Given that most folks are going to be coming from Windows, it probably makes sense to have their initial experience use the windows-like metaphors that they understand as much as possible.
You can easily offer a toggle to switch to the better linux way of doing things. When people are more comfortable, you can try to convince them of the benefits of switching.
Features that are likely to confuse people should be (at least until the user decides otherwise) hidden away in somewhere that is clearly marked 'advanced'
wouldn't this be more interesting if you were to encrypt something with a much shorter number, say 5 or 9, and then to send DCMA notices to 'protect' that number.
They are very careful to play Symbian off against Windows and (to a lesser extent) Palm. As soon as one OS is dominant, the owner will be able to demand a larger portion of the pie. No industry is going to let Microsoft own the space if they can help it.
on the left I have a widescreen monitor rotated 90degrees (to profile layout) -perfect for my documentation in pdf, or for viewing my site in dreamweaver as it gives me lots of height to my window
centre monitor (20in) is my main coding window. -Either codewarrior or Komodo go here
right monitor is for misc stuff -file explorer windows, ssh, desktop search, skype, etc
all held up to viewing height by an ergotron 3 monitor stand.
"Are not in daily, constant fear of being beaten randomly"
are you quite sure? There seems to be a lot of contrary evidence.
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/casework_omardeghayes.h tm "and then transferred to Guantanamo Bay, where he has been held for three years. In one beating by the ERF (Emergency Reaction Force) team, he was permanently blinded in his right eye."
not Japanese POW camps certainly, but hardly a shining beacon of justice.
When you say 'common carrier' you imply a whole set of assumptions about how the network should work.
All he's doing with his Akami example is demonstrating that there can be a good case for allowing a different way for the network to work. His assertion that this can be beneficial seems reasonable.
yup - pilots like to think that what they do is really hard.
passing the pilots exam may be fairly hard, but most casual pilots have forgotton all that guff 5 years down the line. They just hop into a plane a few times a year and fly to where they're going. Seems to work out most of the time.
Once you've got the hang of landing (takes about as many tries as parallell parking to get the idea) it's pretty straightforward to take off, fly somewhere and land.
It was more a case of spinning off the hardware division.
Palm wanted the OS to be in loads of devices by loads of manufacturers.
Their os partners didn't really trust the Palm OS folks because they kept thinking that the Palm hardware folks would steal any innovations.
So, they spun the hardware side of Palm off as Palm One and called the OS side PalmSource their major OS customer (sony) ditched Palm OS and the new customers they must have been hoping for didn't materialise. so PalmSource only had one customer - Palm One.
Gradually, the child has been buying back the parent - first they bought the brand, now they've bought the OS.
"now they've sold it to be shown on a different channel which we have to pay to receive. Bastards."
ok, so you got to see it a few times for free (subject to licence fee) and now the BBC is trying to sell it to the rest of the world and commercial networks so they can bring in more cash to fund programming.
Would you rather they left it in a basement and just charged more for the licence fee?
just make it illegal for Visa/Mastercard/Paypal to process payments for companies that use spam.
it wouldn't be hard to set up a community-based system where people clicked on their spam, then bought something with their special personal 'set off a flag in the visa network' credit card number.
More than a few of those and visa beat up the bank and the bank beat up the merchant (incidentally withholding any funds due). If the bank gets more than x% of spammy merchants, they face a financial penalty from Visa. They'll figure out how to stop it when they lose money instaead of making money from spam.
it won't stop the stock pumping, but it will stop the enhancement/drugs pitches.
then instead of telling the world how they support the olympics, visa et al can tell the world how they 'saved the internet'
BBC Radio4 article just finished (they're normally a good source) they mentioned:
1) it will not support ipod (they implied all other mp3 devices were supported) 2) an executive said that though you will have to watch ads as you download music videos, you won't have any ads when you burn those videos into your video playlist.
assuming only that a) the tax is a fairly small percentage of the cost of the media b) this makes it legal to fill my ipod with music that I don't have to pay for in some other way
I'd love to see the court case where someone is sued for sharing billions of tracks via p2p and they use the defence that it is paid for in full through the media tax on the hard drive it is distributed from, and the ipod it is downloaded to.
another issue here is that the electricity system doesn't properly count the full cost as the market is inefficient.
e.g. how much did it cost New York to lose power for days it would make sense to pay extra to avoid that risk, (you'd pay through higher electricity bills) In practice, most consumers would rather have lower bills today and take the chance.
---Don't want strangers to use your AP? Secure it.
Or turn it into a hotspot www.wifitastic.com
a small fee would generate some revenue and keep people from sitting on the wireless for ever. For a small coffee shop, it would be worse if someone buys not much, then thinks they can sit and use the wireless for ever. At least he wasn't using a table!
Interesting to me to hear his rant about the fact that customers were more impressed by his 'easy-to-build data tips tool', than they were by his friends 'very-hard-to-build better call stack display tool'.
To him, that was just wierd and crazy. To me, it makes the point that it's important to think about what the user wants/needs as well as worring about the engineering.
Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the US is required to ~"pursue plans to reduce and liquidate their stockpiles"
Now I know this is not likely to happen, but it does gall me to see the US (And the UK for that matter) ignoring their treaty obligations, and then getting righteous over how Iran may be failing it's Non-Proliferation duties.
I write and sell software. Typically for $10 to $25. None of my software is perfect (bug free), but it is pretty good and keeps getting better.
I choose to improve the software with extra features all the time (upgrades are free). If I faced a penalty for any bugs, then I would
a) have to fix minor bugs rather than update features (that wouldn't generally be in the best interest of most users) b) fret about adding features (they inevitably add bugs) c) worry about being sued out of business
If you make it harder for people to create software, then the inevitable effect will be that fewer people will create software. That will mean software in general (there will be exceptions) getting more expensive and/or more boring.
Why not just try to create a more efficient market. E.g. how about a central site where users could report on the bugginess of software.
This approach is only sustainable whilst bandwidth constraints make it inconvenient to download movies.
It doesn't seem to be a good thing that the existence of an industry which provides a valuable product (yes, many expensive movies are valuable to the audience) depends on limited bandwidth for it's existence.
I don't see anyone arguing that you should be allowed to copy dvds and sell them.
The market forces argument would require a market for viewing films. Dvd's, movie theatres, would have variable prices amongst other things (why do I pay the same for a crap movie and a good one anyway?)
Slashdot Mirror
is that the source of the infamous playground chant
'Neenah Neenah...'
?
Given that most folks are going to be coming from Windows, it probably makes sense to have their initial experience use the windows-like metaphors that they understand as much as possible.
You can easily offer a toggle to switch to the better linux way of doing things. When people are more comfortable, you can try to convince them of the benefits of switching.
Features that are likely to confuse people should be (at least until the user decides otherwise) hidden away in somewhere that is clearly marked 'advanced'
wouldn't this be more interesting if you were to encrypt something with a much shorter number, say 5 or 9, and then to send DCMA notices to 'protect' that number.
They are very careful to play Symbian off against Windows and (to a lesser extent) Palm.
As soon as one OS is dominant, the owner will be able to demand a larger portion of the pie.
No industry is going to let Microsoft own the space if they can help it.
Open source may change this...
yup - I bring down the networks all the time.
I write software, release it in beta/alpha states.
Folks put it on their Treos and bam. No phone calls in the US.
hey - I wonder if I could sell my services to criminals?
I love my 3 monitor setup.
on the left I have a widescreen monitor rotated 90degrees (to profile layout)
-perfect for my documentation in pdf, or for viewing my site in dreamweaver as it gives me lots of height to my window
centre monitor (20in) is my main coding window.
-Either codewarrior or Komodo go here
right monitor is for misc stuff
-file explorer windows, ssh, desktop search, skype, etc
all held up to viewing height by an ergotron 3 monitor stand.
"Are not in daily, constant fear of being beaten randomly"
h tm
are you quite sure? There seems to be a lot of contrary evidence.
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/casework_omardeghayes.
"and then transferred to Guantanamo Bay, where he has been held for three years. In one beating by the ERF (Emergency Reaction Force) team, he was permanently blinded in his right eye."
not Japanese POW camps certainly, but hardly a shining beacon of justice.
When you say 'common carrier' you imply a whole set of assumptions about how the network should work.
All he's doing with his Akami example is demonstrating that there can be a good case for allowing a different way for the network to work. His assertion that this can be beneficial seems reasonable.
so morality should be based on what others decide?
I disagree.
That's morality, that's following orders.
If they told you to kick the baby would you?
You don't need to _see_ a difference to _percieve_ a difference.
the placebo effect is a powerful thing
yup - pilots like to think that what they do is really hard.
passing the pilots exam may be fairly hard, but most casual pilots have forgotton all that guff 5 years down the line. They just hop into a plane a few times a year and fly to where they're going. Seems to work out most of the time.
Once you've got the hang of landing (takes about as many tries as parallell parking to get the idea) it's pretty straightforward to take off, fly somewhere and land.
random crashes are probably related to old applications that don't handle the way the new Treos use cache memory.
c he-crash.php
read about how to track down the problems here:
http://www.hobbyistsoftware.com/InsideYourTreo/ca
It was more a case of spinning off the hardware division.
Palm wanted the OS to be in loads of devices by loads of manufacturers.
Their os partners didn't really trust the Palm OS folks because they kept thinking that the Palm hardware folks would steal any innovations.
So, they spun the hardware side of Palm off as Palm One and called the OS side PalmSource
their major OS customer (sony) ditched Palm OS and the new customers they must have been hoping for didn't materialise.
so PalmSource only had one customer - Palm One.
Gradually, the child has been buying back the parent - first they bought the brand, now they've bought the OS.
"now they've sold it to be shown on a different channel which we have to pay to receive. Bastards."
ok, so you got to see it a few times for free (subject to licence fee) and now the BBC is trying to sell it to the rest of the world and commercial networks so they can bring in more cash to fund programming.
Would you rather they left it in a basement and just charged more for the licence fee?
just make it illegal for Visa/Mastercard/Paypal to process payments for companies that use spam.
it wouldn't be hard to set up a community-based system where people clicked on their spam, then bought something with their special personal 'set off a flag in the visa network' credit card number.
More than a few of those and visa beat up the bank and the bank beat up the merchant (incidentally withholding any funds due).
If the bank gets more than x% of spammy merchants, they face a financial penalty from Visa.
They'll figure out how to stop it when they lose money instaead of making money from spam.
it won't stop the stock pumping, but it will stop the enhancement/drugs pitches.
then instead of telling the world how they support the olympics, visa et al can tell the world how they 'saved the internet'
BBC Radio4 article just finished (they're normally a good source)
they mentioned:
1) it will not support ipod (they implied all other mp3 devices were supported)
2) an executive said that though you will have to watch ads as you download music videos, you won't have any ads when you burn those videos into your video playlist.
assuming only that
a) the tax is a fairly small percentage of the cost of the media
b) this makes it legal to fill my ipod with music that I don't have to pay for in some other way
I'd love to see the court case where someone is sued for sharing billions of tracks via p2p and they use the defence that it is paid for in full through the media tax on the hard drive it is distributed from, and the ipod it is downloaded to.
another issue here is that the electricity system doesn't properly count the full cost as the market is inefficient.
e.g. how much did it cost New York to lose power for days
it would make sense to pay extra to avoid that risk, (you'd pay through higher electricity bills)
In practice, most consumers would rather have lower bills today and take the chance.
---Don't want strangers to use your AP? Secure it.
Or turn it into a hotspot
www.wifitastic.com
a small fee would generate some revenue and keep people from sitting on the wireless for ever.
For a small coffee shop, it would be worse if someone buys not much, then thinks they can sit and use the wireless for ever.
At least he wasn't using a table!
Interesting to me to hear his rant about the fact that customers were more impressed by his 'easy-to-build data tips tool', than they were by his friends 'very-hard-to-build better call stack display tool'.
To him, that was just wierd and crazy.
To me, it makes the point that it's important to think about what the user wants/needs as well as worring about the engineering.
What happened to the old warning on NYTimes links?
I actually clicked on this one, assuming that I would now go to the story.
Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the US is required to ~"pursue plans to reduce and liquidate their stockpiles"
Now I know this is not likely to happen, but it does gall me to see the US (And the UK for that matter) ignoring their treaty obligations, and then getting righteous over how Iran may be failing it's Non-Proliferation duties.
I write and sell software. Typically for $10 to $25. None of my software is perfect (bug free), but it is pretty good and keeps getting better.
I choose to improve the software with extra features all the time (upgrades are free). If I faced a penalty for any bugs, then I would
a) have to fix minor bugs rather than update features (that wouldn't generally be in the best interest of most users)
b) fret about adding features (they inevitably add bugs)
c) worry about being sued out of business
If you make it harder for people to create software, then the inevitable effect will be that fewer people will create software. That will mean software in general (there will be exceptions) getting more expensive and/or more boring.
Why not just try to create a more efficient market. E.g. how about a central site where users could report on the bugginess of software.
I don't see your issue.
You say many people wouldn't use it. Do you object of some do?
My guess is that it would be popular, and would mostly not be blocked. After all - there is a lot of demand for porm on the internet....
This approach is only sustainable whilst bandwidth constraints make it inconvenient to download movies.
It doesn't seem to be a good thing that the existence of an industry which provides a valuable product (yes, many expensive movies are valuable to the audience) depends on limited bandwidth for it's existence.
I don't see anyone arguing that you should be allowed to copy dvds and sell them.
The market forces argument would require a market for viewing films. Dvd's, movie theatres, would have variable prices amongst other things (why do I pay the same for a crap movie and a good one anyway?)