Larry Page isn't giving you foot massage? And if he gave you one, you would complain it didn't have a happy ending?
My thoughts exactly. This doesn't seem to merit the title of "the next evolution in GUI". It seems to be prettier. I gaped when I saw that image of iCal, but I wouldn't call it "innovation"; it's just turning the slider for "pretty" way higher than anyone else. To answer the original question, I would say "No," skeuomorphic designs aren't making technology accessible, they're just making what we already had more visually aesthetic. Which, I suppose, you could argue makes less tech-saavy people use it more, but I don't know of anything that supports this.
They really should have called the Smart Tutors the "Samsung Smart Guy". Psst: it's from Conan! On a serious not, I understand that two wrongs don't make a right, but after the whole rounded corners thing, I don't see how this is wrong.
Poorly phrased and you are already being torn a new one for it, but overall correct IMO. There are far worse things than videos and such. On top of it, there are other jobs. If he was truly not qualified enough to do anything better than this, he had some sort of karma-punishment coming, and perhaps this was a bit harsh, but that's life. On top of _that_, he could have just done like every other real American and half-assed his job. The point is, when you find yourself watching these types of videos for a living, odds are you messed up at some point. Not Google.
While I agree with what you've said, as a programmer, I must ask you to never ever say "just made it work" again. We get enough of that shit from management. :)
Those boot times were in the 20's. Can someone please explain this? My computers boot in... 2-4 seconds. Anything beyond 10 and I start considering reinstalling the OS. In the 20's, I start thinking I bought the wrong computer. What on earth were they testin this on?
You don't know your memes. It goes Something Something ????? Profit! You make it sound like they know what they're doing.
Most Americans think that evolution is controversial, that Algebra is too hard for them, that FOX is informative, and that the Earth revolves around Oprah. Indeed, nothing strange here. Move along.
I'm still a linux noob but isn't the beauty of linux that you can create your own distros? Yes, it does create the problem that there are a lot of distros running around, but if there is demand, there should be supply. I don't think there is anything wrong with Valve making their own distro, if there is the demand for it. But in this case, it seems impractical. Not only would they need to convert Windows/Mac users to Linux, they would need to convert Linux users to their special distro. This is bound to turn some people off, which Valve probably can't afford at this stage. Ubuntu is so popular and user-friendly that it's "good enough" right now.
Really? I'm not offended or anything but my experience with Windows / Linux has been the exact same as what you said, but with the words "Linux" and "Windows" reversed. From the moment I popped that disk into my computer, everything worked. Sure, I had to look some stuff up, but Ask Ubuntu helped with that in moments, much better than msdn or general googling for Windows. What I've found is that while Windows tends to work, when it doesn't, you're screwed. Ubuntu encounters a lot of small kinks right and left but since you have access to everything with the command line, you can fix it. This may just be due to the types of problems I encounter. Each to his own I suppose.
They don't try to make better products, they just try to kill the competition. I see ads for their crap with cool songs, a lizard, and neat apps everywhere but the actual thing doesn't work. Even they can't work it right, as shown by several demos they have done. They seem to recognize it but instead of dealing with it, they just try to eliminate everyone else. Linux has a MUCH better programming environment than anything Microsoft can offer. Even its overall usability (I use Ubuntu) is more intuitive. So Microsoft tries this shit. It's not secure and it's not user-friendly. It's just meant to make Linux harder to install. And I can't support a company that takes this approach. Fuck them. It's a good thing their company is dying. Hopefully more OEMs see this and start offering Linux PC's, but I kind of doubt it.
You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?