This is where I have a problem with the fine article (or summary at least). Sure, there may be less problems over the life of the car, which todays seems to be not anymore than about 10 years. Where back in the 50's thru the 70s you commonly heard about the 30 year car. There seems to be a different in long term quality of the vehicles.
I had a old 1981 Honda Accord, which other than routine maintenance (oil changes, brakes, tires, clutch, spark plugs, battery, etc.) there were no breakdowns at all that prevented me from getting to a destination. I had this vehicle for 20 years, and when I did get rid of it, I saw it on the road for another 4+ years delivering pizza. I don't think any car today would be able to do that.
And the thing was, I was up north in Saskatchewan, Canada, where -40c was a typical winter (and at times colder). Never once did I ever have problems starting due to the cold - even if the block heater wasn't plugged in. And to boot, that vehicle was great in the snow. It would go where 4x4s would get stuck. I don't know what it was, but that vehicle was great, and I was sad when I had to get rid of it (had a new baby on the way, and wanted something with 4 doors).
So when they say most reliable, I would bet that it's not over a long life of a car... considering the life of a car today is about 10 years. The more complex cars get, the more that can go wrong with them. I'd take that 81 Honda again, in a second, over a lot of the cars today.
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - Eric Schmidt, Google CEO/
Gee Mr. Eric, why don't you let people see the source cods of your search engine? Why not let people see the algorithms of your advertising routines? Why can't we see the technical boards of your data center computers? What? I can't, because it's private or non-disclosure? Hmm, perhaps you shouldn't be do that in the first place.
Looks like another good option. Doesn't look like at this point it has all the same features, but it looks like a very respectable community build project. It will be good to keep that on the list of alternatives.
Thanks,
Cheers
The group that I've been playing with since pre-Y2K, and who has been playing for the 25+ years before me have been using this gaming desktop for about 8+ years now. It really came into use after I moved down to Chicago, from Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Pair it up with Skype (or any other VoIP setup) and you might as well be there. Another player is working over in China and we both connect up to the rest of the group in Canada.
I am not an agent of KloogeWerks or the likes, just a player. Several of the plus of this gaming desktop are:
~ it is written in Java so it is portable across multiple platforms -yes, it will run on the various flavors of *nix.
~ it is definition based - you are not locked into just a single set of game rules or game type. There are definitions for Dnd (2, 3, 3.5x, 4.x), Pathfinder, Gurps, etc. or create your own.
~ it also has a scripting language where you can setup scripts to do your complex tasks - eg: targeting a magical effect (fireball) and all in the area of effect auto magically roll their saving throws, and the appropriate damage applied.
~ players can move their own characters as required, target opponents, select their own weapons, roll skill checks, etc.
~ DM can reveal all or only portions of the map, enter combat more (initiative base turns), target players, etc.
Updates are not as often as I would like, but most bugs do have a work around and sometime the network configuration can be a pain to setup, especially if your behind a firewall/router. But all you need to do is setup port forwarding which isn't that difficult, after all this is slashdot right? We are all nerds here
It works well for what it is, isn't too outrageously priced, and best of all, your not tied into a specific BRAND (read: in bed with WoC) and limited to only one set of rules and best of all it is customizable. I'd encourage you to check it out - it may not be exactly what you want, but I'm pretty sure it will be more flexible than what WoC will bring to the table (pardon the pun)
I'm of the same make up also. It's funny, we play First Edition with about 38 years worth house rules. Yeah, I feel old, but the ironic thing is, I'm the "baby" of the group at 41 years old. I started with them just before Y2K, and it is absolutely fantastic when they pull out historical notes about what occurred with character in 1976 or the likes - those original characters they played and their heroic deeds have become the more recent historical canon of our world (World of Greyhawk w/ 38 years of play history which translates into a dozen plus generations of characters.) I always get a kick when we need to go into the "Ye Olde Archives" to look up some of the details of historical event that a current characters ancestor was involved in.
I can completely understand your "well invested" comment. The rules needing to change by WoC is completely irrelevant. The need to upgrade is not needed. Generally the 38 years of house rules cover what we want, and if not, we adapt our rules to what is needed. We have been playing longer than most of the staff at WoC, why do we need them to tell us how to play? We are happy and enjoy with what we have, but that's not to say that we won't take a peek at what the new systems have and incorporate ideas that we like.
The biggest problem I had with WoC (or when they took over), was the endless supplemental rules, upon supplemental rules they brought out (think: handbooks, kit books, etc.). It just became too costly, too rule intensive and diminished the role playing aspect of the game that we loved - it's a role playing game, not a rule playing game.
But you know as well as me, playable requirements and minimum requirements are two completely different things. Minimum requirements only tell you just that, will the game run or not. It doesn't tell you if it is playable. Remember the old minimum specs for Windows XP? Only 128mb? Sure it would run, but it would be completely unusable.
I also have issues of needing to install software to "assess" if I have the correct hardware to run their software. That to me is just asking to be loaded with monitoring/malware. Just tell me the specs required.
Ok, it's been downloaded 3 million times. But how many copies of the game did they sell? Half a statistic is meaningless.
While I agree with you completely, the only reason they give half the stat is is because they want the public [read: regulators] to think that a download equals a lost sale; much the same way the RI/MPAA tries to equate a download equals a lost sale.
So, since there are 3,920,000 non-paid for downloads, they want you to believe they have lost well over $254,800,000 due to illegal downloads (assuming a $65 per download). When someone says that turns into over a quarter of a billion of lost revenue, regulators have a tendency to listen.
But of course they forget, there are three types of lies in this world: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
So that's why they only report half the statistics.
Yeah, I knew this type of response would come along. Never did I say it couldn't be done - I said with the new interface, some of the options are so unintuitive it is a pain to find them, even to do the simplest of things (eg, add a page number field). Under the new interface, it seems like I'm searching, upon searching to find out where MS has hidden a feature within the ribbon. I'm not saying it's not there, I'm saying I (and others) find it extremely difficult locate for something that used to be so simple to find. It also appears that I'm not the only one that runs into this problem. Sure, coming into it new, probably not that big of a deal - coming from the old, it seems to be complete unintuitive.
The intuitiveness of the ribbon for me, and the majority of my classmates is just not there. Yes, the ribbon is hierarchical somewhat, but that hierarchy changes depending what you happen to be focused on - in the old menu system, no matter where you were, to find the option the path was the same. For me, the number of clicks is less relevant than the ease of finding what you want to do. The fact that I need to click is taking my hand away from the keyboard and making me click. When it comes to the ribbon, that ease just doesn't exist at first. Also it takes up far too much real estate on my screen (and yeah, I know it can be minimized)
I am willing to admit it has to do with my unfamiliarity with this new versions interface more than anything. If I wasn't forced to use it the occasional time at the schools computers, there would be no problem as I would continue to use Office 2003. There is nothing more frustrating than knowing how to do something very simple (in the pre-2007 version), and spending more time poking around trying to find out where the options are due to the new interface. Simply, customizable or not, an interface that is not intuitive to a user is not a good interface. I'm am not the only one that feels the anti-intuitiveness of the ribbon. What more do I want? Pretty simple really.. How about an option in your settings that says "Interface Type", with the choices of "New - Office 2007/10" or "Classic - Office 2003 and earlier". I honestly don't think I would be alone in asking for this option.
I come from the old days of WordStar and WordPerfect 5.x and earlier. While today, most would feel completely lost at the unintuitiveness in the WordStar Ctl-key combinations, or the various CTL/ALT/SHIFT-Fn key combinations of WordPerfect. I miss and embrace the simplicity and efficiency of those days of not needing to reach for the mouse to execute a particular function. And yes, I am familiar with the keyboard shortcuts, I use them all the time.
I have used MS office for years, and word since version 2.0 and earlier. While I don't consider myself a super power user with Word, I do consider myself to be extremely competent. The 2007+ interface might as well have taken me back to being a new user. A quick search on Google of "hate Microsoft word ribbon" turns up over 10.2 million results, while "love Microsoft word ribbon" yields 1.2... Pretty big difference, yet pretty meaningless since we know there are more bitches than loves on the 'net - what it does do is show that I'm not alone in my opinions.
Well said my friend! I was about to post something very similar, but you said it much better than I.
I also get frustrated with trying to find some particular option. And god forbid, if your trying to setup a custom header and footer than happens to not follow the "styles" that are included - Many of my classmates want to hang themselves with this frustration - I don't worry about that, b/c I pull out my good old 2003 era laptop, wait the not so timely boot-up, and make the changes with office 2003. It saves a lot of stress, headache, and frustraton.
The largest oversight with the new version of office, is the inability to maintain the old style interface. There is something to be said for a logical hierarchical interface, rather than an interface based on what MS thinks you want to do. There is not good reason why they couldn't have a setting that would maintain the old interface.
But Microsoft is notorious for making changes like this. Changing the names of control panel applets? Come on, where it was "Add Remove Programs" it is now "Programs and Features" - is that a change that was really necessary? Nothing worse than trying to support someone that is freaking out because they can't find the "My Computer" icon, when they have renamed it to just "Computer" - changes just for the sake of change don't seem to make a lot of sense. MS in the past has worked so hard as maintaining downward compatibility, but seem to forget that when it comes to the user interface.
I always get cR@p from my g/f that complains "why are you carrying that big heavy camera and bag"... But when I get the pictures, she never seems to complain. Quite honestly, if carrying a couple lenses (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, 50mm f/1.8, and a 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6, all basic kit type lenses) and getting tired from carrying a DSLR there are other things you should likely be concerned with - photography isn't likely one of them.
Quite honestly what the original post is requesting something that is better than a phone camera...Quite honestly, just about any compact point and shoot will be an improvement. It has more to do with optics rather than just specs (IE more megapixels doesn't always mean better).
The questions one really needs to know:
What are you planning on shooting? portraits, landscapes, fast moving targets (sports), etc.
Lighting conditions. Low light is a bitch to capture without the right equipment/settings. Most point and shoot with the on-board flash tend to blow out the subject resulting in undesirable results
Much of taking a good pictures has to do with composition and managing your depth of field (f-stop) and shutter speed. Many point and shoots don't have the manual settings to do this, and what ones do, you, the photographer, needs to be willing to learn how to use them and how they affect one other.
Size/weight - as much as I disagree with this being a primary factor, utility is important - a camera that one is not willing to use because it is too big or heavy is a useless camera for that person. Are you willing to carry a DSLR and associated equipment (lenses, tripod, external flash(s), etc.) IF not, a DSLR is not for you.
High-end equipment does not equal better pictures. Bad photos can be taken with the best of equipment, just as good photos can be taken with entry-level equipment (see composition note above). Knowing the limitations of what your equipment can and can not do. I know that if I don't have a tripod for many low-light conditions there usually isn't any point to taking the picture (underexposed, too blurry, or too blown out with just an on-board flash)
What you are shooting will dictate what equipment you need. If your wanting to learn about photography, but not take it to at least the level of a being a hobbyist, your probably not going to need a DSLR. That would be like having a high-performance Ferrari and only driving it at 15mph or less - in case like this, it would be for bragging right only, and not about the photography. A point and shoot (or point and pray as I like to call them) will likely be enough.
Taking good photos is entirely about compromise - there is not other way to put it. Learning on what to compromise on (think: composition) is what is important (ie: sharpness vs blur, depth of field vs bokka effect, picture with image grain (high ISO) vs getting no picture at all, are auto settings good enough vs. manual settings, etc.). Generally most of that can be accomplished with any camera that allows manual settings (control of aperture, ISO and shutter speed) but if your not willing to learn how those setting interact with your photography then there is not much point to having those settings - it will just make things to complex for the user..
Since the original post is coming from a camera phone, virtually any digital compact will be an improvement since you immediately have a larger sensor and a larger lens that will allow more light to to reach the sensor. Does (s)he need a point and shoot with manual settings? Depends, how much does (s)he want to step it up and how far (s)he want to take it in the future. But by the sounds of it, any point and shoot will do him/her just fine.
I'm of the same mind also...I switch back and forth between the two different styles without much difficulty at all and rarely make typos due to thinking I'm typing on the wrong key layout.
Honestly, muscle memory being screwed up? Because I can swing a baseball bat well, does that mean that swinging a golf club is going to ruin that? Sorry, I honestly don't think so.
I pretty much agree with this.. As of recent, I've found that google has become less and less useful - it seems that every results turns out to be a sales pitch for some item or service rather than the information I was looking for.
It's unfortunate our list of options for search engines has been reduced to such a degree that it is just turns out to be different OEM like packaging of google or bing.
The SEO w#0r3z have totally changed the usefulness of many results. Talk about getting some useless results. I never knew that JC Pennys were experts on MS SQL server, or cosmetic tattooing (g/f's business). It seems that certain sites just turn up regardless of what you are looking for.
You see, everywhere else in the world, university is the place you go to learn and specialize in your field. They don't baby you, they don't teach you to "write", "comprehend", and "reason", that's what your high schools, and lower educational facilities are for.
Perhaps that is what lower educational facilities are for, but the better question would be: Is that what they do?
I would say generally not.
The only students who need to learn how to write, are the international students, and they usually do courses beforehand.
Speaking as a international student - I generally speak and write better English than most US highschool graduates [although not on slashdot - I like to troll;) ] . Having to write the test of English language proficiency exam was simply offensive.
As for reasoning and comprehending, well fuck me, if they need to teach you this sort of thing at that level (beyond that which is required for your specialization, eg, the ability to understand programs), then your universities must be remedial universities.
when high-schools pump out remedial students, universities need to prepare for the lowest common denominator.
I think it's safe to say that âoebeing forced to memorize information which you'll most likely never use (and probably forgetâ would be viewed by most people as a waste of time.
And much of the time, if it is just viewed as simply as that, it's not really education. Understanding the underlying concept is far more useful than just the memorization of random information. With the concept, you can generally derive the required information.
I was really asking where did the idea that education was about âoememorizing random informationâ come from. It seems like it's a cynical attitude to learning that runs counter to purpose of education-beyond-training (which is, after all, what the teaching side of universities were all about).
I feel that it it is a result of the earlier school system. In elementary and high-school, students are taught to the exam. Multiple choice tests indirectly teach that memorization is what it means to be educated - which we both know is not the case, it's what is needed to pass an exam, that is used to determine funding that is provided to a school... so in the end, it has very little to do with educating and more to do with securing funding. So, I can understand where the cynical attitude comes from. In high-school, free thinking and questioning, etc., is *not* valued, so it comes down to memorization and say what they "want to hear."
I think it's just as awful as you likely do, but it is what most students of today have been brought up in
He keeps using that word "CS" - I do not think it means what he thinks it means.
Granted, I'm an older student now. When I was young I had the same attitude - Teach me what I want to know, and don't bore me with that other crap. Now, I really appreciate "all that other crap" that I took. As crazy as it may sound, I find that I use my Philosophy classes more in my life than any of the specific courses course I took.
Don't get hoodwinked - education is not just about learning stuff - it more about learning how to think, how to process, how to analyze, and how to critique.
We know in technology things are going to change. To put it into the context of the original question - languages are going to come and go. Knowing how to think, adapt, and process is going to be far more important than knowing a programming language. Why do you think that all these old COBOL and FORTRAN dinosours are able to work in the old stuff, yet be able to pick up the new stuff also? It's not because they know how to program in COBOL or FORTRAN... It's because they know how to think.
Have we come this far where we need a services to tell people that email us that we are being swamped with email? Have we becomes such an instant now society we just can't exercise some patience and god forbid, wait for it?
Come on people, is this really necessary? Anyone considered the concerns with supplying a 3rd party with access to your email? I bet you spammer would love to get hold of that information.
Not an option I would even considered, let alone supply a password for.
You can absolutely go back. I also pull out the old dos legacy games all the time, and even the old Apple// games also. Perhaps I'm nostalgic, but despite the crummy graphics and sound (by comparison), I find the game play to be second to none. Even after 30 years, pulling out Santa Pravia, or Seven Cities of Gold, or even the first Civilization to be an absolute treat. It's funny how the game play is what really makes the difference, not the graphics/sounds.
Yeah, perhaps lol. I remember when call waiting (in my phone service area, they originally called it 'call alert' came along and when you were at that 38 minute point and your sisters teenie-bopper friend would call and all that time done, gone, time to curse and restart again.... Long before the days when you were able to cancel call waiting.. and before you were able to auto-recover from a disconnected download. Ahh, those were the days...
I remember downloading GIF files at the time and waiting for what seemed like forever to see them (ok, I admit...p0rN.)
I recall when the first dDial arrived in our area. It was pretty amazing. A 7 line chat system all running of a single Apple ][+. The sysop was able to get a seventh line by loading the software off a tape drive system which free up another slot for a modem. And remembering the hours upon hours dialing to only get a busy tone.... Back in the days when blog was shorthand for back log.
Yeah... It's funny how old school becomes what us old pharts considered new. My old school online presence was a FidoNet address (1:340/17) back in the early eighties. I get tired of people thinking that online presence started when "information superhighway" became mainstream (I hated that term at the time, and still hate it now.)
Back in the good old days, we thought 300bps was lightening fast and we loved it god dammit!
Just like space engineers hired by management know better than staff what the space requirements are for a job.
It seems that the executives that are never in their office get the most space. I even recall that a space engineer taking away the space in our server room for the UPSes because it looked like the space wasn't necessary - same for the humidity and air-conditioning system. And the canister for the haylon (when they still used that stuff) fire suppression wasn't needed either - they space engineered that the regular h2o sprinkler system would do just fine.
This is the problem with the amount of disconnect that typically occurs between the workforce, management and executive. Unfortunately, far too common of an occurrence.
Can't say I have done that, but one of the reasons that I refuse to purchase a laptop is due to the screen resolution. Since about 1995 or so, at work I've used 1600x1200 monitor. Going home to my 1024x768 was painful. Today, I'm on a 28" 1920x1080 (16:10) display. I couldn't even imagine going to some of those low vertical resolutions on a laptop.
As with most technology, it integrates into how we work, how we process, and even how we plan. Going backwards is extremely difficult. Imagine having to go back to running Windows on an old Pentium 100mhz.- It is much more difficult that one originally thinks. You are completely correct when you say it is incredibly painful.
Slashdot Mirror
This is where I have a problem with the fine article (or summary at least). Sure, there may be less problems over the life of the car, which todays seems to be not anymore than about 10 years. Where back in the 50's thru the 70s you commonly heard about the 30 year car. There seems to be a different in long term quality of the vehicles.
I had a old 1981 Honda Accord, which other than routine maintenance (oil changes, brakes, tires, clutch, spark plugs, battery, etc.) there were no breakdowns at all that prevented me from getting to a destination. I had this vehicle for 20 years, and when I did get rid of it, I saw it on the road for another 4+ years delivering pizza. I don't think any car today would be able to do that.
And the thing was, I was up north in Saskatchewan, Canada, where -40c was a typical winter (and at times colder). Never once did I ever have problems starting due to the cold - even if the block heater wasn't plugged in. And to boot, that vehicle was great in the snow. It would go where 4x4s would get stuck. I don't know what it was, but that vehicle was great, and I was sad when I had to get rid of it (had a new baby on the way, and wanted something with 4 doors).
So when they say most reliable, I would bet that it's not over a long life of a car... considering the life of a car today is about 10 years. The more complex cars get, the more that can go wrong with them. I'd take that 81 Honda again, in a second, over a lot of the cars today.
Gee Mr. Eric, why don't you let people see the source cods of your search engine? Why not let people see the algorithms of your advertising routines? Why can't we see the technical boards of your data center computers? What? I can't, because it's private or non-disclosure? Hmm, perhaps you shouldn't be do that in the first place.
Looks like another good option. Doesn't look like at this point it has all the same features, but it looks like a very respectable community build project. It will be good to keep that on the list of alternatives. Thanks, Cheers
Take a look at KloogeWerks gaming desktop at http://www.kloogeinc.com/
The group that I've been playing with since pre-Y2K, and who has been playing for the 25+ years before me have been using this gaming desktop for about 8+ years now. It really came into use after I moved down to Chicago, from Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Pair it up with Skype (or any other VoIP setup) and you might as well be there. Another player is working over in China and we both connect up to the rest of the group in Canada.
I am not an agent of KloogeWerks or the likes, just a player. Several of the plus of this gaming desktop are:
Updates are not as often as I would like, but most bugs do have a work around and sometime the network configuration can be a pain to setup, especially if your behind a firewall/router. But all you need to do is setup port forwarding which isn't that difficult, after all this is slashdot right? We are all nerds here
It works well for what it is, isn't too outrageously priced, and best of all, your not tied into a specific BRAND (read: in bed with WoC) and limited to only one set of rules and best of all it is customizable. I'd encourage you to check it out - it may not be exactly what you want, but I'm pretty sure it will be more flexible than what WoC will bring to the table (pardon the pun)
Cheers!
I'm of the same make up also. It's funny, we play First Edition with about 38 years worth house rules. Yeah, I feel old, but the ironic thing is, I'm the "baby" of the group at 41 years old. I started with them just before Y2K, and it is absolutely fantastic when they pull out historical notes about what occurred with character in 1976 or the likes - those original characters they played and their heroic deeds have become the more recent historical canon of our world (World of Greyhawk w/ 38 years of play history which translates into a dozen plus generations of characters.) I always get a kick when we need to go into the "Ye Olde Archives" to look up some of the details of historical event that a current characters ancestor was involved in.
I can completely understand your "well invested" comment. The rules needing to change by WoC is completely irrelevant. The need to upgrade is not needed. Generally the 38 years of house rules cover what we want, and if not, we adapt our rules to what is needed. We have been playing longer than most of the staff at WoC, why do we need them to tell us how to play? We are happy and enjoy with what we have, but that's not to say that we won't take a peek at what the new systems have and incorporate ideas that we like.
The biggest problem I had with WoC (or when they took over), was the endless supplemental rules, upon supplemental rules they brought out (think: handbooks, kit books, etc.). It just became too costly, too rule intensive and diminished the role playing aspect of the game that we loved - it's a role playing game, not a rule playing game.
But you know as well as me, playable requirements and minimum requirements are two completely different things. Minimum requirements only tell you just that, will the game run or not. It doesn't tell you if it is playable. Remember the old minimum specs for Windows XP? Only 128mb? Sure it would run, but it would be completely unusable.
I also have issues of needing to install software to "assess" if I have the correct hardware to run their software. That to me is just asking to be loaded with monitoring/malware. Just tell me the specs required.
While I agree with you completely, the only reason they give half the stat is is because they want the public [read: regulators] to think that a download equals a lost sale; much the same way the RI/MPAA tries to equate a download equals a lost sale.
So, since there are 3,920,000 non-paid for downloads, they want you to believe they have lost well over $254,800,000 due to illegal downloads (assuming a $65 per download). When someone says that turns into over a quarter of a billion of lost revenue, regulators have a tendency to listen.
But of course they forget, there are three types of lies in this world: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
So that's why they only report half the statistics.
And one of the quotes of Obama that I agree with..."You can put lipstick on a pig... it's still a pig."
Yeah, I knew this type of response would come along. Never did I say it couldn't be done - I said with the new interface, some of the options are so unintuitive it is a pain to find them, even to do the simplest of things (eg, add a page number field). Under the new interface, it seems like I'm searching, upon searching to find out where MS has hidden a feature within the ribbon. I'm not saying it's not there, I'm saying I (and others) find it extremely difficult locate for something that used to be so simple to find. It also appears that I'm not the only one that runs into this problem. Sure, coming into it new, probably not that big of a deal - coming from the old, it seems to be complete unintuitive.
The intuitiveness of the ribbon for me, and the majority of my classmates is just not there. Yes, the ribbon is hierarchical somewhat, but that hierarchy changes depending what you happen to be focused on - in the old menu system, no matter where you were, to find the option the path was the same. For me, the number of clicks is less relevant than the ease of finding what you want to do. The fact that I need to click is taking my hand away from the keyboard and making me click. When it comes to the ribbon, that ease just doesn't exist at first. Also it takes up far too much real estate on my screen (and yeah, I know it can be minimized)
I am willing to admit it has to do with my unfamiliarity with this new versions interface more than anything. If I wasn't forced to use it the occasional time at the schools computers, there would be no problem as I would continue to use Office 2003. There is nothing more frustrating than knowing how to do something very simple (in the pre-2007 version), and spending more time poking around trying to find out where the options are due to the new interface. Simply, customizable or not, an interface that is not intuitive to a user is not a good interface. I'm am not the only one that feels the anti-intuitiveness of the ribbon. What more do I want? Pretty simple really.. How about an option in your settings that says "Interface Type", with the choices of "New - Office 2007/10" or "Classic - Office 2003 and earlier". I honestly don't think I would be alone in asking for this option.
I come from the old days of WordStar and WordPerfect 5.x and earlier. While today, most would feel completely lost at the unintuitiveness in the WordStar Ctl-key combinations, or the various CTL/ALT/SHIFT-Fn key combinations of WordPerfect. I miss and embrace the simplicity and efficiency of those days of not needing to reach for the mouse to execute a particular function. And yes, I am familiar with the keyboard shortcuts, I use them all the time.
I have used MS office for years, and word since version 2.0 and earlier. While I don't consider myself a super power user with Word, I do consider myself to be extremely competent. The 2007+ interface might as well have taken me back to being a new user. A quick search on Google of "hate Microsoft word ribbon" turns up over 10.2 million results, while "love Microsoft word ribbon" yields 1.2... Pretty big difference, yet pretty meaningless since we know there are more bitches than loves on the 'net - what it does do is show that I'm not alone in my opinions.
Well said my friend! I was about to post something very similar, but you said it much better than I.
I also get frustrated with trying to find some particular option. And god forbid, if your trying to setup a custom header and footer than happens to not follow the "styles" that are included - Many of my classmates want to hang themselves with this frustration - I don't worry about that, b/c I pull out my good old 2003 era laptop, wait the not so timely boot-up, and make the changes with office 2003. It saves a lot of stress, headache, and frustraton.
The largest oversight with the new version of office, is the inability to maintain the old style interface. There is something to be said for a logical hierarchical interface, rather than an interface based on what MS thinks you want to do. There is not good reason why they couldn't have a setting that would maintain the old interface.
But Microsoft is notorious for making changes like this. Changing the names of control panel applets? Come on, where it was "Add Remove Programs" it is now "Programs and Features" - is that a change that was really necessary? Nothing worse than trying to support someone that is freaking out because they can't find the "My Computer" icon, when they have renamed it to just "Computer" - changes just for the sake of change don't seem to make a lot of sense. MS in the past has worked so hard as maintaining downward compatibility, but seem to forget that when it comes to the user interface.
In Soviet Russia, the Monkey punches you!
Hear Ye! Hear Ye!
I always get cR@p from my g/f that complains "why are you carrying that big heavy camera and bag"... But when I get the pictures, she never seems to complain. Quite honestly, if carrying a couple lenses (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, 50mm f/1.8, and a 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6, all basic kit type lenses) and getting tired from carrying a DSLR there are other things you should likely be concerned with - photography isn't likely one of them.
Quite honestly what the original post is requesting something that is better than a phone camera...Quite honestly, just about any compact point and shoot will be an improvement. It has more to do with optics rather than just specs (IE more megapixels doesn't always mean better).
The questions one really needs to know:
What you are shooting will dictate what equipment you need. If your wanting to learn about photography, but not take it to at least the level of a being a hobbyist, your probably not going to need a DSLR. That would be like having a high-performance Ferrari and only driving it at 15mph or less - in case like this, it would be for bragging right only, and not about the photography. A point and shoot (or point and pray as I like to call them) will likely be enough.
Taking good photos is entirely about compromise - there is not other way to put it. Learning on what to compromise on (think: composition) is what is important (ie: sharpness vs blur, depth of field vs bokka effect, picture with image grain (high ISO) vs getting no picture at all, are auto settings good enough vs. manual settings, etc.). Generally most of that can be accomplished with any camera that allows manual settings (control of aperture, ISO and shutter speed) but if your not willing to learn how those setting interact with your photography then there is not much point to having those settings - it will just make things to complex for the user..
Since the original post is coming from a camera phone, virtually any digital compact will be an improvement since you immediately have a larger sensor and a larger lens that will allow more light to to reach the sensor. Does (s)he need a point and shoot with manual settings? Depends, how much does (s)he want to step it up and how far (s)he want to take it in the future. But by the sounds of it, any point and shoot will do him/her just fine.
I'm of the same mind also...I switch back and forth between the two different styles without much difficulty at all and rarely make typos due to thinking I'm typing on the wrong key layout.
Honestly, muscle memory being screwed up? Because I can swing a baseball bat well, does that mean that swinging a golf club is going to ruin that? Sorry, I honestly don't think so.
First Post!
I pretty much agree with this.. As of recent, I've found that google has become less and less useful - it seems that every results turns out to be a sales pitch for some item or service rather than the information I was looking for.
It's unfortunate our list of options for search engines has been reduced to such a degree that it is just turns out to be different OEM like packaging of google or bing.
The SEO w#0r3z have totally changed the usefulness of many results. Talk about getting some useless results. I never knew that JC Pennys were experts on MS SQL server, or cosmetic tattooing (g/f's business). It seems that certain sites just turn up regardless of what you are looking for.
ok...I'll bite
Perhaps that is what lower educational facilities are for, but the better question would be: Is that what they do?
I would say generally not.
Speaking as a international student - I generally speak and write better English than most US highschool graduates [although not on slashdot - I like to troll ;) ] . Having to write the test of English language proficiency exam was simply offensive.
when high-schools pump out remedial students, universities need to prepare for the lowest common denominator.
And much of the time, if it is just viewed as simply as that, it's not really education. Understanding the underlying concept is far more useful than just the memorization of random information. With the concept, you can generally derive the required information.
I feel that it it is a result of the earlier school system. In elementary and high-school, students are taught to the exam. Multiple choice tests indirectly teach that memorization is what it means to be educated - which we both know is not the case, it's what is needed to pass an exam, that is used to determine funding that is provided to a school... so in the end, it has very little to do with educating and more to do with securing funding. So, I can understand where the cynical attitude comes from. In high-school, free thinking and questioning, etc., is *not* valued, so it comes down to memorization and say what they "want to hear."
I think it's just as awful as you likely do, but it is what most students of today have been brought up in
He keeps using that word "CS" - I do not think it means what he thinks it means.
Granted, I'm an older student now. When I was young I had the same attitude - Teach me what I want to know, and don't bore me with that other crap. Now, I really appreciate "all that other crap" that I took. As crazy as it may sound, I find that I use my Philosophy classes more in my life than any of the specific courses course I took.
Don't get hoodwinked - education is not just about learning stuff - it more about learning how to think, how to process, how to analyze, and how to critique.
We know in technology things are going to change. To put it into the context of the original question - languages are going to come and go. Knowing how to think, adapt, and process is going to be far more important than knowing a programming language. Why do you think that all these old COBOL and FORTRAN dinosours are able to work in the old stuff, yet be able to pick up the new stuff also? It's not because they know how to program in COBOL or FORTRAN... It's because they know how to think.
Have we come this far where we need a services to tell people that email us that we are being swamped with email? Have we becomes such an instant now society we just can't exercise some patience and god forbid, wait for it?
Come on people, is this really necessary? Anyone considered the concerns with supplying a 3rd party with access to your email? I bet you spammer would love to get hold of that information.
Not an option I would even considered, let alone supply a password for.
This should bring back some memories...
www.virtualapple.org/
You can absolutely go back. I also pull out the old dos legacy games all the time, and even the old Apple // games also. Perhaps I'm nostalgic, but despite the crummy graphics and sound (by comparison), I find the game play to be second to none. Even after 30 years, pulling out Santa Pravia, or Seven Cities of Gold, or even the first Civilization to be an absolute treat. It's funny how the game play is what really makes the difference, not the graphics/sounds.
Wish I had some mod points for you.
Yeah, perhaps lol. I remember when call waiting (in my phone service area, they originally called it 'call alert' came along and when you were at that 38 minute point and your sisters teenie-bopper friend would call and all that time done, gone, time to curse and restart again.... Long before the days when you were able to cancel call waiting.. and before you were able to auto-recover from a disconnected download. Ahh, those were the days...
I remember downloading GIF files at the time and waiting for what seemed like forever to see them (ok, I admit...p0rN.)
I recall when the first dDial arrived in our area. It was pretty amazing. A 7 line chat system all running of a single Apple ][+. The sysop was able to get a seventh line by loading the software off a tape drive system which free up another slot for a modem. And remembering the hours upon hours dialing to only get a busy tone.... Back in the days when blog was shorthand for back log.
Yeah... It's funny how old school becomes what us old pharts considered new. My old school online presence was a FidoNet address (1:340/17) back in the early eighties. I get tired of people thinking that online presence started when "information superhighway" became mainstream (I hated that term at the time, and still hate it now.)
Back in the good old days, we thought 300bps was lightening fast and we loved it god dammit!
Now get the hell off my lawn!
Just like space engineers hired by management know better than staff what the space requirements are for a job.
It seems that the executives that are never in their office get the most space. I even recall that a space engineer taking away the space in our server room for the UPSes because it looked like the space wasn't necessary - same for the humidity and air-conditioning system. And the canister for the haylon (when they still used that stuff) fire suppression wasn't needed either - they space engineered that the regular h2o sprinkler system would do just fine.
This is the problem with the amount of disconnect that typically occurs between the workforce, management and executive. Unfortunately, far too common of an occurrence.
Can't say I have done that, but one of the reasons that I refuse to purchase a laptop is due to the screen resolution. Since about 1995 or so, at work I've used 1600x1200 monitor. Going home to my 1024x768 was painful. Today, I'm on a 28" 1920x1080 (16:10) display. I couldn't even imagine going to some of those low vertical resolutions on a laptop.
As with most technology, it integrates into how we work, how we process, and even how we plan. Going backwards is extremely difficult. Imagine having to go back to running Windows on an old Pentium 100mhz.- It is much more difficult that one originally thinks. You are completely correct when you say it is incredibly painful.