Silly, I didn't say that there are NO average Joes on OS X. I just said the geek quotient was high. If your 70-year-old mom is not a geek, then she's not contributing to the high geek quotient.
Don't be so sure. OS X has a high geek to average Joe quotient. I'd actually be interested in what Apple's research says about the technical education of it's OS X user base.
Getting back on topic (LOL), I say the more OS choices the better. And hopefully the best ones will subsume the best features of the others.
Seemingly objective? If my post above was not objective, then I'm not sure what kind of discussion you are actually "all for."
If you think art discussion should be limited to "I like it," and "I don't," then I'm not sure why we should discuss art at all. Perhaps that's your point, but it's not a sustainable goal. People will always try to swing another's opinion one way or another to align with theirs. And with that line of reasoning, why should anything ever be discussed at all if everybody is simply doing, buying, saying and thinking what they feel with no actual reason or concrete behind those vacillating and temporary fancies?
Here's my point: Art is just a small piece of a much larger discussion. Whether someone likes something or not is only one measure of it's merit. People have reasons for the things they like, say, do... Nobody should ever get off the hook simply for saying it's what they "feel" and because of that, it's untouchable and doesn't need to be explained. This is a cop out that so many use instead of actually putting critical thought into the reasons behind their actions and emotions. "Feel" is not a defense.
Often people will find that they change their minds or like things for different reasons when they put a little thought into their responses. Often people buy art simply to hang on their wall and be pretty, because it goes with the colors of their room or something. But there are deeper reasons they choose a Norman Rockwell or a Kinkade print over a Mondrian or Rothko, though they may not say it immediately. And it has to do with the subject matter and how it speaks to them. The execution might leave a lot to be desired, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, but the people buying Rockwells and Kinkades blend the execution into the underlying message about simplicity, or community, or childhood, and that's good enough for them to like the entire piece and think it pretty. Others will buy a Rothko because it gives them a sense of tranquility or light and heat. Notice, these feelings are not simply "like" and "dislike," but can be connected to events and memories of larger meaning.
This neuron drive artist says he put a lot of thought into it, so he invites criticism from an artistic perspective more than if he had said "here's my latest piece of eye-candy." And besides, even without the hard drive and fans poking through, he would have invited criticism on it as an abstract art piece. People don't typically hang neurons on their wall unless it's got an abstract look to it.
I'm sorry for the second very long post, but art criticism is of special interest to me, being that I am an artist and make special effort to have reasons behind everything I do in my work. It's like programming in that way, actually. They're both art forms where distraction and extraneous information should be cast out leaving just the most essential parts for efficient communication.
Yes, art is subjective. Yes, people should buy art that they like, because of its subjective nature. But the merits of an artistic concept and execution can be discussed. And it's those points where this artist fails.
His concept seems to be centered on the comparing a hard drive to a component of a living organism, its brain cells, to be precise. So he is trying to relate our natural place and existence to the seemingly organic and possibly viral (I infer) growth of technology, and its eventual replacement of us. Organic to cyborg to anthropomorphic machines.
My take on that part? Yawn. We can get that anywhere. Science fiction has been making this point since Jules Verne. Just because we CAN technologically doesn't mean we should... when tech advances beyond our moral capability to deal with it responsibly, we become corrupt... etc. It's been said far better by far finer artists and commentators.
As for his execution, it's left much to be desired. First of all, the use of a hard drive seems oblique, since the processor or microscopic switches inside it would more accurately reflect the functions inside a neural network. Perhaps the entire computer would be a better metaphor for a brain, as it accomplishes many functions with many interworking parts. Problem with machines is they have no soul. He could have made a far better commentary with that line of thought. Again, not original, but more emotionally engaging.
Perhaps he was making a comment about memory by using a hard drive? But nothing else in this bland painting cues the viewer to such, so I wouldn't want to project too much here. If I were given this painting to complete, I would probably have avoided the use of the computer components and simply added a tiny line-drawing of someone taking a walk with their dog through the forest of neurons. It would be whimsical, mostly. But for one who cared to read into it, would make allusions to memory and the mysteries of our physiology. Even that is kind of lame and can't save this sophomoric piece.
And, I agree with the other posters who say that the hard drive and fans have no relevance. If he wanted to incorporate technology, he should think harder about his metaphors and the technical reasons behind what he's doing.
A past art teacher of mine always made students do research about their subjects: How do apples grow, why is their skin red, when are they ripe, why are they shaped the way they are, what mythology comes with apple imagery... and so on. This was all an effort to make us understand exactly what it is we are incorporating into our work. This artist could use a similar lesson.
Agreed. It's hack-job, lame-metaphor art like this that gives artists a bad name. No wonder everybody thinks artists are stuck-up snobs with no grounding in reality. Worst of all is, many hack artists are not even that, they're just trying to impersonate what they think is good art.
disclaimer: I'm an artist. Might be a hack, might not.
I think everybody has misread everything ever posted on slashdot cuz we're all just a bunch of asshats. If we all start apologizing to eachother now, the board will grind to a halt and the universe will fold in on itself. The friction at slashdot is the only thing keeping it all from cooling to absolute zero.
Dumbass, you have no point except the one on top of your f-in head. You flew off the rocker after I made fun of someone's Windows security rigamarole in which they'd said it's not that hard to keep their machine clean, and listed like a hundred things they have to be mindful of on a weekly basis b/c Win security is such crud. It's the difference between giving yourself a weekly blowjob or getting one every day without having to do a damn thing. Personally, I'd rather receive.
-The OS X defragmenter works without me having to do a thing.
-The Virex that came free with my.mac account updates its virus definitions and runs system checks itself.
-Cookies? While I'm sure the paranoid among us keep every cookie off their system, the average user enjoys the convenience of having a site remember their settings.
-No, I don't clean up my temporary files. The system optimizes every time there's an OS update. Should there ever be a strange system slowdown (haven't had one yet in the year I've had this Powerbook), I can run any number of tools to clean it up.
Do I think about these things constantly? No way. I'm busy using my computer rather than keeping it on life support. OS X allows me to do that.
To be fair with Microsoft: The original poster should have known better to get a router, use the built-in firewall, install a good anti-virus piece of software, install a cookie catcher (like SpyBot), get RegCleaner, and Empty Temp and then, on a regular - weekly basis - clean their system up. We have been really lucky or watchful (I don't know which) with our systems in that we have as of yet to get a virus or to allow cookies to remain on our systems for more than a day or two. SpyBot does a great job of keeping our system clean (I've donated a couple of times now to try to help out) and BitDefender does a great job of keeping viruses in check. Once a week run all of the above and clean the system up. Then scandisk and defrag over night. By doing this our systems have stayed virus/cookie free and we do not have a lot of crashes (unless I'm programming something and step on memory or something like that).
Yeah, any computer user should know that!
Christ what a load of crap. Glad I don't need to be thinking about keeping my Powerbook running all the time. I have a life.
Control-click is what's at issue, here. Not command-click. Due to size restrictions, command is the only system modifier key on the right side of Powerbooks and iBooks.
The way I figure, on the train, using my Powerbook, my hands are so close to the keyboard already (cuz the trackpad's right there) that having a finger from my left hand on the ctrl button isn't a problem... unless of course you only have one hand.
Either Apple is discriminating against people with one hand, or Powerbook users that complain about one-button trackpads are always doing something else with their other hand.
I'd agree with this and take it a step further. Many users don't separate the concepts of computer and internet. They say things like "I had my web open" or "I closed my internet," when they mean they closed their IE window. So they don't make a distinction between the internet as a resource and the application used to access it. Thusly most users don't think they have another option to access the web.
I would posit that this is where many virus problems come from. Users think they're safe from viruses and malware if the "internet is closed,' meaning they don't have a browser window opened. Problem is, the computer is still connected to the internet and they're still using IE to view web pages.
How does one re-educate the using public about the relationship between computer, user and internet? In one sense, they should think of them as closely related and users are increasingly being encouraged to think of it all as one experience. In another sense, users should be aware of the internet as a vast library of information with many different ways of accessing it.
Think average Joe users know about or would understand an RSS reader now that the IE experience is indelibly linked to the idea of "my internet?" I think not.
Ahh, and as usual, a completely un- user-friendly interface in open source software. I'd venture to say that more information architects and world-class designers need to get involved in open source for it to be a viable option.
There's a lot of well-designed Mac open source, a lot of crappy too. But it's always far better than the other platforms' interfaces.
There's nothing/.ers like more than talking about themselves. I'd say this is the perfect post for this forum . Close up shop and go home. We've reached the climax of this venture.
"Maybe that's the reason why they need to have those bubbles popping up with an explanation of their use when the mouse hovers over them?"
Uhh... bubbles don't pop up when I mouse over the close/minimize/maximize buttons. Little symbols appear in them as the rollover state of the sprite, but I can't see how that can draw such ire from you. Hmmm...
Generally, I tend to think of the colors/symbol/traffic connotation as meaning: Red/X/Stop = Stop this window from existing, or "close" it in computer terms Yellow/-/Slow = Pause to idle and wait for further instruction, or "minimize" in computer terms. Green/+/Go = Grow, get bigger, or to the Mac, make the window large enough to house all of its contents.
It's not that hard if you've used it for a minute.
Slashdot Mirror
Silly, I didn't say that there are NO average Joes on OS X. I just said the geek quotient was high. If your 70-year-old mom is not a geek, then she's not contributing to the high geek quotient.
Don't be so sure. OS X has a high geek to average Joe quotient. I'd actually be interested in what Apple's research says about the technical education of it's OS X user base.
Getting back on topic (LOL), I say the more OS choices the better. And hopefully the best ones will subsume the best features of the others.
Seemingly objective? If my post above was not objective, then I'm not sure what kind of discussion you are actually "all for."
If you think art discussion should be limited to "I like it," and "I don't," then I'm not sure why we should discuss art at all. Perhaps that's your point, but it's not a sustainable goal. People will always try to swing another's opinion one way or another to align with theirs. And with that line of reasoning, why should anything ever be discussed at all if everybody is simply doing, buying, saying and thinking what they feel with no actual reason or concrete behind those vacillating and temporary fancies?
Here's my point: Art is just a small piece of a much larger discussion. Whether someone likes something or not is only one measure of it's merit. People have reasons for the things they like, say, do... Nobody should ever get off the hook simply for saying it's what they "feel" and because of that, it's untouchable and doesn't need to be explained. This is a cop out that so many use instead of actually putting critical thought into the reasons behind their actions and emotions. "Feel" is not a defense.
Often people will find that they change their minds or like things for different reasons when they put a little thought into their responses. Often people buy art simply to hang on their wall and be pretty, because it goes with the colors of their room or something. But there are deeper reasons they choose a Norman Rockwell or a Kinkade print over a Mondrian or Rothko, though they may not say it immediately. And it has to do with the subject matter and how it speaks to them. The execution might leave a lot to be desired, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, but the people buying Rockwells and Kinkades blend the execution into the underlying message about simplicity, or community, or childhood, and that's good enough for them to like the entire piece and think it pretty. Others will buy a Rothko because it gives them a sense of tranquility or light and heat. Notice, these feelings are not simply "like" and "dislike," but can be connected to events and memories of larger meaning.
This neuron drive artist says he put a lot of thought into it, so he invites criticism from an artistic perspective more than if he had said "here's my latest piece of eye-candy." And besides, even without the hard drive and fans poking through, he would have invited criticism on it as an abstract art piece. People don't typically hang neurons on their wall unless it's got an abstract look to it.
I'm sorry for the second very long post, but art criticism is of special interest to me, being that I am an artist and make special effort to have reasons behind everything I do in my work. It's like programming in that way, actually. They're both art forms where distraction and extraneous information should be cast out leaving just the most essential parts for efficient communication.
Yes, art is subjective. Yes, people should buy art that they like, because of its subjective nature. But the merits of an artistic concept and execution can be discussed. And it's those points where this artist fails.
His concept seems to be centered on the comparing a hard drive to a component of a living organism, its brain cells, to be precise. So he is trying to relate our natural place and existence to the seemingly organic and possibly viral (I infer) growth of technology, and its eventual replacement of us. Organic to cyborg to anthropomorphic machines.
My take on that part? Yawn. We can get that anywhere. Science fiction has been making this point since Jules Verne. Just because we CAN technologically doesn't mean we should... when tech advances beyond our moral capability to deal with it responsibly, we become corrupt... etc. It's been said far better by far finer artists and commentators.
As for his execution, it's left much to be desired. First of all, the use of a hard drive seems oblique, since the processor or microscopic switches inside it would more accurately reflect the functions inside a neural network. Perhaps the entire computer would be a better metaphor for a brain, as it accomplishes many functions with many interworking parts. Problem with machines is they have no soul. He could have made a far better commentary with that line of thought. Again, not original, but more emotionally engaging.
Perhaps he was making a comment about memory by using a hard drive? But nothing else in this bland painting cues the viewer to such, so I wouldn't want to project too much here. If I were given this painting to complete, I would probably have avoided the use of the computer components and simply added a tiny line-drawing of someone taking a walk with their dog through the forest of neurons. It would be whimsical, mostly. But for one who cared to read into it, would make allusions to memory and the mysteries of our physiology. Even that is kind of lame and can't save this sophomoric piece.
And, I agree with the other posters who say that the hard drive and fans have no relevance. If he wanted to incorporate technology, he should think harder about his metaphors and the technical reasons behind what he's doing.
A past art teacher of mine always made students do research about their subjects: How do apples grow, why is their skin red, when are they ripe, why are they shaped the way they are, what mythology comes with apple imagery... and so on. This was all an effort to make us understand exactly what it is we are incorporating into our work. This artist could use a similar lesson.
Agreed. It's hack-job, lame-metaphor art like this that gives artists a bad name. No wonder everybody thinks artists are stuck-up snobs with no grounding in reality. Worst of all is, many hack artists are not even that, they're just trying to impersonate what they think is good art. disclaimer: I'm an artist. Might be a hack, might not.
Actually, it sounds more like a Server of Disrepute. One with a very good reputation ;-)
I think everybody has misread everything ever posted on slashdot cuz we're all just a bunch of asshats. If we all start apologizing to eachother now, the board will grind to a halt and the universe will fold in on itself. The friction at slashdot is the only thing keeping it all from cooling to absolute zero.
Dumbass, you have no point except the one on top of your f-in head. You flew off the rocker after I made fun of someone's Windows security rigamarole in which they'd said it's not that hard to keep their machine clean, and listed like a hundred things they have to be mindful of on a weekly basis b/c Win security is such crud. It's the difference between giving yourself a weekly blowjob or getting one every day without having to do a damn thing. Personally, I'd rather receive.
-The OS X defragmenter works without me having to do a thing. -The Virex that came free with my .mac account updates its virus definitions and runs system checks itself.
-Cookies? While I'm sure the paranoid among us keep every cookie off their system, the average user enjoys the convenience of having a site remember their settings.
-No, I don't clean up my temporary files. The system optimizes every time there's an OS update. Should there ever be a strange system slowdown (haven't had one yet in the year I've had this Powerbook), I can run any number of tools to clean it up.
Do I think about these things constantly? No way. I'm busy using my computer rather than keeping it on life support. OS X allows me to do that.
To be fair with Microsoft: The original poster should have known better to get a router, use the built-in firewall, install a good anti-virus piece of software, install a cookie catcher (like SpyBot), get RegCleaner, and Empty Temp and then, on a regular - weekly basis - clean their system up. We have been really lucky or watchful (I don't know which) with our systems in that we have as of yet to get a virus or to allow cookies to remain on our systems for more than a day or two. SpyBot does a great job of keeping our system clean (I've donated a couple of times now to try to help out) and BitDefender does a great job of keeping viruses in check. Once a week run all of the above and clean the system up. Then scandisk and defrag over night. By doing this our systems have stayed virus/cookie free and we do not have a lot of crashes (unless I'm programming something and step on memory or something like that). Yeah, any computer user should know that! Christ what a load of crap. Glad I don't need to be thinking about keeping my Powerbook running all the time. I have a life.
Control-click is what's at issue, here. Not command-click. Due to size restrictions, command is the only system modifier key on the right side of Powerbooks and iBooks.
In Safari, spacebar goes down one pageheight, shift-space goes up one pageheight.
The way I figure, on the train, using my Powerbook, my hands are so close to the keyboard already (cuz the trackpad's right there) that having a finger from my left hand on the ctrl button isn't a problem... unless of course you only have one hand. Either Apple is discriminating against people with one hand, or Powerbook users that complain about one-button trackpads are always doing something else with their other hand.
I'd agree with this and take it a step further. Many users don't separate the concepts of computer and internet. They say things like "I had my web open" or "I closed my internet," when they mean they closed their IE window. So they don't make a distinction between the internet as a resource and the application used to access it. Thusly most users don't think they have another option to access the web. I would posit that this is where many virus problems come from. Users think they're safe from viruses and malware if the "internet is closed,' meaning they don't have a browser window opened. Problem is, the computer is still connected to the internet and they're still using IE to view web pages. How does one re-educate the using public about the relationship between computer, user and internet? In one sense, they should think of them as closely related and users are increasingly being encouraged to think of it all as one experience. In another sense, users should be aware of the internet as a vast library of information with many different ways of accessing it. Think average Joe users know about or would understand an RSS reader now that the IE experience is indelibly linked to the idea of "my internet?" I think not.
How about: "Blogs see no real journalism in So Called Liberal Media"
I think anyone that switched would be surprised at how slow everything would run on the deficient x86 architecture.
Ahh, and as usual, a completely un- user-friendly interface in open source software. I'd venture to say that more information architects and world-class designers need to get involved in open source for it to be a viable option. There's a lot of well-designed Mac open source, a lot of crappy too. But it's always far better than the other platforms' interfaces.
There's nothing /.ers like more than talking about themselves. I'd say this is the perfect post for this forum . Close up shop and go home. We've reached the climax of this venture.
I've had a concept like this on my personal site for months. studio saynuk
"Maybe that's the reason why they need to have those bubbles popping up with an explanation of their use when the mouse hovers over them?"
Uhh... bubbles don't pop up when I mouse over the close/minimize/maximize buttons. Little symbols appear in them as the rollover state of the sprite, but I can't see how that can draw such ire from you. Hmmm...
Generally, I tend to think of the colors/symbol/traffic connotation as meaning:
Red/X/Stop = Stop this window from existing, or "close" it in computer terms
Yellow/-/Slow = Pause to idle and wait for further instruction, or "minimize" in computer terms.
Green/+/Go = Grow, get bigger, or to the Mac, make the window large enough to house all of its contents.
It's not that hard if you've used it for a minute.