They look like this (only without the missing keys) or this. I hate these modern abominations with the flimsy construction, the weak candy-like keys, and all these stupid extra keys. They don't help me do my job-- in fact, all they ever do is get in the way. I've found myself trying to hit, say, PgUp or PgDown, and accidentally hitting a "Sleep" key or some crap like that. Luckily, the computer in question (my friend's) wasn't set up with the drivers (!!!) for that keyboard. (Am I the only one who finds the concept of a "keyboard driver" rather alarming?)
"His design is to make the window system do the absolute minimum and move all the work into the client."
This is ridiculous. Look, ALL modern software has gotten so incredibly bloated and complex that it's just a joke. What we need is a windowing system that adopts the concept of Apple's old "toolbox"-- windowing functions and basic graphical functions AS PART OF THE CORE SYSTEM-- without the horrible kluge that I've heard "classic" Mac OS coding was. The concept was nice, though.
Look at GNOME, KDE, Windows XP. It's fucking ridiculous. How many fucking library dependancies do you need for a modern windowing system? Have you ever run 'ldd' on a modern GNOME or KDE app? It's enough to make you vomit.
It shouldn't have to be so fucking complex. The windowing system should offer basic 2D and 3D functions, widgets (file selection boxes, drop-downs, radio buttons, checkboxes, crap like that), they should be efficiently and tightly coded (preferably in C, with some ASM for speed on common architectures, and in the most CPU-intensive crap like 3D).
Look at what the Amiga was able to do with a 680x0. Sure, it had some custom chips too, but it was still a 680x0-- and modern CPUs are so fast that those extra chips are no longer necessary. With an old Mac Plus, it would take maybe a minute to boot up System 6... and with a modern Windows XP or RedShat/Fedorka box, it takes... maybe a minute. And this is progress? Also, most programs for System 6 required how many libs? Count 'em... YES, THAT'S RIGHT: ZERO! They simply used Toolbox calls, and any functions that were needed beyond that were not so hard to include right in the binary itself.
Simplicity, people. What we need is simplicity. For most tasks, a P4 running XP "feels" no faster than a '386 running Windows 3.0 in '386 Enhanced Mode did.
I always wonder if there isn't some Generally Accepted Practice in business (and I mean business in general) to find ways to keep poor people screwed... unable to afford items like decent LCD monitors, big TVs, etc...
When you get an email, at the top, 'caller ID' shows up (e.g. "This email
was sent from: SOMEWHERE IN CHINA", vs. "This email was sent from:
CITIBANK'S servers")
When you mouseover a link, a LARGE JavaScript thingy pops up saying "This
link is to: SOMEWHERE IN NIGERIA" or "This link is to: CITIBANK'S site"
Follow these people back to their dorms. Watch what operating system they boot up on their OWN computers. (Hint hint: Windows.) There are MacIdiots who are similar to these WinIdiots.. it's just that the WinIdiots are far more prevalent, since the Windows monoculture itself is so prevalent.
Yes, MS is engaging in Orwellian doublespeak by saying that the task limitation will help people... however, they may very well be right.
I've noticed just two "WinIdiot" patterns of task handling:
1) Start Word. Type some stuff. Realize you want to view a Web page. QUIT WORD. Run IE. Do what you wanna do. Maybe copy and paste, if you're that Clueful. QUIT IE. Run Word. Realize you want to check your email. QUIT WORD. Run Outlook. Read email. Catch virus. QUIT OUTLOOK. Run Word...
1) Start Word. Type some stuff. Realize you want to view a Web page. SAVE WORK. RUN IE. Do what you wanna do. Maybe copy and paste, if you're that Clueful. KEEP IE OPEN. RUN WORD AGAIN. Type some more. Realize you want to check your mail. KEEP WORD OPEN. RUN OUTLOOK. Check mail. Want to type more in Word. RUN WORD AGAIN...
Eventually, you have a bajillion copies of Word running at once...
Or, in other words, (1)-type people don't realize a computer CAN multitask (don't even get me started on how they don't realize stuff in the taskbar constitutes multitasking.), and (2)-type people don't realize that every time you run something, it eats up more RAM... so they end up with 12 copies of Word running at once...
* (WinIdiot: computer-illiterate person, who runs Windows, and who doesn't even WANT to learn how to be better computer users-- sometimes, they've been using computers for 20 years, but they're still just as clueless as the day they started)
I was once going to a client's data center at Globix. I was carrying a particularly nifty, but heavy, item that I found on the streets of Chinatown (an old Commodore monitor-- which, as I surmised, was still in working order!). Because I was holding this bulky object, I fumbled a bit as I pressed my finger to the scanner.
I was still let in.
So I went in, put the monitor down, and came back out to experiment. I tried another finger. It worked... I tried a knuckle. It worked...
Finally, I held my hair (long hair) back, leaned down, and gently pressed the tip of my NOSE to the scanner plate.
It worked.
Moral of the story: Biometric security is sometimes just so much heehaw, and it does malfunction (and yields false-positives as well as false-negatives).
...when they're affordable. It took so bloody long to get color handhelds under a decent price... now these neat little toys come onto the market at prices THREE TO FOUR TIMES that of a typical desktop. WTF?
This is WONDERFUL news! It's interesting how NASA has kept saying "We'll just let the Hubble de-orbit" while maintaining a "head in the sand" attitude about its replacement. The scientists who rely upon Hubble need it now as much as ever (if not more than ever), but NASA has seemingly ignored them. Oh, I am so happy to hear that they've finally come to the right decision!
I mean, why should we deorbit Hubble if it doesn't already have a replacement up there?! Doesn't make sense.
Google's "Do No Evil" mantra is almost certainly another reason why Wall Street wants them to fail. A sense of morality is practically anathema in today's Fortune 500 world. They don't want a company that is not easily tempted by money at the cost of (employees' livelihood|third-world workers' lives|anything else worth protecting that isn't money) to ascend to their misty eyrie.
Why are we supposed to take SlashDot articles about highly academic topics seriously if the editors can't even spell "Mandelbrot" or "financial" (see: "finantial" (sic))?
That's just it. I had NO INTEREST in "adapting [to], growing [with], and learning under pressure" such almost random, totally meaningless crap. College was basically just a big, arbitrary "obstacle course". And I don't like being patronized to. I guess that's what it boils down to... I felt belittled by the knowledge that basically, what I was being told by "society" (ha ha) is "Here, here's a big pile of crap you'll never need to know in your life. But learn it, just to show us how l33t your brain is." Well, screw that. I have better things to do with my time than learn some theoretical underpinning of a hypothetical Algol compiler, or learn how to calculate the area under a curve. Both of these things are very, very, very, very unlikely to come up in my working day (particularly the former), and if I wanted to learn about them, that's what Google's for.
Maybe school, on a whole, is obsolete? Or at least as it is...
I dropped out of school halfway through. I couldn't deal with it. Even the CS courses were theoretical hogwash that did nothing to improve my coding or my systems admin abilities; the non-CS courses were even worse. I already knew all I'd ever need to know about English, if I wanted to learn history I'd read history books, and math? Hah. Don't even get me started on math. My school required four years of Calculus (!!!), as well as Discrete Math and other assorted hellpits, just to get a BS in CS.
After entering college as a National Merit Scholar, with an SAT score of 1540, from one of the highest ranked public high schools in my state, I dropped out after a couple of years-- I couldn't take it psychologically. To this day I have nightmares-- literal nightmares-- about Calculus. I wish that was a joke.
Wanna know how many times I've had to use any math above algebra in all the years I've been a programmer?
ONCE.
And it was Trig (just barely above algebra in complexity). Certainly not Calc...
Slashdot Mirror
Where's Alviso?
(hint for the cluebies: You are seeking out THIS street map, around 8 feet tall, standing among the peeps.)
d00d, j00 sP3@k l337 700????!!!??!?!?@%%?!@?%!@%
So they're betting on whether someone's going to "implement" cosmic ray origins by 2010? Someone alrady did, since obviously, cosmic rays exist ;)
"Suuurrrrffff...TURRRRFFFF!!!!!" -- Where have I heard that from before?
This is absolutely ridiculous.
The best keyboards I've ever had have 101 keys.
They look like this (only without the missing keys) or this. I hate these modern abominations with the flimsy construction, the weak candy-like keys, and all these stupid extra keys. They don't help me do my job-- in fact, all they ever do is get in the way. I've found myself trying to hit, say, PgUp or PgDown, and accidentally hitting a "Sleep" key or some crap like that. Luckily, the computer in question (my friend's) wasn't set up with the drivers (!!!) for that keyboard. (Am I the only one who finds the concept of a "keyboard driver" rather alarming?)
Sounds like a company that makes prophylactix... err, I mean prophylactics.
...three...two...one...
"His design is to make the window system do the absolute minimum and move all the work into the client."
This is ridiculous. Look, ALL modern software has gotten so incredibly bloated and complex that it's just a joke. What we need is a windowing system that adopts the concept of Apple's old "toolbox"-- windowing functions and basic graphical functions AS PART OF THE CORE SYSTEM-- without the horrible kluge that I've heard "classic" Mac OS coding was. The concept was nice, though.
Look at GNOME, KDE, Windows XP. It's fucking ridiculous. How many fucking library dependancies do you need for a modern windowing system? Have you ever run 'ldd' on a modern GNOME or KDE app? It's enough to make you vomit.
It shouldn't have to be so fucking complex. The windowing system should offer basic 2D and 3D functions, widgets (file selection boxes, drop-downs, radio buttons, checkboxes, crap like that), they should be efficiently and tightly coded (preferably in C, with some ASM for speed on common architectures, and in the most CPU-intensive crap like 3D).
Look at what the Amiga was able to do with a 680x0. Sure, it had some custom chips too, but it was still a 680x0-- and modern CPUs are so fast that those extra chips are no longer necessary. With an old Mac Plus, it would take maybe a minute to boot up System 6... and with a modern Windows XP or RedShat/Fedorka box, it takes... maybe a minute. And this is progress? Also, most programs for System 6 required how many libs? Count 'em... YES, THAT'S RIGHT: ZERO! They simply used Toolbox calls, and any functions that were needed beyond that were not so hard to include right in the binary itself.
Simplicity, people. What we need is simplicity. For most tasks, a P4 running XP "feels" no faster than a '386 running Windows 3.0 in '386 Enhanced Mode did.
And that is sad...
WTF?! Isn't Phil Collins gonna ..... oh, wait. Never mind.
A super-deformed 802.11b card?
I always wonder if there isn't some Generally Accepted Practice in business (and I mean business in general) to find ways to keep poor people screwed... unable to afford items like decent LCD monitors, big TVs, etc...
When you get an email, at the top, 'caller ID' shows up (e.g. "This email was sent from: SOMEWHERE IN CHINA", vs. "This email was sent from: CITIBANK'S servers")
When you mouseover a link, a LARGE JavaScript thingy pops up saying "This link is to: SOMEWHERE IN NIGERIA" or "This link is to: CITIBANK'S site"
Follow these people back to their dorms. Watch what operating system they boot up on their OWN computers. (Hint hint: Windows.) There are MacIdiots who are similar to these WinIdiots.. it's just that the WinIdiots are far more prevalent, since the Windows monoculture itself is so prevalent.
Or rather:
Ultra Expensive Disk Drives With No Moving Parts
from the free-adverts-for-things-nobody-can-afford dept.
C'mon guys. Shouldn't this have been titled:
Ultra Fast Disk Drives With No Moving Parts
from the free-adverts-for-things-nobody-can-afford dept.
s/some users/virtually all users/
s/their computer works/anything even vaguely pertaining to computers, software or technology/
Yes, MS is engaging in Orwellian doublespeak by saying that the task limitation will help people... however, they may very well be right.
I've noticed just two "WinIdiot" patterns of task handling:
1) Start Word. Type some stuff. Realize you want to view a Web page. QUIT WORD. Run IE. Do what you wanna do. Maybe copy and paste, if you're that Clueful. QUIT IE. Run Word. Realize you want to check your email. QUIT WORD. Run Outlook. Read email. Catch virus. QUIT OUTLOOK. Run Word...
1) Start Word. Type some stuff. Realize you want to view a Web page. SAVE WORK. RUN IE. Do what you wanna do. Maybe copy and paste, if you're that Clueful. KEEP IE OPEN. RUN WORD AGAIN. Type some more. Realize you want to check your mail. KEEP WORD OPEN. RUN OUTLOOK. Check mail. Want to type more in Word. RUN WORD AGAIN...
Eventually, you have a bajillion copies of Word running at once...
Or, in other words, (1)-type people don't realize a computer CAN multitask (don't even get me started on how they don't realize stuff in the taskbar constitutes multitasking.), and (2)-type people don't realize that every time you run something, it eats up more RAM... so they end up with 12 copies of Word running at once...
* (WinIdiot: computer-illiterate person, who runs Windows, and who doesn't even WANT to learn how to be better computer users-- sometimes, they've been using computers for 20 years, but they're still just as clueless as the day they started)
It's "GATTACA", not "GATACCA".
I was once going to a client's data center at Globix. I was carrying a particularly nifty, but heavy, item that I found on the streets of Chinatown (an old Commodore monitor-- which, as I surmised, was still in working order!). Because I was holding this bulky object, I fumbled a bit as I pressed my finger to the scanner.
I was still let in.
So I went in, put the monitor down, and came back out to experiment. I tried another finger. It worked... I tried a knuckle. It worked...
Finally, I held my hair (long hair) back, leaned down, and gently pressed the tip of my NOSE to the scanner plate.
It worked.
Moral of the story: Biometric security is sometimes just so much heehaw, and it does malfunction (and yields false-positives as well as false-negatives).
...when they're affordable. It took so bloody long to get color handhelds under a decent price... now these neat little toys come onto the market at prices THREE TO FOUR TIMES that of a typical desktop. WTF?
Wake me when I can actually afford to buy one.
This is WONDERFUL news! It's interesting how NASA has kept saying "We'll just let the Hubble de-orbit" while maintaining a "head in the sand" attitude about its replacement. The scientists who rely upon Hubble need it now as much as ever (if not more than ever), but NASA has seemingly ignored them. Oh, I am so happy to hear that they've finally come to the right decision!
I mean, why should we deorbit Hubble if it doesn't already have a replacement up there?! Doesn't make sense.
Google's "Do No Evil" mantra is almost certainly another reason why Wall Street wants them to fail. A sense of morality is practically anathema in today's Fortune 500 world. They don't want a company that is not easily tempted by money at the cost of (employees' livelihood|third-world workers' lives|anything else worth protecting that isn't money) to ascend to their misty eyrie.
Why are we supposed to take SlashDot articles about highly academic topics seriously if the editors can't even spell "Mandelbrot" or "financial" (see: "finantial" (sic))?
That's just it. I had NO INTEREST in "adapting [to], growing [with], and learning under pressure" such almost random, totally meaningless crap. College was basically just a big, arbitrary "obstacle course". And I don't like being patronized to. I guess that's what it boils down to... I felt belittled by the knowledge that basically, what I was being told by "society" (ha ha) is "Here, here's a big pile of crap you'll never need to know in your life. But learn it, just to show us how l33t your brain is." Well, screw that. I have better things to do with my time than learn some theoretical underpinning of a hypothetical Algol compiler, or learn how to calculate the area under a curve. Both of these things are very, very, very, very unlikely to come up in my working day (particularly the former), and if I wanted to learn about them, that's what Google's for.
Maybe school, on a whole, is obsolete? Or at least as it is...
I dropped out of school halfway through. I couldn't deal with it. Even the CS courses were theoretical hogwash that did nothing to improve my coding or my systems admin abilities; the non-CS courses were even worse. I already knew all I'd ever need to know about English, if I wanted to learn history I'd read history books, and math? Hah. Don't even get me started on math. My school required four years of Calculus (!!!), as well as Discrete Math and other assorted hellpits, just to get a BS in CS.
After entering college as a National Merit Scholar, with an SAT score of 1540, from one of the highest ranked public high schools in my state, I dropped out after a couple of years-- I couldn't take it psychologically. To this day I have nightmares-- literal nightmares-- about Calculus. I wish that was a joke.
Wanna know how many times I've had to use any math above algebra in all the years I've been a programmer?
ONCE.
And it was Trig (just barely above algebra in complexity). Certainly not Calc...