Windows 8 has a reputation already for having a "horrible interface" -- It remains to be seen, however, how well the UI will work in practice. Reviews seem mixed to me, and I'm withholding judgement until I've spent a few months with the new UI. (I'll get back to you on that sometime in 2014, maybe.)
Now, the idiotic policies regarding what we once called "metro" apps are something we can legitimately hate about Windows 8. Let's stick to that for now.
The power button is, by the way, the wrong way to shut down a machine. It variously sleeps, hibernates or hard reboots the machine depending on your configuration.
What a stupid reason. That's like saying that using the keyboard to type is the wrong way because all of the keys various represent different letters depending on your configuration.
By default, pressing the power button starts a soft shutdown (not a "hard reboot" -- you've got to hold the button for that, and in that case, it's not the work of software!) It's absolutely no different than clicking start->shutdown. The end result is the same.
When I shut a machine down at work, I hit the power button. The machine shuts down gracefully. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
That problem demands real solutions from which tangible results can be seen in a reasonable time-frame. Global warming, well, it's way harder to see if we're making any progress. That makes it much easier to turn a profit feeding in to the hysteria as you don't need to do any actual work.
Just kidding, of course. Want to buy some carbon offsets? They're totally legit.
Well, not having 20/10 vision, the extra resolution doesn't mean I get much more on the screen with a higher resolution. These fancy newfangled widescreen monitors do make placing two windows side-by-side more attractive. Still, outside a few rare occasions, I've not had the need.
TeXWorks by default puts the code and preview windows side by side, for example. Of course, I wouldn't notice if they were just jammed in to one window. That is, while it's great to have them side-by-side, my use of the apps is no different than if the code and preview were together in one maximized. window Writing code, I want as much space as I can get, so the editor is always maximized. For the web, well, it seems the whole damned thing is nothing but pages designed to not shrink below 1024 on the horizontal -- I could zoom out and see everything, but then I couldn't read the tiny text.
I have no need to constantly monitor a bunch of little things. For regular stuff like email, little notifications in the corner serve me more than adequately.
I guess 99% of my need for overlapping windows is file management, but it's only an occasional convenience.
How are your needs better served by cascaded or tiled windows?
Well, as far back as windows 3.1 there were options to arrange open windows. It's common to see a toolbar button or two in software that uses an MDI to arrange sub-windows in stacks or to tile them.
Why isn't it common? Well, it turns out that no one works that way. Most people work with apps in full-screen, switching between them when needed. For those rare weirdo's who do want more than one window open on the display at once, they don't want the OS deciding how to arrange their windows.
You're new to this whole "reading" thing, aren't you? Read my post again. You'll figure out what all those words mean in no time!
Oh, just FYI, the blame for everything on your list was lays squarely with conservative idiots. The only possible exception is Vietnam, though only due to LBJ. The motivations for the "war" are undeniably conservative.
Learn to read, then learn some history. You've got a very long way to go...
When you see "down everyone's throat" you can safely assume that the comment is made by a poorly educated conservative who thinks that Fox News is the only media outlet that "tells it like it is".
I see it as an exception to Poe's Law. Well, until now...
Give me a break. Do what the rest of us do and live below your means. At $100k/year, any responsible person could have $200k of student loan debt paid off in well-under 10 years and still have a nice lifestyle.
I know that Tesla worship is all the rage, but does he need mentioned every time someone brings up Edison? Hell, bringing him up here only implies that he was a "greedy entrepreneur" -- probably not the message you wanted to send!
I agree that Tesla isn't given the historical credit he deserves. Still, we can't go on about Tesla as if he was the genius of geniuses who did nothing but amazing work.
The truth is that most of Tesla's inventions were squarely in crack-pot territory. From his earthquake machine to his camera for photographing thoughts, Tesla was the 19th century equivalent of the peswiki.com community all wrapped up in one crazy package.
You're being deliberately obtuse. The $10 addon is, as you know, a bit dishonest. Some of the more popular addons to restore lost functionality cost close to $500.
Sure, it added some new features, but was, at release, quite obviously not a professional tool -- as professionals tell it. I don't get the bits in all caps -- Project Backups? Yeah... if that was missing in the first few releases of FCPX, it was quite clearly not ready for prime-time.
Still, if you want to list features, you'll need to compare the features list from other competing packages. I don't know enough about that market to comment, but I suspect things like project backups are standard features!
Features like trackless editing seem to be a mix -- some people love it, other hate it -- and it doesn't jive with the processes the industry has developed over the past few decades. Really, it doesn't matter how great that feature is if adopting it locks you in to FCP. Not a great decision as Apple seems intent on alienating the professional market (see the recent MBP troubles) -- Competing options like Premier look a lot more attractive price-wise when you consider the difference in price between Adobe and Apple post addons, and it'll work with your old FCP7 projects. It was a bad move on Apple's part, if they wanted to retain the pro market, no matter which way you slice it.
Still, there are rather important missing features more than a year after release. I don't know that I'd call that "timely".
I know that you love Apple stuff, but you're being somewhat less than rational in your defense here. They clearly misread the professional market and botched FCPX. It's okay. You'll get over it.
It's the opposite here. Technical folks in the are avoid Apple products so that they *don't* need to overcome technical difficulties and limitations. That's spilled over to the average consumer here as well, for similar reasons. I guess you could say that the county is virtually Apple-free.
I find the buttons for flipping pages on my Kindle v3 are very well placed. I'd hate to touch the screen I'm reading on. It bothers me.
On the plus side for you, there are several ebook readers that feature a touchscreen, including recent Kindle and Nook models. Even my wife's old Sony eReader features a touchscreen (using IR, no less -- works with either a finger or fine-point stylus. It's very cool.) So if a touchscreen is important to you, for whatever reason, you can have your choice of e-readers.
Doesn't that make the point though? If you need to rely extensively on third-party software to make up for features missing in the new release, which were present in the old release, it's not difficult to argue that the new software is no longer the professional tool it was in previous incarnations. That these features are in other professional tools from Avid and Adobe just kind of cements it, yeah?
I'm sure you can think of other instances where Apple has misunderstood the professional market in some of their other products. I know I can think of few myself.
That's quite a baby boom! Still, I'm skeptical that their population could increase nearly 100 fold so quickly -- no matter how efficient the population is at fucking.
No, I think I can handle basic arithmetic. What you want me to think, of course, is "Holy Shit! Millons of very scary Muslims! In INDIA!!!"
Let's not play pretend that the purpose of that first paragraph was something other than pure rhetoric. You can keep your klansman-style propaganda, we don't need it here.
As for the supposed threat of Islamic terrorism, I'm not even a little bit concerned. See, here in the US the big threat isn't Muslims -- it's hateful bigots. You'll find that here, virtually every act of terrorism in the last decade was committed by a Christian. Typically white and, more often than not, by someone who shares your hateful beliefs about Muslims.
Enjoy living in fear in your imaginary hate-filled world. I recommend that you avoid reality -- you'll find that the monsters there look a bit too much like you for comfort...
One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.
One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.
The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that any sensible alternative is provided by the software. Of course, "updating" your workflow isn't helpful if that workflow doesn't jive with your other applications. As I understand it, FCPX doesn't support OMF transfers which appears to be a common feature. Given that solutions to many of the missing features in FCPX include the use of third-party software, this kind of omission, well, makes the software somewhat less than professional.
I don't know enough about video editing or the software to give a through critique -- all I can do is report on the problems. That FCPX was anything but a professional tool seems to be the consensus.
A quick google search will turn up article after article about the "royal clusterfuck" that was the release of Final Cut Pro X. Hell, I have no interest in the app at all and even I'm familiar with that mess of a release.
Anyhow, the biggest complaint seems to be that Apple removed a shit-ton of essential features from the program, turning a once professional tool in to a play-toy. See for yourself. Apple, once again, fails to understand working professionals and their needs.
Slashdot Mirror
Who talks like that?
Morons who parrot the opinions they've been told to have -- usually by repeating slogans. For example, I have actually heard people say:
"I like Fox [News], they're fair and balanced"
"I like Apple stuff because it just works"
"We really need to think globally and act locally"
Well, I guess "ducking" kinda sounds like what was going on ...
Windows 8 has a reputation already for having a "horrible interface" -- It remains to be seen, however, how well the UI will work in practice. Reviews seem mixed to me, and I'm withholding judgement until I've spent a few months with the new UI. (I'll get back to you on that sometime in 2014, maybe.)
Now, the idiotic policies regarding what we once called "metro" apps are something we can legitimately hate about Windows 8. Let's stick to that for now.
The power button is, by the way, the wrong way to shut down a machine. It variously sleeps, hibernates or hard reboots the machine depending on your configuration.
What a stupid reason. That's like saying that using the keyboard to type is the wrong way because all of the keys various represent different letters depending on your configuration.
By default, pressing the power button starts a soft shutdown (not a "hard reboot" -- you've got to hold the button for that, and in that case, it's not the work of software!) It's absolutely no different than clicking start->shutdown. The end result is the same.
When I shut a machine down at work, I hit the power button. The machine shuts down gracefully. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Monitor is about 3-4 feet away from me.
You have more than 2 feet???
He clearly said that his monitor is -1 feet away.
That problem demands real solutions from which tangible results can be seen in a reasonable time-frame. Global warming, well, it's way harder to see if we're making any progress. That makes it much easier to turn a profit feeding in to the hysteria as you don't need to do any actual work.
Just kidding, of course. Want to buy some carbon offsets? They're totally legit.
Well, not having 20/10 vision, the extra resolution doesn't mean I get much more on the screen with a higher resolution. These fancy newfangled widescreen monitors do make placing two windows side-by-side more attractive. Still, outside a few rare occasions, I've not had the need.
TeXWorks by default puts the code and preview windows side by side, for example. Of course, I wouldn't notice if they were just jammed in to one window. That is, while it's great to have them side-by-side, my use of the apps is no different than if the code and preview were together in one maximized. window Writing code, I want as much space as I can get, so the editor is always maximized. For the web, well, it seems the whole damned thing is nothing but pages designed to not shrink below 1024 on the horizontal -- I could zoom out and see everything, but then I couldn't read the tiny text.
I have no need to constantly monitor a bunch of little things. For regular stuff like email, little notifications in the corner serve me more than adequately.
I guess 99% of my need for overlapping windows is file management, but it's only an occasional convenience.
How are your needs better served by cascaded or tiled windows?
Well, as far back as windows 3.1 there were options to arrange open windows. It's common to see a toolbar button or two in software that uses an MDI to arrange sub-windows in stacks or to tile them.
Why isn't it common? Well, it turns out that no one works that way. Most people work with apps in full-screen, switching between them when needed. For those rare weirdo's who do want more than one window open on the display at once, they don't want the OS deciding how to arrange their windows.
I was agreeing that there is plenty of right wing crap shoved down our throats
So ... this was someone else?
There are plenty of things that both sides of the aisle shove down our throats, you simpleton.
Some peoples children...
You're new to this whole "reading" thing, aren't you? Read my post again. You'll figure out what all those words mean in no time!
Oh, just FYI, the blame for everything on your list was lays squarely with conservative idiots. The only possible exception is Vietnam, though only due to LBJ. The motivations for the "war" are undeniably conservative.
Learn to read, then learn some history. You've got a very long way to go...
Why? Unless a palette of homeopathic cold medicine falls on you, it's not like it can hurt you at all.
Oh, you mean so that idiots don't mistake it for actual medicine, right? Gotcha.
When you see "down everyone's throat" you can safely assume that the comment is made by a poorly educated conservative who thinks that Fox News is the only media outlet that "tells it like it is".
I see it as an exception to Poe's Law. Well, until now...
And they can't pay those off at $100k a year?
Give me a break. Do what the rest of us do and live below your means. At $100k/year, any responsible person could have $200k of student loan debt paid off in well-under 10 years and still have a nice lifestyle.
New to this reading thing, yeah?
I agree that Tesla isn't given the historical credit he deserves.
I know that Tesla worship is all the rage, but does he need mentioned every time someone brings up Edison? Hell, bringing him up here only implies that he was a "greedy entrepreneur" -- probably not the message you wanted to send!
I agree that Tesla isn't given the historical credit he deserves. Still, we can't go on about Tesla as if he was the genius of geniuses who did nothing but amazing work.
The truth is that most of Tesla's inventions were squarely in crack-pot territory. From his earthquake machine to his camera for photographing thoughts, Tesla was the 19th century equivalent of the peswiki.com community all wrapped up in one crazy package.
Let's find a little balance here.
You're being deliberately obtuse. The $10 addon is, as you know, a bit dishonest. Some of the more popular addons to restore lost functionality cost close to $500.
Sure, it added some new features, but was, at release, quite obviously not a professional tool -- as professionals tell it. I don't get the bits in all caps -- Project Backups? Yeah ... if that was missing in the first few releases of FCPX, it was quite clearly not ready for prime-time.
Still, if you want to list features, you'll need to compare the features list from other competing packages. I don't know enough about that market to comment, but I suspect things like project backups are standard features!
Features like trackless editing seem to be a mix -- some people love it, other hate it -- and it doesn't jive with the processes the industry has developed over the past few decades. Really, it doesn't matter how great that feature is if adopting it locks you in to FCP. Not a great decision as Apple seems intent on alienating the professional market (see the recent MBP troubles) -- Competing options like Premier look a lot more attractive price-wise when you consider the difference in price between Adobe and Apple post addons, and it'll work with your old FCP7 projects. It was a bad move on Apple's part, if they wanted to retain the pro market, no matter which way you slice it.
Still, there are rather important missing features more than a year after release. I don't know that I'd call that "timely".
I know that you love Apple stuff, but you're being somewhat less than rational in your defense here. They clearly misread the professional market and botched FCPX. It's okay. You'll get over it.
It's the opposite here. Technical folks in the are avoid Apple products so that they *don't* need to overcome technical difficulties and limitations. That's spilled over to the average consumer here as well, for similar reasons. I guess you could say that the county is virtually Apple-free.
I find the buttons for flipping pages on my Kindle v3 are very well placed. I'd hate to touch the screen I'm reading on. It bothers me.
On the plus side for you, there are several ebook readers that feature a touchscreen, including recent Kindle and Nook models. Even my wife's old Sony eReader features a touchscreen (using IR, no less -- works with either a finger or fine-point stylus. It's very cool.) So if a touchscreen is important to you, for whatever reason, you can have your choice of e-readers.
Doesn't that make the point though? If you need to rely extensively on third-party software to make up for features missing in the new release, which were present in the old release, it's not difficult to argue that the new software is no longer the professional tool it was in previous incarnations. That these features are in other professional tools from Avid and Adobe just kind of cements it, yeah?
I'm sure you can think of other instances where Apple has misunderstood the professional market in some of their other products. I know I can think of few myself.
That's quite a baby boom! Still, I'm skeptical that their population could increase nearly 100 fold so quickly -- no matter how efficient the population is at fucking.
And you can't do the math.
No, I think I can handle basic arithmetic. What you want me to think, of course, is "Holy Shit! Millons of very scary Muslims! In INDIA!!!"
Let's not play pretend that the purpose of that first paragraph was something other than pure rhetoric. You can keep your klansman-style propaganda, we don't need it here.
As for the supposed threat of Islamic terrorism, I'm not even a little bit concerned. See, here in the US the big threat isn't Muslims -- it's hateful bigots. You'll find that here, virtually every act of terrorism in the last decade was committed by a Christian. Typically white and, more often than not, by someone who shares your hateful beliefs about Muslims.
Enjoy living in fear in your imaginary hate-filled world. I recommend that you avoid reality -- you'll find that the monsters there look a bit too much like you for comfort...
One of the biggest complaints was the lack of multi-camera editing. I'm not that familiar with video editing, but that doesn't sound like a workflow issue to me. The same goes for the lack of RED camera support, which is apparently quite popular with filmmakers.
One particularly damning problem was the inability to import projects from the previous version of the software. Again, not really a workflow issue.
The inability to assign audio tracks I suppose is a workflow issue, though it doesn't appear that any sensible alternative is provided by the software. Of course, "updating" your workflow isn't helpful if that workflow doesn't jive with your other applications. As I understand it, FCPX doesn't support OMF transfers which appears to be a common feature. Given that solutions to many of the missing features in FCPX include the use of third-party software, this kind of omission, well, makes the software somewhat less than professional.
I don't know enough about video editing or the software to give a through critique -- all I can do is report on the problems. That FCPX was anything but a professional tool seems to be the consensus.
In your haste to submit your bigoted and hateful post, you forgot to check the demographics. India is overwhelmingly Hindu.
Apparently they don't.
A quick google search will turn up article after article about the "royal clusterfuck" that was the release of Final Cut Pro X. Hell, I have no interest in the app at all and even I'm familiar with that mess of a release.
Anyhow, the biggest complaint seems to be that Apple removed a shit-ton of essential features from the program, turning a once professional tool in to a play-toy. See for yourself. Apple, once again, fails to understand working professionals and their needs.
Yup, the solution to every problem Apple developers face is, as always, bend over a little further.