This "tilt" intrigues. It's interesting in that it
describes an unfolding and evolving business model to which
companies must react.
I like that he doesn't just whine about the problem but offers
solutions too, to provide the "stickiness" required to keep
customers coming and interacting with companies' sites. This is
the way the evollution should work.
Oh, that the RIAA and the music industry would have to abide
by the same principle now that their business model has changed,
rather than buying legislation to cripple advances in technology
(which, btw, will NOT work).
Maybe, maybe, the music industry could learn something from
this.
First of all, I'm always curious and a little suspicious
when anything is a winner of a competition, "next generation
computer design sponsored by Microsoft." My gut reaction to
MS sponsored design is that the winner is going to be more about
something Microsoft will leverage and much less about what is
good for the consumer. Here's why:
Interesting design, but even more constrained in some ways
than traditional computers. For my personal taste I much more
prefer to put my computer somewhere completely out of sight and
not taking up any desktop real estate. I'm not adding and
modding so much that I need the "bookshelf metaphor" to
accommodate my computing needs.
I'm not even sure I'm convinced
this modular design will stem the constant support I give to
friends of family when things don't work. Visually it looks
simpler for managing a computer, I wonder that vendors would do
any better creating truly modular and plug 'n play components for
this design.
As for the DRM, from the article:
One of the greatest concerns in the computer and
digital industries today is copyright, Shim says. Studies show
that consumers are more likely to disregard the ownership and
copyright of digital contents because such files lack the
physical properties of format media such as compact discs (CDs),
laser discs (LDs) or digital video discs (DVDs).
..., I think this is just plain wrong. The industry doesn't get
it, and these guys aren't getting it either. People are willing
and able to consider copyright even in abstract form. People who
aren't disregard it in physical and abstract form. Forwarding a
design ostensibly to instantiate (in the OO sense) abstract
copyright products is a canard (yet another) and a trojan horse
to impose even more restrictions (unnecessarily) on customers and
users.
This new look is essentially a Bang and Olufsen
computer -- lots of sizzle, but compared to what really
could be done advancing computer design, not much new. If you're
into eye-candy, this is for you.
seems like it could be okay
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
While it's been some time since I installed iTunes (to
provide support for friends and family -- hard to walk them
through an interface I've never seen) it seems to me that the
tracking and recommendations is optional. I could be wrong.
That said, even if it were NOT optional, I'm not sure I see
the controversy here. People love the iTunes/iPod marriage and
the "it just works" philosophy.
Part of that philosophy is the synergy that is the
relationship between the user and the product. Apple seems to be
good at defining and enhancing that relationship. So, it seems
(to me) a logical extension to "observe" the music a user likes
and make recommendations therein.
How different and onerous is this compared to the Amazon
"people who have purchased this also have purchased...,"
feature?
iTunes isn'tmy cup of tea, but for
many users, this "malware", in my opinion, is a far different
(and more benign) animal than, say, the SONY DRM debacle.
As for the author's opinion about how controversial this
should be, quoting the last paragraph from the article:
So, for now, if you don't want iTunes phoning
home--and you may not want Apple to record the music you listen
to--you can simply hide the MiniStore. I find Apple remiss for
not being forthright about this feature, both in its EULA and
other information in iTunes. But I have a feeling that this issue
will be making some waves in the immediate future.
specifically and especially to his last sentence, I don't (have a
feeling this will be making some waves in the immediate future).
Furthermore!, it should be pointed out the
author "concedes" in the article:
Edit: after more analysis, this does not send info to
Apple when you are playing music, but rather when you click on a
song. So if you start playing a song by double-clicking, it will
send info to the iTunes Music Store and retrieve suggestions. But
if the song is in a playlist, the MiniStore display will not
change when the next song begins
which almost completely renders moot the original thesis.
I can't vouch for this, but it's
interesting information --
why aren't you googling?
Key quote from above article:
"There isn't
good research that says it causes permanent damage, but even
temporary symptoms are worth noting," said
Ticho.
For the record, I've been using computers for LONG hours for
over twenty years and haven't noticed any deterioration in my
ability to sads lkjasl llksdkl!
Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! The Noise. Make it stop!
No, seriously, you cannot comment your code and enforce that
as policy. You can't impose standards and impose enforce that!
It doesn't work.
You either know how to program/code, and commenting
is part of that, or you don't. Either your staff knows same or
doesn't.
Go ahead and establish "guidelines", you'll feel better. But
I've been in this industry for over 20 years and applying
"standards" for coding and "comments" has never worked.
Write un-obfuscated code, have peer reviews and walkthroughs,
and have staff that know how to create... It's really all you
need.
(As an anecdotal experience -- we had "standards" on a major
project, and I accidentally created a Class without the proper
capitalization. A peer came to me and confronted me on said
transgression and wondered what I intended to do about it. I
said I intended to let it slide and would try to be better in the
future. He insisted we "fix" this problem and we spent (and I'm
NOT making this up!) the next day's worth of time re-factoring
the code (the IDE wasn't up to speed for this -- thanks
Microsoft) to "correct" the "problem". Sigh)
AFAIK this barely even brushes up against being a felony,
but let the school officials have their fun!
Had they just ignored this and let it go (maybe take the kid
aside and dress him down a bit), this would have slipped off the
radar in half a day. As it is, they've loaded, locked, and are
about to fire, aiming right at their own feet.
BTW, I'm just wondering who the first brave soul in slashdot
is who will actually post the schools URL. (Also, BTW, it's
pretty easily found in Google: Lake High School Uniontown Ohio,
duh).
It may be a volatile topic, but where better to discuss the
reality, validity, etc., of these purported vulnerabilities?
Get your education here (hopefully) so you can address the
confrontations at work, from your friends, etc. when they accuse
you of evangelizing an OS more vulnerable than Windows!
Look for answers to:
how these vulnerabilities are reported (the article is
painfully light on this)
what the vulnerabilities were and how serious they were
whether or not there is redundancy in the reporting
mechanisms
what association and influence Microsoft has over this
reporting process
how quickly vulnerabilities are fixed and how soon working
patches are made available to the public
who is the author of this article? (Gregg Keizer), and what
is his slant/bias?
I'm sure this is a partial list, and I don't know the answers
to these points, but I'd like to.
I used to work for someone who was impossibly manic about
things he wanted to do, which always meant things he asked "us"
to do. I considered him visionary, but sometimes it was just too
much.
My methodology was to mentally file away any requests (and
there were many), and take no action other than to sketch
mentally what the work would entail. The indicator whether or
not it was real work I ever need do was if he came back to me in
the next few days or so to see what progress I'd made for "task
X".
Fortunately I was able to intuitively cull things that looked
important from those that were simply "what ifs", and it was
mostly a synergistic relationship -- I always had plenty to do
from his bounty of ideas, but was able to be more productive by
exercising a "procrastination policy".
"This would be a
significant chunk of change," said Hayes Ledford, the Chattanooga
Area Chamber of Commerces director of public
affairs.
That pretty much seems to say it all when public officials
view taxation as "significant chunks of change", rather than the
basis for sustaining government and infrastructure.
Interestingly part of the motivation for the proposed taxation
is to allow for, and quoting from the article again:
The new rule would provide a uniform standard
across the state
So, in the interest of a uniform standard, they want to
ratchet up the taxation, sounds pretty much like taxation without
representation (I know, I know, home rule).
When governments start unilaterally considering these kinds of
move, they may end up understanding "significant chunk of
change" in a whole new context, as in significant chunk of
change in the constituents' tolerance for government.
Okay, I'm going to go way out on a limb here and expose myself to total mod annihilation. (but before you do, at least read down to my example of why I think it's a free country.)
I think a lot of the reaction here is glib and over the top. Does anyone remember what happened Sept 11, 2001?
Yeah, there has been a lot of "unauthorized" spying, but it looks to be pretty specific (e.g., Mosques... where large Muslim populations ostensibly would have privacy to worship). The United States was attacked and continues to be targeted for major future terror attacks. And, like it or not, the community most likely to cultivate, plan, and escalate this activity is Muslim. And, a country so viciously attacked would be naive, maybe even stupid to allow unfettered large gatherings where this planning could go on with no observation.
I cringe to think spying may go on, and may be necessary, but it isn't the same world as five years ago.
As for those complaining about the abridgement of their rights and rampant government interference I would ask you, have you or anyone you know observed or experienced serious interference in your life (lives)? I haven't, and I don't know anyone who has. I do know some people get caught in the quagmire that is the increased surveillance, but for now it's probably a dear price we're paying and will for a while.
However, let me give an example of the freedom in this country. A friend recently returned from visiting friends in California. She brought back as a souvenir three toilet paper sheets... from the TP roll where she stayed. Each of the sheets had printed on it a picture of George Bush and some choice quote by him. Hilarious? Maybe, depends on your point of view. Permissible? You bet!
I may not be happy the world is a bit more wrapped around the axle these days, but I am happy to live in a country that has enough freedom that you can print the president's face on toilet paper.
Who'd have thunk it, the music industry being crooked? So,
who are the pirates now?
It does seem maybe these (alleged) crooks may be losing their
grip on the industry: getting caught with their hand in the
pricing cookie jar, and potential other investigations into
payola (the other way they control the flow and
exposure to music/artists).
Disclaimer: I know, innocent until proven
guilty, but with the propensity and willingness of these
(alleged) crooks to string up the customer like so many Christmas
(Merry!) lights, publicly indicting/convicting consumers before
trial. How's the shoe feel on the other foot? Maybe there really
is a Santa Claus(e)!
A point of order from the slashdot "article"... from the
article:
Wired News reports that Wikipedia founder
Jimmy Wales has edited his own entry in the online encyclopedia
at least 18 times, in violation of Wikipedia's policy on
autobiography
But, the actual link includes in the very first paragraph:
This page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia. It illustrates
standards of conduct, which many editors agree with in principle.
However, it is not policy.
While there may be a patina of suspicion for self-edited
bio's, it doesn't sound like Wales committed any overt actions
warranting this scrutiny. (for example, I've just visited
bomis.com, and had it not been referred to in this article as
potentially a porn or soft-porn site, I never would have guessed
by scanning the home page -- his "correction" is probably
warranted.) I guess it's a price to pay for the
internet fame.
Okay, I'm done reading about three articles about Bill
Buxton. Sounds like a bright and interesting guy.
Now, the litmus test, which Microsoft repeatedly fails, will
be whether Microsoft cares or is willing to listen to this guy
and his ideas. In my opinion, Microsoft's hiring of high-profile
talents or personalities in the past has been more for:
squashing opposing or interesting "other" ideas.
presenting themselves to the public as progressive,
innovative, and creative
The last great creative mind I remember at Microsoft was
Nathan Myhrvold, and I can't remember any great contributions
from him.
As for Burton's quote about the move and Microsoft:
My sense is that Microsoft is in transition from
an engineering-led company to...a design-led
company
Microsoft always has been and always be a Gates/Ballmer-led
company, and that's not about engineering, and that's not about
design. Waxing eloquent about his new employer is quaint, but
Burton sheds no light on Microsoft's intentions or future
directions. If history serves, no changes are in the offing.
This is news, but it isn't big news, and it isn't very
interesting news.
Bill Gates amassed a fortune through ruthless and merciless
and eventually illegal practices. That he has chosen to give
some back, and I tip my hat to him for that, anc for all the good
he is now doing I liken to the mafia giving ill-gotten gains
to charities and somehow being anointed for that. It is
misguided. Unfortunately, I have no subscription to
Time to cancel.
shazbot, I hate replying to myself with followup, but for those who care, the book I mentioned above is: Influence: Science and Practice. It's a great book, it's worth reading, it illustrates exactly why people choose things expensive when they have no other criteria by which they can determine value, and, it is on topic!:-)
I think it's unfortunate but in the IT world it is
generally true there is no relationship between
quality of software and cost. Some of the best
software I've ever used has been free, some of the worst software
I've ever used has been expensive.
IT and technology and particularly software can be
(is) difficult to understand on many levels:
functionality; efficiency; ergonomics; stability; etc. In a book
(and God, I wish I could remember the title of this book -- one
of my faves) talking about manipulating perceptions one of the
discussions centered on the fact that when all other criteria are
indeterminate or unavailable, it is human nature to assign
credibility and worth based on price or cost. This is rife in
the world of software.
Unfortunately, I see this as something taken advantage of
rather that properly addressed.... sigh.
Jail time for unlicensed publishing of lyrics? I don't know how many times I've gone looking for lyrics to songs and the only place I can find anything is some web site where a fan has taken the time to put lyrics together. Maybe that's changed some and now that the music industry see dollar signs you really can go "buy" this stuff -- is it my responsibility to monitor and find this stuff (which, btw should have been available a long time ago)?
The music industry has betrayed the consumers since forever. Are they going to go after the publicly available and free CDDB? Probably. But even that didn't exist until the consuming public put together the first application to make this available on-line. And guess who provided the data? The friggin' public, again. And, now that the industry sees dollar signs, they want to claim ownership.
Pat's review is accurate. It is also incomplete (but for
the squeezebox, that is easy to have happen... you just keep
discovering more cool features).
Soooooooooo, in addition to his review I would add the
following cool things about this device:
the Squeezebox is served by the slimserver software.
This server allows you to run and play songs from your
browser/computer as well as other places (I know technically this
isn't a "feature" of the Squeezebox, but it ties in to some other
features).
because it runs through slimserve, you can control the songs
you hear via your browser -- that may sound mostly trick, but as
with any fully featured piece of hardware, I find remotes only go
so far before they're just plain cumbersome to use. (the
Squeezebox remote IS a pretty good one, not perfect, but good).
you can synchronize more than one Squeezebox so they play the
same music at the same time throughout the house (or whatever).
I've used this with no problems, but have read other reviews
saying it doesn't always work perfectly... ymmv.
the slimserver serving music to the Squeezebox supports
plugins, and there are lots of them out there, some way cool.
And, if you don't like any of those, you can roll your own.
the Squeezebox has myriad options for how it looks when
"idle", when "off", when "now playing", etc. It has some
interesting screen savers considering the tiny real estate.
you can listen to shoutcast/internet radio without your PC
turned on -- it is built into the latest Squeezeboxes
So, you can see there is lots more than just stated in the
review, and probably lots more than what I've shown.
I think Squeezebox is a great product (I own three). I am
waiting for the day someone (hopefully SlimDevices) comes out
with a decent and reasonably priced streaming device that has
video out to display liner notes, lyrics, now playing, etc.
(and, no, I'm NOT interested in a media center...)
Since day one, "SAVE" has been obsolete along with a myriad
of abstractions offered end users (what the heck is the notion of
a "FILE" menu anyway? -- What the heck is the notion of "FILE"?
I know I've read every beginner's book about getting familiar
with computers, and they always go into excruciatingly dull
detail about the file abstraction (it's a collection of bytes the
comprise a document, blah, blah, blah.)). Users don't care what a
file is, they don't want to know what a file is, they just want
to do work.
(I will admit caution when absolving users of any
responsibility to learn, but generally speaking, end users have
enough on their plate without having to incorporate geek-speak to
do their work.)
I was in a design meeting one day discussing the
appropriateness of the "FILE" menu for the application we were
delivering. One of the anointed Golden Boys of the team had
sketched the layout and included the "FILE" menu. I asked
why we needed it, there was NO notion of "FILE" in our
application, there was no notion of "SAVE FILE", etc. in our
application.
He said, "cuz they expect it, it's a standard menu." I said,
"standard cuz they expect it, or standard cuz it's always been
there?" I finally gave up on the chicken and egg discussion, let
it be resolved the end users "expect" "FILE"
(NOT!).
That said, I could (and may) go through the menu selections in
virtually any application and find half of the "options" are
abstractions that have bubbled up either historically, or were
just never "translated" for end userdom. It's a mess, and it's a
presentation piece of software I am constantly explaining, and
apologizing for.
It's toothpaste out of the tube, I wish it could go back in.
But, it's a great lesson in humility when you actually take a
lay-step back and actually try to interpret what we see as
normal-speak on a daily basis. It isn't normal, and it isn't
transparent.
Short answer to the poster's question: yes
Most of the crap we throw the users' way is artifact crap that
never went away. (Does anyone know or remember the story about
cutting away 1/3 or the Thanksgiving Ham when preparing it for
Thanksgiving Dinner?)
I think the answer to your question lies within the
technology itself, and the obvious answer is "yes", web pages are
getting larger. Consider that:
processor speeds have increased nearly 80x since the
approximate time of the "web".
disk and memory have increased even more dramatically than
processor speeds
average bandwidth (more optical networks, more 100M LAN's,
etc.) has increased dramatically.
features and functionality of browsers has expanded
dramatically (sorry, not going to go into the laundry list here)
the number of web sites has grown exponentially
the ways of finding these sites has become easier if not just
plain simple
So, yes, the web universe is "expanding" in very nearly every
dimension. To your specific question, will you need to petition
for more bandwidth? Undoubtedly. And, I can't imagine it isn't
doable at today's rates. It sounds like a balky bureaucracy, not
a question of need. Good luck.
I think maybe the better question to ask, is what has happened
to the general psyche of the average employee, and how do you
address it? If I had to guess (see, I'm not proving
anything with this post!) I'd guess the
technology has easily stepped up to the task of underpinning the
network use but people still have not learned how to modulate and
attenuate the siren that is the internet. (Maybe that would help
decelerate your need to upgrade and expand bandwidth.)
Slashdot Mirror
This "tilt" intrigues. It's interesting in that it describes an unfolding and evolving business model to which companies must react.
I like that he doesn't just whine about the problem but offers solutions too, to provide the "stickiness" required to keep customers coming and interacting with companies' sites. This is the way the evollution should work.
Oh, that the RIAA and the music industry would have to abide by the same principle now that their business model has changed, rather than buying legislation to cripple advances in technology (which, btw, will NOT work).
Maybe, maybe, the music industry could learn something from this.
First of all, I'm always curious and a little suspicious when anything is a winner of a competition, "next generation computer design sponsored by Microsoft." My gut reaction to MS sponsored design is that the winner is going to be more about something Microsoft will leverage and much less about what is good for the consumer. Here's why:
Interesting design, but even more constrained in some ways than traditional computers. For my personal taste I much more prefer to put my computer somewhere completely out of sight and not taking up any desktop real estate. I'm not adding and modding so much that I need the "bookshelf metaphor" to accommodate my computing needs.
I'm not even sure I'm convinced this modular design will stem the constant support I give to friends of family when things don't work. Visually it looks simpler for managing a computer, I wonder that vendors would do any better creating truly modular and plug 'n play components for this design.
As for the DRM, from the article:
This new look is essentially a Bang and Olufsen computer -- lots of sizzle, but compared to what really could be done advancing computer design, not much new. If you're into eye-candy, this is for you.
While it's been some time since I installed iTunes (to provide support for friends and family -- hard to walk them through an interface I've never seen) it seems to me that the tracking and recommendations is optional. I could be wrong.
That said, even if it were NOT optional, I'm not sure I see the controversy here. People love the iTunes/iPod marriage and the "it just works" philosophy.
Part of that philosophy is the synergy that is the relationship between the user and the product. Apple seems to be good at defining and enhancing that relationship. So, it seems (to me) a logical extension to "observe" the music a user likes and make recommendations therein.
How different and onerous is this compared to the Amazon "people who have purchased this also have purchased ...,"
feature?
iTunes isn't my cup of tea, but for many users, this "malware", in my opinion, is a far different (and more benign) animal than, say, the SONY DRM debacle.
As for the author's opinion about how controversial this should be, quoting the last paragraph from the article:
specifically and especially to his last sentence, I don't (have a feeling this will be making some waves in the immediate future).Furthermore!, it should be pointed out the author "concedes" in the article:
which almost completely renders moot the original thesis.I can't vouch for this, but it's interesting information -- why aren't you googling?
Key quote from above article:
For the record, I've been using computers for LONG hours for over twenty years and haven't noticed any deterioration in my ability to sads lkjasl llksdkl!
Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! The Noise. Make it stop!
No, seriously, you cannot comment your code and enforce that as policy. You can't impose standards and impose enforce that! It doesn't work.
You either know how to program/code, and commenting is part of that, or you don't. Either your staff knows same or doesn't.
Go ahead and establish "guidelines", you'll feel better. But I've been in this industry for over 20 years and applying "standards" for coding and "comments" has never worked.
Write un-obfuscated code, have peer reviews and walkthroughs, and have staff that know how to create... It's really all you need.
(As an anecdotal experience -- we had "standards" on a major project, and I accidentally created a Class without the proper capitalization. A peer came to me and confronted me on said transgression and wondered what I intended to do about it. I said I intended to let it slide and would try to be better in the future. He insisted we "fix" this problem and we spent (and I'm NOT making this up!) the next day's worth of time re-factoring the code (the IDE wasn't up to speed for this -- thanks Microsoft) to "correct" the "problem". Sigh)
AFAIK this barely even brushes up against being a felony, but let the school officials have their fun! Had they just ignored this and let it go (maybe take the kid aside and dress him down a bit), this would have slipped off the radar in half a day. As it is, they've loaded, locked, and are about to fire, aiming right at their own feet.
BTW, I'm just wondering who the first brave soul in slashdot is who will actually post the schools URL. (Also, BTW, it's pretty easily found in Google: Lake High School Uniontown Ohio, duh).
I hope this doesn't turn into a marathon!
It may be a volatile topic, but where better to discuss the reality, validity, etc., of these purported vulnerabilities?
Get your education here (hopefully) so you can address the confrontations at work, from your friends, etc. when they accuse you of evangelizing an OS more vulnerable than Windows!
Look for answers to:
I'm sure this is a partial list, and I don't know the answers to these points, but I'd like to.
I used to work for someone who was impossibly manic about things he wanted to do, which always meant things he asked "us" to do. I considered him visionary, but sometimes it was just too much.
My methodology was to mentally file away any requests (and there were many), and take no action other than to sketch mentally what the work would entail. The indicator whether or not it was real work I ever need do was if he came back to me in the next few days or so to see what progress I'd made for "task X".
Fortunately I was able to intuitively cull things that looked important from those that were simply "what ifs", and it was mostly a synergistic relationship -- I always had plenty to do from his bounty of ideas, but was able to be more productive by exercising a "procrastination policy".
Point taken. Thanks for pointing that out.
From The Fine Article:
That pretty much seems to say it all when public officials view taxation as "significant chunks of change", rather than the basis for sustaining government and infrastructure.
Interestingly part of the motivation for the proposed taxation is to allow for, and quoting from the article again:
So, in the interest of a uniform standard, they want to ratchet up the taxation, sounds pretty much like taxation without representation (I know, I know, home rule).
When governments start unilaterally considering these kinds of move, they may end up understanding "significant chunk of change" in a whole new context, as in significant chunk of change in the constituents' tolerance for government.
Okay, I'm going to go way out on a limb here and expose myself to total mod annihilation. (but before you do, at least read down to my example of why I think it's a free country.)
I think a lot of the reaction here is glib and over the top. Does anyone remember what happened Sept 11, 2001?
Yeah, there has been a lot of "unauthorized" spying, but it looks to be pretty specific (e.g., Mosques... where large Muslim populations ostensibly would have privacy to worship). The United States was attacked and continues to be targeted for major future terror attacks. And, like it or not, the community most likely to cultivate, plan, and escalate this activity is Muslim. And, a country so viciously attacked would be naive, maybe even stupid to allow unfettered large gatherings where this planning could go on with no observation.
I cringe to think spying may go on, and may be necessary, but it isn't the same world as five years ago.
As for those complaining about the abridgement of their rights and rampant government interference I would ask you, have you or anyone you know observed or experienced serious interference in your life (lives)? I haven't, and I don't know anyone who has. I do know some people get caught in the quagmire that is the increased surveillance, but for now it's probably a dear price we're paying and will for a while.
However, let me give an example of the freedom in this country. A friend recently returned from visiting friends in California. She brought back as a souvenir three toilet paper sheets... from the TP roll where she stayed. Each of the sheets had printed on it a picture of George Bush and some choice quote by him. Hilarious? Maybe, depends on your point of view. Permissible? You bet!
I may not be happy the world is a bit more wrapped around the axle these days, but I am happy to live in a country that has enough freedom that you can print the president's face on toilet paper.
Who'd have thunk it, the music industry being crooked? So, who are the pirates now?
It does seem maybe these (alleged) crooks may be losing their grip on the industry: getting caught with their hand in the pricing cookie jar, and potential other investigations into payola (the other way they control the flow and exposure to music/artists).
Disclaimer: I know, innocent until proven guilty, but with the propensity and willingness of these (alleged) crooks to string up the customer like so many Christmas (Merry!) lights, publicly indicting/convicting consumers before trial. How's the shoe feel on the other foot? Maybe there really is a Santa Claus(e)!
A point of order from the slashdot "article"... from the article:
But, the actual link includes in the very first paragraph:
While there may be a patina of suspicion for self-edited bio's, it doesn't sound like Wales committed any overt actions warranting this scrutiny. (for example, I've just visited bomis.com, and had it not been referred to in this article as potentially a porn or soft-porn site, I never would have guessed by scanning the home page -- his "correction" is probably warranted.) I guess it's a price to pay for the internet fame.
Okay, I'm done reading about three articles about Bill Buxton. Sounds like a bright and interesting guy.
Now, the litmus test, which Microsoft repeatedly fails, will be whether Microsoft cares or is willing to listen to this guy and his ideas. In my opinion, Microsoft's hiring of high-profile talents or personalities in the past has been more for:
The last great creative mind I remember at Microsoft was Nathan Myhrvold, and I can't remember any great contributions from him.
As for Burton's quote about the move and Microsoft:
Microsoft always has been and always be a Gates/Ballmer-led company, and that's not about engineering, and that's not about design. Waxing eloquent about his new employer is quaint, but Burton sheds no light on Microsoft's intentions or future directions. If history serves, no changes are in the offing.
This is news, but it isn't big news, and it isn't very interesting news.
Bill Gates amassed a fortune through ruthless and merciless and eventually illegal practices. That he has chosen to give some back, and I tip my hat to him for that, anc for all the good he is now doing I liken to the mafia giving ill-gotten gains to charities and somehow being anointed for that. It is misguided. Unfortunately, I have no subscription to Time to cancel.
Aside from more jargonism, can anyone cite one major application, one major project for which this was used?
I'm signing up for my 10-year training plan to learn the terminology, jargon, etc.
Then I'll consider if I even want to learn to apply it. Sheesh, this is embarrassing
shazbot, I hate replying to myself with followup, but for those who care, the book I mentioned above is: Influence: Science and Practice. It's a great book, it's worth reading, it illustrates exactly why people choose things expensive when they have no other criteria by which they can determine value, and, it is on topic! :-)
I think it's unfortunate but in the IT world it is generally true there is no relationship between quality of software and cost . Some of the best software I've ever used has been free, some of the worst software I've ever used has been expensive.
IT and technology and particularly software can be (is) difficult to understand on many levels: functionality; efficiency; ergonomics; stability; etc. In a book (and God, I wish I could remember the title of this book -- one of my faves) talking about manipulating perceptions one of the discussions centered on the fact that when all other criteria are indeterminate or unavailable, it is human nature to assign credibility and worth based on price or cost. This is rife in the world of software.
Unfortunately, I see this as something taken advantage of rather that properly addressed.... sigh.
It's amazing what you can do with an awk one-liner, and this is the book to get you going on it.
Jail time for unlicensed publishing of lyrics? I don't know how many times I've gone looking for lyrics to songs and the only place I can find anything is some web site where a fan has taken the time to put lyrics together. Maybe that's changed some and now that the music industry see dollar signs you really can go "buy" this stuff -- is it my responsibility to monitor and find this stuff (which, btw should have been available a long time ago)?
The music industry has betrayed the consumers since forever. Are they going to go after the publicly available and free CDDB? Probably. But even that didn't exist until the consuming public put together the first application to make this available on-line. And guess who provided the data? The friggin' public, again. And, now that the industry sees dollar signs, they want to claim ownership.
I have a Dvorak keyboard!
Pat's review is accurate. It is also incomplete (but for the squeezebox, that is easy to have happen... you just keep discovering more cool features).
Soooooooooo, in addition to his review I would add the following cool things about this device:
So, you can see there is lots more than just stated in the review, and probably lots more than what I've shown.
I think Squeezebox is a great product (I own three). I am waiting for the day someone (hopefully SlimDevices) comes out with a decent and reasonably priced streaming device that has video out to display liner notes, lyrics, now playing, etc. (and, no, I'm NOT interested in a media center...)
Since day one, "SAVE" has been obsolete along with a myriad of abstractions offered end users (what the heck is the notion of a "FILE" menu anyway? -- What the heck is the notion of "FILE"? I know I've read every beginner's book about getting familiar with computers, and they always go into excruciatingly dull detail about the file abstraction (it's a collection of bytes the comprise a document, blah, blah, blah.)). Users don't care what a file is, they don't want to know what a file is, they just want to do work.
(I will admit caution when absolving users of any responsibility to learn, but generally speaking, end users have enough on their plate without having to incorporate geek-speak to do their work.)
I was in a design meeting one day discussing the appropriateness of the "FILE" menu for the application we were delivering. One of the anointed Golden Boys of the team had sketched the layout and included the "FILE" menu. I asked why we needed it, there was NO notion of "FILE" in our application, there was no notion of "SAVE FILE", etc. in our application.
He said, "cuz they expect it, it's a standard menu." I said, "standard cuz they expect it, or standard cuz it's always been there?" I finally gave up on the chicken and egg discussion, let it be resolved the end users "expect" "FILE" (NOT!).
That said, I could (and may) go through the menu selections in virtually any application and find half of the "options" are abstractions that have bubbled up either historically, or were just never "translated" for end userdom. It's a mess, and it's a presentation piece of software I am constantly explaining, and apologizing for.
It's toothpaste out of the tube, I wish it could go back in. But, it's a great lesson in humility when you actually take a lay-step back and actually try to interpret what we see as normal-speak on a daily basis. It isn't normal, and it isn't transparent.
Short answer to the poster's question: yes
Most of the crap we throw the users' way is artifact crap that never went away. (Does anyone know or remember the story about cutting away 1/3 or the Thanksgiving Ham when preparing it for Thanksgiving Dinner?)
I think the answer to your question lies within the technology itself, and the obvious answer is "yes", web pages are getting larger. Consider that:
So, yes, the web universe is "expanding" in very nearly every dimension. To your specific question, will you need to petition for more bandwidth? Undoubtedly. And, I can't imagine it isn't doable at today's rates. It sounds like a balky bureaucracy, not a question of need. Good luck.
I think maybe the better question to ask, is what has happened to the general psyche of the average employee, and how do you address it? If I had to guess (see, I'm not proving anything with this post!) I'd guess the technology has easily stepped up to the task of underpinning the network use but people still have not learned how to modulate and attenuate the siren that is the internet. (Maybe that would help decelerate your need to upgrade and expand bandwidth.)