Historically, IBM keyboards like the 84-key on my trusty ol' XT put control left of A where it was on every other DTE/computer keyboard at the time. Unfortunately the AT keyboard put it back where it was on typewriters.
Personally, I remap caps lock on modern keyboards back to control as I use it far more often than even the shift keys. It's also how my finger memory was programmed an age ago. On typical terminals ^H is easier than reaching for backspace, ^[ for escape, ^I for tab, ^U for kill line not to mention all those handy vi and emacs editing commands. I suffer from tendinitis across the tops of my hands which is magnified by reaching for keys more than a keycap away from the home row. Control-below-shift is the worst with my little finger curling up to do the reaching.
Apparently some cars already have stick controls, how have they handled these issues? Or is it assumed that handicapped drivers aren't likely to drive to such extremes?
A friend of mine drives his 928 is PCA club races. He uses levers to actuate the brake and throttle. He uses a wheel to control the steering.
That's funny and I see you're joking. Maybe you're thinking of the rudder pedals? My RWD cars have always had yaw control. The FWD cars too with some coaxing. Gas, turn, lift, countersteer, gas.... Given enough power you really don't even need to lift.
Now controlling that with the twitchiness of a joystick even if they do get the feedback right is another matter entirely. And that's coming from a person used to a very quick "sneeze and die" steering ratio. Lateral movement controls in a car are largely inferior than rotary (or pushbutton) controls because they are more easily affected by the movement of your body within the car during bumps and turns. I can hang onto a wheel or dial to steady myself and still provide usable control inputs, not so with a slider.
To counter the twitchiness, maybe you introduce acceleration into the movement: precise on-center and progressively faster steering (maybe not accel/decel) as you get to the end of travel. I predict that increases the learning curve and implementation difficulties, particularly between differing marques.
Moving to vim is still on my to-do list. You see, I've been using nvi for a very long time and I'm rather used to its implementation of various extensions. What I desire most is vim's tab-complete-everything, search history and superior UTF-8 handling.
But what are your vim vs. other vi annoyances?
The only big thing I can think of off the top of my head is the undo stack's incompatability with original BSD vi. "uu" in BSD vi and nvi undo and "un-undo" a change. In vim, this undoes the last two operations. Nvi implements the undo stack with ".", the perfectly vi-like repeat command. Thus "u." undoes the last two operations. I'm sure with some practice I can overcome this incompatability, but it's an unnecessary and most un-vi-like UI gaffe IMHO. Advice?
I rather prefer nvi's simpler if less powerful split screen capability for the fewer keystrokes alone. I don't need half a dozen buffers open at once so the clever management benefits me little. I use cscope for complex navigation. An inconsequential quibble — power to Teh Vim!
I also like the way nvi lets me fully manage my own command history just like any other edit buffer. I can prune, sort, etc. my history. Vim is rather inflexible on this point.
I just use ctrl-[ (open bracket, a.k.a. ASCII ESC). Works well on all keyboards and ctrl is a much more common keystroke so the finger memory is already there. 'Course I also map ctrl to be left of A where it was before the IBM PC/AT screwed it up.;-)
I'm similarly lazy with backspace (ctrl-H) and tab (ctrl-I). I seem to do fine with newline.
Modal editing is a common complaint. It's just a different paradigm and a very small time investment can get most folks past it.
Anyone who is willing to switch there entire network over to something only out of beta for a few days is an idiot. It's that simple.
It's called eating your own dogfood and I respect anyone willing to put their business on the line to prove their product works well. Time will tell if this pays off for Microsoft. But I'm sure you know better...
Last I checked I was also getting 62.something lifetime mileage in our '02 commuting in Austin. (Hiya, neighbor.) 'Course I usually get between 68 and 76 commuting down Mopac every day, so it's been on the rise ever since we bought it. My best southbound was 80.3 and northbound was 83.4 mpg. The EPA rated the '02s at 61/68.
I'm a little surprised at how much outrage such a simple thing has caused. Granted, most of it is simply humorous (like this particular thread) but some of these messages are really creepy. My advice: cut back.:-)
You may be surprised that some people can most often regulate their sleep patterns naturally but that they actually like the flavor of coffee. I regard anything to preserve the flavor a step in the right direction.
It may be a fruit salad comparison but the 6M/384K SBC ADSL connection I've had for about three years totally kills my neighbor's TimeWarner cable. It's more reliable too. (And rather more expensive, but I didn't notice that was part of the comparison.) The speed came up noticably when SBC extended their coverage area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't SUV's not part of the CAFE?
SUVs, pickups and other light trucks are not part of the car CAFE regulations. They have their own, more forgiving fuel economy requirements. This made sense when uncool trucks stayed on the farm and one drove one's nice car into town. Now that trucks are commonly used as commuter vehicles (sigh) or fashion accessories (double sigh) there is a push for light truck regs to match passenger car regs or at least to raise CAFE numbers for both. Given the number of single-passenger SUVs and pickups I see on my commute -- almost 50% -- I'm all for equal CAFE regs for (non-commercial) light trucks and cars.
Slashdot Mirror
Historically, IBM keyboards like the 84-key on my trusty ol' XT put control left of A where it was on every other DTE/computer keyboard at the time. Unfortunately the AT keyboard put it back where it was on typewriters.
Personally, I remap caps lock on modern keyboards back to control as I use it far more often than even the shift keys. It's also how my finger memory was programmed an age ago. On typical terminals ^H is easier than reaching for backspace, ^[ for escape, ^I for tab, ^U for kill line not to mention all those handy vi and emacs editing commands. I suffer from tendinitis across the tops of my hands which is magnified by reaching for keys more than a keycap away from the home row. Control-below-shift is the worst with my little finger curling up to do the reaching.
Apparently some cars already have stick controls, how have they handled these issues? Or is it assumed that handicapped drivers aren't likely to drive to such extremes?
A friend of mine drives his 928 is PCA club races. He uses levers to actuate the brake and throttle. He uses a wheel to control the steering.
That's funny and I see you're joking. Maybe you're thinking of the rudder pedals? My RWD cars have always had yaw control. The FWD cars too with some coaxing. Gas, turn, lift, countersteer, gas.... Given enough power you really don't even need to lift.
Now controlling that with the twitchiness of a joystick even if they do get the feedback right is another matter entirely. And that's coming from a person used to a very quick "sneeze and die" steering ratio. Lateral movement controls in a car are largely inferior than rotary (or pushbutton) controls because they are more easily affected by the movement of your body within the car during bumps and turns. I can hang onto a wheel or dial to steady myself and still provide usable control inputs, not so with a slider.
To counter the twitchiness, maybe you introduce acceleration into the movement: precise on-center and progressively faster steering (maybe not accel/decel) as you get to the end of travel. I predict that increases the learning curve and implementation difficulties, particularly between differing marques.
Moving to vim is still on my to-do list. You see, I've been using nvi for a very long time and I'm rather used to its implementation of various extensions. What I desire most is vim's tab-complete-everything, search history and superior UTF-8 handling.
But what are your vim vs. other vi annoyances?
The only big thing I can think of off the top of my head is the undo stack's incompatability with original BSD vi. "uu" in BSD vi and nvi undo and "un-undo" a change. In vim, this undoes the last two operations. Nvi implements the undo stack with ".", the perfectly vi-like repeat command. Thus "u." undoes the last two operations. I'm sure with some practice I can overcome this incompatability, but it's an unnecessary and most un-vi-like UI gaffe IMHO. Advice?
I rather prefer nvi's simpler if less powerful split screen capability for the fewer keystrokes alone. I don't need half a dozen buffers open at once so the clever management benefits me little. I use cscope for complex navigation. An inconsequential quibble — power to Teh Vim!
I also like the way nvi lets me fully manage my own command history just like any other edit buffer. I can prune, sort, etc. my history. Vim is rather inflexible on this point.
I just use ctrl-[ (open bracket, a.k.a. ASCII ESC). Works well on all keyboards and ctrl is a much more common keystroke so the finger memory is already there. 'Course I also map ctrl to be left of A where it was before the IBM PC/AT screwed it up. ;-)
I'm similarly lazy with backspace (ctrl-H) and tab (ctrl-I). I seem to do fine with newline.
Modal editing is a common complaint. It's just a different paradigm and a very small time investment can get most folks past it.
It's called eating your own dogfood and I respect anyone willing to put their business on the line to prove their product works well. Time will tell if this pays off for Microsoft. But I'm sure you know better...
Last I checked I was also getting 62.something lifetime mileage in our '02 commuting in Austin. (Hiya, neighbor.) 'Course I usually get between 68 and 76 commuting down Mopac every day, so it's been on the rise ever since we bought it. My best southbound was 80.3 and northbound was 83.4 mpg. The EPA rated the '02s at 61/68.
Yes, this is true of traditional lead-acid batteries, but what about the NiCd and NiMH batteries powering the electric motors in hybrid cars?
Run your markup through the W3C Validator or Google for any number of other free, online resources. Share and enjoy!
You may be surprised that some people can most often regulate their sleep patterns naturally but that they actually like the flavor of coffee. I regard anything to preserve the flavor a step in the right direction.
It may be a fruit salad comparison but the 6M/384K SBC ADSL connection I've had for about three years totally kills my neighbor's TimeWarner cable. It's more reliable too. (And rather more expensive, but I didn't notice that was part of the comparison.) The speed came up noticably when SBC extended their coverage area.
SUVs, pickups and other light trucks are not part of the car CAFE regulations. They have their own, more forgiving fuel economy requirements. This made sense when uncool trucks stayed on the farm and one drove one's nice car into town. Now that trucks are commonly used as commuter vehicles (sigh) or fashion accessories (double sigh) there is a push for light truck regs to match passenger car regs or at least to raise CAFE numbers for both. Given the number of single-passenger SUVs and pickups I see on my commute -- almost 50% -- I'm all for equal CAFE regs for (non-commercial) light trucks and cars.