Eh, I guess you're right. Think of the "windowed" world as command line. Something BIGGER must come along and bring us into the fabled 21st century.
We take start menus and windows for granted...it's time to move on.
On the contrary. We're so stuck in this windowed world of operating systems. Why do we have to rely on the model of "windows" and "start" or "application" bars? The computing world is no longer flat or one-dimensional.
Until someone comes up with something COMPLETELY different from the windows/taskbar/buttons model, I'll stick with XP. I'm waiting for the next jump in OS development (akin to the jump from 3.1 - Win95). Now THAT was revolutionary.
This is the dilemma for RIAA and record companies in general:
When TV was introduced, everyone watched it. It was free, and it was awesome. Then cable came around. Why would someone pay a subscription for something that's free? Easy: THERE WAS VALUE ADDED! Quality pictures, more channels, guaranteed reception, etc.
The record companies don't get it. Humans will not pay for something that they can get for free (whether it's illegal or not is irrelevant).
They need to ADD SOMETHING that makes it better than what we're getting now. It's not my job to think of that *something*. But when it comes, I'll pay a subscription fee for music.
My parents bought a Sony VVega KV36XBR400 HD-ready TV almost two years ago. Granted, it's a big-ticket item (and it's heavy as hell! 235 lbs!) but it hasn't given us a wink of trouble.
I think the problem is less in big electronics than it is in small, handheld devices. People drop cell phones and Palms more than they'd like to admit, but I've never seen a design that's of high enough quality to take such abuse.
With all the R&D money manufacturers spend on enhancing an already bloated feature set, can't they spend half as much to make the product durable and give it a high-quality feel? I would buy in a second (and at almost any price) a cell phone that's advertised as durable and able to withstand a fall from a pocket or backpack.
Quality is still quite important in consumer electronics, and I'd like to see more manufacturers take it in to serious consideration as a selling point for their products.
In the computer labs here at the U of Michigan, we use 400 (or 450, I'm not sure) MHz G4s with OSX 10.1 and 1.8 GHz Dell Optiplex GX240s with Win2K.
The Win boxes take about 20 seconds to log in. The Macs take about 50 secs - 1 minute. Apparently, it's not just megahertz myth...it's network thoroughput as well...?
The Mac boxes are slower at loading most programs too. No specifics ('cept maybe IE), but it's just something that's consciously noticable.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, I guess you're right. Think of the "windowed" world as command line. Something BIGGER must come along and bring us into the fabled 21st century. We take start menus and windows for granted...it's time to move on.
On the contrary. We're so stuck in this windowed world of operating systems. Why do we have to rely on the model of "windows" and "start" or "application" bars? The computing world is no longer flat or one-dimensional. Until someone comes up with something COMPLETELY different from the windows/taskbar/buttons model, I'll stick with XP. I'm waiting for the next jump in OS development (akin to the jump from 3.1 - Win95). Now THAT was revolutionary.
This is the dilemma for RIAA and record companies in general:
When TV was introduced, everyone watched it. It was free, and it was awesome. Then cable came around. Why would someone pay a subscription for something that's free? Easy: THERE WAS VALUE ADDED! Quality pictures, more channels, guaranteed reception, etc.
The record companies don't get it. Humans will not pay for something that they can get for free (whether it's illegal or not is irrelevant).
They need to ADD SOMETHING that makes it better than what we're getting now. It's not my job to think of that *something*. But when it comes, I'll pay a subscription fee for music.
My parents bought a Sony VVega KV36XBR400 HD-ready TV almost two years ago. Granted, it's a big-ticket item (and it's heavy as hell! 235 lbs!) but it hasn't given us a wink of trouble.
I think the problem is less in big electronics than it is in small, handheld devices. People drop cell phones and Palms more than they'd like to admit, but I've never seen a design that's of high enough quality to take such abuse.
With all the R&D money manufacturers spend on enhancing an already bloated feature set, can't they spend half as much to make the product durable and give it a high-quality feel? I would buy in a second (and at almost any price) a cell phone that's advertised as durable and able to withstand a fall from a pocket or backpack.
Quality is still quite important in consumer electronics, and I'd like to see more manufacturers take it in to serious consideration as a selling point for their products.
In the computer labs here at the U of Michigan, we use 400 (or 450, I'm not sure) MHz G4s with OSX 10.1 and 1.8 GHz Dell Optiplex GX240s with Win2K.
The Win boxes take about 20 seconds to log in. The Macs take about 50 secs - 1 minute. Apparently, it's not just megahertz myth...it's network thoroughput as well...?
The Mac boxes are slower at loading most programs too. No specifics ('cept maybe IE), but it's just something that's consciously noticable.