"Actually, Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to provide any of that to the consumer."
The world would be a kinder gentler (and more intelligent) place if that indeed was true. Almost all of the items you've listed (and a really long list of other items you haven't listed) can be replaced by superiour (most often free) third-party alternatives. More importantly, they should be.
I would love the chance to send anyone who makes comments like yours a bill for time I've had to spend wrestling with Windows to either uninstall crap or install something better. As for the the average user, well, he or she may figure out how to replace Notepad (an important system file) but no user to my knowledge has ever been able to get rid of Pinball fully.
Silly examples, perhaps, but the point here is we (both consumers and developers) would all be better off if the OS was stripped of all this crap. It doesn't take much effort to come up with a large number of items that could be included, ranging from a default install of the ActiveState distribution (buried on the installation CD) to a full Cygwin installatin to a better browser to anything else you want to think of. That, I think, to use your term, would be "useful." Instead, we have cultivated inertia and ignorance on the part of consumers in combination with FUD and illegal behaviour on the part of a monopolist.
At the risk of turning this into "A Queer Eye for a Slashdot Guy" thread, I had been wondering about the straight razor thing. A friend of mine uses one that was given to him by his dad on his 16th birthday. I chalked that up to his being English thinking maybe they have some rite of passage over there that's gone missing over here. He insisted that it offered a better albeit more dangerous shave. I've not seen straight razors or blades sold anywhere so I never thought much about it. If you say the blades are still being sold, maybe I'll have a look around and consider trading in the pseudo hi-tech plastic instrument.
The shaving mug/brush approach -- great isn't it? A luxury everyone should try. I'm not one for spending time in front of the mirror, but giving yourself a treat that takes only extra few each morning is like buying yourself a hooker for your birthday. Ok, maybe a bad analogy. And a bit off topic when we're all supposed to be discussing the finer points of manufacturing.
Here's a thought. I've recently gone back to paying premium prices for "premium" razorblades. Why? The reasons probably run the gamut between cuts on my face and wishful thinking, but I'm convinced that the generic brands sold in supermarkets are not identical.
Yeah, we've all heard the "made on the same assembly line yada yada" argument, and indeed that may be perfectly valid in a number cases (or valid to the degree it makes any difference). But anyone who has experience in manufacturing knows that the process isn't necessarily as simple as it's made out to be here. Put another way, even top tier manufacturers put out "budget" brands that by definition skimp on materials, quality, etc. to bring down the cost so that the product can be sold at a cheaper price.
would suggest you give up the notion of recipes. Cooking is about ingredients, or to quote a famous chef, "85 percent of cooking is shopping."
Look, if you go to a top line culinary school, you'll learn two things: ingredients and technique. They don't teach recipes. Once you've learned what's taught, you go shopping. Or make a reservation here
I agree, but consider that if you wrote technical documentation for a living, would you spend your time documenting How Things Work, or would you put that aside and compile a list of how to's and tips? I'd suggest that overlap aside, they're very different approaches intended for different audiences.
If you want everything in a "How do I?" format, then you'd be best served by narrowing web searches by using "FAQ" or "tutorial" keywords. You'll discover that that many are written separately and by different groups. Here's an example: one of the most extensive "How do I?" documents I've recently come across is the Vim FAQ. The first line reads "This Vim FAQ is created from the questions and answers posted to the
vim@vim.org user mailing list and the comp.editors newsgroup". It's detailed enough that you could actually use it to learn from, but the point is that it's been authored by someone else and is being offered to a different audience.
If it helps, you may find that after reading enough tutorials, you'll find yourself re-reading man pages because you want more "complex stuff."
From the "Yeah But" department: I've found many titles published by O'Reilly short almost to the point of being inadequate. Which isn't a Bad Thing necessarily, but when you need information not provided in the carefully targetted book you're reading, you're looking at 2 or 3 books per subject at a minimum. (Perl, for example has 35 titles.) Add to that an equal number of books on subjects directly related, and the "amazing number of technical books" doesn't seem so amazing.
Maybe it's me, but I'm starting to find it more useful to re-read the original documentation that was skipped over thinking I was going to find an easier answer elsewhere than to pay for yet another book. Boring, but true.
Well, here's a thought. If a GUI newsreader can handle hundreds of thousands of headers without breaking a sweat, and additionally comes with native support for filtering, regexps, yada yada, then why can't a GUI-based email client? Not that any of them do, of course.
Case in point -- my Outlook database runs about 180MB and contains maybe a few thousand messages. My GUI-based newsreader database currently has at least 200K messages and is less than 100MB.
Nothing against Mutt, eMacs, etc. but I don't think a stripped-down interface is necessary even if it is all just text. Just a thought, anyway. I have others.
"...lets you prevent HTML (by default doesn't download images, etc from internet),.."
Nice to know it doesn't download images, but does anyone know whether email in Outlook is, to any extent, "plain text," or is it simply html using a monospaced font?
SBC offers a package for 1.5-3.0Mbs down / 384Kbps costing only 44.95 (single dynamic IP). The 5-static IP plan is 99.99.
Not sure why discussions of broadband get framed as though broadband is provided by cable companies only, but my own opinion is that I find it difficult enough relying on my cable company to provide cable service let alone considering them for internet connectivity. And phone service from a cable company? Not bloody likely.
A utility company offering broadband, however, is something I would consider.
"Why do people keep associating OSS with anti-Microsoft?" could be rephrased to "Why does Microsoft associate OSS with being anti-Microsoft?" I'm sure you can find on the web enough quotes, confidential memos, legal pleadings and related commentary to keep you busy discovering answers to the question irrespective of how it's phrased.
Similarly, if one accepts your reductive "it's all about choices" oversimplification, do you really believe that that Microsoft could suddenly become A New Different Microsoft(TM) and not do everything in its power to limit those choices? Or that it hasn't or continues to do so?
A judge ruled so long ago Microsoft held monopoly power with Windows and that it used that power to "harm consumers, computer makers and other companies". Not much nobility there, I think.
I think you've just articulated the problem with a majority of the "But the LCD is easier on the eyes!" type of comments -- lame CRTs.
A few comments above someone remarked on having to push the resolution on their monitor up to 75Hz! Like, duh! Selecting a monitor setting so that it performs a few percentage points above a flickering fluorescent light is a basis for comparison?
No doubt there are a lot of crappy CRTs on the market, but I'd venture to say that even the better ones are running at some nutty "factory default" of 60Hz/256-colours.
Mind you, I do lust after the kewl factor (and the desktop space), but I'll wait a few years before I consider an LCD.
"...the RFC specification says that http authentication is not allowed in a http url, it is allowed in a generic URI but not for HTTP urls, this is an exception! RFC 1738 - Page 8
3.3. HTTP
The HTTP URL scheme is used to designate Internet resources accessible using HTTP (HyperText Transfer Protocol).
The HTTP protocol is specified elsewhere. This specification only describes the syntax of HTTP URLs.
An HTTP URL takes the form:
http://<host>:<port>/<path>?<searchpart>
where <host> and <port> are as described in Section 3.1. If:<port> is omitted, the port defaults to 80. No user name or password is allowed.
So, Microsoft is in fact sticking to the RFC this time, something they should have done long time ago. I have been blocking this "http authentication" in every mail I received on my domain for over a year, but when I saw the IE url obfuscation issue a few weeks back, I was amased that nobody knew this, so I thought I was wrong and that's why I didn't reply. Microsoft still gets a "D" from me for this big mess!"
To continue this tangent... is it just me, or do carbonated beverages (that's "pop" for the northerners, and "soda" for everyone else) contain a lot less carbonation than... well, back around the time when coke was sold only in glass bottles?
I also seem to recall that coke was typically served/sold chilled to a far lower temperature than your typical modern-day 7-11 cooler.
Reminds me of what some senator said not so long ago with respect to the state of health care in the U.S. -- everyone (including the poorest of the poor) has access to health care in the same way that everyone has access to the new Cadillac sitting in a showroom.
If it's all about access, then I'm sure when I go out for the evening tommorrow I'll be accessing hundreds of available women.
An additional point to consider with respect to the unique problems of guitar tablature is that it can become even more of a challenge to transcribe music that's based on assymetrical rhythms.
Flamenco is such an example where most everything is based on a count of 12 (counts not beats) and the different rhythms are defined by where the accent or beat is placed. Sort of. A standard solea, for example, is defined (using a count of 12) with accents on 3, 6, 8, 10 and 12. A seguiyrias will have similar intervals between beats, but the rhythm is different in that it starts and ends at different points yielding 8, 10, 12, 3 and 6 instead. There's more complicated examples, of course, but the only rhythm I'd trust to interpet correctly from tablature is a rumba which is based on a count of 2, the accent falling on the 2. (The Gypsy Kings use this rhythm almost exclusively which is why they're not taken very seriously in the flamenco world).
This discussion has reminded me of all those "guitar books" I bought in my teens. The music in these books was always transcribed for piano with chord progressions (invariably wrong) that were thrown in after the fact to sell the book to kids like me trying to learn to play Stairway to Heaven. They couldn't even get an ordinary Beatles song right.
I'd say the value of peace and quiet was somewhere between $439 and $1,500 according to the pricing of professionally-made isolation enclosures (for studios, etc.) seen
here, here, here and
here. On the other hand, if I was cheap, I'd say the home-made approaches seen here, here and
here suggest it's about $100 plus time and labour.
A case that functions as a heat-sink is a brilliant idea. I do hope the idea if not the product takes off but for now I doubt any of us are reaching for our cheque books.
Personally, I gave up on the idea of swapping out noisy components for quieter, better-engineered replacements (expensive idea if you have multiple systems) and built my own box. The results are always better and you get way-kewl furniture as a bonus. 3/4-inch MDF is cheap, 3/4-inch birch isn't much more, and even if you double-wall the enclosure for a dead air layer (highly recommended), you'll shell out less than $100. The time? Skip tee vee for a night or two and pretend you're Norm -- plaid shirt required, of course.
Oh, and if you're living with rackmount equipment and need a solution, this centrifugal fan (read "bathroom) is probably the quietest in existence, moves lots of air, and works great either housed in a cabinet or installed in the ceiling of a small closet.
Typically, most stories don't receive much press, save for local coverage or an occasional bit on NPR. The truth is that there's been disasters and disasters-in-the-making happening for years that are ignored if not covered up. Most of choose not to look, deciding life's just fine or the problem is not ours to worry about.
Instead of punitive damage after the fact, I'd suggest setting up a large mechanical boxing glove at the reception desk of the USTPO, but I hear the idea's already been patented by Acme.
Slashdot Mirror
"Actually, Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to provide any of that to the consumer."
The world would be a kinder gentler (and more intelligent) place if that indeed was true. Almost all of the items you've listed (and a really long list of other items you haven't listed) can be replaced by superiour (most often free) third-party alternatives. More importantly, they should be.
I would love the chance to send anyone who makes comments like yours a bill for time I've had to spend wrestling with Windows to either uninstall crap or install something better. As for the the average user, well, he or she may figure out how to replace Notepad (an important system file) but no user to my knowledge has ever been able to get rid of Pinball fully.
Silly examples, perhaps, but the point here is we (both consumers and developers) would all be better off if the OS was stripped of all this crap. It doesn't take much effort to come up with a large number of items that could be included, ranging from a default install of the ActiveState distribution (buried on the installation CD) to a full Cygwin installatin to a better browser to anything else you want to think of. That, I think, to use your term, would be "useful." Instead, we have cultivated inertia and ignorance on the part of consumers in combination with FUD and illegal behaviour on the part of a monopolist.
At the risk of turning this into "A Queer Eye for a Slashdot Guy" thread, I had been wondering about the straight razor thing. A friend of mine uses one that was given to him by his dad on his 16th birthday. I chalked that up to his being English thinking maybe they have some rite of passage over there that's gone missing over here. He insisted that it offered a better albeit more dangerous shave. I've not seen straight razors or blades sold anywhere so I never thought much about it. If you say the blades are still being sold, maybe I'll have a look around and consider trading in the pseudo hi-tech plastic instrument.
The shaving mug/brush approach -- great isn't it? A luxury everyone should try. I'm not one for spending time in front of the mirror, but giving yourself a treat that takes only extra few each morning is like buying yourself a hooker for your birthday. Ok, maybe a bad analogy. And a bit off topic when we're all supposed to be discussing the finer points of manufacturing.
Here's a thought. I've recently gone back to paying premium prices for "premium" razorblades. Why? The reasons probably run the gamut between cuts on my face and wishful thinking, but I'm convinced that the generic brands sold in supermarkets are not identical.
Yeah, we've all heard the "made on the same assembly line yada yada" argument, and indeed that may be perfectly valid in a number cases (or valid to the degree it makes any difference). But anyone who has experience in manufacturing knows that the process isn't necessarily as simple as it's made out to be here. Put another way, even top tier manufacturers put out "budget" brands that by definition skimp on materials, quality, etc. to bring down the cost so that the product can be sold at a cheaper price.
would suggest you give up the notion of recipes. Cooking is about ingredients, or to quote a famous chef, "85 percent of cooking is shopping."
Look, if you go to a top line culinary school, you'll learn two things: ingredients and technique. They don't teach recipes. Once you've learned what's taught, you go shopping. Or make a reservation here
I agree, but consider that if you wrote technical documentation for a living, would you spend your time documenting How Things Work, or would you put that aside and compile a list of how to's and tips? I'd suggest that overlap aside, they're very different approaches intended for different audiences.
If you want everything in a "How do I?" format, then you'd be best served by narrowing web searches by using "FAQ" or "tutorial" keywords. You'll discover that that many are written separately and by different groups. Here's an example: one of the most extensive "How do I?" documents I've recently come across is the Vim FAQ. The first line reads "This Vim FAQ is created from the questions and answers posted to the vim@vim.org user mailing list and the comp.editors newsgroup". It's detailed enough that you could actually use it to learn from, but the point is that it's been authored by someone else and is being offered to a different audience.
If it helps, you may find that after reading enough tutorials, you'll find yourself re-reading man pages because you want more "complex stuff."
From the "Yeah But" department: I've found many titles published by O'Reilly short almost to the point of being inadequate. Which isn't a Bad Thing necessarily, but when you need information not provided in the carefully targetted book you're reading, you're looking at 2 or 3 books per subject at a minimum. (Perl, for example has 35 titles.) Add to that an equal number of books on subjects directly related, and the "amazing number of technical books" doesn't seem so amazing.
Maybe it's me, but I'm starting to find it more useful to re-read the original documentation that was skipped over thinking I was going to find an easier answer elsewhere than to pay for yet another book. Boring, but true.
You forgot top-posting?
Well, here's a thought. If a GUI newsreader can handle hundreds of thousands of headers without breaking a sweat, and additionally comes with native support for filtering, regexps, yada yada, then why can't a GUI-based email client? Not that any of them do, of course.
Case in point -- my Outlook database runs about 180MB and contains maybe a few thousand messages. My GUI-based newsreader database currently has at least 200K messages and is less than 100MB.
Nothing against Mutt, eMacs, etc. but I don't think a stripped-down interface is necessary even if it is all just text. Just a thought, anyway. I have others.
"...lets you prevent HTML (by default doesn't download images, etc from internet),.."
Nice to know it doesn't download images, but does anyone know whether email in Outlook is, to any extent, "plain text," or is it simply html using a monospaced font?
SBC offers a package for 1.5-3.0Mbs down / 384Kbps costing only 44.95 (single dynamic IP). The 5-static IP plan is 99.99.
Not sure why discussions of broadband get framed as though broadband is provided by cable companies only, but my own opinion is that I find it difficult enough relying on my cable company to provide cable service let alone considering them for internet connectivity. And phone service from a cable company? Not bloody likely.
A utility company offering broadband, however, is something I would consider.
"...my last bribe^H^H^H^H^H"
So Balmer drafts his emails in the cygwin console version of vi?
Funny, yes, but I wouldn't underestimate the promotional (and educational) value of shiny new PCs all running shiny new Linux distros.
"Why do people keep associating OSS with anti-Microsoft?" could be rephrased to "Why does Microsoft associate OSS with being anti-Microsoft?" I'm sure you can find on the web enough quotes, confidential memos, legal pleadings and related commentary to keep you busy discovering answers to the question irrespective of how it's phrased.
Similarly, if one accepts your reductive "it's all about choices" oversimplification, do you really believe that that Microsoft could suddenly become A New Different Microsoft(TM) and not do everything in its power to limit those choices? Or that it hasn't or continues to do so?
A judge ruled so long ago Microsoft held monopoly power with Windows and that it used that power to "harm consumers, computer makers and other companies". Not much nobility there, I think.
Yeah, but why is that when you point at the moon, your dog stares your finger?
Someone's already sold your idea. Seems they skipped the pepperoni, but included a fast BMW and a cute Asian chic.
I think you've just articulated the problem with a majority of the "But the LCD is easier on the eyes!" type of comments -- lame CRTs.
A few comments above someone remarked on having to push the resolution on their monitor up to 75Hz! Like, duh! Selecting a monitor setting so that it performs a few percentage points above a flickering fluorescent light is a basis for comparison?
No doubt there are a lot of crappy CRTs on the market, but I'd venture to say that even the better ones are running at some nutty "factory default" of 60Hz/256-colours.
Mind you, I do lust after the kewl factor (and the desktop space), but I'll wait a few years before I consider an LCD.
"...the RFC specification says that http authentication is not allowed in a http url, it is allowed in a generic URI but not for HTTP urls, this is an exception! RFC 1738 - Page 8
So, Microsoft is in fact sticking to the RFC this time, something they should have done long time ago. I have been blocking this "http authentication" in every mail I received on my domain for over a year, but when I saw the IE url obfuscation issue a few weeks back, I was amased that nobody knew this, so I thought I was wrong and that's why I didn't reply. Microsoft still gets a "D" from me for this big mess!"
To continue this tangent ... is it just me, or do carbonated beverages (that's "pop" for the northerners, and "soda" for everyone else) contain a lot less carbonation than ... well, back around the time when coke was sold only in glass bottles?
I also seem to recall that coke was typically served/sold chilled to a far lower temperature than your typical modern-day 7-11 cooler.
Reminds me of what some senator said not so long ago with respect to the state of health care in the U.S. -- everyone (including the poorest of the poor) has access to health care in the same way that everyone has access to the new Cadillac sitting in a showroom.
If it's all about access, then I'm sure when I go out for the evening tommorrow I'll be accessing hundreds of available women.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe M$ has supported anything natively but its own .CAB format.
There was, however, the ZIP support that was added to XP, but that support seemed (at least to me) limited.
An additional point to consider with respect to the unique problems of guitar tablature is that it can become even more of a challenge to transcribe music that's based on assymetrical rhythms.
Flamenco is such an example where most everything is based on a count of 12 (counts not beats) and the different rhythms are defined by where the accent or beat is placed. Sort of. A standard solea, for example, is defined (using a count of 12) with accents on 3, 6, 8, 10 and 12. A seguiyrias will have similar intervals between beats, but the rhythm is different in that it starts and ends at different points yielding 8, 10, 12, 3 and 6 instead. There's more complicated examples, of course, but the only rhythm I'd trust to interpet correctly from tablature is a rumba which is based on a count of 2, the accent falling on the 2. (The Gypsy Kings use this rhythm almost exclusively which is why they're not taken very seriously in the flamenco world).
This discussion has reminded me of all those "guitar books" I bought in my teens. The music in these books was always transcribed for piano with chord progressions (invariably wrong) that were thrown in after the fact to sell the book to kids like me trying to learn to play Stairway to Heaven. They couldn't even get an ordinary Beatles song right.
A case that functions as a heat-sink is a brilliant idea. I do hope the idea if not the product takes off but for now I doubt any of us are reaching for our cheque books.
Personally, I gave up on the idea of swapping out noisy components for quieter, better-engineered replacements (expensive idea if you have multiple systems) and built my own box. The results are always better and you get way-kewl furniture as a bonus. 3/4-inch MDF is cheap, 3/4-inch birch isn't much more, and even if you double-wall the enclosure for a dead air layer (highly recommended), you'll shell out less than $100. The time? Skip tee vee for a night or two and pretend you're Norm -- plaid shirt required, of course.
Oh, and if you're living with rackmount equipment and need a solution, this centrifugal fan (read "bathroom) is probably the quietest in existence, moves lots of air, and works great either housed in a cabinet or installed in the ceiling of a small closet.
Maybe not so tame.
Typically, most stories don't receive much press, save for local coverage or an occasional bit on NPR. The truth is that there's been disasters and disasters-in-the-making happening for years that are ignored if not covered up. Most of choose not to look, deciding life's just fine or the problem is not ours to worry about.
Instead of punitive damage after the fact, I'd suggest setting up a large mechanical boxing glove at the reception desk of the USTPO, but I hear the idea's already been patented by Acme.