A better bet is point-of-use heating. When my wife and I were planning the remodel of our kitchen, we decided to install an "instant hot" device to allow her to quickly and easily make tea. It's a one-gallon storage tank/heater that's located in the cupboard under the sink and has a separate faucet on the counter. It dispenses near-boiling water on demand, which means it only takes as long to make a cup of tea as it takes the tea to steep. It's also useful in a lot of other situations--when making dinners for our three year old for instance--it takes about a minute for the stove to boil the pre-heated water for macaroni and cheese:-)
While the heat loss through the pipes is negligible, it was worth it to us to install the device because it means not running water down the drain while waiting for it to get hot, and not waiting for the kettle to boil when making tea
Conversely, the aim may be to create a government-controlled network on the server-client model, where the "new," "improved" intertubes no longer provide even the slightest hint of anonymity and will incorporate inspection down to the packet level to make sure that the government "anti-terrorist" agencies get to inspect every subversive thought of the great unwashed masses.
Basically, whether you're a "big corporations are ruining America" lefty, or a "Obama is reading my email" right-winger, there's something for everyone to hate here. And just because someone has an outrageous theory about a conspiracy (on the right or left) that doesn't necessarily rule a conspiracy out.
The one Chinese-made vehicle I owned (purchased against my better judgment, I admit) was a scooter I bought new for $1200. It lasted approximately four months (~500 miles) before dying. The drum on the CVT went and not only could you not get a replacement, the old one couldn't be removed.
As much as possible, I've stopped buying made-in-China stuff, except for the occasional toys for my daughters.
Did you try the bread? The stable self life bread had just made it into MREs when I was in the Middle East (for GW 1) and I thought that was some pretty nasty stuff. Made from 70% flour, 10% water, and 20% preservatives, was how it tasted.:-)
When I was in the 82nd, we used to say that the cooks had a way to tell if the coffee was strong enough: if you can't stand a fork up in the cup, it's too weak.
I agree: if it's hot enough, you can drink some pretty terrible coffee. My theory is that the boiling water burns off your taste buds so you don't notice the awfulness so much. Of course, the Army also taught me that you can eat anything, if you put enough Tabasco on it:-)
Yes. However, since there is apparently no Chinese word for "quality" and since human lives are at stake, clearly the bottom line isn't the end-all, be-all of this proposal.
Personally, you couldn't pay me to ride in a Chinese-built car at freeway speeds, let alone fly on a Chinese rocket at escape velocity.
Maybe not, but it would surely make me think twice about whether I wanted to use this "feature" in the future. I agree that it's probably not some nefarious scheme, but losing access to important documents because of a mistake on Microsoft's part would be a big red flag for most organizations.
And it hurts one important anti-cloud argument that I've been expecting "traditional" software vendors to make--that when docs are in the cloud access is at the whim of the vendor/connectivity, whereas when they're local, as long as you have electricity you have access. So much for that.
I have the Mac version of Office ($10 through MS's HUP program if your employer is a member) and it's a lot better than OOo.
I wanted to like OOo on the Mac--I would've been only too happy to ditch that last little bit of dependency on Microsoft. I installed it first, and tried it out for a couple of months. But I'm not an Open Source ideologue/zealot so actually being able to accomplish things is of primary importance to me and I just couldn't handle OOo's slow speed and other assorted issues.
It's kind of sad, but Office on the Mac is one of Microsoft's better offerings.
No, the ribbon is bad UI design. Like a lot of the cruft put out by Microsoft--designed for the perpetual novice with little or no thought given to how it works for those already familiar with the interface. Microsoft's UI group is badly broken because of their inability got get past this issue (hiding "advanced" options, "personalizing" menus, etc.)
Fortunately, real "power users" of Word don't bother with menus, so as long as the keyboard shortcuts don't get changed (again) it's not that big of a deal. And people writing (anything of length) professionally don't use Word anyway.
But this is why professional writers don't use Word for "work"--it's fine for a memo or letter, but I've never met any half-competent writer who relies on Word for long (>200 page) documents.
I'm a writer in my day job, and I've turned down jobs (of course, in a different economic climate:-> ) where they were trying to write books with Word.
But that doesn't mean that I want to read tags or hand-edit page layout in a relatively obscure config file. There are a number of powerful, flexible WYSIWYG tools out there other than Word that allow me to write without getting caught up in the details of presentation.
Not that I'm a LyX/LaTeX hater, but there are plenty of other non-Word options out there.
Google's spam filters are the Postini filters, recalibrated with Google's data. I'm in agreement with the parent that gmail is not significantly better than the competition.
The quality of their search engine results have been reduced by people gaming the system, the transparent trick of heavily weighting wikipedia results, and the rise of aggregators. Not that others are doing much better, but a lot of that "I'm feeling lucky" mojo is gone.
Maps came from Telcontar. The street view was innovative, but the maps themselves--not so much.
I'm not a Google hater, but it's important not to look at ANY company through rose-colored glasses.
Aside from the "superpatriotic" you've just described Obama to a T.
The only question left, as far as I can tell, is will our new overlords claim to be right/fascists, or left/totalitarians. Whatever they claim, in practice I see the "traditional" left and right here in the U.S. as two sides of the same coin: power-mad politicians desperate to tell you what to do, what to say, and what to think.
No. The differences between Bing and Google are anything but minor. From research that I've done (not extensive, but enough to know what's going on) it's clear that Microsoft is tweaking the results of bing searches to provide favorable (to Microsoft) results.
For instance: search both sites for "windows security flaws" and Google's top result is: Windows Security Flaw Is 'Severe' - washingtonpost.com
Microsoft's top result? Security Fix - Microsoft Fixes 19 Windows Security Flaws...
Or you could search for "windows antitrust" and Google provides: United States v. Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bing? Competition law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Part of why Microsoft's usability is bad is because of their focus on usability "studies".
What you have to understand first is that there are three classes of users: novice users, intermediate users, and power users. Unfortunately, when you do usability testing/studies, you are presenting your interface to users who've never seen it before; i.e. these are the first group: new users. Designing your software to meet the needs of these users would be fine except that for any frequently-used software, new users quickly become intermediate users. So all that "hiding" menu items, only showing "frequently used" controls, etc, that worked so great for the novices is now getting in the way of the intermediate users. And keep in mind that if your software is at all useful, then users are going to use it, learn it, and move from the temporary novice user stage to the semi-permanent intermediate user stage fairly quickly. And most users are going to be at that intermediate stage for most of the time that they're using your interface.
Any software development process that focuses mainly on the novice user is going to create something that's not as useful to the intermediate user. This is the pitfall into which Microsoft has tumbled.
Slashdot Mirror
A better bet is point-of-use heating. When my wife and I were planning the remodel of our kitchen, we decided to install an "instant hot" device to allow her to quickly and easily make tea. It's a one-gallon storage tank/heater that's located in the cupboard under the sink and has a separate faucet on the counter. It dispenses near-boiling water on demand, which means it only takes as long to make a cup of tea as it takes the tea to steep. It's also useful in a lot of other situations--when making dinners for our three year old for instance--it takes about a minute for the stove to boil the pre-heated water for macaroni and cheese :-)
While the heat loss through the pipes is negligible, it was worth it to us to install the device because it means not running water down the drain while waiting for it to get hot, and not waiting for the kettle to boil when making tea
I don't think Linda Lovelace was anonymous...
Conversely, the aim may be to create a government-controlled network on the server-client model, where the "new," "improved" intertubes no longer provide even the slightest hint of anonymity and will incorporate inspection down to the packet level to make sure that the government "anti-terrorist" agencies get to inspect every subversive thought of the great unwashed masses.
Basically, whether you're a "big corporations are ruining America" lefty, or a "Obama is reading my email" right-winger, there's something for everyone to hate here. And just because someone has an outrageous theory about a conspiracy (on the right or left) that doesn't necessarily rule a conspiracy out.
The easy kind?
Hmmm.
The one Chinese-made vehicle I owned (purchased against my better judgment, I admit) was a scooter I bought new for $1200. It lasted approximately four months (~500 miles) before dying. The drum on the CVT went and not only could you not get a replacement, the old one couldn't be removed.
As much as possible, I've stopped buying made-in-China stuff, except for the occasional toys for my daughters.
Did you try the bread? The stable self life bread had just made it into MREs when I was in the Middle East (for GW 1) and I thought that was some pretty nasty stuff. Made from 70% flour, 10% water, and 20% preservatives, was how it tasted. :-)
When I was in the 82nd, we used to say that the cooks had a way to tell if the coffee was strong enough: if you can't stand a fork up in the cup, it's too weak.
I agree: if it's hot enough, you can drink some pretty terrible coffee. My theory is that the boiling water burns off your taste buds so you don't notice the awfulness so much. Of course, the Army also taught me that you can eat anything, if you put enough Tabasco on it :-)
Yes. However, since there is apparently no Chinese word for "quality" and since human lives are at stake, clearly the bottom line isn't the end-all, be-all of this proposal.
Personally, you couldn't pay me to ride in a Chinese-built car at freeway speeds, let alone fly on a Chinese rocket at escape velocity.
Maybe not, but it would surely make me think twice about whether I wanted to use this "feature" in the future. I agree that it's probably not some nefarious scheme, but losing access to important documents because of a mistake on Microsoft's part would be a big red flag for most organizations.
And it hurts one important anti-cloud argument that I've been expecting "traditional" software vendors to make--that when docs are in the cloud access is at the whim of the vendor/connectivity, whereas when they're local, as long as you have electricity you have access. So much for that.
I have the Mac version of Office ($10 through MS's HUP program if your employer is a member) and it's a lot better than OOo.
I wanted to like OOo on the Mac--I would've been only too happy to ditch that last little bit of dependency on Microsoft. I installed it first, and tried it out for a couple of months. But I'm not an Open Source ideologue/zealot so actually being able to accomplish things is of primary importance to me and I just couldn't handle OOo's slow speed and other assorted issues.
It's kind of sad, but Office on the Mac is one of Microsoft's better offerings.
No, the ribbon is bad UI design. Like a lot of the cruft put out by Microsoft--designed for the perpetual novice with little or no thought given to how it works for those already familiar with the interface. Microsoft's UI group is badly broken because of their inability got get past this issue (hiding "advanced" options, "personalizing" menus, etc.)
Fortunately, real "power users" of Word don't bother with menus, so as long as the keyboard shortcuts don't get changed (again) it's not that big of a deal. And people writing (anything of length) professionally don't use Word anyway.
But this is why professional writers don't use Word for "work"--it's fine for a memo or letter, but I've never met any half-competent writer who relies on Word for long (>200 page) documents.
I'm a writer in my day job, and I've turned down jobs (of course, in a different economic climate :-> ) where they were trying to write books with Word.
But that doesn't mean that I want to read tags or hand-edit page layout in a relatively obscure config file. There are a number of powerful, flexible WYSIWYG tools out there other than Word that allow me to write without getting caught up in the details of presentation.
Not that I'm a LyX/LaTeX hater, but there are plenty of other non-Word options out there.
Microsoft does not write all of its code itself but sometimes misappropriates GLP code for specific tool[s]...
FTFY
On a site like /. it's assumed that "editors" should always be in quotes
Google's spam filters are the Postini filters, recalibrated with Google's data. I'm in agreement with the parent that gmail is not significantly better than the competition.
The quality of their search engine results have been reduced by people gaming the system, the transparent trick of heavily weighting wikipedia results, and the rise of aggregators. Not that others are doing much better, but a lot of that "I'm feeling lucky" mojo is gone.
Maps came from Telcontar. The street view was innovative, but the maps themselves--not so much.
I'm not a Google hater, but it's important not to look at ANY company through rose-colored glasses.
Aside from the "superpatriotic" you've just described Obama to a T.
The only question left, as far as I can tell, is will our new overlords claim to be right/fascists, or left/totalitarians. Whatever they claim, in practice I see the "traditional" left and right here in the U.S. as two sides of the same coin: power-mad politicians desperate to tell you what to do, what to say, and what to think.
We've always been at war with Eastasia
No. The differences between Bing and Google are anything but minor. From research that I've done (not extensive, but enough to know what's going on) it's clear that Microsoft is tweaking the results of bing searches to provide favorable (to Microsoft) results.
For instance: search both sites for "windows security flaws" and Google's top result is:
Windows Security Flaw Is 'Severe' - washingtonpost.com
Microsoft's top result? ...
Security Fix - Microsoft Fixes 19 Windows Security Flaws
Or you could search for "windows antitrust" and Google provides:
United States v. Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bing?
Competition law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Part of why Microsoft's usability is bad is because of their focus on usability "studies".
What you have to understand first is that there are three classes of users: novice users, intermediate users, and power users. Unfortunately, when you do usability testing/studies, you are presenting your interface to users who've never seen it before; i.e. these are the first group: new users. Designing your software to meet the needs of these users would be fine except that for any frequently-used software, new users quickly become intermediate users. So all that "hiding" menu items, only showing "frequently used" controls, etc, that worked so great for the novices is now getting in the way of the intermediate users. And keep in mind that if your software is at all useful, then users are going to use it, learn it, and move from the temporary novice user stage to the semi-permanent intermediate user stage fairly quickly. And most users are going to be at that intermediate stage for most of the time that they're using your interface.
Any software development process that focuses mainly on the novice user is going to create something that's not as useful to the intermediate user. This is the pitfall into which Microsoft has tumbled.
Usability studies have shown that hiding options is a Bad Thing© Users tend to remember items in menus by location, not by name. For instance, the "Save" item is in the first menu, about a third of the way down. Moving items around (by "hiding" less-used or currently unavailable ones) goes against the way that most users locate them.
At 5m/s, that's a lot of Celine Dion < shudder >
Dude--your explanation sounds WAY too much like the Catholic church's explanation of transubstantiation.
You should read Martin Greenberg's Freedom (link to sample chapters at the Baen free library)
It contains a number of excellent Sci Fi short stories about the absence of government.
I think "yourtaxdollarsatrest" would be more accurate
"wonton" participation? Some kind of Chinese fast-food deal with the Bush administration?
< waves hand > This is not the dupe you're looking for