But the additions mentioned in this article are not "additional types, values, objects, properties, and functions".
They're new reserved words, like "for" and "if".
Ain't oversimplification a bitch?;-)
Customer: "Can I have a glass of water?" Waiter: "Certainly, sir, with ice or without?" Customer: "With ice, please" Waiter: "Sparkling or flat" Customer: "Flat" Waiter: "With a slice of lemon?" Customer: "No thank you" Waiter: "How about cucumber?" Customer: "JUST GET ME THE DAMN WATER!"
Choice has a cognitive cost, and if there is no value to be gained by providing choice, then providing a choice is a bad thing to do.
The main problem with the MS is:
a) It had an OS monopoly.
b) It used that OS monopoly to force people into using its proprietary applications.
c) In the end, the only real advantage of the OS was that it ran its proprietary applications, creating a anti-competitive chicken-and-egg.
Breaking up into a monopoly on OS and a monopoly on Office would help because:
a) Presumably, Office for Linux would be released
b) The Linux desktop would become much more viable to a lot of people, and the OS monopoly much shakier
The point is that OpenOffice + Linux might eventually leech marketshare, it is currently fighting a battle on 2 fronts.
There's a difference between not choosing the technology for yourself and not seeing the use of the technology. Admittedly text-messaging is far less mature in the states than other countries, but the technology is profoundly changing the way many of us communicate. Granted, not all the changes are good - do we really want a world of contact-obsessed lemmings? - but to say "I don't see the point" seems a little shortsighted.
A study found that text-message has decreased the level of smoking in teenage girls in the UK (sorry, I can't remember the reference, it was discussed in a seminar). That's a communication technology overpowering a chemical addiction. Reasons for the link were unclear, but it was theorised that it either sucked up their disposable cash, or gave them something to keep their hands busy (for want of a better choice of words).
So don't tell them about middle-click, and it'll work just like Windows!
*sigh*
No it won't. Unless you've got 2 entirely seperate clipboards for the 2 different mechanisms, which would be even more confusing. Because whenever mom selects text, or accidentally clicks the middle button, wierd stuff would happen....and she'd run the virus checker, because obviously her computer had a virus;)
Before you can assess whether something is broken, you need to have a task.
If the task is "making the linux desktop usable for 'mom and pop'", then more consistency for such thing with windows and apple is necessary.
The issue is not that the system hasn't been well engineered . The fact is, it's being repurposed from its original use as a geek system to a mainstream one. And to do this, much more consistency is necessary. It's a similar situation to compatability with Word formats.
The ideal solution would be to include a system-wide configuration option where you can choose your clipboard configuration. Bigger picture, you could develop a cross-platform preference file format, and then put it onto a usb memory card, and take your desktop with you wherever you go: apple, unix, or windows.
That last line made so sense, and the entire comment had little to do with what I said.
I ain't no Microsoftie - not after Exchange Server;). Unlike some I have the ability to make points that aren't a sheeplike manifestation of some sort of techno-political alignment.
A good deed with selfish intentions is still a good deed. Everything is "simple business", in the sense that MS will benefit. The fact is that they've chosen a path which benefits themselves and others, and for that some kudos are due.
Just because you hate MS doesn't mean you can't be happy with some of their decisions.
So don't give me a computer that tries to be smart and second-guess me, give me a computer that's dumb as a brick and does what I tell it to do.
Translation: Linux shouldn't be for ordinary users, it should be restricted to hackers for whom spending time getting the thing working is a hobby.
Well, separate end-user distributions and hacker distributions can solve the dichotomy, but the attitude is cancerous to the goal of end-user linux usability.
Fortunately, the larger companies which are starting to provide linux desktops care more about cashflow than ideology, and want to make it accessbile to as many people as possible.
Actually, our minds are primarily visual and spatial. Espeically those of us who ain't coders.
I imagine that it'd be pretty easy to recognise the site you were on last week by its branding in a thumbnail - assume it wasn't black text on a white background:p
it's hard to turn something as huge as communication into a scalar.
The most meaningful communication generally happens face-to-face, and this is unlikely to change without some seriously dystopic biotech. However, in terms of the time I spend communicating, much of it isn't face to face, given that I sit in front of a PC all day. Rather, MSN and weblogs commenting forms a large chunk of my daily "chit chat".
that's why 48 hour competitions like this are good - no one needs anything except 2 days. there are no barriers to entry. more people can enter, and it becomes more likely that someone will hit on that winner idea.
People always say "no Linux is not userfriendly enough" but they never say what EXACTLY is wrong!
Yeah I hate that. It's like how people say there's too many people dying of hunger, and don't say EXACTLY how to fix it. Anyone who points out a difficult problem without a complete solution is obviously a troll.
A MS monopoly on office software is a lot better than a MS monopoly on an operating system. The antitrust problems have mostly come from bundling stuff in with the O/S.
IBM doesn't care about delivering software freedom. They care about becoming a serious desktop-software player. Linux is a means to this end, not a bloody religion.
For IBM's purposes, getting MS Office going on Linux makes total sense. And even though it's not the best thing they could do, it will be of some help to The Church.:P
Supporting multiple, unknown hardward platforms adds a lot of complexity. Extra complexity inevitably introduces bugs, so you shouldn't add complexity for the sake of it.
Slashdot Mirror
But the additions mentioned in this article are not "additional types, values, objects, properties, and functions". They're new reserved words, like "for" and "if". Ain't oversimplification a bitch? ;-)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're not in a leadership role in large IT projects.
Customer: "Can I have a glass of water?"
Waiter: "Certainly, sir, with ice or without?"
Customer: "With ice, please"
Waiter: "Sparkling or flat"
Customer: "Flat"
Waiter: "With a slice of lemon?"
Customer: "No thank you"
Waiter: "How about cucumber?"
Customer: "JUST GET ME THE DAMN WATER!"
Choice has a cognitive cost, and if there is no value to be gained by providing choice, then providing a choice is a bad thing to do.
No, but he said "nuh uh" using emotive similies, so if you disagree with him then you are in favour of rape, child-abuse, and murder. Shame on you!
The main problem with the MS is: a) It had an OS monopoly. b) It used that OS monopoly to force people into using its proprietary applications. c) In the end, the only real advantage of the OS was that it ran its proprietary applications, creating a anti-competitive chicken-and-egg. Breaking up into a monopoly on OS and a monopoly on Office would help because: a) Presumably, Office for Linux would be released b) The Linux desktop would become much more viable to a lot of people, and the OS monopoly much shakier The point is that OpenOffice + Linux might eventually leech marketshare, it is currently fighting a battle on 2 fronts.
There's a difference between not choosing the technology for yourself and not seeing the use of the technology. Admittedly text-messaging is far less mature in the states than other countries, but the technology is profoundly changing the way many of us communicate. Granted, not all the changes are good - do we really want a world of contact-obsessed lemmings? - but to say "I don't see the point" seems a little shortsighted.
A study found that text-message has decreased the level of smoking in teenage girls in the UK (sorry, I can't remember the reference, it was discussed in a seminar). That's a communication technology overpowering a chemical addiction. Reasons for the link were unclear, but it was theorised that it either sucked up their disposable cash, or gave them something to keep their hands busy (for want of a better choice of words).
You're either can't be serious, or you're just too old to adopt new technologies.
I don't know where to begin.
So don't tell them about middle-click, and it'll work just like Windows!
...and she'd run the virus checker, because obviously her computer had a virus ;)
*sigh*
No it won't. Unless you've got 2 entirely seperate clipboards for the 2 different mechanisms, which would be even more confusing. Because whenever mom selects text, or accidentally clicks the middle button, wierd stuff would happen.
Before you can assess whether something is broken, you need to have a task.
If the task is "making the linux desktop usable for 'mom and pop'", then more consistency for such thing with windows and apple is necessary.
The issue is not that the system hasn't been well engineered . The fact is, it's being repurposed from its original use as a geek system to a mainstream one. And to do this, much more consistency is necessary. It's a similar situation to compatability with Word formats.
The ideal solution would be to include a system-wide configuration option where you can choose your clipboard configuration. Bigger picture, you could develop a cross-platform preference file format, and then put it onto a usb memory card, and take your desktop with you wherever you go: apple, unix, or windows.
That last line made so sense, and the entire comment had little to do with what I said. I ain't no Microsoftie - not after Exchange Server ;). Unlike some I have the ability to make points that aren't a sheeplike manifestation of some sort of techno-political alignment.
A good deed with selfish intentions is still a good deed. Everything is "simple business", in the sense that MS will benefit. The fact is that they've chosen a path which benefits themselves and others, and for that some kudos are due. Just because you hate MS doesn't mean you can't be happy with some of their decisions.
Most lawyers are alright people.
The problem is that most highly successful lawyers are bad, because they're the ones who push for these bullshit infringement claims / lawsuits / etc.
And since the highly successful lawyers are the ones that take on the newsworthy cases, it seems like they're all arseholes.
Clicking the scroll-wheel acts as a middle-click. No mouse upgrade necessary.
So don't give me a computer that tries to be smart and second-guess me, give me a computer that's dumb as a brick and does what I tell it to do.
Translation: Linux shouldn't be for ordinary users, it should be restricted to hackers for whom spending time getting the thing working is a hobby.
Well, separate end-user distributions and hacker distributions can solve the dichotomy, but the attitude is cancerous to the goal of end-user linux usability.
Fortunately, the larger companies which are starting to provide linux desktops care more about cashflow than ideology, and want to make it accessbile to as many people as possible.
That's beside the point. Most of like to be in the same room as people, from time to time, even if magical technology makes it unnecessary...
I imagine that it'd be pretty easy to recognise the site you were on last week by its branding in a thumbnail - assume it wasn't black text on a white background :p
this space was intentionally left blank
The most meaningful communication generally happens face-to-face, and this is unlikely to change without some seriously dystopic biotech. However, in terms of the time I spend communicating, much of it isn't face to face, given that I sit in front of a PC all day. Rather, MSN and weblogs commenting forms a large chunk of my daily "chit chat".
that's why 48 hour competitions like this are good - no one needs anything except 2 days. there are no barriers to entry. more people can enter, and it becomes more likely that someone will hit on that winner idea.
ridiculous limitations are actually very good at getting the creative spark going.
People always say "no Linux is not userfriendly enough" but they never say what EXACTLY is wrong!
Yeah I hate that. It's like how people say there's too many people dying of hunger, and don't say EXACTLY how to fix it. Anyone who points out a difficult problem without a complete solution is obviously a troll.
Access sucks but users love it.
A MS monopoly on office software is a lot better than a MS monopoly on an operating system. The antitrust problems have mostly come from bundling stuff in with the O/S.
For IBM's purposes, getting MS Office going on Linux makes total sense. And even though it's not the best thing they could do, it will be of some help to The Church. :P
As is building a bridge over a harbour. However, sometimes the better problem solver will just walk around the coast.
Supporting multiple, unknown hardward platforms adds a lot of complexity. Extra complexity inevitably introduces bugs, so you shouldn't add complexity for the sake of it.