This morning I was standing outside my office after having spent the night there. I looked down the street and noticed that every building west of 5th Avenue had power while we where still in the dark.
I found myself thinking about the power line tool in SimCity. Man, if we just had one of those, we could hook up that block to our block...problem solved!
First of all, I'm not going to get into an esoteric debate about whether or not M$ has designed a good desktop (I happen to be using redhat 9 myself, and I was irked that they put a litle folder saying/home/cyranoVR on my desktop - I quickly renamed it...and why is there a little hat in the bottom left corner of my screen??? but I digress).
My point is this: on the GNOME RH9 desktop, there is a little icon that says "START HERE." Most home users (and a lot of corp users) would look at this icon and go "whaaaaaa? My computer is already started!" or somesuch. They are either lazy or dumb or both.
See, in my personal, Real World experience, I've found that people who don't grasp the "My Computer == THIS COMPUTER" paradigm also tend to think that that their computer works due to a little process known as "magic," gets "cranky" in the afternoons and only starts working properly when I walk into the room.
This group of people is so dense that the only way they are able to interact with their computer is through full screen prompts. God forbid that a dialog box appears in the middle of the screen saying "click OK to continue." I've seen users who, when presented with such boxes, ask befuddledly "what do I do now?"
(I would imagine that the above difficulty with dialog boxes is probably the origin of the Blue Screen of Death phenomenon)
Anyway, I am sincerely interested in hearing your suggestions on how we could improve the PC user interface? Perhaps we should do away with screens entirely and go back to giant levers, whistles and lamps? In all seriousness, I'm thinking some users would be better off with such a setup.
Maybe keyboards and mice should be replaced with oversized buttons that read "GET EMAIL" "PRINT DOCUMENT." Meanwhile, an oversized flashing light would indicate new email. Users could type their documents on a typewriter and then insert into a scanner to be digitized via OCR. Basically, the whole setup would look like a PlaySkool toy.
We have arrived at the desktop paradigm becaues these companies have whole R & D centers (like XEROX Parq for starters) that spent (combined) millions of dollars trying to dumb-down computers. But it is all for naught: you can't go less than zero on the IQ scale.
That's an ok POV and for the most part I agree with you. However, I understand that some companies have a budget. This means that if all a employee needs their computer for is to 1) send/recieve email 2) read pdfs 3) write a document in word 4) log onto the system mainframe 5) every once in a while, use the internet.
Then the system i described is going to do the job. They don't need the latest Dell or whatever for what they're doing. Again: the limiting factor is the budget. So they are going to have to learn to not run 10 applications at once.
Note that I'm not talking about legit complaints, like when they are using Word and it randomly crashes, losing everything. In that case, I work with them to recover the lost document if I can - but I also explain to them that upgrading to the latest Dell 5500 whatever will not solve buggy software problems (a very common misconception).
Ok first of all, we're using windows 98 for almost all the installs. We have a "no non-work related programs" policy, but enforcing it is more theory than fact because windows 98 doesn't have user-level control like win2k or XP does (unless I'm missing something here).
Second, our employees use AIM and MSN to talk to clients who are overseas. So we can't prevent them from installing those.
I basically have to go around telling our employees "try remember to close programs you aren't using."
I also have installed MaxMem on a few user PCs, but that doesn't always solve the problem.
What about the fact that users lie? I have had many many cases where a user calling in would not tell me what they had done to crash their computer / download the file / whatever.
Me: What were you doing when it crashed Usr: Nothing, I was just typing a letter and it crashed. [after I go to the user's desk on a different floor] Me: ok, I it looks like there is a "printing..." box up. So you were trying to print? Usr: No, it just crashed, why won't you get me a new computer!!!!
OR
Usr: I can't download the file into excel Me: Ok, what do you see on your screen Usr: What does that matter I want to download my statement! Me: You see the underlined words that say "download file." Usr: [immediately]Yeah sure. Me: Click that Usr: [slience] Me: Well? Usr: NOTHING HAPPENED! Me: Ok, you didn't see a box pop up that said "save as"? Usr: There isn't anything that says "download file!" Me: You just said clicked it, right? Usr: Look, just help me download my statement ok? Me: Ok, can you scroll down? Usr: Ok i found it. Me: Um ok click "download" Usr: [immediately]I did. Nothing happened! Me: Uh you have to wait for the file to download. Usr: Ok I clicked it. It says "downloading" Me: Ok good Usr: But excel's not opening! Look, ok, I just want to get this done. Give me your manager.
(Sidenote: customer's account manager confirmed later that this is a "problem" customer - i.e. stupidity is not a factor here).
Where's the "Forgotten Passwords" section? I have to deal with 3-4 users a day that have forgotten their password but are steadfast that they put in the "right" one and that their computer is "broken." 99 times out of 100, they had their caps lock key on (and, no, the XP feature that detects caps lock keys during password entries has not helped reduce this - users inexplicably ignore it). I guess that one's not very funny - just irritating.
Then there are the greedy users - you know who I'm talking about: the ones that run Excel, Word, Acrobat Reader, AIM, MSN Msgr and several IE windows all at once. They call me complaining that their computer keeps "crashing" and inevitably demand a "better" computer.
(Fun detail - all of them use the phrase "this is COMPLETELY unacceptable" after they finish describing their problem).
Of course, the problem isn't that their computer is crashing - no, it's that they are using W98 with 64MB ram while running their dozen apps at once. The "crash" is actually their OS struggling to keep up, constantly writing to the swap file. It was hanging so long that they figured it had crashed and would hit the reset button.
Now, granted, they could get a "better" computer (well, if not for our budget anyway) - but for the purposes of their job they could as well be using a 400mghz Win95 box with 32MB RAM and a 500MB hard drive. But NO they want a 1.4Ghz Dell with a flat panel and 80 gig hard drive so they can surf the web and write word documents. o_0 Dey is jus' greedy.
I understand your analogy, but that's not what has been happening in the last 10 years with home operating systems.
Designers of Home OS's (with Apple leading the way) have gone to ridiculous lengths to "dumb down" operating systems for users. It's gotten to the point where XP has little dancing banners and word balloons at every turn telling you what to do "CLICK HERE" "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THAT???" etc.
They haven't been "adding a new foot swtich to start the wipers." Rather, they have added a big red button to the dashboard that said "WINDOW WIPERS ON." Hell, I wish I had that button in my car - I still have problems getting the wipers set at the right speed (I live in NYC so I never had to drive a car until I moved to Jersey last year).
Anyway, the "abstraction" itself was created to make computers easier for users. 99.99% of home users would self-destruct if presented with the innocent looking
C:>
If the customers don't understand that the little cartoony "My Computer" actually represents their frickin' computer - the real problem is that they skew towards the left-hand side of the Bell Curve.
Look, people in general are dumb. I think George Carlin said it best - Think of someone of average intelligence: HALF of the people in the world are stupider than that!.
On the flip side, a lot of big companies are farming their tech support out to foreign countries - with very bad results.
Sometimes this works out ok (i.e. an Irish techie helping me get a new recovery cd for my Aptiva at 2 in the monring) but most of the time it doesn't - you get some doof who can barely speak english and follows a script not because of corporate liability concerns - but because they don't know anything else!
Secondly because of quantum uncertainty, objects can actually briefly accelerate faster than light (at least on a subatomic level)
That's really a goofy statement. Is this based on pure theory or observations in the laboratory? I am honestly curious. Please direct me too a paper or article about an experiement that could plausibly be explained by faster than light motion.
And no, experiments that show that the "information traveled faster than light" doesn't count (remember, the observer influences the outcome!).
Also, I believe Einstein is often quoted as having said "God does not play dice with the Universe!" so putting concepts of relativity and the phrase "quantum uncertainty" together in the same paragraph seems a little bit absurd.
I think what they mean is this: the laws of physics are the same on both sides of the event horizon. You wouldn't enter another universe or something freaky like that. You just would never be able to escape past the event horizon.
IIRC, from an outside observer, however, it would look like you had suddenly been put into freeze frame and then slowly fade away. But I don't remember why, I just remember reading about this in Brief History of Time and other layman's physics books...
What about taking a picture with my digital camera? Surely, that is a single instant?
But no: a camera shutter is actually open for fractions of a second - so what I am really capturing is a very small duration of time - during which I allowed photons to hit my S40's photo-receptor. No cameral captures an "instant."
I think this could make for some very interesting courtroom defenses in cases where a photograph of a supposed event is key evidence!
I think most physicists don't believe in the singularity. The singularity is an embarrasing reminder that we don't have a theory of quantum gravity.
In my college astronomy class, the professor told us that Russian astrophysicists call black holes "collapsars." The reason being that (according to prevailing theory, I guess) once inside the black hole event horizon, you would look down and see the surface of the former star collapsing - but it never quite makes it to the "singularity" stage.
It's just perpetually collapsing.
(Also, I just realized that you could see something because light is able to travel away from the star surface - just not past the event horizon. In fact, if I remember my Hawking correctly - aside from the "tidal" forces that would tear you apart - you wouldn't notice any difference in the universe upon crossing the event horizon).
Ever since I wired my house, I almost always watch TV while simultaneously browsing the web on my laptop. That way, I can look up info about shows I'm watching on IMBD.com, AllMusic.com, PBS.org - whatever - simultaneously. Not to mention the tv schedule (which is a lot faster than waiting for Cablevision's channel guide to scroll down!).
And then there's News - on the Internet you get to seek it out yourself rather than waiting around for some talking head - babbling about topics you don't care about - to finally get to whatever you're interested in. NOt to mention the fact that you can read differnt POVs on a story rather than having them spoon fed to you.
Basically, the experience of watching TV without the Internet seems...flat.
Conversely, the media experience on the Internet is superior because it is more Interactive and appeals to the "immediate gratification" desires of the "younger generation."
Maybe I'm showing my age here, but anyone who remembers DC Comic's Crisis on Infinite Earths from the 80s knows that the primary difference between regular matter and anti-matter universes is that the anti-matter universe is EVIL!!!
The article is actually on Slate.com, a site that was acquired by Microsoft and is supposed to be a news content/commentary site - so it's not necessarily the same thing as "the folks at MSN."
One might as well say "the folks over at VA Software..." when linking to a Slashdot article.
It obvious, of course, that our intrepid editors are implying that MSN is using Slate to spread bad PR about Google in prep for their impending Search Engine War (tm). Perhaps so. But if you read the article, it does make some good points (for example: searching for "apple" and only finding links to apple computers stuff).
Interesting presentation (I kinda wish I had to voice over to go along with it though).
1) Their suggested strategy for overcoming being outsourced is somewhat absurd: if EVERYONE follows their plan - which seems to focus on becoming a "recognized expert" - then we will end up with hundreds of people fighting for the limited time slots to give speeches and space to publish articles. There are going to be a lot more losers than winners, so I think that strategy is not too effective (i.e. not applicable to 95+% of/.ers).
2) Someone explain the time != value "Everquest syndrome"? Are they implying that the way to beat outsourcing is to get a senior developer or IT executive to "twink" you?
3) It seems the that the authors paint "young" programmers with the same brush as "overseas" programmers - i.e. a "Threat." This is rather asurd as well, as most young programmers I know (in NYC) can't find full-time work.
A few years back Bill was on the cover of Fortune (again) and the cover story was "Bill's makeover." He had - for the first time anywhere, apparently - an actual hairstyle and designer wireframe glasses.
Obviously, the hairstyle. Check out that shapeless bowlcut - yeesh! Somebody needs to clue him in on "Executive Hair."
Ok, I have been modded (-1)Off Topic by some idiot, so I guess I have to spell things out for everyone...
Remember that part in The Empire Strikes Back where Han, Leia, Chewie and the droids are about to escape from Hoth? - and Darth Vader is coming after them? - and they are having problems with repairs to the Millenium Falcon - and right when they are about to take off and escape the Snow Troopesr, the MF engine sputters and dies? - and then Han glares at the dashboard, GIVES IT A GOOD, SOLID SMACK WITH HIS FIST! - and then it powers on again???
Slashdot Mirror
Masters of Doom
Chapter 1
DOOM goes online.
Chapter 2
OMFG jeh hax0rzd!
Hi from Billy Gates!
I have enuf $$$ that I can spend weekend making anti-worm worm-software!
PS - linux sux0rz!
This morning I was standing outside my office after having spent the night there. I looked down the street and noticed that every building west of 5th Avenue had power while we where still in the dark.
I found myself thinking about the power line tool in SimCity. Man, if we just had one of those, we could hook up that block to our block...problem solved!
Somebody's reaching here - since when does this third-rate web site represent the "New Yorker attitude?"
*Sigh* indeed.
First of all, I'm not going to get into an esoteric debate about whether or not M$ has designed a good desktop (I happen to be using redhat 9 myself, and I was irked that they put a litle folder saying /home/cyranoVR on my desktop - I quickly renamed it...and why is there a little hat in the bottom left corner of my screen??? but I digress).
My point is this: on the GNOME RH9 desktop, there is a little icon that says "START HERE." Most home users (and a lot of corp users) would look at this icon and go "whaaaaaa? My computer is already started!" or somesuch. They are either lazy or dumb or both.
See, in my personal, Real World experience, I've found that people who don't grasp the "My Computer == THIS COMPUTER" paradigm also tend to think that that their computer works due to a little process known as "magic," gets "cranky" in the afternoons and only starts working properly when I walk into the room.
This group of people is so dense that the only way they are able to interact with their computer is through full screen prompts. God forbid that a dialog box appears in the middle of the screen saying "click OK to continue." I've seen users who, when presented with such boxes, ask befuddledly "what do I do now?"
(I would imagine that the above difficulty with dialog boxes is probably the origin of the Blue Screen of Death phenomenon)
Anyway, I am sincerely interested in hearing your suggestions on how we could improve the PC user interface? Perhaps we should do away with screens entirely and go back to giant levers, whistles and lamps? In all seriousness, I'm thinking some users would be better off with such a setup.
Maybe keyboards and mice should be replaced with oversized buttons that read "GET EMAIL" "PRINT DOCUMENT." Meanwhile, an oversized flashing light would indicate new email. Users could type their documents on a typewriter and then insert into a scanner to be digitized via OCR. Basically, the whole setup would look like a PlaySkool toy.
We have arrived at the desktop paradigm becaues these companies have whole R & D centers (like XEROX Parq for starters) that spent (combined) millions of dollars trying to dumb-down computers. But it is all for naught: you can't go less than zero on the IQ scale.
That's an ok POV and for the most part I agree with you. However, I understand that some companies have a budget. This means that if all a employee needs their computer for is to
1) send/recieve email
2) read pdfs
3) write a document in word
4) log onto the system mainframe
5) every once in a while, use the internet.
Then the system i described is going to do the job. They don't need the latest Dell or whatever for what they're doing. Again: the limiting factor is the budget. So they are going to have to learn to not run 10 applications at once.
Note that I'm not talking about legit complaints, like when they are using Word and it randomly crashes, losing everything. In that case, I work with them to recover the lost document if I can - but I also explain to them that upgrading to the latest Dell 5500 whatever will not solve buggy software problems (a very common misconception).
Ok first of all, we're using windows 98 for almost all the installs. We have a "no non-work related programs" policy, but enforcing it is more theory than fact because windows 98 doesn't have user-level control like win2k or XP does (unless I'm missing something here).
Second, our employees use AIM and MSN to talk to clients who are overseas. So we can't prevent them from installing those.
I basically have to go around telling our employees "try remember to close programs you aren't using."
I also have installed MaxMem on a few user PCs, but that doesn't always solve the problem.
What about the fact that users lie? I have had many many cases where a user calling in would not tell me what they had done to crash their computer / download the file / whatever.
Me: What were you doing when it crashed
Usr: Nothing, I was just typing a letter and it crashed.
[after I go to the user's desk on a different floor]
Me: ok, I it looks like there is a "printing..." box up. So you were trying to print?
Usr: No, it just crashed, why won't you get me a new computer!!!!
OR
Usr: I can't download the file into excel
Me: Ok, what do you see on your screen
Usr: What does that matter I want to download my statement!
Me: You see the underlined words that say "download file."
Usr: [immediately]Yeah sure.
Me: Click that
Usr: [slience]
Me: Well?
Usr: NOTHING HAPPENED!
Me: Ok, you didn't see a box pop up that said "save as"?
Usr: There isn't anything that says "download file!"
Me: You just said clicked it, right?
Usr: Look, just help me download my statement ok?
Me: Ok, can you scroll down?
Usr: Ok i found it.
Me: Um ok click "download"
Usr: [immediately]I did. Nothing happened!
Me: Uh you have to wait for the file to download.
Usr: Ok I clicked it. It says "downloading"
Me: Ok good
Usr: But excel's not opening! Look, ok, I just want to get this done. Give me your manager.
(Sidenote: customer's account manager confirmed later that this is a "problem" customer - i.e. stupidity is not a factor here).
Arg.
Where's the "Forgotten Passwords" section? I have to deal with 3-4 users a day that have forgotten their password but are steadfast that they put in the "right" one and that their computer is "broken." 99 times out of 100, they had their caps lock key on (and, no, the XP feature that detects caps lock keys during password entries has not helped reduce this - users inexplicably ignore it). I guess that one's not very funny - just irritating.
Then there are the greedy users - you know who I'm talking about: the ones that run Excel, Word, Acrobat Reader, AIM, MSN Msgr and several IE windows all at once. They call me complaining that their computer keeps "crashing" and inevitably demand a "better" computer.
(Fun detail - all of them use the phrase "this is COMPLETELY unacceptable" after they finish describing their problem).
Of course, the problem isn't that their computer is crashing - no, it's that they are using W98 with 64MB ram while running their dozen apps at once. The "crash" is actually their OS struggling to keep up, constantly writing to the swap file. It was hanging so long that they figured it had crashed and would hit the reset button.
Now, granted, they could get a "better" computer (well, if not for our budget anyway) - but for the purposes of their job they could as well be using a 400mghz Win95 box with 32MB RAM and a 500MB hard drive. But NO they want a 1.4Ghz Dell with a flat panel and 80 gig hard drive so they can surf the web and write word documents. o_0 Dey is jus' greedy.
I understand your analogy, but that's not what has been happening in the last 10 years with home operating systems.
Designers of Home OS's (with Apple leading the way) have gone to ridiculous lengths to "dumb down" operating systems for users. It's gotten to the point where XP has little dancing banners and word balloons at every turn telling you what to do "CLICK HERE" "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THAT???" etc.
They haven't been "adding a new foot swtich to start the wipers." Rather, they have added a big red button to the dashboard that said "WINDOW WIPERS ON." Hell, I wish I had that button in my car - I still have problems getting the wipers set at the right speed (I live in NYC so I never had to drive a car until I moved to Jersey last year).
Anyway, the "abstraction" itself was created to make computers easier for users. 99.99% of home users would self-destruct if presented with the innocent looking
C:>
If the customers don't understand that the little cartoony "My Computer" actually represents their frickin' computer - the real problem is that they skew towards the left-hand side of the Bell Curve.
Look, people in general are dumb. I think George Carlin said it best - Think of someone of average intelligence: HALF of the people in the world are stupider than that!.
On the flip side, a lot of big companies are farming their tech support out to foreign countries - with very bad results.
Sometimes this works out ok (i.e. an Irish techie helping me get a new recovery cd for my Aptiva at 2 in the monring) but most of the time it doesn't - you get some doof who can barely speak english and follows a script not because of corporate liability concerns - but because they don't know anything else!
That's a great site - but just to be fair, everyone make sure they read this section.
Secondly because of quantum uncertainty, objects can actually briefly accelerate faster than light (at least on a subatomic level)
That's really a goofy statement. Is this based on pure theory or observations in the laboratory?
I am honestly curious. Please direct me too a paper or article about an experiement that could plausibly be explained by faster than light motion.
And no, experiments that show that the "information traveled faster than light" doesn't count (remember, the observer influences the outcome!).
Also, I believe Einstein is often quoted as having said "God does not play dice with the Universe!" so putting concepts of relativity and the phrase "quantum uncertainty" together in the same paragraph seems a little bit absurd.
What are you talking about?
In our universe, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vaccuum.
I wonder if this is too late for Sun?
A more relevant question is, I think, is this too late for Linux?
I think what they mean is this: the laws of physics are the same on both sides of the event horizon. You wouldn't enter another universe or something freaky like that. You just would never be able to escape past the event horizon.
IIRC, from an outside observer, however, it would look like you had suddenly been put into freeze frame and then slowly fade away. But I don't remember why, I just remember reading about this in Brief History of Time and other layman's physics books...
What about taking a picture with my digital camera? Surely, that is a single instant?
But no: a camera shutter is actually open for fractions of a second - so what I am really capturing is a very small duration of time - during which I allowed photons to hit my S40's photo-receptor. No cameral captures an "instant."
I think this could make for some very interesting courtroom defenses in cases where a photograph of a supposed event is key evidence!
I think most physicists don't believe in the singularity. The singularity is an embarrasing reminder that we don't have a theory of quantum gravity.
In my college astronomy class, the professor told us that Russian astrophysicists call black holes "collapsars." The reason being that (according to prevailing theory, I guess) once inside the black hole event horizon, you would look down and see the surface of the former star collapsing - but it never quite makes it to the "singularity" stage.
It's just perpetually collapsing.
(Also, I just realized that you could see something because light is able to travel away from the star surface - just not past the event horizon. In fact, if I remember my Hawking correctly - aside from the "tidal" forces that would tear you apart - you wouldn't notice any difference in the universe upon crossing the event horizon).
Ever since I wired my house, I almost always watch TV while simultaneously browsing the web on my laptop. That way, I can look up info about shows I'm watching on IMBD.com, AllMusic.com, PBS.org - whatever - simultaneously. Not to mention the tv schedule (which is a lot faster than waiting for Cablevision's channel guide to scroll down!).
And then there's News - on the Internet you get to seek it out yourself rather than waiting around for some talking head - babbling about topics you don't care about - to finally get to whatever you're interested in. NOt to mention the fact that you can read differnt POVs on a story rather than having them spoon fed to you.
Basically, the experience of watching TV without the Internet seems...flat.
Conversely, the media experience on the Internet is superior because it is more Interactive and appeals to the "immediate gratification" desires of the "younger generation."
Maybe I'm showing my age here, but anyone who remembers DC Comic's Crisis on Infinite Earths from the 80s knows that the primary difference between regular matter and anti-matter universes is that the anti-matter universe is EVIL!!!
The article is actually on Slate.com, a site that was acquired by Microsoft and is supposed to be a news content/commentary site - so it's not necessarily the same thing as "the folks at MSN."
One might as well say "the folks over at VA Software..." when linking to a Slashdot article.
It obvious, of course, that our intrepid editors are implying that MSN is using Slate to spread bad PR about Google in prep for their impending Search Engine War (tm). Perhaps so. But if you read the article, it does make some good points (for example: searching for "apple" and only finding links to apple computers stuff).
Using a series of magnets to accelerate a metal slug - it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to do. Right?
Also, aren't "Guass Guns" are more widely known via the games (both board- and PC-) BattleTech and Mechwarrior?
Interesting presentation (I kinda wish I had to voice over to go along with it though).
/.ers) .
1) Their suggested strategy for overcoming being outsourced is somewhat absurd: if EVERYONE follows their plan - which seems to focus on becoming a "recognized expert" - then we will end up with hundreds of people fighting for the limited time slots to give speeches and space to publish articles. There are going to be a lot more losers than winners, so I think that strategy is not too effective (i.e. not applicable to 95+% of
2) Someone explain the time != value "Everquest syndrome"? Are they implying that the way to beat outsourcing is to get a senior developer or IT executive to "twink" you?
3) It seems the that the authors paint "young" programmers with the same brush as "overseas" programmers - i.e. a "Threat." This is rather asurd as well, as most young programmers I know (in NYC) can't find full-time work.
A few years back Bill was on the cover of Fortune (again) and the cover story was "Bill's makeover." He had - for the first time anywhere, apparently - an actual hairstyle and designer wireframe glasses.
Obviously, the hairstyle. Check out that shapeless bowlcut - yeesh! Somebody needs to clue him in on "Executive Hair."
Ok, I have been modded (-1)Off Topic by some idiot, so I guess I have to spell things out for everyone...
Remember that part in The Empire Strikes Back where Han, Leia, Chewie and the droids are about to escape from Hoth? - and Darth Vader is coming after them? - and they are having problems with repairs to the Millenium Falcon - and right when they are about to take off and escape the Snow Troopesr, the MF engine sputters and dies? - and then Han glares at the dashboard, GIVES IT A GOOD, SOLID SMACK WITH HIS FIST! - and then it powers on again???
That was cool.