Okay, so you have your keyboard interface. This is always undergoing some modification, sometimes radical, most times less so. The standard QWERTY layout vs Dvorak, of course, but then you have your ergonomic vs straight layout argument, as well as chording keyboards, keyboards drawn with light, keyboards that can fold up, keyboards with decent keys (Hello, Model M, I love you!), etc.
You gotcher mouse, trackball, and mutant variations and combinations thereof, including tablets. Add force feedback and stir, where appropriate (slow down the mouse over window controls, etc.). Oh yeah, don't forget the whole wireless vs wired argument, plus security or lack thereof implied therein.
You gotcher touchscreens (icky), and yer voice command, and then, we come at last to voice recognition and haptic interfaces.
The thing is, humans have a limited number of ways to enter information, and depending on the nature of the information, it's going to probably have to come down to keyboards or voice recognition (or handwriting recognition) for _entering_ information.
For _manipulating_ information, you have a lot more choices, but doing so efficiently depends heavily on the nature of the information being manupulated. If you're editing a video, the appropriate efficient interface is probably going to be vastly different from that of editing plain text. And there's always going to be a personal preference entering the equation (e.g. some prefer trackballs over mice, some prefer pen & tablet over either).
I don't want an interface that uses scent or taste, thanks.:)
Well... if all mouse buttons are marked like a keyboard, and do the same thing regardless of context.
That's what the right mouse button is FOR, to pull up the context menu. The same thing when you hit the command-apple-whatever key, the appropriate menu for wherever the mouse pointer is.
The thing is, it's not that the Mac doesn't have the equivalent functionality, because it does, it's that it forces you to use a combination of mouse and keyboard instead of having a key just for that on the mouse.
If you are right, why can't I play piano when it has less 'key's than my keyboard? It should be simpler right?
Funny way of putting it, but hardly the same thing. The difference between a 2 key device and a 1 key device is more accurately stated as a difference of '1' in this case, rather than the true but misleading '100% more'. One extra button on the mouse to make something that Mac users already do easier, rather than something they don't already do.
Look, if _Windows users_ can do it, surely Mac users can too.:)
one button mouse, it's very difficult to press the wrong button
Look, if a person can handle a keyboard full of keys, surely they can handle a measley two button mouse! By having only one button on the mouse, even a normal user can make very good use of the right mouse button under Windows. With the Mac, one has to use a combination of holding down a key on the keyboard at the same time as pressing the mouse button to get equivalent functionality. I'd argue that's much more complex than having a second mouse button.
Not that that will stop me from buying a Mac mini when I have the money. But I sure as hell won't be using a one button mouse with it.:)
You need to realize that not all machines run all browsers the same way. On a low resources machine (slow cpu, not much RAM), IE and Opera absolutely blow away Firefox. Since I'm sure as hell NOT going to run IE, that leaves me Opera for my work machine, as Firefox is unbelievably slow on this machine. Even the moox builds don't help that much. There are also still big problems with CPU usage with Firefox on pages with badly-designed Flash (which don't have the same CPU usage problem with IE/Opera). Depends on your situation.
Fortunately even really high quality RAM (like Corsair) in the PC3200 (faster than the Mac mini uses) 1Gig DIMM variety with 2.5-3-3 timings, still cost far less than what Apple charges. Even if you pay Apple $50 to install it for you, you're going to save some real money there.
The thing I'm concerned with upgrading is the HD - I really want a 7200rpm drive in mine (Hitachi makes a nice 60GB model).
I meant for the ][, II,// family, not for Apple. The Mac mini is probably going to double their marketshare. At least, I hope so. At last, I can afford a Mac!
Ahh, the good ole days. Choplifter, Hard Hat Mack, Conan, Gemstone Warrior, & Karateka. Back when games were fun. Games today are either Mortal Kombat clones, or race games. No imagination.
I can think of a few reasons, right off the top of my head:
1) Improving the UI. Many cameras suffer from poor UI design.
2) Improving algorithms in the firmware. Many reviews I read on DPReview show that many cameras have overly-aggressive sharpening, etc. There are obviously many settings in most cameras that aren't controllable via the normal UI that could be if it were opened.
3) Adding support for new file formats and software features.
4) Adding support for more settings, or changing default settings. A 'SNAP' (hyperfocal) mode could and should be available on every camera, for instance. Or having some easily-accessible presets.
I'm sure there are lots of other things that could be added if it were made possible.
But, being the smart and vicious people we are, we will have superior weapons to the over 95% of the populace, so overpopulation shouldn't be a problem.
Either that, or, hey, more slaves to do our bidding!
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, so you have your keyboard interface. This is always undergoing some modification, sometimes radical, most times less so. The standard QWERTY layout vs Dvorak, of course, but then you have your ergonomic vs straight layout argument, as well as chording keyboards, keyboards drawn with light, keyboards that can fold up, keyboards with decent keys (Hello, Model M, I love you!), etc.
:)
You gotcher mouse, trackball, and mutant variations and combinations thereof, including tablets. Add force feedback and stir, where appropriate (slow down the mouse over window controls, etc.). Oh yeah, don't forget the whole wireless vs wired argument, plus security or lack thereof implied therein.
You gotcher touchscreens (icky), and yer voice command, and then, we come at last to voice recognition and haptic interfaces.
The thing is, humans have a limited number of ways to enter information, and depending on the nature of the information, it's going to probably have to come down to keyboards or voice recognition (or handwriting recognition) for _entering_ information.
For _manipulating_ information, you have a lot more choices, but doing so efficiently depends heavily on the nature of the information being manupulated. If you're editing a video, the appropriate efficient interface is probably going to be vastly different from that of editing plain text. And there's always going to be a personal preference entering the equation (e.g. some prefer trackballs over mice, some prefer pen & tablet over either).
I don't want an interface that uses scent or taste, thanks.
"Don't write perl." :)
Fortran-77 was the bane of my college existence. *shudder*
Well... if all mouse buttons are marked like a keyboard, and do the same thing regardless of context.
:)
That's what the right mouse button is FOR, to pull up the context menu. The same thing when you hit the command-apple-whatever key, the appropriate menu for wherever the mouse pointer is.
The thing is, it's not that the Mac doesn't have the equivalent functionality, because it does, it's that it forces you to use a combination of mouse and keyboard instead of having a key just for that on the mouse.
If you are right, why can't I play piano when it has less 'key's than my keyboard? It should be simpler right?
Funny way of putting it, but hardly the same thing. The difference between a 2 key device and a 1 key device is more accurately stated as a difference of '1' in this case, rather than the true but misleading '100% more'. One extra button on the mouse to make something that Mac users already do easier, rather than something they don't already do.
Look, if _Windows users_ can do it, surely Mac users can too.
We had to program in 6502 machine code, using a non-relocatable assembler, in under 32K, and save onto tape!
You had a tape drive?! Lucky bastard!
You can buy a mouse and keyboard with it if you want. Just as you can buy a display, add memory, etc.
one button mouse, it's very difficult to press the wrong button
:)
Look, if a person can handle a keyboard full of keys, surely they can handle a measley two button mouse! By having only one button on the mouse, even a normal user can make very good use of the right mouse button under Windows. With the Mac, one has to use a combination of holding down a key on the keyboard at the same time as pressing the mouse button to get equivalent functionality. I'd argue that's much more complex than having a second mouse button.
Not that that will stop me from buying a Mac mini when I have the money. But I sure as hell won't be using a one button mouse with it.
You are such a nerd.
:)
You beat me to commenting on that.
I think they should alternate the nesting between parentheses and braces. You know, to make it more readable. :)
(((Score)==(+3))(Insightful)))
I haven't seen so many parentheses since my cat slept on my keyboard. *ba-bam!*
You need to realize that not all machines run all browsers the same way. On a low resources machine (slow cpu, not much RAM), IE and Opera absolutely blow away Firefox. Since I'm sure as hell NOT going to run IE, that leaves me Opera for my work machine, as Firefox is unbelievably slow on this machine. Even the moox builds don't help that much. There are also still big problems with CPU usage with Firefox on pages with badly-designed Flash (which don't have the same CPU usage problem with IE/Opera). Depends on your situation.
TOO RIGHT!
This is the reason I'm stuck using Opera at work - it's the only browser that performs well. Time to DL the newest K-Meleon and give it a whirl.
(who lusts for the feel of a 3270 keyboard under his fingers)
:)
Dammit, you had to bring up the best keyboard ever made. Now I've got an erection. I'm such a nerd.
Fortunately even really high quality RAM (like Corsair) in the PC3200 (faster than the Mac mini uses) 1Gig DIMM variety with 2.5-3-3 timings, still cost far less than what Apple charges. Even if you pay Apple $50 to install it for you, you're going to save some real money there.
The thing I'm concerned with upgrading is the HD - I really want a 7200rpm drive in mine (Hitachi makes a nice 60GB model).
I meant for the ][, II, // family, not for Apple. The Mac mini is probably going to double their marketshare. At least, I hope so. At last, I can afford a Mac!
My Apple //e said //e, not ][e or IIe, FYI.
//gs, IMO. What a piece of crap compared to the Amiga 1000 which predated it!
The beginning of the end was the Apple
Blasphemy! Everybody knows it's ][, not II!
//, old-timer.
Hardly. It's
Ahh, the good ole days. Choplifter, Hard Hat Mack, Conan, Gemstone Warrior, & Karateka. Back when games were fun. Games today are either Mortal Kombat clones, or race games. No imagination.
Where the hell's my PSP, Sony?!
if you're sitting on top of Quartz, might as well use it, no?
If you use the quartz-wm, you _are_ using Quartz with X11 on OS X, at least, that's my understanding, and what the article link says.
It's always the worst day of the year in England!
That's some pretty nasty-looking code. Probably a Perl programmer. :)
The thing is, many things Mac users expand with are external devices via USB or Firewire, so the Mac Mini _can_ be expanded in fairly common Mac ways.
What case with PSU are you using for your comparison?
I can think of a few reasons, right off the top of my head:
1) Improving the UI. Many cameras suffer from poor UI design.
2) Improving algorithms in the firmware. Many reviews I read on DPReview show that many cameras have overly-aggressive sharpening, etc. There are obviously many settings in most cameras that aren't controllable via the normal UI that could be if it were opened.
3) Adding support for new file formats and software features.
4) Adding support for more settings, or changing default settings. A 'SNAP' (hyperfocal) mode could and should be available on every camera, for instance. Or having some easily-accessible presets.
I'm sure there are lots of other things that could be added if it were made possible.
I had actually considered this one:
Mac OS XX, codename "Hello Kitty (we've run out of big cat names)"
But it didn't roll of the tongue well.
Additions:
Hurd, still not ready.
*BSD, still dying.
But, being the smart and vicious people we are, we will have superior weapons to the over 95% of the populace, so overpopulation shouldn't be a problem.
:)
Either that, or, hey, more slaves to do our bidding!
Yes, I think like a cat.