The way things "should be done" is the way people want them to be done and are used to them being done. Bull....to an extent. Intuitive means it behaves in a way that you can reason out, that is natural. CLIs for instance are not intuitive, there is no real world example of CLI, however CLI is damn useful so we use it and there is a method to doing CLI that we deem useful. I should be able to use things like tab or man or/? and find out how to do things in CLI. But this is limited to tech people. For the general public we have to think in the manner of how do things work in life that they use every day. Think remote controls, all buttons are in front of you, at best there is an +10 on the remote. Or consider a more organic approach, at a grocery store you dont have to push fruit out of the way to get to the vegetables to get to the potatoes. You go to the produce isle and head for the potatoes right in front of you.
If you are lost right now with my examples,the point is, software made for the general public needs to be built for the general public. To do that we need to mimic something they already know. having them memorize a menu system is not useful. having the system mimic something they know is. This is what we call intuitive. Many great software packages have failed because of this. I Can scan a screen visually much faster than I can click through it.
Ya because drilling down and doing guesswork to find one option is really easy to do...was that option under tools, accounts, mail or was it under edit preferences, wait maybe it was in the help menu...dammit....
Menus are only good for people who spent the time to memorize the layout. Contextual layouts are much much more efficient. The problem is, it is change...and people have to deal with that. The Ribbon style of thinking is provably easier to use. Hell why do you think people run multple desktops in linux? It is the same idea, Have one ribbon for editing all features in front of you, have one desktop with editing tools up. Not one environment that looks like a friggin spiderweb and needs a PHD to navigate.
Having taught people in Office 2000, 2003, and 2007, I can say for certain, 2007 was a much smoother transitional process than the other two incarnations. To this day I still get more calls from individuals hunting for things in 2003 and 2007.
Actually the ribbon style is not built for eye candy but rather for usability. The problem with menu style systems is that it is not intuitive. There is resistance to the change because of 'menus are the way we are used to doing things' not necessarily the way things should be done. Putting features in front of the user rather than 3 to 4 deep in a menu system is far more intuitive. In fact I think the office ribbon layout is due to a massive amount of consumer research on Microsoft's Behalf. (I cant find a reference for that right now).
However, I will believe this change when I see it.
Agreed. I can only speak for the LCMS when it comes to data, but since 'Christian' is an ambiguous term in the secular world, it would be impossible to prove any statistics.
Where I was coming from was that lately there seems to be a bit of a miscommunication in that since as Christians we are largely against Embryonic stem cell research therefore we are against all genetic research. Some loud Christians are very good at perpetuating those myths. But in my experience it is fundies not christians that seem to be the issue. For an example see the book 'Ishmael'. Individuals talking about the purity of the earth and natural processes:)
Well put, however your original quote of "And the results being things that haven't evolved" still stands as incorrect. Any change in DNA is evolved, whether we like the change, or are for it matters not. What you can say is you do not think that evolution that occurs via human viral manipulation across species is not ethical. But to say that it isn't evolution is to take a good opinion and throw it aside because 'you' have a fundamental misunderstanding of the debate at hand.
Also in these situations I prefer the stereotyping as it works, stereotyping has its place especially in public forum as we have a lot of personality holes to fill. So rather than addressing your entire persona and attacking you from a single post, I address the group I do know and prefer not to attack the individual who may just being misunderstood.
Actually, I teach them. And while yes, there are a lot of misconceptions regarding evolution and genetic engineering that I am working hard to fix, the vast majority of Christians are for GM foods. There are extremist wackos that get in the news but there are more non-Christians in the community screaming against GM than Christians. We use a considerable amount in crops on missions projects, we distribute modified grains to populations around the world. The GM foods allow for agriculture in places that would normally starve.
"you people" is used because I, and people like me, address the culture. I do not know you as an individual so I cannot say 'you'. However, I can address the population that uses the phrase that you have used as that population I have had many experiences with. You are merely a launching pad and need to realize that by making a statement you are lumping yourself into a group which can be addressed.
And it does have quite a bit to do with the argument at hand, artificial selection and natural selection are all mechanics of evolution and a means to change genetic material. Semantics matter, no educational debate can be had without an agreement of terms. In this particular instance, to say that artificial selection isn't evolution negates your argument. Personally I blame poor teachers and pop culture for indoctrinating you into believing otherwise.
I know you are being humorous but in my experience the people against genetic engineering aren't the Christians, but rather the secular humanists and the naturalists. But good job perpetuating stereotypes. I never hear enough misinformation from non-Christians.
Definition of evolution: change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
Eg Delta, change, any change good or bad. You people need to get off of the soundbite train and get a grasp on what evolution is.
Who is this going to thwart? People recording and burning discs and the ones that would have easy access to the workarounds when they inevitably hit the market.
Ya I just went for the parent map. But I quatified by saying that I dont agree that the definition of Midwest is correct. Most of the states north of texas, south of ND west of the Mississippi and east of the rockies fit pretty well into the wind power is feasible group.
I for one see lots of people going into science programs but then dropping out because they cant understand their professor's accent, or the professor could care less about the students than their next publication. Our main issue is we don't have any Science teachers out there. We have Grad students trying to pay their way through college, publication farms, and burnt out tenured profs.
Then for those passionate enough to make it through the academic minefield that is science, what do you have to look forward to? Post Docs? A highly competitive research field?
It is no wonder intelligent people go for their MBAs, it is much more efficient you just put a quarter the effort into it and earn 3x as much, get more prestige, and a have fraction of the workload.
It is the same problem with Political Sciences, who is crazy enough to waste their time doing it? By all accounts it isn't worth the effort.
this map would beg to differ http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp, but of course you guys over east think you're midwest so I can see how you would think that wind isnt that great of an option...but for us in NE, SD, ND Michigan (along the lakes), it is fantastic.
Ya,Ohio isn't the Midwest, Midwest is usually the Mississippi to the Western part of the range,with the bordering states of the Mississippi being granted leeway. The rest is west, West coast, East, Eastcoast, south, northwest, northeast...etc. The Census bureau is wrong, of course this is all subjective:)
I was about to list a bunch of movies, but I then realized that the movies in which tech goes horribly wrong tends to be in the minority so an article on such things would be rather boring. However, a article on genetic engineering viewed in a good light in movies...now there would be a hard find.
I agree with that, most boards need to be versatile for sales. The OEM motherboards built for dell HP and IBM all have a specific purpose and therefore not as much need for legacy support.
In my opinion is the lack of actual technical professionals. We have too many people who know how to fix product A, because they were trained to fix product A and that is what they do. So when product A becomes un-fixable it gets replaced with another product A.
We will see the massive changes in tech when the CS and IT folks who entered the market in the 2000s make it to management and start controlling the tech. These are individuals that have grown up with change and are adaptable to it. A large number of them WANTED to be geeks, they arent paycheck hunters and are genuinely interested in the advance of tech. Why do I think this? Of the people I know that have adopted newer techs, eg IPv6 or maintain stricter code, or push for HTML5 or whatnot, they all are individuals who graduated high school or college in the last 10 years...just my observation though.
Exactly, any CS or engineering student (let alone a professional) worth their salt can build a clock with nothing but a breadboard capacitors and a couple nand gates.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 does that as well now.
If you are lost right now with my examples,the point is, software made for the general public needs to be built for the general public. To do that we need to mimic something they already know. having them memorize a menu system is not useful. having the system mimic something they know is. This is what we call intuitive. Many great software packages have failed because of this. I Can scan a screen visually much faster than I can click through it.
oops that is supposed to read "To this day I still get more calls from individuals hunting for things in 2003 THAN 2007."
Menus are only good for people who spent the time to memorize the layout. Contextual layouts are much much more efficient. The problem is, it is change...and people have to deal with that. The Ribbon style of thinking is provably easier to use. Hell why do you think people run multple desktops in linux? It is the same idea, Have one ribbon for editing all features in front of you, have one desktop with editing tools up. Not one environment that looks like a friggin spiderweb and needs a PHD to navigate.
Having taught people in Office 2000, 2003, and 2007, I can say for certain, 2007 was a much smoother transitional process than the other two incarnations. To this day I still get more calls from individuals hunting for things in 2003 and 2007.
However, I will believe this change when I see it.
Where I was coming from was that lately there seems to be a bit of a miscommunication in that since as Christians we are largely against Embryonic stem cell research therefore we are against all genetic research. Some loud Christians are very good at perpetuating those myths. But in my experience it is fundies not christians that seem to be the issue. For an example see the book 'Ishmael'. Individuals talking about the purity of the earth and natural processes :)
Yuck pardon that last post, I didn't check my grammar, a number of double negatives in there and some piss poor sentence structure.
Also in these situations I prefer the stereotyping as it works, stereotyping has its place especially in public forum as we have a lot of personality holes to fill. So rather than addressing your entire persona and attacking you from a single post, I address the group I do know and prefer not to attack the individual who may just being misunderstood.
Actually, I teach them. And while yes, there are a lot of misconceptions regarding evolution and genetic engineering that I am working hard to fix, the vast majority of Christians are for GM foods. There are extremist wackos that get in the news but there are more non-Christians in the community screaming against GM than Christians. We use a considerable amount in crops on missions projects, we distribute modified grains to populations around the world. The GM foods allow for agriculture in places that would normally starve.
I don't get what you are getting at?
And it does have quite a bit to do with the argument at hand, artificial selection and natural selection are all mechanics of evolution and a means to change genetic material. Semantics matter, no educational debate can be had without an agreement of terms. In this particular instance, to say that artificial selection isn't evolution negates your argument. Personally I blame poor teachers and pop culture for indoctrinating you into believing otherwise.
I know you are being humorous but in my experience the people against genetic engineering aren't the Christians, but rather the secular humanists and the naturalists. But good job perpetuating stereotypes. I never hear enough misinformation from non-Christians.
Definition of evolution: change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
Eg Delta, change, any change good or bad. You people need to get off of the soundbite train and get a grasp on what evolution is.
LOL, pay per view still exists? ;)
Who is this going to thwart? People recording and burning discs and the ones that would have easy access to the workarounds when they inevitably hit the market.
Ya I just went for the parent map. But I quatified by saying that I dont agree that the definition of Midwest is correct. Most of the states north of texas, south of ND west of the Mississippi and east of the rockies fit pretty well into the wind power is feasible group.
Then for those passionate enough to make it through the academic minefield that is science, what do you have to look forward to? Post Docs? A highly competitive research field?
It is no wonder intelligent people go for their MBAs, it is much more efficient you just put a quarter the effort into it and earn 3x as much, get more prestige, and a have fraction of the workload.
It is the same problem with Political Sciences, who is crazy enough to waste their time doing it? By all accounts it isn't worth the effort.
this map would beg to differ http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp, but of course you guys over east think you're midwest so I can see how you would think that wind isnt that great of an option...but for us in NE, SD, ND Michigan (along the lakes), it is fantastic.
Ya,Ohio isn't the Midwest, Midwest is usually the Mississippi to the Western part of the range,with the bordering states of the Mississippi being granted leeway. The rest is west, West coast, East, Eastcoast, south, northwest, northeast...etc. The Census bureau is wrong, of course this is all subjective :)
Let me fix that for you....http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Palantir
Facebook tells me I have 350 friends, that means I am popular...right? RIGHT?
I was about to list a bunch of movies, but I then realized that the movies in which tech goes horribly wrong tends to be in the minority so an article on such things would be rather boring. However, a article on genetic engineering viewed in a good light in movies...now there would be a hard find.
I agree with that, most boards need to be versatile for sales. The OEM motherboards built for dell HP and IBM all have a specific purpose and therefore not as much need for legacy support.
We will see the massive changes in tech when the CS and IT folks who entered the market in the 2000s make it to management and start controlling the tech. These are individuals that have grown up with change and are adaptable to it. A large number of them WANTED to be geeks, they arent paycheck hunters and are genuinely interested in the advance of tech. Why do I think this? Of the people I know that have adopted newer techs, eg IPv6 or maintain stricter code, or push for HTML5 or whatnot, they all are individuals who graduated high school or college in the last 10 years...just my observation though.
Exactly, any CS or engineering student (let alone a professional) worth their salt can build a clock with nothing but a breadboard capacitors and a couple nand gates.