Much better to headbutt Bob squarely between the eyes, and then drop-kick him in the nuts as he's going down.
You, sir, are truly a poet. Seriously, you should be an attorney. Summations like that are guaranteed to sway jurors in your favor and ensure a career of successful cases.
Funny thing about preferences is that they change from user to user. Myself, I prefer my Mail window as wide as possible. If it didn't have a drawer, I'd probably expand it out that much more. I don't like iCal to take up quite so much of the screen though, probably since I don't use it as often. Making generalizations without lots of user research isn't a good idea - it can easily lead to a "well this is how I do it, so it must be right" mentality.
It seems your argument for detachable drawers is that developers can implement them incorrectly. How would adding another level of complexity solve this problem? It isn't a fault of a UI element if developers disregard the guidelines for its use. There will always be developers who break the GUI guidelines - some for better, some for worse. Usually it's a matter of personal preference, but even when they actually do futz up the GUI, it's their fault for poor implementation.
Perhaps you misunderstand, but the extinction-level event is more along the lines of a mile-or-two-wide meteor crashing into us at roughly a gazillion miles per hour. The results of that would be, in a word, bad.
I was going to point out how many pieces of very large, very fast-moving rock have had "near" misses with us in the last few years, but even assuming we don't get hit by a huge chunk of something in the forseeable future, your argument is still a false dilemma. Our space program and the hungry in China have nothing to do with each other.
I disagree, and along with the Matrix I think these are being subjected to the kind of pile-on-and-pick-at-its-faults mentality everywhere these days.
Now I won't claim that it's ground-breaking cinema, but I definitely thought EpII was entertaining, for what it was. Maybe 20 years of buildup have obscured the fact that a lot of the OT was badly acted as well, with hoakey dialogue.
The guy should have been identifiable as the same Obi Wan we all knew.
One paragraph after you complain about a lack of character development, you complain that Obi-Wan isn't the same 40 or 50 years earlier? Find me someone who acts the same at 20 as they do at 60 and I'll show you someone with some big developmental or emotional problems.
The scenes in Mos Eisley were spare...
I've never heard this from anywhere "official," but my take was that during the prequels galactic culture is at its peak, everything is new and bright and vibrant. But after 30 or so years of war and opression, things don't look so nice and clean anymore. Especially in the backwater places, where most of the original trilogy took place. We never see Naboo or Coruscant during IV, V, and VI, which is where all the gawdiness was coming from.
Sorry to go off on a rant, but I'd rather try and focus on the good points, rather than pick apart any movie that comes out because it doesn't meet my expectations.
It's had lots of volcanic activity in the past - Olympus Mons is the largest volcano in the solar system - but from what I remember from waaay back when I was in school, there isn't much, if any, current tectonic activity.
It's more that cash is still the end goal, but people with a long-term outlook realise things like recognition and publicity are what keep the cash coming to you. Brand recognition and ad campaigns might cost you a lot right now, but you'll have a better chance of still being around to make your hard earned cash a few years down the road.
Technically, promoting gambling encourages gambling. The fact that it's addictive to some doesn't mean that gambling is bad, only that it's bad for some.
That said, I agree with your other point - Adobe is free to add/remove whatever functionality they want. We're free to bitch about it as much as we want though, in the hopes that they change their mind and let us do what we want with it (within the law). We're also free to not upgrade from 7 to 8/CS, or to switch brand loyalty as soon as anything with features remotely resembling Photoshop's comes on the market.
On the other hand, without gub'ment legislation you're still free to jump ship to another product as soon as it comes along. It could be that the time is almost right for another company's image editing software to make boatloads of cash. Dammit, I wish I had my own image editing software...
I've never used GIMP, so I can't comment intelligently (yeah, yeah, I know this is slashdot...) but I'm not a big fan of Adobe's interface decisions since Photoshop 6 either. PS5 seemed like it really had a good mix of functionality vs ease of use, but I don't see a lot of reasoning behind the decisions they've made since then (and I'm a designer, for what it's worth).
By the way, back on the topic of counterfeiting...according to the US Treasury's site, you're allowed to make photographic reproductions at the same size as long as it's one-sided. Maybe Adobe is afraid of some liability, but come on, is it really necessary for them to decide which images I can and can't edit? I could care less about editing scans of currency, but who's to say this will stop here once pattern recognition algorithms become more complex?
Would you suggest all payers in the pool simply pay equal amounts? Why should I put an equal share of money in the pool if I have a spotless record? Why should I put an equal share in the pool if I drive a beaten-up 1976 Oldsmobile?
Why should a payer in the pool with a spotless record and an old beaten-up car pay more than someone with a flashy new Mercedes and a record with several blemishes on it, simply because the payer is 10 years younger? My complaint against the insurance industry is similar to my complaint against speed limits - I'm being punished for something that I may be statistically more likely to do, but have not done yet.
With insurance, you have high rates (a spotless safety record helps some, but it's still high) for the first 10 years or so of driving. If the number of accidents was the main factor in how much you pay in premiums, I wouldn't complain as I have one accident on my record that wasn't my fault (rear ended at a stop light). Simply hiding away a stash of money isn't an option either, as far as I know, since most states insist on their drivers having insurance. So here I am, a teenage kid who obeys the road signs and speed limits, paying higher for mandatory insurance than someone who's been in multiple accidents simply because I'm male and under 25.
As to the speeding aspect, I have been pulled over for going over the limit. On empty roads. By sheriffs hiding behind bushes with radar guns. The claim that this somehow creates safer roads is a bit of a stretch. If the main interest was safer roads, the sheriff's vehicles would've been in plain sight for miles away. Speeding fines are revenue generators disguised as safety measures. Sure, in some instances I agree - I say throw the book at anyone barrelling through a school zone. Take their license away. But don't charge me more for going 10mph over the speed limit on an empty rural highway than I'd be charged if I actually had hit another vehicle!
In true/. fashion, I have not RTA, but I don't see why you would have to wait 10 seconds per sent email. Your machine would do the ~10 sec. calculation in the background, whereas you the user would go on your merry computing way.
Oh yeah? Well I'm going to get my own cubicle, with blackjack, and hookers...in fact, forget the cubicle and the blackjack!
Re:The "Home Computer Museum"...
on
First Computers
·
· Score: 1
Aaahhh, sweet Compute's Gazette...I remember many long hours sitting in front of my C64 typing in page after page of BASIC, finally getting to the end and typing "run," and then having to go back and figure out where the typos were. Oh, how I loathed seeing those two little words: "SYNTAX ERROR." So much work for that little snake game...
I never would've guessed that 20 or so years later I'd be getting paid to do almost the same thing...
Re:The battles would have been a lot better
on
Message in a Battle
·
· Score: 1
So then your complaint is really against the movie interpretation of the army of the dead, not the CG...
Re:The battles would have been a lot better
on
Message in a Battle
·
· Score: 1
Again, why not? At its most basic principle, a snowboard is a sled that you ride standing up. That shouldn't have been such an outrageous leap of imagination for an elf to come up with, especially since elves would have the agility to actually do a maneuver like that.
Maybe a better comparison would be the asteroid chase in ESB and the asteroid chace in AOTC. All comments on the quality of Ep II aside, the Jango/Obi-Wan chase is much more visually satisfying than the Falcon/TIE chase (although I'll admit, ESB is my favorite). The awareness of either ship's position in the chase is due to their position relative to who's chasing them, not to a percieved position in three space.
And since you mentioned the potatoes, another asteroid in ESB is actually a shoe. In Ep II, the animators inserted a shaak (the flea/cow creature Anakin rides in the Sound of Music scene) as one of the asteroids around Geonosis, and in the final battle on the surface, too, if I recall correctly. Just because it's CG doesn't mean the animators don't put their own mark on a scene they're proud of.
Whether it be CG, stop-motion, bluescreen, etc., any kind of effect has its limitations. I think it's easy to forget how bad other fx techniques looked before CG came around, and I think audiences should use their imaginations a little more and just enjoy the show.
Re:The battles would have been a lot better
on
Message in a Battle
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Not to pick nits, but you're complaining that a ghost army doesn't look real? Hmm...how does a real ghost army look?:)
Re:The battles would have been a lot better
on
Message in a Battle
·
· Score: 1
Why isn't it appropriate? What makes you think the inhabitants of Middle Earth aren't familiar with the concept of a sled?
Slashdot Mirror
Much better to headbutt Bob squarely between the eyes, and then drop-kick him in the nuts as he's going down.
You, sir, are truly a poet. Seriously, you should be an attorney. Summations like that are guaranteed to sway jurors in your favor and ensure a career of successful cases.
Funny thing about preferences is that they change from user to user. Myself, I prefer my Mail window as wide as possible. If it didn't have a drawer, I'd probably expand it out that much more. I don't like iCal to take up quite so much of the screen though, probably since I don't use it as often. Making generalizations without lots of user research isn't a good idea - it can easily lead to a "well this is how I do it, so it must be right" mentality.
It seems your argument for detachable drawers is that developers can implement them incorrectly. How would adding another level of complexity solve this problem? It isn't a fault of a UI element if developers disregard the guidelines for its use. There will always be developers who break the GUI guidelines - some for better, some for worse. Usually it's a matter of personal preference, but even when they actually do futz up the GUI, it's their fault for poor implementation.
Perhaps you misunderstand, but the extinction-level event is more along the lines of a mile-or-two-wide meteor crashing into us at roughly a gazillion miles per hour. The results of that would be, in a word, bad.
I was going to point out how many pieces of very large, very fast-moving rock have had "near" misses with us in the last few years, but even assuming we don't get hit by a huge chunk of something in the forseeable future, your argument is still a false dilemma. Our space program and the hungry in China have nothing to do with each other.
Maybe some oxygen...
You have what you want, Cohaagen! Give de people back deir governor!
I disagree, and along with the Matrix I think these are being subjected to the kind of pile-on-and-pick-at-its-faults mentality everywhere these days.
Now I won't claim that it's ground-breaking cinema, but I definitely thought EpII was entertaining, for what it was. Maybe 20 years of buildup have obscured the fact that a lot of the OT was badly acted as well, with hoakey dialogue.
The guy should have been identifiable as the same Obi Wan we all knew.
One paragraph after you complain about a lack of character development, you complain that Obi-Wan isn't the same 40 or 50 years earlier? Find me someone who acts the same at 20 as they do at 60 and I'll show you someone with some big developmental or emotional problems.
The scenes in Mos Eisley were spare...
I've never heard this from anywhere "official," but my take was that during the prequels galactic culture is at its peak, everything is new and bright and vibrant. But after 30 or so years of war and opression, things don't look so nice and clean anymore. Especially in the backwater places, where most of the original trilogy took place. We never see Naboo or Coruscant during IV, V, and VI, which is where all the gawdiness was coming from.
Sorry to go off on a rant, but I'd rather try and focus on the good points, rather than pick apart any movie that comes out because it doesn't meet my expectations.
It's had lots of volcanic activity in the past - Olympus Mons is the largest volcano in the solar system - but from what I remember from waaay back when I was in school, there isn't much, if any, current tectonic activity.
Don't forget to add in two Martian cops who don't see eye-to-eye. Oh, and a "wacky" neighbor...
I started to think about this, but then I realized if I did my head would explode.
It's more that cash is still the end goal, but people with a long-term outlook realise things like recognition and publicity are what keep the cash coming to you. Brand recognition and ad campaigns might cost you a lot right now, but you'll have a better chance of still being around to make your hard earned cash a few years down the road.
Technically, promoting gambling encourages gambling. The fact that it's addictive to some doesn't mean that gambling is bad, only that it's bad for some.
That said, I agree with your other point - Adobe is free to add/remove whatever functionality they want. We're free to bitch about it as much as we want though, in the hopes that they change their mind and let us do what we want with it (within the law). We're also free to not upgrade from 7 to 8/CS, or to switch brand loyalty as soon as anything with features remotely resembling Photoshop's comes on the market.
On the other hand, without gub'ment legislation you're still free to jump ship to another product as soon as it comes along. It could be that the time is almost right for another company's image editing software to make boatloads of cash. Dammit, I wish I had my own image editing software...
I've never used GIMP, so I can't comment intelligently (yeah, yeah, I know this is slashdot...) but I'm not a big fan of Adobe's interface decisions since Photoshop 6 either. PS5 seemed like it really had a good mix of functionality vs ease of use, but I don't see a lot of reasoning behind the decisions they've made since then (and I'm a designer, for what it's worth).
By the way, back on the topic of counterfeiting...according to the US Treasury's site, you're allowed to make photographic reproductions at the same size as long as it's one-sided. Maybe Adobe is afraid of some liability, but come on, is it really necessary for them to decide which images I can and can't edit? I could care less about editing scans of currency, but who's to say this will stop here once pattern recognition algorithms become more complex?
For the moment, at least. These days it seems standing up against having them whittled away gets you branded "unpatriotic" or "soft on terrorism."
You'll get it back in a day or so...although you might not want to touch it anymore.
No, we'll just declare any alien life we find as an "enemy non-combatant" and remove them that way.
I'd like to point out a flaw in your rant...
Would you suggest all payers in the pool simply pay equal amounts? Why should I put an equal share of money in the pool if I have a spotless record? Why should I put an equal share in the pool if I drive a beaten-up 1976 Oldsmobile?
Why should a payer in the pool with a spotless record and an old beaten-up car pay more than someone with a flashy new Mercedes and a record with several blemishes on it, simply because the payer is 10 years younger? My complaint against the insurance industry is similar to my complaint against speed limits - I'm being punished for something that I may be statistically more likely to do, but have not done yet.
With insurance, you have high rates (a spotless safety record helps some, but it's still high) for the first 10 years or so of driving. If the number of accidents was the main factor in how much you pay in premiums, I wouldn't complain as I have one accident on my record that wasn't my fault (rear ended at a stop light). Simply hiding away a stash of money isn't an option either, as far as I know, since most states insist on their drivers having insurance. So here I am, a teenage kid who obeys the road signs and speed limits, paying higher for mandatory insurance than someone who's been in multiple accidents simply because I'm male and under 25.
As to the speeding aspect, I have been pulled over for going over the limit. On empty roads. By sheriffs hiding behind bushes with radar guns. The claim that this somehow creates safer roads is a bit of a stretch. If the main interest was safer roads, the sheriff's vehicles would've been in plain sight for miles away. Speeding fines are revenue generators disguised as safety measures. Sure, in some instances I agree - I say throw the book at anyone barrelling through a school zone. Take their license away. But don't charge me more for going 10mph over the speed limit on an empty rural highway than I'd be charged if I actually had hit another vehicle!
In true /. fashion, I have not RTA, but I don't see why you would have to wait 10 seconds per sent email. Your machine would do the ~10 sec. calculation in the background, whereas you the user would go on your merry computing way.
Oh yeah? Well I'm going to get my own cubicle, with blackjack, and hookers...in fact, forget the cubicle and the blackjack!
Aaahhh, sweet Compute's Gazette...I remember many long hours sitting in front of my C64 typing in page after page of BASIC, finally getting to the end and typing "run," and then having to go back and figure out where the typos were. Oh, how I loathed seeing those two little words: "SYNTAX ERROR." So much work for that little snake game...
I never would've guessed that 20 or so years later I'd be getting paid to do almost the same thing...
So then your complaint is really against the movie interpretation of the army of the dead, not the CG...
Again, why not? At its most basic principle, a snowboard is a sled that you ride standing up. That shouldn't have been such an outrageous leap of imagination for an elf to come up with, especially since elves would have the agility to actually do a maneuver like that.
Maybe a better comparison would be the asteroid chase in ESB and the asteroid chace in AOTC. All comments on the quality of Ep II aside, the Jango/Obi-Wan chase is much more visually satisfying than the Falcon/TIE chase (although I'll admit, ESB is my favorite). The awareness of either ship's position in the chase is due to their position relative to who's chasing them, not to a percieved position in three space.
And since you mentioned the potatoes, another asteroid in ESB is actually a shoe. In Ep II, the animators inserted a shaak (the flea/cow creature Anakin rides in the Sound of Music scene) as one of the asteroids around Geonosis, and in the final battle on the surface, too, if I recall correctly. Just because it's CG doesn't mean the animators don't put their own mark on a scene they're proud of.
Whether it be CG, stop-motion, bluescreen, etc., any kind of effect has its limitations. I think it's easy to forget how bad other fx techniques looked before CG came around, and I think audiences should use their imaginations a little more and just enjoy the show.
Not to pick nits, but you're complaining that a ghost army doesn't look real? Hmm...how does a real ghost army look? :)
Why isn't it appropriate? What makes you think the inhabitants of Middle Earth aren't familiar with the concept of a sled?