Insightful. Come on moderators. Did you accidentally hit insightful when you were looking for BULLSHIT!
1. Installation sucks. Hardware support is lacking, the process is ambiguous and confusing for most users. Included in this is "Your documentation generally sucks because it's done by non-professionals."
Friday night. I'd just bought some new second-hand hardware comprised of a new motherboard video card. AMD Sempron 3000+ to AMD ??? 4200. Nvidia 6200TC to 7900. Put the new hardware in a new case, and pulled the harddrives out of my old system. Booted it up and went to playing Xplane with super resolution (compared to the old system). Let's see you try that with a Windows machine without a complete reinstall. I don't know about Macs. I've never used their hardware.
2. Much familiar, high quality Windows software is missing. Yes, Photoshop really is better than GIMP. And Office is better than OpenOffice. Quark is better than Scribus (or inDesign).
Familiar? To you maybe. How many typical users would be anything but lost in Photoshop? You're lucky if most even recognize the name. Quark? I don't even really know what that does. But does Windows have KiCAD? Until there is KiCAD on Windows or a Mac, neither does me any good.
3. People want clear, simple, fast answers to common problems, not a "fiddle with it and come back to our mailing list so we can call you stupid again."
And we know that there is all sorts of clear, simple answers to Window's problems all over the place. They consist of "Reboot" and "load the latest driver". Anything beyond that leaves you on your own.
4. Someone to call in case of emergency who can give definite answers. It's 3 AM and your taxes are due, and there's some odd problem you don't understand. You can call Microsoft and for $200 they'll fix it. For Linux?
If you're paying that much for support, there's Red Hat, Suse, Mandrivia, all sorts of local folks... Hell, for 200 bucks I'll show up on a Saturday to fix you computer problem.
I've tried playing my boys games. 5 minutes of humiliation and I'm done. a-b-left-right-up-down...what? Whadya mean square instead of triangle?! You said triangle! Fuck-it! I've gotta read/.
But one of their friends brought a Wii over a couple weeks ago. I played for nearly an hour. We talked. We laughed. We had FUN. All of us.
If you go in all serious and defensive, trying to explain why M$ didn't invent the internet, people assume that there must be an element of truth to get you so riled. If you go in snickering or seriously laughing your ass off at the pure hilarity, you're viewed in a different light.
Reference the Apple commercials. They were incredibly successful, because they cut the legs from the competitions arguments. I'm waiting for the next one where the fat pasty guy walks around saying "I invented that." "I invented the sandwich." "I invented communication." "I invented shoes."
Microsoft isn't full of morons; they wouldn't have put their flagship product out there with the ribbon interface unless they could prove statistically, via testing, that the interface is plain better.
Like they wouldn't put out new file formats with gratuitous changes to force users to upgrade? Your argument is patently silly considering Microsoft's track record. Businesses have been asking, "Why should I spend tens of thousands to upgrade a perfectly functional piece of software?" Microsoft has to answer with either, "You don't" or "Because, the last piece of software I sold you was a piece of unmitigated shit." In the past they've been able to get by with "Because, we've added $XYZ feature", but they've run up against a wall in that there's not really much left to add. How much crap can you graft onto a glorified typewriter?
So they come up with a "new interface" that makes users "more productive"? ("More productive" must mean "spend even more time fiddling with font choices instead of typing the damn letter".) And this "new interface" is all due to "research" and has nothing to do with trying to find a reason to convince business leaders to pony up to the bar once more?
You see, I set up a chair in the park and started playing my guitar. Ignore that I've never had a guitar or voice lesson in my life, and only started playing last week after I bought the instrument from Target. But set up in the park I did, and put out a tin can so that people could pay me for adding musical beauty to their stroll in the park.
Can you believe that most people wouldn't throw even a nickle in my can? Bastards!! Why, some people even had the temerity to put their fingers in their ears! The NERVE of some people!!
You see, if they were going to stroll in the park, they should be willing to PAY for the content I provide. And they definitely shouldn't take steps to avoid it.
if people remembered that prior to WWII americans didn't want any part of world politics or being a global policeman. It's too bad that Japanese attacked Perl Harbor and Hitler had stupidity to declare unnecessary for him war on US. After the war it became apparent that Stalin's regime was as bad as Hitler's.
And just why did Japan attack the US, and Hitler declare war? Could it be because we did actually want a little part in world politics? Why else would be be running an oil blockade against Japan, as they were fighting a war with China? Or why would be be supplying arms to the Allies, but not the Axis powers?
The only thing 'great' about WWII, was that the leadership did a better job of selling it.
Some of those reports are approaching 100 yrs old. Some are quite readable. Some of them hurt my head. There are reports on engines, mufflers, wing design, flutter characteristics, ergonomics...
The point is that it's all real. Was all leading edge material at one time, and is all interesting to someone. At least to me, this gives the material more significance.
"Partisanship, Fox-hatred and left v. right wing BS arguments aside, at least Fox News does go out of their way to provide two opposing viewpoints, and it seems rather popular."
This is bull shit of the most dangerous kind. It was Joseph Goebbels, Nazi propaganda minister, who said that the key to a successful propaganda campaign is to give the appearance of diversity, while at the same time making sure that all media venues convey the same basic message.
Except that Fox is not "all media venues".
The problem I see is that most people don't know the difference between commentary and news. A bunch of talking heads spewing their opinions is NOT news. Not on Fox. Not on CBS. And not anywhere else. News is almost exclusively limited to what comes over the AP wire, and that is reported word-for-word across all the stations. You always know what the real news is, because you'll hear the same phrases rattled off from multiple 'reporters' and printed in the newspaper. I often find that these stories are leftward leaning, but I readily admit that is because I'm more conservative. I find the liberal bias somewhat grating, whereas the conservative bias goes by unnoticed.
Now, Goebbels statement goes both ways. If there is a liberal bias, and has been for a LONG time, how would you know? For that matter, what is the measuring stick you use for liberal/conservative?
Does anybody else wonder whether the US government has been taken over by somebody (possibly giant alien lizards) who are deliberately trying to ruin the country?
Yes. The monster is called "The Public". Remember that democracy is the notion that people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
Unlike your software creations, a society is grown, not engineered. There will be all sorts of anomalies and branches sticking out in strange ways when something is grown. This will all get corrected as people like the subject blogger bring the issues to light. Think of this process as pruning.
That doesn't make Moller a scam artist it makes him a dreamer.
A PhD that can't see do the failure analysis of a vehicle riding on 4 engines placed at it's corners is not a dreamer, especially when he's had 20 years to do the analysis. Here's a hint. A problem with one engine out of 4 means you die. The wing area would indicate that this thing has the glide ratio of a refrigerator. It doesn't even have autorotation to depend on like a helicopter.
Idiot. Scammer. I can believe either one. I'd possibly accept dreamer if it weren't for the PhD qualification. My preference is to call him a scammer, and the press that keeps giving him the spotlight are the idiots.
Moller may never produce a 'flying car', but someone will eventually.
The Laws of Physics don't change when the wheels leave the ground. Until someone designs an "air" brake that is as effective as metallicized asbestos squeezing a cast iron disk, there will be no commuter 'flying car'.
All this for about $100,000?!?!?! Hell yes I'd buy one!
As someone who is building a plane that started as a concept for a roadable plane (http://ernest.isa-geek.org), I'd say that the MIT car/plane is a scam if they think they're going to hit this price point of $148,000.
$90K to $100K is what a lot of the light sport aircraft are coming in at. A basic 172RG will set you back a quarter million. This thing will have to carry an extra tire, windshield wipers (with fluid), headlights, taillights, a horn, rearview mirrors, and a list of other annual safety check items that are required in just about every state. All this equipment with the associated controls adds up to a LOT of weight and aerodynamic compromises. An unacceptable amount in the world of GA aircraft. This is why John Dyke ditched the "roadable" plane, and just went with a "towable" plane.
They may try propeller propulsion for the freeway, but this will be immediately abandon if it isn't immediately outlawed. The rocks and chips picked up that don't destroy the propeller will wipe out the windshields of following traffic. Do you think the SUV drivers will tolerate having their cars sandblasted in the daily commute? This will force them to have some sort of gearing interlock. With all this extra equipment and aerodynamic compromises, they're going to need at least 160Hp, and 180 would be a better fit. The gearbox to handle the lockout will be heavy. There goes even more of the payload. Taylor successfully built a sky car, but every estimation I've heard is that it sucks as an airplane and as a car. Airplane speed, payload and range all suffer, and it's slow on the ground.
I'm sure MIT can improve on what Taylor did in the 50's using modern techniques and materials, but there's no way they're going to do it for less than $150K(US). Once they do produce something, the next trick will be to get people to buy into they trade-offs they will have to make.
Microsoft stands to lose an incredible cash cow and market control.
Political bodies are starting to pass laws requiring that official documents be published in an open format. If Microsoft doesn't rush their format through standardization, these governments will start moving to ODF. Once the ship of state starts moving, it is very difficult to stop or turn. When the ship of state moves in the ODF direction, a huge portion of the economy, every vendor or contractor supply that government, will move with it. The government's power to set standards is that powerful. For an example, just try to find a new CRT monitor that isn't Energy Start compliant.
If this huge section of the market moves to ODF, Microsoft will no longer have the ability to lock users into MS-Office and force upgrades. Now if you open a DOC file in OpenOffice and it doesn't look right, it is OpenOffice's fault. Once there are several vendors selling ODF solution, resolution of fault will fall back to does it comply with the standard. User's have been forced to pay for the latest releases of MS-Office just to remain compatible with the latest format tweaks (that a partner may be using). MS has long been suspected of making gratuitous changes to the format just to force users to buy a new version. They won't be able to tweak an open and published standard, users won't be forced into gratuitous 'upgrades'. The market power and the cash cow will both disappear very quickly.
The countries need to vote 'no' as you state, but they don't have to do it in a hurry. A delayed approval will allow many of the laws to go into effect and start turning the ship of state. Each day the approval is delayed is another day of erosion of the DOC file format.
That's why I'm waiting for the P release. No one would think to name their distribution "Pink Cat" (and we'd all know what they were really talking about.)
I was working as a security guard while in school at a fairly large chemical research company. They were doing some plant maintenance and had to shut down the water. The clueless guy who was head of security went out to do it and closed the valve to fast. Yes, he just closed the valve. Nothing else. The pipe broke and the facility had to be shut down until it was repaired.
The typical large facility has a lot of gotcha's and hidden dangers that would be VERY expensive to design around. Consider the amount of inertia from flowing water in a 6-inch pipe several hundred yards long. Shutting a valve to fast is equivalent to some very severe braking, and that energy has to go somewhere. Pipe strong enough to handle those sort of forces would simply be to expensive to install, so you train your people to have a clue instead.
If your goal was to take a plant offline (think PETA shutting down a rendering factory, or disrupting a toilet paper factory during war time*), you won't have to know a lot about the plant to cause all sorts of mayhem.
*Hard to aim a rifle when you have an itchy ass, you know 8*)
There's also the idea that if you understand it all, there's not job left to do.
Politicians freely admit that "society needs fixing". Religious leaders freely admit that "morality needs fixing". Philosophers freely admit that . . . we don't know enough to know what to fix? Shoot, painters will freely admit that my house needs painting if I give 'em a chance.
If you job is to acquire understanding, it's not strange that you'll be excited that new mysteries appear.
My name is Negeroponte. I am the third cousin of our beloved dictator that was deposed recently. I am involved in a secret plot to move his hidden funds of approximately $3 billion (US) out of the country. I would like to invest in your sausage. It sounds truly delicious. If you would simply transfer $200 in the account, whose number I will provide,.....
Personal bias is important when considering an unverifiable opinion.
No one gives a flip about your bias when facts are verifiable...even less when they're EASILY verifiable. Weather monitoring stations usually sit on public property.
But reproducible scientific analysis can only occur on a string of anecdotal evidence. If you perform a string of bad experiments, you come to erroneous conclusions no matter how long you analyze.
Slashdot Mirror
Insightful. Come on moderators. Did you accidentally hit insightful when you were looking for BULLSHIT!
1. Installation sucks. Hardware support is lacking, the process is ambiguous and confusing for most users. Included in this is "Your documentation generally sucks because it's done by non-professionals."
Friday night. I'd just bought some new second-hand hardware comprised of a new motherboard video card. AMD Sempron 3000+ to AMD ??? 4200. Nvidia 6200TC to 7900. Put the new hardware in a new case, and pulled the harddrives out of my old system. Booted it up and went to playing Xplane with super resolution (compared to the old system). Let's see you try that with a Windows machine without a complete reinstall. I don't know about Macs. I've never used their hardware.
2. Much familiar, high quality Windows software is missing. Yes, Photoshop really is better than GIMP. And Office is better than OpenOffice. Quark is better than Scribus (or inDesign).
Familiar? To you maybe. How many typical users would be anything but lost in Photoshop? You're lucky if most even recognize the name. Quark? I don't even really know what that does. But does Windows have KiCAD? Until there is KiCAD on Windows or a Mac, neither does me any good.
3. People want clear, simple, fast answers to common problems, not a "fiddle with it and come back to our mailing list so we can call you stupid again."
And we know that there is all sorts of clear, simple answers to Window's problems all over the place. They consist of "Reboot" and "load the latest driver". Anything beyond that leaves you on your own.
4. Someone to call in case of emergency who can give definite answers. It's 3 AM and your taxes are due, and there's some odd problem you don't understand. You can call Microsoft and for $200 they'll fix it. For Linux?
If you're paying that much for support, there's Red Hat, Suse, Mandrivia, all sorts of local folks... Hell, for 200 bucks I'll show up on a Saturday to fix you computer problem.
I've tried playing my boys games. 5 minutes of humiliation and I'm done. a-b-left-right-up-down...what? Whadya mean square instead of triangle?! You said triangle! Fuck-it! I've gotta read /.
But one of their friends brought a Wii over a couple weeks ago. I played for nearly an hour. We talked. We laughed. We had FUN. All of us.
It doesn't have a lot of games? Who cares.
The way you counteract it is with humor.
If you go in all serious and defensive, trying to explain why M$ didn't invent the internet, people assume that there must be an element of truth to get you so riled. If you go in snickering or seriously laughing your ass off at the pure hilarity, you're viewed in a different light.
Reference the Apple commercials. They were incredibly successful, because they cut the legs from the competitions arguments. I'm waiting for the next one where the fat pasty guy walks around saying "I invented that." "I invented the sandwich." "I invented communication." "I invented shoes."
Microsoft isn't full of morons; they wouldn't have put their flagship product out there with the ribbon interface unless they could prove statistically, via testing, that the interface is plain better.
Like they wouldn't put out new file formats with gratuitous changes to force users to upgrade? Your argument is patently silly considering Microsoft's track record. Businesses have been asking, "Why should I spend tens of thousands to upgrade a perfectly functional piece of software?" Microsoft has to answer with either, "You don't" or "Because, the last piece of software I sold you was a piece of unmitigated shit." In the past they've been able to get by with "Because, we've added $XYZ feature", but they've run up against a wall in that there's not really much left to add. How much crap can you graft onto a glorified typewriter?
So they come up with a "new interface" that makes users "more productive"? ("More productive" must mean "spend even more time fiddling with font choices instead of typing the damn letter".) And this "new interface" is all due to "research" and has nothing to do with trying to find a reason to convince business leaders to pony up to the bar once more?
Give us a break. OK?
You see, I set up a chair in the park and started playing my guitar. Ignore that I've never had a guitar or voice lesson in my life, and only started playing last week after I bought the instrument from Target. But set up in the park I did, and put out a tin can so that people could pay me for adding musical beauty to their stroll in the park.
Can you believe that most people wouldn't throw even a nickle in my can? Bastards!! Why, some people even had the temerity to put their fingers in their ears! The NERVE of some people!!
You see, if they were going to stroll in the park, they should be willing to PAY for the content I provide. And they definitely shouldn't take steps to avoid it.
if people remembered that prior to WWII americans didn't want any part of world politics or being a global policeman. It's too bad that Japanese attacked Perl Harbor and Hitler had stupidity to declare unnecessary for him war on US. After the war it became apparent that Stalin's regime was as bad as Hitler's.
And just why did Japan attack the US, and Hitler declare war? Could it be because we did actually want a little part in world politics? Why else would be be running an oil blockade against Japan, as they were fighting a war with China? Or why would be be supplying arms to the Allies, but not the Axis powers?
The only thing 'great' about WWII, was that the leadership did a better job of selling it.
One issue is getting real material that is technical in nature. One very extensive source is
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp
Some of those reports are approaching 100 yrs old. Some are quite readable. Some of them hurt my head. There are reports on engines, mufflers, wing design, flutter characteristics, ergonomics...
The point is that it's all real. Was all leading edge material at one time, and is all interesting to someone. At least to me, this gives the material more significance.
"Partisanship, Fox-hatred and left v. right wing BS arguments aside, at least Fox News does go out of their way to provide two opposing viewpoints, and it seems rather popular."
This is bull shit of the most dangerous kind. It was Joseph Goebbels, Nazi propaganda minister, who said that the key to a successful propaganda campaign is to give the appearance of diversity, while at the same time making sure that all media venues convey the same basic message.
Except that Fox is not "all media venues".
The problem I see is that most people don't know the difference between commentary and news. A bunch of talking heads spewing their opinions is NOT news. Not on Fox. Not on CBS. And not anywhere else. News is almost exclusively limited to what comes over the AP wire, and that is reported word-for-word across all the stations. You always know what the real news is, because you'll hear the same phrases rattled off from multiple 'reporters' and printed in the newspaper. I often find that these stories are leftward leaning, but I readily admit that is because I'm more conservative. I find the liberal bias somewhat grating, whereas the conservative bias goes by unnoticed.
Now, Goebbels statement goes both ways. If there is a liberal bias, and has been for a LONG time, how would you know? For that matter, what is the measuring stick you use for liberal/conservative?
Does anybody else wonder whether the US government has been taken over by somebody (possibly giant alien lizards) who are deliberately trying to ruin the country?
Yes. The monster is called "The Public". Remember that democracy is the notion that people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
Unlike your software creations, a society is grown, not engineered. There will be all sorts of anomalies and branches sticking out in strange ways when something is grown. This will all get corrected as people like the subject blogger bring the issues to light. Think of this process as pruning.
That doesn't make Moller a scam artist it makes him a dreamer.
A PhD that can't see do the failure analysis of a vehicle riding on 4 engines placed at it's corners is not a dreamer, especially when he's had 20 years to do the analysis. Here's a hint. A problem with one engine out of 4 means you die. The wing area would indicate that this thing has the glide ratio of a refrigerator. It doesn't even have autorotation to depend on like a helicopter.
Idiot. Scammer. I can believe either one. I'd possibly accept dreamer if it weren't for the PhD qualification. My preference is to call him a scammer, and the press that keeps giving him the spotlight are the idiots.
Moller may never produce a 'flying car', but someone will eventually.
The Laws of Physics don't change when the wheels leave the ground. Until someone designs an "air" brake that is as effective as metallicized asbestos squeezing a cast iron disk, there will be no commuter 'flying car'.
All this for about $100,000?!?!?! Hell yes I'd buy one!
As someone who is building a plane that started as a concept for a roadable plane (http://ernest.isa-geek.org), I'd say that the MIT car/plane is a scam if they think they're going to hit this price point of $148,000.
$90K to $100K is what a lot of the light sport aircraft are coming in at. A basic 172RG will set you back a quarter million. This thing will have to carry an extra tire, windshield wipers (with fluid), headlights, taillights, a horn, rearview mirrors, and a list of other annual safety check items that are required in just about every state. All this equipment with the associated controls adds up to a LOT of weight and aerodynamic compromises. An unacceptable amount in the world of GA aircraft. This is why John Dyke ditched the "roadable" plane, and just went with a "towable" plane.
They may try propeller propulsion for the freeway, but this will be immediately abandon if it isn't immediately outlawed. The rocks and chips picked up that don't destroy the propeller will wipe out the windshields of following traffic. Do you think the SUV drivers will tolerate having their cars sandblasted in the daily commute? This will force them to have some sort of gearing interlock. With all this extra equipment and aerodynamic compromises, they're going to need at least 160Hp, and 180 would be a better fit. The gearbox to handle the lockout will be heavy. There goes even more of the payload. Taylor successfully built a sky car, but every estimation I've heard is that it sucks as an airplane and as a car. Airplane speed, payload and range all suffer, and it's slow on the ground.
I'm sure MIT can improve on what Taylor did in the 50's using modern techniques and materials, but there's no way they're going to do it for less than $150K(US). Once they do produce something, the next trick will be to get people to buy into they trade-offs they will have to make.
Microsoft stands to lose an incredible cash cow and market control.
Political bodies are starting to pass laws requiring that official documents be published in an open format. If Microsoft doesn't rush their format through standardization, these governments will start moving to ODF. Once the ship of state starts moving, it is very difficult to stop or turn. When the ship of state moves in the ODF direction, a huge portion of the economy, every vendor or contractor supply that government, will move with it. The government's power to set standards is that powerful. For an example, just try to find a new CRT monitor that isn't Energy Start compliant.
If this huge section of the market moves to ODF, Microsoft will no longer have the ability to lock users into MS-Office and force upgrades. Now if you open a DOC file in OpenOffice and it doesn't look right, it is OpenOffice's fault. Once there are several vendors selling ODF solution, resolution of fault will fall back to does it comply with the standard. User's have been forced to pay for the latest releases of MS-Office just to remain compatible with the latest format tweaks (that a partner may be using). MS has long been suspected of making gratuitous changes to the format just to force users to buy a new version. They won't be able to tweak an open and published standard, users won't be forced into gratuitous 'upgrades'. The market power and the cash cow will both disappear very quickly.
The countries need to vote 'no' as you state, but they don't have to do it in a hurry. A delayed approval will allow many of the laws to go into effect and start turning the ship of state. Each day the approval is delayed is another day of erosion of the DOC file format.
Would an upgrade from "Horny Homo" to "Pink Pussy" require a just a reformat or complete repartition of the hard drive? ...or...or...
Could people who run one of those distros only run the other from a floppy?
That's why I'm waiting for the P release. No one would think to name their distribution "Pink Cat" (and we'd all know what they were really talking about.)
A recent survey by online compensation firm Salary.com showed about six out of 10 employees in the United States acknowledged wasting time at work.
It also showed that about 4 out of 10 employees lie about wasting time at work.
Firing only the people who don't support the new CEO's agenda is scandalous?
If I'm the boss, how is it scandalous that I decide to fire the people who've decided that they know better than I?
This whole thing is a made up scandal.
I was working as a security guard while in school at a fairly large chemical research company. They were doing some plant maintenance and had to shut down the water. The clueless guy who was head of security went out to do it and closed the valve to fast. Yes, he just closed the valve. Nothing else. The pipe broke and the facility had to be shut down until it was repaired.
The typical large facility has a lot of gotcha's and hidden dangers that would be VERY expensive to design around. Consider the amount of inertia from flowing water in a 6-inch pipe several hundred yards long. Shutting a valve to fast is equivalent to some very severe braking, and that energy has to go somewhere. Pipe strong enough to handle those sort of forces would simply be to expensive to install, so you train your people to have a clue instead.
If your goal was to take a plant offline (think PETA shutting down a rendering factory, or disrupting a toilet paper factory during war time*), you won't have to know a lot about the plant to cause all sorts of mayhem.
*Hard to aim a rifle when you have an itchy ass, you know 8*)
KITT: Michael, someone's trying to hack into my operating system! Help me Michael!
Allow or deny?
There's also the idea that if you understand it all, there's not job left to do.
Politicians freely admit that "society needs fixing".
Religious leaders freely admit that "morality needs fixing".
Philosophers freely admit that . . . we don't know enough to know what to fix?
Shoot, painters will freely admit that my house needs painting if I give 'em a chance.
If you job is to acquire understanding, it's not strange that you'll be excited that new mysteries appear.
Hello sir,
.....
My name is Negeroponte. I am the third cousin of our beloved dictator that was deposed recently. I am involved in a secret plot to move his hidden funds of approximately $3 billion (US) out of the country. I would like to invest in your sausage. It sounds truly delicious. If you would simply transfer $200 in the account, whose number I will provide,
Personal bias is important when considering an unverifiable opinion.
No one gives a flip about your bias when facts are verifiable...even less when they're EASILY verifiable. Weather monitoring stations usually sit on public property.
Me again. My response was inappropriate. You had already pointed out the sight I was point out. Please excuse my inability to read.
8(
But reproducible scientific analysis can only occur on a string of anecdotal evidence. If you perform a string of bad experiments, you come to erroneous conclusions no matter how long you analyze.
/
http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/weather_stations
There's also more interesting links:
/
http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/weather_stations