I understand what it's all about, and sure, I can turn off styles and that. I'm not discounting the -usefulness- of these things, I'm more aggrevated at the sites that overuse it or all the hype about it. I certainly don't mind a site with "web 2.0" here and there sparingly, or if it's put to especially good use, but alot of these websites are following the same trend. Gradients, dragging of everything, colors, layouts, and it's beta. Everything is beta.
I must be the only person under the age of 25 who hates the advent of all this "Web 2.0" Ajax stuff. I grew up around computers despite being young now, even as a small child, and they were more of a tinkering toy than a game machine or a tool to get on the internet in the mid-90's. I witnessed the rise and fall of the first internet wave, I played with alot of technologies when they were brand new, laughed at the stupidity of those who waited out in line to get Windows 95. Even the browser wars, but I digress, because I guess these things aren't important.
I suppose the meaning of this comment is that the ugly webpages and first gigantic annoying ads, and Cnet's pages, all that, were just plain old HTML (mostly). Why can't we go back to that? Just content, no neat looking flash, no CSS layouts that are manipulated just so, that when you scroll the page the colors kinda change. Provided these "technologies" are useful and they themselves aren't bad (maybe except flash), but their media overrated-ness and even their usability aggrevates me. Every time I go onto one of these new Web 2.0 sites it's like making yourself at home in a Windows install. Overwhelming, too many things to click. I guess I'm just old-fashioned and bitter. Or I want my scrolling marquees back.
The thing is, is that while -you- might want to be on the mailing list, why isn't AOL allowed to assume that your subscription is in the name of a disease that could easily be used as a subject medium for an email scam? It's a machine reading your mail, not them, so they can just make a broad generalization and throw in a generic string on the filter machines until the organization -does- pay.
We make a gigantic TOKEN RING! And we can all sit around a campfire with our computers and sing songs and eat hotdogs from a stick in front of their headquarters'. That'll teach the providers, we'll hippy our asses out to them until they're too grossed out by the smell of our unwashed bodies and computers to care about tiered internets.
Well, the fact that they're forcing third parties to sell their software with machines preinstalled, (well, maybe not forcing, but still, there's strong-arming going on) And the shitty interoperability is elements of a monopoly.
I don't know about you, but if it walks like a duck..
By all means a pretty site does not mean a good site, there's obviously great content you can find on minimalistic or ass-ugly pages- but is it just me or does for a site preaching the benefits of ajax, it's really disgusting-looking?
I couldn't seem to find it.. is Microsoft doing a standalone distributable update (like for the flaw that took out some news networks) for large amounts of computers? A link would be helpful if someone had it.
Every UI that is new to a person requires a bit of patience and education.. sure, the options might not be readily available to you (or available at all, in a more unfortunate case) but isn't it a little wise to try and understand not every OS runs -exactly- the same? I mean, look at all the windows converts going to OS X for the first time and having to get used to two effective taskbars to work. Some may find it inefficient and go back, which is unfortunate. Those that are more sensible will learn to get around it on their own or make the best of it.
I mean, the way you describe how window focusing works for you? Personally doesn't work out for me. But if I was by some miracle using your computer, I'd get used to it, griping about it aside.
You used a NeXT machine? You're so lucky.. (seriously, my dad was teaching me batch files when I was a kid, not opening my eyes to stuff more advanced than DOS 5)
There'll always be the option for trying another desktop environment in lieu of another or creating/altering the program to suit our tastes. But that doesn't change the fact that unless we really want to go out of our way to handle the latter, (or just not upgrading), the problems that face us in the "light" of "new features" that are really just hack-outs of things that aren't functional to mom and dad.
Hell, even Windows has an "Advanced" button or tab in most of its own settings, and you know how Windows is regarded here.
It seems to be moving in this direction for almost all GTK+ apps (except maybe the Gimp?) including Gnome. *Dons tinfoil armor* I love Gnome, don't get me wrong, but GTK+ and Gnome-offshoot apps are taking a dive towards "Gramma and grampa" users. I'd love to see in the future, these developers adding an option for more options, for those of us who know what we're doing.
That and an option to remove the status crap on this version of Gaim's buddy list. Who the hell thought that up? I remember when because of all these options they took away, I could make Gaim as thin or bloated as I wanted..
Is it just me, or did they oversimplify everything? I know they're trying to go in a new direction with this version of Gaim but jeez, all the options became so sugar-coated that I no longer feel like I'm being treated like a newbie at the program, I'm feeling like grandma.
Where are all of my options?
Now I see what Linus was talking about, though Gaim isn't static to Gnome..
I submitted ONE article in my usership here, and they edited the small amounts of wit in the body (I didn't leave out any of the details, for those ready to criticize). So the/. editors DO edit, they only actually edit when they feel they need to say something over your voice.
Is it just me, or does this sound like an underhanded attempt to try and make sure Massachusetts doesn't happen all over again? They might open the format, but that still doesn't mean people won't fork over the large sum of money for Office.
Slashdot Mirror
Congratulations, you win! That's the first funny comment about my sig I've seen.
You win a copy of previously mentioned game "Duke Nukem" (probably "Forever") when released.
...Duke.. Nukem..?
My father was a virgin, you insensitive clod!
I understand what it's all about, and sure, I can turn off styles and that. I'm not discounting the -usefulness- of these things, I'm more aggrevated at the sites that overuse it or all the hype about it. I certainly don't mind a site with "web 2.0" here and there sparingly, or if it's put to especially good use, but alot of these websites are following the same trend. Gradients, dragging of everything, colors, layouts, and it's beta. Everything is beta.
I must be the only person under the age of 25 who hates the advent of all this "Web 2.0" Ajax stuff. I grew up around computers despite being young now, even as a small child, and they were more of a tinkering toy than a game machine or a tool to get on the internet in the mid-90's. I witnessed the rise and fall of the first internet wave, I played with alot of technologies when they were brand new, laughed at the stupidity of those who waited out in line to get Windows 95. Even the browser wars, but I digress, because I guess these things aren't important.
I suppose the meaning of this comment is that the ugly webpages and first gigantic annoying ads, and Cnet's pages, all that, were just plain old HTML (mostly). Why can't we go back to that? Just content, no neat looking flash, no CSS layouts that are manipulated just so, that when you scroll the page the colors kinda change. Provided these "technologies" are useful and they themselves aren't bad (maybe except flash), but their media overrated-ness and even their usability aggrevates me. Every time I go onto one of these new Web 2.0 sites it's like making yourself at home in a Windows install. Overwhelming, too many things to click. I guess I'm just old-fashioned and bitter. Or I want my scrolling marquees back.
I didn't know Real Networks had in on this project.
The thing is, is that while -you- might want to be on the mailing list, why isn't AOL allowed to assume that your subscription is in the name of a disease that could easily be used as a subject medium for an email scam? It's a machine reading your mail, not them, so they can just make a broad generalization and throw in a generic string on the filter machines until the organization -does- pay.
Not that it matters though, it is AOL after all.
We make a gigantic TOKEN RING! And we can all sit around a campfire with our computers and sing songs and eat hotdogs from a stick in front of their headquarters'. That'll teach the providers, we'll hippy our asses out to them until they're too grossed out by the smell of our unwashed bodies and computers to care about tiered internets.
Noone spits on Apple for doing it. Not trying to flame, trying to make a point.
Bambi 2: Bambi Returns (starring Michael Keaton)
I could be spiteful, but I won't. Nice job being a clod because you don't find my humor funny.
"pres butan, receev degree"
Well, the fact that they're forcing third parties to sell their software with machines preinstalled, (well, maybe not forcing, but still, there's strong-arming going on) And the shitty interoperability is elements of a monopoly.
I don't know about you, but if it walks like a duck..
By all means a pretty site does not mean a good site, there's obviously great content you can find on minimalistic or ass-ugly pages- but is it just me or does for a site preaching the benefits of ajax, it's really disgusting-looking?
I'd like an invite if you have one.
I couldn't seem to find it.. is Microsoft doing a standalone distributable update (like for the flaw that took out some news networks) for large amounts of computers? A link would be helpful if someone had it.
Every UI that is new to a person requires a bit of patience and education.. sure, the options might not be readily available to you (or available at all, in a more unfortunate case) but isn't it a little wise to try and understand not every OS runs -exactly- the same? I mean, look at all the windows converts going to OS X for the first time and having to get used to two effective taskbars to work. Some may find it inefficient and go back, which is unfortunate. Those that are more sensible will learn to get around it on their own or make the best of it.
I mean, the way you describe how window focusing works for you? Personally doesn't work out for me. But if I was by some miracle using your computer, I'd get used to it, griping about it aside.
You used a NeXT machine? You're so lucky.. (seriously, my dad was teaching me batch files when I was a kid, not opening my eyes to stuff more advanced than DOS 5)
By editing some sections of code and stuff like that, it's easily compiled in linux, but it won't play sound yet.
There'll always be the option for trying another desktop environment in lieu of another or creating/altering the program to suit our tastes. But that doesn't change the fact that unless we really want to go out of our way to handle the latter, (or just not upgrading), the problems that face us in the "light" of "new features" that are really just hack-outs of things that aren't functional to mom and dad.
Hell, even Windows has an "Advanced" button or tab in most of its own settings, and you know how Windows is regarded here.
It seems to be moving in this direction for almost all GTK+ apps (except maybe the Gimp?) including Gnome. *Dons tinfoil armor* I love Gnome, don't get me wrong, but GTK+ and Gnome-offshoot apps are taking a dive towards "Gramma and grampa" users. I'd love to see in the future, these developers adding an option for more options, for those of us who know what we're doing.
That and an option to remove the status crap on this version of Gaim's buddy list. Who the hell thought that up? I remember when because of all these options they took away, I could make Gaim as thin or bloated as I wanted..
Is it just me, or did they oversimplify everything? I know they're trying to go in a new direction with this version of Gaim but jeez, all the options became so sugar-coated that I no longer feel like I'm being treated like a newbie at the program, I'm feeling like grandma. Where are all of my options? Now I see what Linus was talking about, though Gaim isn't static to Gnome..
I submitted ONE article in my usership here, and they edited the small amounts of wit in the body (I didn't leave out any of the details, for those ready to criticize). So the /. editors DO edit, they only actually edit when they feel they need to say something over your voice.
Is it just me, or does this sound like an underhanded attempt to try and make sure Massachusetts doesn't happen all over again? They might open the format, but that still doesn't mean people won't fork over the large sum of money for Office.
Flux capacitors anyone?