Typewriter vs. PC with good keyboard doesn't matter, what matters is whether you learn touch typing or not.
And you'd be surprised how little that actually matters.
I've been sitting in front of keyboards since I was 11. I don't type in a way that is formally 'touch typing', but I can type as fast (if not faster) than most people anyway.
If you use a keyboard long enough, you'll figure out how to type at a 'good enough' speed, and if you don't put exactly the 'right' finger on the right key... well, it still gets typed.
It's not that hard to piece together how to do it. And given time, you'll be able to type without looking for the most part.
Now here is the big question: What skill you can learn on an iPad that you cannot learn on a laptop?
I doubt very much it's a specific skill, more that you have a device which can access the material. They seem to be treated more like 'smart textbooks' than a dumb entry machine you're meant to learn to type on.
As with regular ads, it's only annoying when it's things I don't want immediately as soon as I hear about them
Really? You're willing to accept ads in video games?
I'm sure as hell not, and it was that which made be disconnect my XBox from the network in the first place.
I bought the game, I bought the console. I didn't buy it to provide an advertising channel for the idiots who made the console to make even more money off me and tracj my playing habits.
Which is why any gaming console which requires internet access will never make it into my house.
This is exactly why my company has timesheets due on Tuesdays for the previous week. How your situation can exist is simply beyond me.
Oh, believe me, I've tried to explain how it's not possible to do this, and that if they need accurate time they'll have to wait until my work week is over.
But, nobody listens, and our BU can get fined for non-compliance. So every week I make up a number, and if I'm within 5% I leave it alone, and if I'm off by more than that I file an update and listen to them bitch about it.
It's complete nonsense, but very real. It's the tail wagging the dog, essentially -- and it's a "no exceptions" policy, which means all of the people who do after hours work have the same problem.
It'll appeal to the same people who don't want to buy a decent quality colour printer, and photo paper, and ink, etc to print their own photos.
You know, I've come to the conclusion that there very little benefit in printing your own pictures.
By the time you pay the consumables, the photo place can print your digital pics for a fraction of what you pay to own and use a colour printer.
I did it for a while, but the cost of ink and paper made me realize that if these guys will do it for a few pennies/photo, there's no point in even owning that printer. Which is why I only have a laser printer in the house these days.
Hell, the wife is of the opinion it's cheaper to throw out the printer instead of getting a new toner cartridge, since the cartridge often costs what the printer did and the printer comes with one.:-P
I've been at places where the bean counters have put so much work on people it's impossible to get their jobs done.
I know people who have to enter their time into no less than 4 different time systems every week. Because the people who own those systems don't have any integration and expect everyone else to make their horribly flawed process work.
My timesheets have to be submitted by Friday at noon, despite that I often work after hours work on Friday nights because that's our change window. They want accurate timesheets in place before the work is done, and get upset when you have to change it later. I've been told on more than one occasion that I need to provide 100% accurate data, even if that means providing it before I know. If I don't know how late I'm working, how can I provide you with a value for how many hours I worked until I'm done? I can't tell you in advance if we'll be done at 9pm or 1am depending on what we're doing.
Hell, at one company we were asked to provide our time accounting in five minute increments, but they got the hint when 2 out of every 5 minutes was classed as "telling you what I've done the last 3 minutes".
I worked at a place where the accountant decided that getting a Solaris machine with a CD-ROM was too expensive, so they updated the PO to drop the CD-ROM -- and then you couldn't install the OS because there was no CD-ROM. The machine sat in a corner for 6 months until we could get a PO for the CD-ROM. We spent FAR more in man-hours fighting with them to get a bloody CD-ROM drive than the initial cost would have been. (In fact, given what they were billing for me at the time, I believe it was about 15 minutes of my time as the client would have paid)
I've been in development shops where accounting decided that building the product cost more than their estimates -- despite them having no bloody clue what was actually involved in the process and their formula being useless. They just came along and said "according to how we calculate this, this took more than it should" -- even the VP was stunned by that one and had to explain to them they needed to go away.
I don't give a damn what their actual title is -- when the micro-managing departments which have no understanding of what is required to make the product are making it impossible to make the product, then from my point of view, the accountants have taken over.
Sorry, but I've worked in far too many corporate environments where the process overshadows the actual work, and the process is frequently divorced from reality.
It's like every Dilbert joke come to life some days, or Office Space. Never underestimate how badly a company can go downhill when the internal business processes make it impossible to actually do the business of the company.
I've known people who worked at IBM, and in a lot of ways they have the exact same problems.
And, except for Pixar and Marvel which Disney has bought and not yet ground into dust... Disney spent an awful lot of years putting out endless, lousy, direct to video sequels and other stuff which was just an endless rehashing of stuff they've already done. Which is why they wanted LucasArts in the first place I'm guessing.
Sometimes stuff gets done despite a management structure stacked against you. But over time, even that can get beaten down.
So essentially the same thing that happens at every large company over time with roots in creating stuff?
It seems like corporations more or less get to a point where they collapse under their own weight and cease to be able to actually do things.
In my experience, that happens right around the time accountants start micro-managing everything, and when winning "buzzword bingo" happens in every company call.
At some point, companies change from being places that create stuff and can get things done, and morph into an entity where you need huge reams of paperwork to get a new pen. At that point, everything you do starts to feel like a futile gesture.
The accountants won't let anything happen, and management is more focused on covering their own asses than building anything new.
I edited a registry key to disable the mouse-in/mouse-out actions for left, right and bottom screen. However I use win+i to open the control panel charm to shutdown the computer when I need to. You may just need a primer for windows 8 shortcuts
Or, you know, Windows 8 shortcuts are non-intuitive and confusing to users.
If their 'shortcuts' need a tutorial, then it sounds more like they've been badly designed.
So no I have to lift my hands from the keyboard to control stuff?
Just how many of the normal motions I make with my hands will trigger random window events?
Sorry guys, but this sounds like a terrible idea, and not one I'd be interested in.
So does having a camera/motion tracker in front of me all day long, especially since Microsoft has already tipped their hand at being able to gather all sorts of extra data with it.
I agree with you that it would seem to be a logical step for the USPO to take
Then you miss my point, I'm saying "approve them and let the courts figure it out" is what they do now, not that they should start doing it.
Unless you are some sort of stellar organization genius that can step up and work miracles, you shouldn't be calling them incompetent, but rather calling their mission directives into question.
Oddly enough, you'll note that I did exactly that. It was the post I replied to who said they were incompetent.
If you have better ideas, call your government and tell them.
This may come as a shock to you, but my government and your government are likely two different entities.
If I contact my government about how many stupid patents the US Patent Office approves, I'd get nowhere.
But the existence of a patent for sideways swinging and some of the other stupid things I've seen tell me that either these guys are truly grossly incompetent, or have been told to approve everything to collect the fees.
You don't need to be an American to look at some of the stupid patents which have been granted and wonder what the hell they were thinking.
The word incompetence doesn't begin to describe the situation.
Is it incompetence, or a system which is measured as successful by how many patents it processes and accepts?
I don't get the impression the USPTO has any incentive to do their job thoroughly and competently -- but that this is what they've been told to do by the government.
Just keep cranking out patents and let the courts decide seems to be how they operate.
For example, GPS coordinates could be effective at limiting the number of recipients. Add to that accelerometer data to determine if the person is moving or possibly asleep - also helpful.
And you think people would be well served by allowing Twitter access to their GPS location and accelerometer data?
Much as I'm sure they'd love to have that, there's no way in hell they should be given it.
So use some intelligent filters along with sensor data to minimize the number of alerts or risk all alerts being ignored.
So, spy on everyone all the time to see if it would be appropriate to send them an emergency message?
And people wonder why I have no interest in Twitter.
You are probably correct, and a re-read of your post confirms that.
I had read it as you saying that they are fully formed and therefore fully capable of differentiating fantasy and real. But a closer read of this and your previous posts tells me I need another coffee. Yes, it is not a one size fits all kind of thing.
We have this idea that kids as old as 16 aren't "fully formed" people. But if your kid doesn't understand the difference between fantasy and reality at 10 or 11 or 12 then there is a parenting problem or other general mental illness.
I'm not sure it's quite so black and white.
Does your child understand that these things wouldn't be acceptable? Or do they think that's how you're supposed to do it?
There's an oft-quoted thing (which I have no idea is true) that you can't test a teenager to see if they're a sociopath, because most teenagers test as a sociopath anyway.
And, to be honest, what little I remember of being 10 and what I've seen of kids that age since then that there is that much of a solid differentiation between fantasy and reality, or that it's indicative of other mental illnesses. Your average 10 year old is going to be fuzzy on some concepts of morality, and completely oblivious to others.
I think the reason people say they're not fully formed people is because there are still things going on that precludes them from being able to make certain kinds of judgements because they don't yet have the experience and maturity to do it.
And I'm just not convinced that giving a 10 year old GTA is really a good choice -- and a bunch of years ago when my nephews were around that age and someone bought them a copy of GTA, I wasn't sure it was a good idea then either. Stealing cars and smacking down ho's wasn't something you wanted them growing up emulating.
So it does all those things you claim users don't want. How does that prevent Surface from doing all the things users do want?
I'm not saying it can't, but Microsoft is marketing is largely on the fact that it's got Office and Outlook. Which makes it look like that's the main point.
But, if you already use Google's services, an Android tablet is more useful to you because it's already integrated with those. If you already use Apple's stuff, you're going to stick with that. And Microsoft is to late to market with this people are already on one of the other platforms.
The reality is, unless you specifically want this stuff to be delivered to you by Microsoft, and if you can get past some of the awful things I've seen about the Metro interface, you might not look at them.
Microsoft has burned a lot of goodwill with people over the years. So unless I had a compelling reason why I'd want/need to be using Microsoft stuff, I'm more inclined to buy an Android device. Because it's got more apps, and because I'm already using Android.
So, unless you are really really keen on having a Microsoft product, there is very little to make a compelling argument that's what you should go out and buy.
The articles I'm seeing so far seem to boil down to "yeah, it's an improvement, but I still don't want one".
Microsoft is so focused on Office and Outlook that they seem to forget that the huge consumer market for tablets isn't being driven by these features. When everything you do is geared to a corporate environment, people not using it in a corporate environment don't look at your product.
It just often seems like Microsoft is doing it's usual "this is what the market wants", and not actually looking at what people do want.
And, quite frankly, Excel spreadsheets, PowerPoint slides, and connecting to a corporate Exchange server with Outlook.. that's not what the vast majority of people buying tablets use them for. It's like they're stuck in that "I'm a PC" mindset from those Apple commercials where the Mac is talking about having fun, and the PC is talking about making charts and saying those are fun.
Tablets are (from what I can see) used as infotainment devices with the ability to send some emails and surf the web. But somehow Microsoft, as ever, is looking at the business use case -- and I am pretty sure that the business use case is a much smaller chunk of the market.
So in terms of what is going to make people choose the Microsoft tablet over an Android tablet, it seems like a much smaller group is going to be looking for that.
Whether this is a product Microsoft keeps losing money on until they get any meaningful market share (like they did with the XBox), or the product starts gaining traction... I have no idea. But looking at what I use my tablet for, Microsoft seems to be missing the point.
You do know that you can go to the school board and freak out right? I think step 1 would be to organize a district wide freakout on the school board. Step 2, private school.
Which I should think would have about the same effect as telling your elected representative your displeasure... the people who pay them huge money in campaign donations get their ear, and the rest of us can go pound sand.
The *AAs likely made some donations contingent on having their views on copyright be required in school. And they will skew the facts the way they always do on the topic of copyright, so the kids will be getting lied to.
And, I'm betting the vast majority of parents can't afford to send their children to private school.
I've seen people fail to start driving when the light turns green because they were texting. I've seen people almost not stop for a light because they were looking at their screen. I've seen the driver behind me with both thumbs typing away on his device and therefore no hands on the wheel. I routinely see people driving along looking at their lap instead of where they're driving as they try to do a quick text.
So, I have no sympathy for people who are convinced they're so awesome at multi-tasking that they're trying to text and drive and end up getting a ticket.
I could walk 5 minutes from my house to an intersection, and if I stood in one place and simply photographed all of the drivers texting or talking on their phone (in their hand and gesturing with the other one), that I bet 30% or more of drivers are doing it.
If the stats tell us that distracted driving is causing a huge number of traffic accidents, then if the cop has decided to enforce the law on all of these people, too bad for them.
From what I've seen, those who can't resist a quick text at the stop light are also doing it while they're driving. It's often astounding to me just how many drivers are paying more attention to their phone than the cars around them.
Slashdot Mirror
And you'd be surprised how little that actually matters.
I've been sitting in front of keyboards since I was 11. I don't type in a way that is formally 'touch typing', but I can type as fast (if not faster) than most people anyway.
If you use a keyboard long enough, you'll figure out how to type at a 'good enough' speed, and if you don't put exactly the 'right' finger on the right key ... well, it still gets typed.
It's not that hard to piece together how to do it. And given time, you'll be able to type without looking for the most part.
I doubt very much it's a specific skill, more that you have a device which can access the material. They seem to be treated more like 'smart textbooks' than a dumb entry machine you're meant to learn to type on.
Really? You're willing to accept ads in video games?
I'm sure as hell not, and it was that which made be disconnect my XBox from the network in the first place.
I bought the game, I bought the console. I didn't buy it to provide an advertising channel for the idiots who made the console to make even more money off me and tracj my playing habits.
Which is why any gaming console which requires internet access will never make it into my house.
Oh, believe me, I've tried to explain how it's not possible to do this, and that if they need accurate time they'll have to wait until my work week is over.
But, nobody listens, and our BU can get fined for non-compliance. So every week I make up a number, and if I'm within 5% I leave it alone, and if I'm off by more than that I file an update and listen to them bitch about it.
It's complete nonsense, but very real. It's the tail wagging the dog, essentially -- and it's a "no exceptions" policy, which means all of the people who do after hours work have the same problem.
You know, I've come to the conclusion that there very little benefit in printing your own pictures.
By the time you pay the consumables, the photo place can print your digital pics for a fraction of what you pay to own and use a colour printer.
I did it for a while, but the cost of ink and paper made me realize that if these guys will do it for a few pennies/photo, there's no point in even owning that printer. Which is why I only have a laser printer in the house these days.
Hell, the wife is of the opinion it's cheaper to throw out the printer instead of getting a new toner cartridge, since the cartridge often costs what the printer did and the printer comes with one. :-P
I've been at places where the bean counters have put so much work on people it's impossible to get their jobs done.
I know people who have to enter their time into no less than 4 different time systems every week. Because the people who own those systems don't have any integration and expect everyone else to make their horribly flawed process work.
My timesheets have to be submitted by Friday at noon, despite that I often work after hours work on Friday nights because that's our change window. They want accurate timesheets in place before the work is done, and get upset when you have to change it later. I've been told on more than one occasion that I need to provide 100% accurate data, even if that means providing it before I know. If I don't know how late I'm working, how can I provide you with a value for how many hours I worked until I'm done? I can't tell you in advance if we'll be done at 9pm or 1am depending on what we're doing.
Hell, at one company we were asked to provide our time accounting in five minute increments, but they got the hint when 2 out of every 5 minutes was classed as "telling you what I've done the last 3 minutes".
I worked at a place where the accountant decided that getting a Solaris machine with a CD-ROM was too expensive, so they updated the PO to drop the CD-ROM -- and then you couldn't install the OS because there was no CD-ROM. The machine sat in a corner for 6 months until we could get a PO for the CD-ROM. We spent FAR more in man-hours fighting with them to get a bloody CD-ROM drive than the initial cost would have been. (In fact, given what they were billing for me at the time, I believe it was about 15 minutes of my time as the client would have paid)
I've been in development shops where accounting decided that building the product cost more than their estimates -- despite them having no bloody clue what was actually involved in the process and their formula being useless. They just came along and said "according to how we calculate this, this took more than it should" -- even the VP was stunned by that one and had to explain to them they needed to go away.
I don't give a damn what their actual title is -- when the micro-managing departments which have no understanding of what is required to make the product are making it impossible to make the product, then from my point of view, the accountants have taken over.
Sorry, but I've worked in far too many corporate environments where the process overshadows the actual work, and the process is frequently divorced from reality.
It's like every Dilbert joke come to life some days, or Office Space. Never underestimate how badly a company can go downhill when the internal business processes make it impossible to actually do the business of the company.
I've known people who worked at IBM, and in a lot of ways they have the exact same problems.
And, except for Pixar and Marvel which Disney has bought and not yet ground into dust ... Disney spent an awful lot of years putting out endless, lousy, direct to video sequels and other stuff which was just an endless rehashing of stuff they've already done. Which is why they wanted LucasArts in the first place I'm guessing.
Sometimes stuff gets done despite a management structure stacked against you. But over time, even that can get beaten down.
LOL ... do the ladies swoon when you tell them this?
I'm not sure I'd be interested in even trying to train myself to keep track of which of 13 buttons I'd mapped to those things.
If I wanted to surf the web while I was laying in bed or in my easy chair ... I'd use my tablet.
So essentially the same thing that happens at every large company over time with roots in creating stuff?
It seems like corporations more or less get to a point where they collapse under their own weight and cease to be able to actually do things.
In my experience, that happens right around the time accountants start micro-managing everything, and when winning "buzzword bingo" happens in every company call.
At some point, companies change from being places that create stuff and can get things done, and morph into an entity where you need huge reams of paperwork to get a new pen. At that point, everything you do starts to feel like a futile gesture.
The accountants won't let anything happen, and management is more focused on covering their own asses than building anything new.
Or, you know, Windows 8 shortcuts are non-intuitive and confusing to users.
If their 'shortcuts' need a tutorial, then it sounds more like they've been badly designed.
Oh, I'm sure they'll keep trying to look innovative. ;-)
I just think they seem to be missing the mark and coming up with stuff that everyone is asking "what the hell would I want that for?"
So no I have to lift my hands from the keyboard to control stuff?
Just how many of the normal motions I make with my hands will trigger random window events?
Sorry guys, but this sounds like a terrible idea, and not one I'd be interested in.
So does having a camera/motion tracker in front of me all day long, especially since Microsoft has already tipped their hand at being able to gather all sorts of extra data with it.
Then you miss my point, I'm saying "approve them and let the courts figure it out" is what they do now, not that they should start doing it.
Oddly enough, you'll note that I did exactly that. It was the post I replied to who said they were incompetent.
This may come as a shock to you, but my government and your government are likely two different entities.
If I contact my government about how many stupid patents the US Patent Office approves, I'd get nowhere.
But the existence of a patent for sideways swinging and some of the other stupid things I've seen tell me that either these guys are truly grossly incompetent, or have been told to approve everything to collect the fees.
You don't need to be an American to look at some of the stupid patents which have been granted and wonder what the hell they were thinking.
If you have yeast, hops and barley ... you can make your own beer if there's water there.
Red Planet Ale sounds tasty.
If you hold a patent that hasn't been invalidated by a court, then likely yes.
Now, as to how you could possibly patent a comb-over or swinging sideways ... well, that's a fascinating question.
Is it incompetence, or a system which is measured as successful by how many patents it processes and accepts?
I don't get the impression the USPTO has any incentive to do their job thoroughly and competently -- but that this is what they've been told to do by the government.
Just keep cranking out patents and let the courts decide seems to be how they operate.
Since when has reality ever factored in when politicians try to legislate technological issues they don't understand and can't control?
As well intentioned as it is, between jurisdictional issues and technical issues ... you just can't hope to make this work.
Kind of like do-not-call lists and rules which require spam to identify itself as spam and give you a way to unsubscribe. People just ignore them too.
And you think people would be well served by allowing Twitter access to their GPS location and accelerometer data?
Much as I'm sure they'd love to have that, there's no way in hell they should be given it.
So, spy on everyone all the time to see if it would be appropriate to send them an emergency message?
And people wonder why I have no interest in Twitter.
Or their names on the paper.
Nah, pissed off grad students and research assistants who weren't going to get any credit. :-P
You are probably correct, and a re-read of your post confirms that.
I had read it as you saying that they are fully formed and therefore fully capable of differentiating fantasy and real. But a closer read of this and your previous posts tells me I need another coffee. Yes, it is not a one size fits all kind of thing.
My bad. :-P
I'm not sure it's quite so black and white.
Does your child understand that these things wouldn't be acceptable? Or do they think that's how you're supposed to do it?
There's an oft-quoted thing (which I have no idea is true) that you can't test a teenager to see if they're a sociopath, because most teenagers test as a sociopath anyway.
And, to be honest, what little I remember of being 10 and what I've seen of kids that age since then that there is that much of a solid differentiation between fantasy and reality, or that it's indicative of other mental illnesses. Your average 10 year old is going to be fuzzy on some concepts of morality, and completely oblivious to others.
I think the reason people say they're not fully formed people is because there are still things going on that precludes them from being able to make certain kinds of judgements because they don't yet have the experience and maturity to do it.
And I'm just not convinced that giving a 10 year old GTA is really a good choice -- and a bunch of years ago when my nephews were around that age and someone bought them a copy of GTA, I wasn't sure it was a good idea then either. Stealing cars and smacking down ho's wasn't something you wanted them growing up emulating.
I'm not saying it can't, but Microsoft is marketing is largely on the fact that it's got Office and Outlook. Which makes it look like that's the main point.
But, if you already use Google's services, an Android tablet is more useful to you because it's already integrated with those. If you already use Apple's stuff, you're going to stick with that. And Microsoft is to late to market with this people are already on one of the other platforms.
The reality is, unless you specifically want this stuff to be delivered to you by Microsoft, and if you can get past some of the awful things I've seen about the Metro interface, you might not look at them.
Microsoft has burned a lot of goodwill with people over the years. So unless I had a compelling reason why I'd want/need to be using Microsoft stuff, I'm more inclined to buy an Android device. Because it's got more apps, and because I'm already using Android.
So, unless you are really really keen on having a Microsoft product, there is very little to make a compelling argument that's what you should go out and buy.
The articles I'm seeing so far seem to boil down to "yeah, it's an improvement, but I still don't want one".
Microsoft is so focused on Office and Outlook that they seem to forget that the huge consumer market for tablets isn't being driven by these features. When everything you do is geared to a corporate environment, people not using it in a corporate environment don't look at your product.
It just often seems like Microsoft is doing it's usual "this is what the market wants", and not actually looking at what people do want.
And, quite frankly, Excel spreadsheets, PowerPoint slides, and connecting to a corporate Exchange server with Outlook .. that's not what the vast majority of people buying tablets use them for. It's like they're stuck in that "I'm a PC" mindset from those Apple commercials where the Mac is talking about having fun, and the PC is talking about making charts and saying those are fun.
Tablets are (from what I can see) used as infotainment devices with the ability to send some emails and surf the web. But somehow Microsoft, as ever, is looking at the business use case -- and I am pretty sure that the business use case is a much smaller chunk of the market.
So in terms of what is going to make people choose the Microsoft tablet over an Android tablet, it seems like a much smaller group is going to be looking for that.
Whether this is a product Microsoft keeps losing money on until they get any meaningful market share (like they did with the XBox), or the product starts gaining traction ... I have no idea. But looking at what I use my tablet for, Microsoft seems to be missing the point.
Which I should think would have about the same effect as telling your elected representative your displeasure ... the people who pay them huge money in campaign donations get their ear, and the rest of us can go pound sand.
The *AAs likely made some donations contingent on having their views on copyright be required in school. And they will skew the facts the way they always do on the topic of copyright, so the kids will be getting lied to.
And, I'm betting the vast majority of parents can't afford to send their children to private school.
I've seen people fail to start driving when the light turns green because they were texting. I've seen people almost not stop for a light because they were looking at their screen. I've seen the driver behind me with both thumbs typing away on his device and therefore no hands on the wheel. I routinely see people driving along looking at their lap instead of where they're driving as they try to do a quick text.
So, I have no sympathy for people who are convinced they're so awesome at multi-tasking that they're trying to text and drive and end up getting a ticket.
I could walk 5 minutes from my house to an intersection, and if I stood in one place and simply photographed all of the drivers texting or talking on their phone (in their hand and gesturing with the other one), that I bet 30% or more of drivers are doing it.
If the stats tell us that distracted driving is causing a huge number of traffic accidents, then if the cop has decided to enforce the law on all of these people, too bad for them.
From what I've seen, those who can't resist a quick text at the stop light are also doing it while they're driving. It's often astounding to me just how many drivers are paying more attention to their phone than the cars around them.