Wait, so a company is not allowed to make any changes to anything because it might alienate existing users? By your logic, we'd still be doing everything by a command prompt, because hey, this UI wizbangery and windows and icons and mouse! They confused all them users!
And I don't recall the start menu being redesigned from scratch. The changes from 2000 to XP to Vista were iterative, and some people actually like em, even old users, like me.
You know all them babies born today? Plenty of new users in the future from those. All those untapped third world markets out there? Plenty of new users right there.
The problem here was that the interface item itself was designed incorrectly in the first place. As a new user, if I go to control panel and know I want to do something with programs, my first inclination would be to look for Programs, or Uninstall Programs or Remove Programs. Why was it called Add/Remove Programs? For the life of me, in god knows how many years I've used Windows, I've never used that to add programs. Plus, Add/Remove Programs didn't indicate that you could also change/remove/add the features of Windows itself, hence, 'Programs and Features' makes more sense.
There's lots to hate about Vista, sure, but renaming Add/Remove Programs to Programs and Features isn't one of them. It'll take an old user all of 30 seconds to find it, and after a couple of times, you've retrained yourself easily. It's not about being friendly to utterly non technical users, it's about being friendly to new users. You know, there are new babies born, and kids grow up to use computers. What's wrong with making sure things make sense?
apple's several transitions, m68k -> PPC -> intel (hardware) and Mac OS classic -> Mac OS X pretty much afected some few specialized (read: badly written) software. nothing that caused widespread problems.
Nothing that caused widespread problems because Apple isn't used widespread.
Though I didn't mean to indicate that backwards compatability is the only reason why Apple isn't very popular in the enterprise, but it is one of them
Thank you! I always seem to be the person saying this. Vista is a pretty good OS. Sure, it has it's flaws. I hate the security prompts, but to be honest, after the initial setup where I install all my programs, I barely see anything now. I've been running Vista since Beta 2, and it's been pretty smooth since RC1. I installed the retail version, and it's the first time where I've had an OS on my machine that lasted almost 2 years without being formatted.
Well, sometimes you need to make changes to the UI that would be more friendly to new users, even if it might confuse old users for a little bit. Yeah, the Programs and Features was a pain in the ass, but after the first couple of times, I don't even think about it (and I still use XP at work).
Why don't they cut backwards compatability? Because businesses want backwards compatability. Businesses are Microsoft's core market. Cut off backwards compatability, and businesses won't like it.
Sure, Apple did it twice, but guess what? That's why Apple isn't very populer within enterprise-level companies.
Let me know when you can do apps like picnik or buzzword in JavaScript, CSS and DHTML without having a nightmare of browser incompatabilities to work around.
I read somewhere a reasoning for this: that google wants OEMs to bundle Chrome with their browser, and OEMs don't want to bundle software marked as 'beta', hence, magically, Chrome comes out of beta!
I think someone needs to get their head out of their ass and face reality. Outside the desktop, Windows isn't visible? Really? Windows Mobile is everywhere. So is Windows Embdedded. Windows Server is gaining marketshare.
YOU may consider Windows a second-class citizen, but the market sure doesn't. In an above post, you compared Microsoft to GM, and declared that they were dying. Yeah, sure, they're dying exactly like GM, except for the fact that they're making money hand over fist, have over $70 billion in assets, and haven't required a government bailout.
Which is fixed in IE8. In fact, a tab is a separate process that restores itself automatically and doesn't bring down other tabs. And it can remember sessions.
Next?
The series has already been 're-imagined' three times in the last console generation that, to be honest, while the game does look cool and may end up being fantastic, I fail to muster up any enthusiasm whatsoever. You're right, they have flagged this dead horse way too much last gen.
No, the problem was that MS changed the underlying layers between the betas, RC's and the RTM. Since that was happening, the manufacturers held off until they had a stable platform to shoot at.
Really? Care to cite proof of them changing the underlying layers between the RC and RTM? Or explain how some manufacturers were able to get drivers working for Vista properly before RTM?
In other terms, when other reputable software shops iron out most bugs in-house before releasing their products, Microsoft just removes show-stoppers and let its customers report all the other bugs.
You mean, like Apple's Leopard release? Or Apple's iPhone 3G release? Or Apple's mobileme release?
I fail to see how Microsoft has a reputation of releasing 'bananaware' whereas Apple doesn't. I don't recall hearing about major, crippling bugs when Office 2007 came out (one of their biggest apps), and regardless of what you hear on Slashdot, Vista was actually a solid enough release and most of the issues were due to bad drivers that manufacturers didn't bother updating a year beforehand when they had betas and release candidates. (Not saying that neither had bugs, they did, but they were in no way 'beta' software.)
So play it when she's not around...or she can, oh, do something else when you're playing it?
It's a good game. I highly suggest you don't miss out on it.
RROD issues have been resolved in the current crop of 360s. And even if you do get it, RROD is warranted for 3 years, free shipping both ways, you get it back in about a 7-10 days from first contacting Microsoft.
The GP was right, though apparently he didnt know why. Most enterprise companies, when they deploy software, also purchase an extra support agreement for said software, usually from the vendor, sometimes from a 3rd party that provides support. Perhaps Star Office has said support from Sun whereas OpenOffice doesn't (not sure).
Slashdot Mirror
True, but I have been doing both A and B in my Vista install. It still seems to work fine, and quite stable.
Huh? Your examples make no sense. You're supposed to use one foot for accelerating and breaking, and it's the right foot...
Not to mention, they're all irrelevant because they're not simple UI changes in an operating system.
I didn't say I liked every UI change. I think they brought back the File menu in IE8 (at least it's there when I booted up my beta).
Wait, so a company is not allowed to make any changes to anything because it might alienate existing users? By your logic, we'd still be doing everything by a command prompt, because hey, this UI wizbangery and windows and icons and mouse! They confused all them users!
And I don't recall the start menu being redesigned from scratch. The changes from 2000 to XP to Vista were iterative, and some people actually like em, even old users, like me.
You know all them babies born today? Plenty of new users in the future from those. All those untapped third world markets out there? Plenty of new users right there.
The problem here was that the interface item itself was designed incorrectly in the first place. As a new user, if I go to control panel and know I want to do something with programs, my first inclination would be to look for Programs, or Uninstall Programs or Remove Programs. Why was it called Add/Remove Programs? For the life of me, in god knows how many years I've used Windows, I've never used that to add programs. Plus, Add/Remove Programs didn't indicate that you could also change/remove/add the features of Windows itself, hence, 'Programs and Features' makes more sense.
There's lots to hate about Vista, sure, but renaming Add/Remove Programs to Programs and Features isn't one of them. It'll take an old user all of 30 seconds to find it, and after a couple of times, you've retrained yourself easily. It's not about being friendly to utterly non technical users, it's about being friendly to new users. You know, there are new babies born, and kids grow up to use computers. What's wrong with making sure things make sense?
apple's several transitions, m68k -> PPC -> intel (hardware) and Mac OS classic -> Mac OS X pretty much afected some few specialized (read: badly written) software. nothing that caused widespread problems.
Nothing that caused widespread problems because Apple isn't used widespread.
Though I didn't mean to indicate that backwards compatability is the only reason why Apple isn't very popular in the enterprise, but it is one of them
Thank you! I always seem to be the person saying this. Vista is a pretty good OS. Sure, it has it's flaws. I hate the security prompts, but to be honest, after the initial setup where I install all my programs, I barely see anything now. I've been running Vista since Beta 2, and it's been pretty smooth since RC1. I installed the retail version, and it's the first time where I've had an OS on my machine that lasted almost 2 years without being formatted.
Well, sometimes you need to make changes to the UI that would be more friendly to new users, even if it might confuse old users for a little bit. Yeah, the Programs and Features was a pain in the ass, but after the first couple of times, I don't even think about it (and I still use XP at work).
Why don't they cut backwards compatability? Because businesses want backwards compatability. Businesses are Microsoft's core market. Cut off backwards compatability, and businesses won't like it.
Sure, Apple did it twice, but guess what? That's why Apple isn't very populer within enterprise-level companies.
So the only really good games are ones that never get mentioned and no one buys?
Let me know when you can do apps like picnik or buzzword in JavaScript, CSS and DHTML without having a nightmare of browser incompatabilities to work around.
I read somewhere a reasoning for this: that google wants OEMs to bundle Chrome with their browser, and OEMs don't want to bundle software marked as 'beta', hence, magically, Chrome comes out of beta!
I think someone needs to get their head out of their ass and face reality. Outside the desktop, Windows isn't visible? Really? Windows Mobile is everywhere. So is Windows Embdedded. Windows Server is gaining marketshare.
YOU may consider Windows a second-class citizen, but the market sure doesn't. In an above post, you compared Microsoft to GM, and declared that they were dying. Yeah, sure, they're dying exactly like GM, except for the fact that they're making money hand over fist, have over $70 billion in assets, and haven't required a government bailout.
Whoopsie? And I re-read the damn thing before I posted it. Sometimes I tend to use one word that sounds similar with another. My bad.
In my defense, I DID spell 'sign' right. It's not like the spell checker would have caught it...
I think he means humani-...oh, wait. I see what you mean.
Which is fixed in IE8. In fact, a tab is a separate process that restores itself automatically and doesn't bring down other tabs. And it can remember sessions. Next?
The series has already been 're-imagined' three times in the last console generation that, to be honest, while the game does look cool and may end up being fantastic, I fail to muster up any enthusiasm whatsoever. You're right, they have flagged this dead horse way too much last gen.
No, the problem was that MS changed the underlying layers between the betas, RC's and the RTM. Since that was happening, the manufacturers held off until they had a stable platform to shoot at.
Really? Care to cite proof of them changing the underlying layers between the RC and RTM? Or explain how some manufacturers were able to get drivers working for Vista properly before RTM?
In other terms, when other reputable software shops iron out most bugs in-house before releasing their products, Microsoft just removes show-stoppers and let its customers report all the other bugs.
You mean, like Apple's Leopard release? Or Apple's iPhone 3G release? Or Apple's mobileme release?
I fail to see how Microsoft has a reputation of releasing 'bananaware' whereas Apple doesn't. I don't recall hearing about major, crippling bugs when Office 2007 came out (one of their biggest apps), and regardless of what you hear on Slashdot, Vista was actually a solid enough release and most of the issues were due to bad drivers that manufacturers didn't bother updating a year beforehand when they had betas and release candidates. (Not saying that neither had bugs, they did, but they were in no way 'beta' software.)
So play it when she's not around...or she can, oh, do something else when you're playing it? It's a good game. I highly suggest you don't miss out on it.
RROD issues have been resolved in the current crop of 360s. And even if you do get it, RROD is warranted for 3 years, free shipping both ways, you get it back in about a 7-10 days from first contacting Microsoft.
The GP was right, though apparently he didnt know why. Most enterprise companies, when they deploy software, also purchase an extra support agreement for said software, usually from the vendor, sometimes from a 3rd party that provides support. Perhaps Star Office has said support from Sun whereas OpenOffice doesn't (not sure).
Ever used the iPhone app store? Which allows for updates as well? Also, Windows apps tend to not need dependencies installed.
An app store would theoretically allow free apps, as does the iPhone app store. How are they different?