You raise an interesting (i.e., good) point about the "silly" six to eight keys and your requirement they be universally available for any OS you'd consider. I've seen movement, albeit grudging, in the linux desktop in that direction. And, I agree it is a necessary piece of an enviroment for Windows users if they were to consider moving to some alternative. I guess if that's where the "standards" are, so be it. I would settle for a second-best compromise allowing me to define my keyboard shortcuts.
I don't want to be the pot calling the kettle black since I am a huge fan and user of "vi", and I love the keyboard control for vi while many (many, many) rail mightily at the vi paradigm (I still think vi is one of the greatest tools ever "invented"). Sigh.
Pretty easy.... not intuitive... and, if they were the only keyboard shortcuts.... but it gets REALLY messy beyond those (C, X, and V....) (and btw, isn't an insertion point more like a caret?).... what about CTL-Z? And , heck let's go into the bizarre world of the MS shortcuts like ALT-F4, etc. It's whack -- so whack they're virtually unknown and unused.... (ask Mom, Dad, Sister.... not fellow/.'ers)
I'm happy for the authors and the glowing review of their work, but I continue to wonder that "production" apps be written with that tool (but then, I wonder about VB apps, too). Amazing apps can be written using Excel (I know, I've written some, but only for me) but I think there is a danger in granting spreadsheets the imprimatur of "production". Not because Excel isn't up to the task but more because of the casual treatment of the world of spreadsheets in IT. I don't believe I've ever seen project management and version control around spreadsheets though both are possible. Also, the level of sophistication to create these applications introduces another problem (in my opinion...): the sophistication required is far beyond the typical Excel user and/or spreadsheet creator (in my anecdotal experiences), and the allure of Excel as a real programming tool is non-existent for the typical IT person... leaving Excel in an interesting netherland.
Oh man, oh man, I hate to do this... (we're gonna slashdot these guys...), but maybe Microsoft really wants the link to their new Windows "preview" to be this.
Yes, part of my official policy is to NOT die! (No disrespect intended at your friend... that must have been difficult...)
Seriously, I don't like to get into "locked down" environments... they feel unhealthy to me. Sure there has to be some security, but I like to maintain a pretty open shop. Basically I find it useful to maintain security that allows users to easily do their work with minimal intrusion, and enough security to prevent them from doing damage to themselves. Unfortunately this model is not sufficient for most... (though I think it could be).
I'd say Open Source has an impressive track record for powerful software, and an abysmal one for polished software. I use and like a lot of OSS, including the stuff you mention, but seldom recommend it to non-geeks. I like power, they demand polish.
So, it depends upon what I meant by "quality".... you make a good distinction: power vs. polish. I try to make a qualified recommendation based on the needs of my "clients". Some need power and are willing to work through the rough edges to harness that power. Others really need the polish for their confidence in the product. Others want both.
As for your "reflex" action regarding CTL-C... I empathize. So far it's not a reflex I've developed though I admit to using it at times. I still feel the CTL-C CTL-V (don't EVEN get me started about CTL-Z) metaphor is a shining example of metaphorical non-sequitor... I never "got it", never will.... (okay, okay... I can get some purchase with the CTL-C meaning copy.... C, copy, C, copy.... I GET it!).... Also calming down now.
It's probably one of the things I MOST don't get about Microsoft. For all of the money they can throw at things they sure don't seem to end up with huge quality return on investment. For me it's evidence of one of two things (I'm sure there's more to consider...): Either 1) You can't solve quality issues by throwing money at them, or, 2) Microsoft doesn't put enough money and/or effort into solving their quality issues. (I suspect a bit of the latter since their responsibility, Gates' and Ballmer's disclaimers aside, is to the share holders and if Microsoft can continue to rake in the profits with marginally competitive technology so much the better....)
I think eventually (as I've posted many times in my somewhat anti-Microsoft bent) the frustration of the consumers coupled with the continued resentment of the IT community will be the downfall of Microsoft. However that downfall won't come for a very long time considering how embedded Microsoft is in the entirety of our technology universe.
To me this pretty much looks like Microsoft ran the screenshots up the
metaphoric flagpole and didn't like the salutes. Instead of spinning it as
beta (which we in the IT community have come to understand, if not respect)
and appropriately rough-edged, Microsoft apparently has decided to take the
low road and is going to hold its breath until it turns blue (irony). Too
bad, the images do suck, but I think Microsoft in its eagerness to prove
"me too" for having a cool new OS stumbled mightily this time. Fortunately,
having $50B petty cash makes recovery from these inconveniences convenient.
Can you video conference between a Mac and Windows PC using gaim yet?
I don't know, but that's mostly because I didn't/wouldn't video conference using the AOL client -- not really interested. Before I make any recommendations for alternatives, I make sure all of the features of the original are available for the replacement (as in, all of the features used by the user). So, I don't know if gaim offers the video, but I always make sure my "clients" are happy with their alternative software. So far, no complaints.
Pretty much exactly my point. Technology is what I do for a living, so not only do I "do" linux even when it pisses me off, I consider it part of my job, even when I'm not on the clock. I do think today linux is close to being a viable candidate for more savvy and adventurous users. Certainly it is more stable (for me) and offers myriad options. Most Windows users don't want that (options) but I've found once users have gotten in deep enough with linux (at least above their balls) they readily take the plunge and even enjoy their new world.
A reasonable compromise is to offer to set up someone with a dual boot machine and show them how to boot to whatever system is NOT the default. Then let them play with linux at their leisure.
(For those who don't realize the progress linux has made, understand that when I was "your age", I had to install linux by hand with more than 70 floppy disks! And it took hours! (And, I had to do it barefoot, in the snow, and uphill!))
I don't recommend Open Source software unless I think it's good software.
That said, Open Source has an impressive track record for quality software
when compared head to head with commercial software. (I couldn't IMAGINE
using any of the standalone IM clients when I look at what gaim
offers both in functionality and in ease of use.)
Especially in the last few years Open Source software has made great
strides (Firefox, OpenOffice, Gimp, Gaim). Still, while I'm a great fan and advocate of linux, I keep my Open
Source recommendations safely in the Windows realm... not what I'd like, but
people are definitely reluctant to learn a new "system", and I do enough
support without having to be the ONLY linux person they know to go to.
(While I still have to field LOTS of Windows questions from friends and
family, at least they have other people they go to when they can't find me.)
But, finally, in the Windows world there are many great Open Source
options and I've found people quite receptive. For example, again and again
I get thanks from converted Firefox users -- which is nice (though I cringe
at the thought of Microsoft finally responding with IE7 and features stolen
to match Firefox).
Bottom line: having learned from experience I only recommend Open Source
alternatives when I'm completely confident the alternative will be:
easy to use.
99% otherly world compatible.
free.
fast.
reliable.
For myself, I try to use Open Source alternatives whenever
possible, but for the unwashed masses the above criteria apply.
How is THAT more secure??? I once spent half a day tracking down a totally bizarre printing behavior/bug that turned out to be a LAN where machines had multiple firewalls running. Multiple firewalls can be more trouble than one well configured firewall.
I worked for a place that the customer service people typically used more than 30 (I am not making this up) different systems. And the passwords and rules were amazing, different, obtuse, and really fscked up. The claim was this provided maximum security. My experience out on the "floor" when visiting these clients (we did software for them) was either:
spiral bound notebooks with matrices for the systems and passwords for easy access.
yellow stickies on the sides of monitors with systems and passwords.
yellow stickies or notebooks in drawers....
NOTE: all of these practices were against company policy..... but rendered the rep's jobs undoable without the "aids". So much for security to a paranoid level.
..., No one else, not even my wife, knows my network password....,
... is about the only part of his screed that could make sense
to me. Not because one should not divulge a password to one's wife, but
because keeping passwords entirely private is good policy. Almost
everything else about his life strikes me as goofy. If you read any of the
"hacker" books, hacking and gaining access to people's stuff isn't about
cracking passwords, it's about social engineering and dishonest behavior,
most of which the author's behaviors won't prevent. But, if it makes him
feel better.... (I wouldn't want to live on his network.)
I worked at a large company and called the administrator of their unix mainframe and complained that/usr/bin and/bin both didn't even have execute privelege so I couldn't even see what commands existed. The administrator dressed me down and explained they did that for security reasons so people couldn't hack in. He went on to tell me about the giant breach on that system from outside hackers and hence, the very tight "security". I gently reminded him the "breach" actually occurred with those very same directory permissions.... and they didn't prevent the hack. Sigh...
I'm willing to bet if you had a room full of 100 programmers and told them they needed to write orthogonal functions you'd get a bunch of blank stares, and some snickering too. WTF is an orthogonal function?, and, should they be orthogonal AND normalized? LOL, when programmers start acquiring mathematical hubris we're in trouble. (I've orthogonalized and normalized n-space vectors, and systems, but the abstraction for functions seems odd, and high-browed.)
Why the heck do WE have to jump through these hoops. "Sign this form promising us you're going to the kitchen to continue listening to this song and in fact are NOT leaving it playing in the living room for guests, too"... What a load, what a burden, what onus, what nerve!, to foist all these promises of earnesty from paying customers.
I still believe this world of drm eventually will so frustrate customers both by angering and also by confusing them the entire paradigm will collapse and the billions the "industry" people hoped to add to their already bloated coffers will evaporate.
As many others have shown in posts, I too have never and will never buy a drm medium ever ever ever. Fsck 'em.
That type of logic applies to any data error rippling through any data system... not only spreadsheets. The problem in my opinion isn't the fallibility of spreadsheets, it's the misconception that anyone can "handle" them.
I never ceased to be amazed at "projects" handed to me from which the management of the assets, funding, etc. were all contained in a spreadsheet, typically in that person's "Documents and Settings" directory somewhere (the "My [insert the item du jour here]" sometimes, sometimes not.
And the spreadsheet often as not was written by someone not familiar with how spreadsheets worked, and were not of programming ilk.
Once (and I'm NOT making this up) I watched as one of the afore-referenced changed a value in a cell, added the values of a small range and entered that number in a "totals" cell. Said person was very surprised when shown the "sum" function.
And this was an incident in a very large corporation... with lots o' money at stake. I was never very popular for taking my stance, but I would always refuse to allow any spreadsheets be a part of my projects for managing info.... (and don't EVEN get me started about using spreadsheets for documentation... )
Dim-witted: I just don't remember where I put that file. I guess I'll have to look in every folder for it.
Not every file being looked for was created by the person looking for it. I've found myself frustrated by this many times, and have been left with no option BUT to search every folder.
...Computer Illiterate: When I click File>Save I just click OK when the dialog pops up....
I do this.... I've gotten so used to having applications configured myself sometimes I use an application that I either forgot to configure, or one that doesn't have an option to configure (so I have to navigate each time to a "standard" place -- don't laugh, lots of these apps still exist, and you don't always get alternative choices...).
...Poor Organizer: I just save everything into My Documents.
If this were a crime, 90 percent of the population would be brought up on charges. It's hard enough to organize stuff you understand with technology you understand.... But try organizing when you're using tools you barely understand with tools noone understands that create files in "standard" places noone knows about!
If corporations would train users how to use and organize their files....
Training?!? What's that?
Seriously, if there weren't a need for retrieval tools, they wouldn't be getting created. On the other hand what I find most fascinating about the original article was Allchin's concession at all about the non-productivity. That "admitted" non-productivity in my opinion is largely contributed to and exacerbated by the amazingly bad paradigm put together by Microsoft for directory structure, organization, and permissions.... "Documents and Settings"????? What the heck it that????
(The one time I'd wished for Microsoft to copy unix with a fairly standard notion of something like "/home/login", but, noooooooo.)
Yeah, pretty amazing, huh? And this coming as a quote from Jim Allchin of Microsoft quoting a Microsoft study! This is pretty scary stuff considering their past claims of how the world of computers would improve productivity and everything else..... I agree, for many paper and a filing cabinet is probably easier and more efficient.
Speaking of past promises still to be delivered.... does ANYONE remember Mr. Gates in a 1999 keynote speech saying (paraphrased... sorry, don't have 20% of my time available to search for the exact quote).... "In a year (or two) people will be interacting and working with their computers by talking to them".... Hmmmmmmmmm.
For those who don't read beyond the end of TFA... a great quote (with
attribution): First, from TFA a quote from Allchin re the current state of
affairs in XP vs. what Longhorn "will" deliver: Allchin: Microsoft's
research shows that the average corporate employee spends about 20%
of her time on the PC simply looking for items. Then, the comment from
a reader: Rod Shuffler 04/22 10:55
An interesting article. Does that 20% non-productivity figure that Allchin
quotes get factored into TCO arguments?
Slashdot Mirror
You raise an interesting (i.e., good) point about the "silly" six to eight keys and your requirement they be universally available for any OS you'd consider. I've seen movement, albeit grudging, in the linux desktop in that direction. And, I agree it is a necessary piece of an enviroment for Windows users if they were to consider moving to some alternative. I guess if that's where the "standards" are, so be it. I would settle for a second-best compromise allowing me to define my keyboard shortcuts.
I don't want to be the pot calling the kettle black since I am a huge fan and user of "vi", and I love the keyboard control for vi while many (many, many) rail mightily at the vi paradigm (I still think vi is one of the greatest tools ever "invented"). Sigh.
What is this "keep ass" you refer to? Is this popular among models?
Pretty easy.... not intuitive... and, if they were the only keyboard shortcuts.... but it gets REALLY messy beyond those (C, X, and V....) (and btw, isn't an insertion point more like a caret?).... what about CTL-Z? And , heck let's go into the bizarre world of the MS shortcuts like ALT-F4, etc. It's whack -- so whack they're virtually unknown and unused.... (ask Mom, Dad, Sister.... not fellow /.'ers)
I'm happy for the authors and the glowing review of their work, but I continue to wonder that "production" apps be written with that tool (but then, I wonder about VB apps, too). Amazing apps can be written using Excel (I know, I've written some, but only for me) but I think there is a danger in granting spreadsheets the imprimatur of "production". Not because Excel isn't up to the task but more because of the casual treatment of the world of spreadsheets in IT. I don't believe I've ever seen project management and version control around spreadsheets though both are possible. Also, the level of sophistication to create these applications introduces another problem (in my opinion...): the sophistication required is far beyond the typical Excel user and/or spreadsheet creator (in my anecdotal experiences), and the allure of Excel as a real programming tool is non-existent for the typical IT person... leaving Excel in an interesting netherland.
Oh man, oh man, I hate to do this... (we're gonna slashdot these guys...), but maybe Microsoft really wants the link to their new Windows "preview" to be this.
Seriously, I don't like to get into "locked down" environments... they feel unhealthy to me. Sure there has to be some security, but I like to maintain a pretty open shop. Basically I find it useful to maintain security that allows users to easily do their work with minimal intrusion, and enough security to prevent them from doing damage to themselves. Unfortunately this model is not sufficient for most... (though I think it could be).
I'd say Open Source has an impressive track record for powerful software, and an abysmal one for polished software. I use and like a lot of OSS, including the stuff you mention, but seldom recommend it to non-geeks. I like power, they demand polish.
So, it depends upon what I meant by "quality".... you make a good distinction: power vs. polish. I try to make a qualified recommendation based on the needs of my "clients". Some need power and are willing to work through the rough edges to harness that power. Others really need the polish for their confidence in the product. Others want both.
As for your "reflex" action regarding CTL-C... I empathize. So far it's not a reflex I've developed though I admit to using it at times. I still feel the CTL-C CTL-V (don't EVEN get me started about CTL-Z) metaphor is a shining example of metaphorical non-sequitor... I never "got it", never will.... (okay, okay... I can get some purchase with the CTL-C meaning copy.... C, copy, C, copy.... I GET it!).... Also calming down now.
lol
It's probably one of the things I MOST don't get about Microsoft. For all of the money they can throw at things they sure don't seem to end up with huge quality return on investment. For me it's evidence of one of two things (I'm sure there's more to consider...): Either 1) You can't solve quality issues by throwing money at them, or, 2) Microsoft doesn't put enough money and/or effort into solving their quality issues. (I suspect a bit of the latter since their responsibility, Gates' and Ballmer's disclaimers aside, is to the share holders and if Microsoft can continue to rake in the profits with marginally competitive technology so much the better....)
I think eventually (as I've posted many times in my somewhat anti-Microsoft bent) the frustration of the consumers coupled with the continued resentment of the IT community will be the downfall of Microsoft. However that downfall won't come for a very long time considering how embedded Microsoft is in the entirety of our technology universe.
Yeah, whatever.... just how DO they get by with that kind of money?!?
To me this pretty much looks like Microsoft ran the screenshots up the metaphoric flagpole and didn't like the salutes. Instead of spinning it as beta (which we in the IT community have come to understand, if not respect) and appropriately rough-edged, Microsoft apparently has decided to take the low road and is going to hold its breath until it turns blue (irony). Too bad, the images do suck, but I think Microsoft in its eagerness to prove "me too" for having a cool new OS stumbled mightily this time. Fortunately, having $50B petty cash makes recovery from these inconveniences convenient.
Can you video conference between a Mac and Windows PC using gaim yet?
I don't know, but that's mostly because I didn't/wouldn't video conference using the AOL client -- not really interested. Before I make any recommendations for alternatives, I make sure all of the features of the original are available for the replacement (as in, all of the features used by the user). So, I don't know if gaim offers the video, but I always make sure my "clients" are happy with their alternative software. So far, no complaints.
(You make a very good point!)
Pretty much exactly my point. Technology is what I do for a living, so not only do I "do" linux even when it pisses me off, I consider it part of my job, even when I'm not on the clock. I do think today linux is close to being a viable candidate for more savvy and adventurous users. Certainly it is more stable (for me) and offers myriad options. Most Windows users don't want that (options) but I've found once users have gotten in deep enough with linux (at least above their balls) they readily take the plunge and even enjoy their new world.
A reasonable compromise is to offer to set up someone with a dual boot machine and show them how to boot to whatever system is NOT the default. Then let them play with linux at their leisure.
(For those who don't realize the progress linux has made, understand that when I was "your age", I had to install linux by hand with more than 70 floppy disks! And it took hours! (And, I had to do it barefoot, in the snow, and uphill!))
I don't recommend Open Source software unless I think it's good software. That said, Open Source has an impressive track record for quality software when compared head to head with commercial software. (I couldn't IMAGINE using any of the standalone IM clients when I look at what gaim offers both in functionality and in ease of use.)
Especially in the last few years Open Source software has made great strides (Firefox, OpenOffice, Gimp, Gaim). Still, while I'm a great fan and advocate of linux, I keep my Open Source recommendations safely in the Windows realm... not what I'd like, but people are definitely reluctant to learn a new "system", and I do enough support without having to be the ONLY linux person they know to go to. (While I still have to field LOTS of Windows questions from friends and family, at least they have other people they go to when they can't find me.)
But, finally, in the Windows world there are many great Open Source options and I've found people quite receptive. For example, again and again I get thanks from converted Firefox users -- which is nice (though I cringe at the thought of Microsoft finally responding with IE7 and features stolen to match Firefox).
Bottom line: having learned from experience I only recommend Open Source alternatives when I'm completely confident the alternative will be:
For myself, I try to use Open Source alternatives whenever possible, but for the unwashed masses the above criteria apply.
How is THAT more secure??? I once spent half a day tracking down a totally bizarre printing behavior/bug that turned out to be a LAN where machines had multiple firewalls running. Multiple firewalls can be more trouble than one well configured firewall.
NOTE: all of these practices were against company policy..... but rendered the rep's jobs undoable without the "aids". So much for security to a paranoid level.
... is about the only part of his screed that could make sense to me. Not because one should not divulge a password to one's wife, but because keeping passwords entirely private is good policy. Almost everything else about his life strikes me as goofy. If you read any of the "hacker" books, hacking and gaining access to people's stuff isn't about cracking passwords, it's about social engineering and dishonest behavior, most of which the author's behaviors won't prevent. But, if it makes him feel better.... (I wouldn't want to live on his network.)
I worked at a large company and called the administrator of their unix mainframe and complained that /usr/bin and /bin both didn't even have execute privelege so I couldn't even see what commands existed. The administrator dressed me down and explained they did that for security reasons so people couldn't hack in. He went on to tell me about the giant breach on that system from outside hackers and hence, the very tight "security". I gently reminded him the "breach" actually occurred with those very same directory permissions.... and they didn't prevent the hack. Sigh...
I'm willing to bet if you had a room full of 100 programmers and told them they needed to write orthogonal functions you'd get a bunch of blank stares, and some snickering too. WTF is an orthogonal function?, and, should they be orthogonal AND normalized? LOL, when programmers start acquiring mathematical hubris we're in trouble. (I've orthogonalized and normalized n-space vectors, and systems, but the abstraction for functions seems odd, and high-browed.)
Why the heck do WE have to jump through these hoops. "Sign this form promising us you're going to the kitchen to continue listening to this song and in fact are NOT leaving it playing in the living room for guests, too"... What a load, what a burden, what onus, what nerve!, to foist all these promises of earnesty from paying customers.
I still believe this world of drm eventually will so frustrate customers both by angering and also by confusing them the entire paradigm will collapse and the billions the "industry" people hoped to add to their already bloated coffers will evaporate.
As many others have shown in posts, I too have never and will never buy a drm medium ever ever ever. Fsck 'em.
And how were these data collected?, and the conclusions therein derived?
A spreadsheet, perhaps?
That type of logic applies to any data error rippling through any data system... not only spreadsheets. The problem in my opinion isn't the fallibility of spreadsheets, it's the misconception that anyone can "handle" them.
I never ceased to be amazed at "projects" handed to me from which the management of the assets, funding, etc. were all contained in a spreadsheet, typically in that person's "Documents and Settings" directory somewhere (the "My [insert the item du jour here]" sometimes, sometimes not.
And the spreadsheet often as not was written by someone not familiar with how spreadsheets worked, and were not of programming ilk.
Once (and I'm NOT making this up) I watched as one of the afore-referenced changed a value in a cell, added the values of a small range and entered that number in a "totals" cell. Said person was very surprised when shown the "sum" function.
And this was an incident in a very large corporation... with lots o' money at stake. I was never very popular for taking my stance, but I would always refuse to allow any spreadsheets be a part of my projects for managing info.... (and don't EVEN get me started about using spreadsheets for documentation... )
Not every file being looked for was created by the person looking for it. I've found myself frustrated by this many times, and have been left with no option BUT to search every folder.
I do this.... I've gotten so used to having applications configured myself sometimes I use an application that I either forgot to configure, or one that doesn't have an option to configure (so I have to navigate each time to a "standard" place -- don't laugh, lots of these apps still exist, and you don't always get alternative choices...).
If this were a crime, 90 percent of the population would be brought up on charges. It's hard enough to organize stuff you understand with technology you understand.... But try organizing when you're using tools you barely understand with tools noone understands that create files in "standard" places noone knows about!
If corporations would train users how to use and organize their files....
Training?!? What's that?
Seriously, if there weren't a need for retrieval tools, they wouldn't be getting created. On the other hand what I find most fascinating about the original article was Allchin's concession at all about the non-productivity. That "admitted" non-productivity in my opinion is largely contributed to and exacerbated by the amazingly bad paradigm put together by Microsoft for directory structure, organization, and permissions.... "Documents and Settings"????? What the heck it that???? (The one time I'd wished for Microsoft to copy unix with a fairly standard notion of something like "/home/login", but, noooooooo.)
Speaking of past promises still to be delivered.... does ANYONE remember Mr. Gates in a 1999 keynote speech saying (paraphrased... sorry, don't have 20% of my time available to search for the exact quote).... "In a year (or two) people will be interacting and working with their computers by talking to them".... Hmmmmmmmmm.
$ ln -s /foo/bar/say_it_aint_so ~/say_it_aint_so
For those who don't read beyond the end of TFA... a great quote (with attribution): First, from TFA a quote from Allchin re the current state of affairs in XP vs. what Longhorn "will" deliver: Allchin: Microsoft's research shows that the average corporate employee spends about 20% of her time on the PC simply looking for items. Then, the comment from a reader: Rod Shuffler 04/22 10:55 An interesting article. Does that 20% non-productivity figure that Allchin quotes get factored into TCO arguments?