Sorry for not going any referances. But I though that this would be common knowledge as well as common sence. Probably a bit naive on my part. But I'm sure Google can help you find your answers.
BTW. I do think that icons have been abused. But the origonal poster was giving the impression that all icons are would be better off as text. And that icons have no use. Not that they were being abused.
Complete and utter bullshit. Research shows that good icons are remembered and that they are more distingashable than a word and of course, take up less space. This is the whole point of icons.
Even though you are trying to look as if you know something about UI and usablility, you obviously don't know anything.
Forgive me for not being smart enough. But what is your email address?
bradCOW AT DOT DOT DOT MOO DOT DOT DOT DOT DOT san is what I see. But the only thing I can get out of that is brad@san or bradcow@moo.san. brad at sanford.edu?
What's with this programmers are artists thing? I'm a graphic designer and I don't even consider my self an artist most of the time. If you're thinking up the solution to a specific goal, then you are not an artist, you're a designer.
Any field can be used in an artistic way. But that doesn't mean that that field is art.
Not nessesarily. it depends on how it was built. E.G. If you sit on a toothbrush, you probably won't do much damage. Although, you might not want to use it again.
Most cellphones are pretty much 2 peice shells. And when they make a smaller cellphone, they usally don't make the shell thinner (or atleast the ratio of thickness to size won't decrease). If anything, they're more likely to be stronger.
Think of a 3cm x 3cm x 0.5 cm sheet of glass compared to a 100cm x 100cm x 0.5 cm sheet of glass.
The Camery--nothing out of the ordinary here. It's a steel monocuoqe.
The Tamiya has a carbon-fiber chassis, with graphite suspension components. This makes the Tamiya capable of surviving impacts of up to 500km/h (scale speed), with no damage to the chassis. An ordinary car--like the Camery--would suffer irrepairable damage.
The stiffness of the chassis adds to the car's handling, while the huge weight savings not only adds to the handling, but also increasing performance and efficiency.
The body of the Tamiya is a once piece, vacuum formed, poly-carbonate shell. This is the same material used to make bullet proof glass. It's very impact resistant. And--unlike a metal body--it retains it's original shape after an impact.
Camery: 5. Tamiya 10.
Daily use
The Camery is a nice car to drive. It has all the luxuries of a modern car. It's a bit bigger than you average sedan, which may make parking a bit more difficult for those tight spots. There is plenty of room both in the cabin and the boot.
The Tamiya is smaller, but still has the same proportions as your average sedan. The Tamiya makes up for it's lack of ability to carry a driver or passanges by being a dream to park. You can pretty much park it in any small crannie. It's zippiness is excellently suited for city driving. But it's range of about 10km means it may not be suited for longer drives.
Camery: 7. Tamiya 3.
Performance
The Camery is no slouch in the performance department. It's grunty 3.0L V6 will is not only a performer on the road, it can also pull a large yacht with ease.
The Tamiya is powered by a very powerful and efficient Reedy Tri-Sonic 12/2 electric motor. This produces enough power to get the Tamiya up to 400km/h (scale speed) in less than 2 seconds! Combined with it's superior handling. It's the clear winner in this department.
Camery: 6. Tamiya 10.
Summary
The Camery is a very nice car to drive, and would be suited to long drives out of the city. The Tamiya isn't as well off in the features or comfort area. But we think it makes up for this with it's incredibly superior performance, handling, and safty.
I think the only thing that Adobe would be really pissed off about is the video editing. But still, they have After Effects (or has Apple got something similar to that aswell?).
Adobe still have Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, and Distiller (Apple's built in PDF support ins't going to be replacing Distiler anytime soon).
I hope that one day that you will wake up and realise that it's your kind of attitude that's the reason Linux etc aren't getting into the desktop market any time soon.
They mean that it was designed by programmers. Not GUI designers. Not to mention that if you run it on, say Windows, it it doesn't even use standard menus etc.
Part of it is just a case of re-learning. But most of it is simply that the GUI isn't designed well. I can't give you any details because I don't have it in front of me. Last time someone asked a similar question. I decided to install GIMP again so I could come up with a list of points. Unfortunately I never got round to it. Perhaps I will this time;) But I fear would not be taken seriously and that I will have simply wasted my time trying to submit anything that isn't code to the OSS community.
The other reason that GIMP will never replace Photoshop for most pros is that it lacks many, many features. Some of them critical, some are annoying. But even if you take care of the big issues, it's still death by a thousand cuts.
Don't get me wrong. I admire what the GIMP people are doing. And their's no reason it's not possible to make a good Photoshop clone. But it will take a huge effort (I'm guessing that Photoshop would be much more complex than Mozilla), and it would also take organization and planning with people who are not coders. This is something that the OSS community seems to be lacking at the moment IMHO.
Yes. Thanks for pointing this out. I don't like MS's business stratigies. But including IE with windows and having the ability for anyone it's HTML rendering engine is great.
Sure, the way it was done might be bad and cunning (probably not done in a nice, modular way). But the idea is good.
Right, but if it turns out the sun is causing 99% of the global warming we've seen, and CO2 is causing 1%, you have to ask yourself whether its worth spending trillions of dollars to get that 1% back.
Perhaps you should also consider if that 1% is important. Only an idiot would just say it's only 1% (at the moment), and conclude that's it not a problem worth worrying about. That's an assumption. And as they say, assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.
You have to find a different way to poke fun at the man-in-the-glasses.
I'm sure I'll be laughing from my Mac when a virus is released that exploits a hole in MSs' DRM system and makes it so you can't back up you own files. he he he.
Re:"Bush's War" at ends with "The War On Terror"
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Arguably, there are other nations in the world whose people are more free in many ways than we are, at the moment, but they learned it from us.
Uh, no offence. But I find this hard to belive. Maybe in some cases, but not all. The idea of democracy existed before the US was even born.
(And before all of you roll your eyes "here's another conservative American comparing Saddam to Hitler", well yeah, I am. I'm not sure how Hitler scores higher on the totalitarian brutal genocidal dictator scale - maybe more industrially efficient, perhaps? But if Hussein ISN'T as bad as Hitler, is he an ok guy if he's only, say 0.8"Hitlers"? 0.65"Hitlers"? What's your personally acceptable level of brutal dictatorship?)
You're missing a key point. Hitler wanted to take over the world, and believed his race was superior and that all others must be wiped out. Saddam doesn't. He just wants to bully the people around him for a bit of fun and profit. He is a danger to his people and the people around him. But not to the entire world.
Something should be done to take him out of power. But certinaly not the way the US is going about it.
And yes, mayby there would have been less people killed if Hitler was killed earlier. But the problem with pre-emtive strikes are: What if nothing was going to happened?
The thing is, you don't know. You can only really do something when they start to attack. Now, that maybe unfortunate, but that's the way it is. Rememeber: Innocent until proven guilty. I know that Idea doesn't really fit here. But it's the easiest way I can explain while pre-emptive attacks are wrong.
The key question is: Are those nuclear weapons being dismateled? Or just deactivated. And even if they are being dismateled, how easy is it for them to re-assemble them again?
I read somehwere that they are only deactivating them. So it might be worth Googling.
Also. The US.mill is now looking at mini nukes, and also hasn't ruled out the use of nuclear weapons in Iraq. So it looks like the US is starting up again. I've even heard talk of Neutron bombs (type of nuclear bomb designed to kill living things by inflicting radiation), the Neutron bomb sounds a bit over the top, but it wouldn't suprise me if they were looking into them again.
As much as I'd like to believe that last paragraph, considering what the US is doing at the moment (dissregarding the UN, and starting a war) I don't believe the US etc will ever reduce their nuclear stockpile to 200 warheads or less (unless they just "deactivate" them). And untill that happens. Their "disarmament" looks more like an act to show us how well we're all getting along.
"A felony conviction is a terrible thing to have on your record," Carter said. Among other things, he said, a person would not be able to become an officer in the U.S. military if convicted of a felony.
Cool. Lets all got out an commit a felony. Shooting John Carter sounds like a good way to get the ball rolling...Fight for peace! </sarcasm>
Slashdot Mirror
BTW. I do think that icons have been abused. But the origonal poster was giving the impression that all icons are would be better off as text. And that icons have no use. Not that they were being abused.
I suspected that. Another tragic vicim of the silly slashdot spam-proofer ;)
shows i'm not at all a programmer...
Acctually, it shows that who ever wrote the spam-proofer isn't a progammer. And certainly not an engineer :P
Moof! Says the dogcow.
Exactly. Why don't you try to come up with something good on only a 16x16 pixel canvas.
Even though you are trying to look as if you know something about UI and usablility, you obviously don't know anything.
Score -1, misleading.
bradCOW AT DOT DOT DOT MOO DOT DOT DOT DOT DOT san is what I see. But the only thing I can get out of that is brad@san or bradcow@moo.san. brad at sanford.edu?
Any field can be used in an artistic way. But that doesn't mean that that field is art.
Most cellphones are pretty much 2 peice shells. And when they make a smaller cellphone, they usally don't make the shell thinner (or atleast the ratio of thickness to size won't decrease). If anything, they're more likely to be stronger.
Think of a 3cm x 3cm x 0.5 cm sheet of glass compared to a 100cm x 100cm x 0.5 cm sheet of glass.
I don't see why. Less material means less mass, which means less energy to absorb (something like that) if you drop it.
Chassis/body
The Camery--nothing out of the ordinary here. It's a steel monocuoqe.
The Tamiya has a carbon-fiber chassis, with graphite suspension components. This makes the Tamiya capable of surviving impacts of up to 500km/h (scale speed), with no damage to the chassis. An ordinary car--like the Camery--would suffer irrepairable damage.
The stiffness of the chassis adds to the car's handling, while the huge weight savings not only adds to the handling, but also increasing performance and efficiency.
The body of the Tamiya is a once piece, vacuum formed, poly-carbonate shell. This is the same material used to make bullet proof glass. It's very impact resistant. And--unlike a metal body--it retains it's original shape after an impact.
Camery: 5. Tamiya 10.
Daily use
The Camery is a nice car to drive. It has all the luxuries of a modern car. It's a bit bigger than you average sedan, which may make parking a bit more difficult for those tight spots. There is plenty of room both in the cabin and the boot.
The Tamiya is smaller, but still has the same proportions as your average sedan. The Tamiya makes up for it's lack of ability to carry a driver or passanges by being a dream to park. You can pretty much park it in any small crannie. It's zippiness is excellently suited for city driving. But it's range of about 10km means it may not be suited for longer drives.
Camery: 7. Tamiya 3.
Performance
The Camery is no slouch in the performance department. It's grunty 3.0L V6 will is not only a performer on the road, it can also pull a large yacht with ease.
The Tamiya is powered by a very powerful and efficient Reedy Tri-Sonic 12/2 electric motor. This produces enough power to get the Tamiya up to 400km/h (scale speed) in less than 2 seconds! Combined with it's superior handling. It's the clear winner in this department.
Camery: 6. Tamiya 10.
Summary
The Camery is a very nice car to drive, and would be suited to long drives out of the city. The Tamiya isn't as well off in the features or comfort area. But we think it makes up for this with it's incredibly superior performance, handling, and safty.
Total: Camery: 18. Tamiya 23.
Adobe still have Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, and Distiller (Apple's built in PDF support ins't going to be replacing Distiler anytime soon).
I hope that one day that you will wake up and realise that it's your kind of attitude that's the reason Linux etc aren't getting into the desktop market any time soon.
Part of it is just a case of re-learning. But most of it is simply that the GUI isn't designed well. I can't give you any details because I don't have it in front of me. Last time someone asked a similar question. I decided to install GIMP again so I could come up with a list of points. Unfortunately I never got round to it. Perhaps I will this time
The other reason that GIMP will never replace Photoshop for most pros is that it lacks many, many features. Some of them critical, some are annoying. But even if you take care of the big issues, it's still death by a thousand cuts.
Don't get me wrong. I admire what the GIMP people are doing. And their's no reason it's not possible to make a good Photoshop clone. But it will take a huge effort (I'm guessing that Photoshop would be much more complex than Mozilla), and it would also take organization and planning with people who are not coders. This is something that the OSS community seems to be lacking at the moment IMHO.
Perhaps they thought it was insightfully funny? I do agree however, but I think part of the problem is the system it's self.
Sure, the way it was done might be bad and cunning (probably not done in a nice, modular way). But the idea is good.
It's a joke. Get over it.
Not when you consider he was answering to a 6 year old girl.
Perhaps you should also consider if that 1% is important. Only an idiot would just say it's only 1% (at the moment), and conclude that's it not a problem worth worrying about. That's an assumption. And as they say, assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.
Don't forget Stuff.co.nz. I prefer them to nzoom.
I'm sure I'll be laughing from my Mac when a virus is released that exploits a hole in MSs' DRM system and makes it so you can't back up you own files. he he he.
Uh, no offence. But I find this hard to belive. Maybe in some cases, but not all. The idea of democracy existed before the US was even born.
You're missing a key point. Hitler wanted to take over the world, and believed his race was superior and that all others must be wiped out. Saddam doesn't. He just wants to bully the people around him for a bit of fun and profit. He is a danger to his people and the people around him. But not to the entire world.
Something should be done to take him out of power. But certinaly not the way the US is going about it.
And yes, mayby there would have been less people killed if Hitler was killed earlier. But the problem with pre-emtive strikes are: What if nothing was going to happened?
The thing is, you don't know. You can only really do something when they start to attack. Now, that maybe unfortunate, but that's the way it is. Rememeber: Innocent until proven guilty. I know that Idea doesn't really fit here. But it's the easiest way I can explain while pre-emptive attacks are wrong.
I read somehwere that they are only deactivating them. So it might be worth Googling.
Also. The US.mill is now looking at mini nukes, and also hasn't ruled out the use of nuclear weapons in Iraq. So it looks like the US is starting up again. I've even heard talk of Neutron bombs (type of nuclear bomb designed to kill living things by inflicting radiation), the Neutron bomb sounds a bit over the top, but it wouldn't suprise me if they were looking into them again.
As much as I'd like to believe that last paragraph, considering what the US is doing at the moment (dissregarding the UN, and starting a war) I don't believe the US etc will ever reduce their nuclear stockpile to 200 warheads or less (unless they just "deactivate" them). And untill that happens. Their "disarmament" looks more like an act to show us how well we're all getting along.
And would part of the complications of this be the size of the buoyancy tank needed?
Cool. Lets all got out an commit a felony. Shooting John Carter sounds like a good way to get the ball rolling...Fight for peace! </sarcasm>