Perhaps you shouldn't be dragging your children along on such long trips. Most children can read sufficiently by the age of 4. That doesn't mean they're reading novels, but rather chilren's books. Unless your child has severe problems reading, perhaps you shouldn't be dragging them along on your trips. It sounds like they're too young to enjoy them anyways.
Perhaps Apple's getting to the point where they're offering consumers too many choices. I can see grannies, and perhaps even parents, being easily confused by all of these different music players and other devices when considering them as gifts for children.
I do have children. They just grew up far before this nonsense with parents thinking that they only way for kids to be entertained was for them to be watching TV or playing video games. Hell, on long trips we'd give our children books to read. And you know what? They were usually quite quiet and well behaved. They might've even learned something, too.
The last thing I ever wanted to do on my lunch break was watch a movie. I'd rather go outside and enjoy the outside, rather than just watching some TV show or movie outside.
While I could see these sort of portable media devices being used in places like Japan or Europe, where they have developed mass transit systems that are widely used, are they used much in the more auto-dependent countries, like the US, Canada and Australia? I mean, chances are that if you're driving, you probably can't watch a movie or a TV show on such a device. Now I'm sure some people will try, but I'd image they'd get thrown through their windshield soon enough. But if you've got a 40 minute train ride to work, then yes, you might get by watching a movie on a device such as this.
Do you or I need it? Of course not. We'd get a phone to increase our productivity. But that's just because we're into getting work done.
They've reached a point where basically everyone has a cell phone that does everything they _need_ it to do. Now they need to start throwing in gimmicks like this to get people to upgrade. This is especially true for the "teenyboppers" or "hardcore gamerz" who are easily amused by gadgetry such as this. Chances are there'll be many 13-year-old boys and girls begging their parents for a phone with 3D graphics support, even though it has very little practical benefit.
How much would it cost these days for a phone that did not have any unnecessities like 3D graphics, address books, calendars, clocks, and so forth? I'm talking about a cell phone equivalent feature-wise to your typical 1960s telephone. How terribly cheap could something like that be produced for? I'd almost be inclined to think that you could find them in vending machines.
"Usability testing" isn't like unit testing or even strength testing of concrete. There's no definite "this is broken" and "this is working".
It doesn't matter how many millions of dollars or how many "experts" they've used. What they have been coming up with for the past few years has not made me more productive. That is why I continue to use late 1980s and early 1990s GUI designs that do make me more productive.
Indeed, I have been using computers for over 30+ years now. Probably longer than a lot of people here have even been alive. And the only real innovation was from NeXT. They produced the only GUI really worth using. Apple has bastardized it somewhat, to make it appeal to those who aren't very computer-oriented.
"Looking cool" is pointless if it interferes with productivity. Even if it's just sending an email to a friend, today's GUIs offer far too much distraction. Thankfully most Linux GUIs offer a way to eliminate most of that by using a NeXTSTEP- or CDE-like theme. It's unfortunate that that isn't the case with Windows and Mac OS X.
Taking your advice, I went and watched one of the demonstration videos on MSDN (or some other part of Microsoft's site). It was long enough, that's for sure. Nothing they did really impressed me. I was hoping I'd see something revolutionary, but all I saw was wasted screen space. It's different, yes, but to suggest that it will increase productivity is questionable.
I hope they do not draw inspiration from Office 12. The screenshots I have seen of it, with it's awful combined toolbar/menu monstrosity, sicken me. I do not want to use a Linux/BSD/Solaris desktop that uses a similar idea. It's nothing but a terrible waste of space.
Such a guideline will be useless if nobody uses it. I mean, the first thing many KDE/GNOME/etc. users do is switch the theme they're using. So unless it's the only theme provided by default, chances are people will switch away from it for an icon set they prefer.
Seriously, I couldn't agree more. The XP and OS X GUIs are perfect for ditzy teen girls. All round, bubbly and colourful. As such, they're more apt for looking at, rather than using. And I don't think that will fly in the Linux/BSD/Solaris world. Most users of UNIX use UNIX because they want to get work done. And getting work done is impeded by excessively round buttons and crap like that.
Indeed, your typical NeXTSTEP- or Motif/CDE-inspired theme often allows for the most productivity, with the minimal amount of confusion.
I think that some of the icons are too detailed, and as such are difficult to interpret when 22x22 px or 16x16 px. The 16x16 px document-print icon, for instance, looks more like a filing cabinet drawer with a document coming out. If used in a toolbar, it could easily be misinterpreted as the "Open" action rather than the "Print" action.
My big question is whether or not it will be usable. I get the impression that it will end up looking like a cross between Windows XP and Mac OS X. It'll be bubbly, and wasteful of screen real estate.
I find I usually use a NeXTSTEP-inspired theme, no matter if I'm using GNOME, KDE, or XFCE. That's because such a theme is all about usability, and less about just looking "pretty". In the Linux, *BSD and Solaris worlds, the focus is on productivity. So I think there may be some conflict between creating a GUI that emulates the bubbliness of Windows and OS X, and creating a GUI that allows people to get work done efficiently and effectively.
That's because only a fool fails to know such examples. France, Australia, Britain, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
I know you'll deny that I'm correct. That's okay. Republicans such as yourself have no option but to deny the truth. Why is that? Because Republicans such as yourself are wrong.
Would they only have worked on missles? I doubt that. Suppose Germany had taken control of Europe, and perhaps portions of Russia. Eventually there would've come a time when there was nobody else for them to fight, be it because they got the territory they wanted/needed, or because there was nobody else to oppose them, or whatnot. Perhaps then they would've started looking into space exploration.
Actually, I think you should cut off your penis. And then eat it. But don't forget to put tartar sauce on it! It should at least taste good when you eat your own genitals.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you shouldn't be dragging your children along on such long trips. Most children can read sufficiently by the age of 4. That doesn't mean they're reading novels, but rather chilren's books. Unless your child has severe problems reading, perhaps you shouldn't be dragging them along on your trips. It sounds like they're too young to enjoy them anyways.
Perhaps Apple's getting to the point where they're offering consumers too many choices. I can see grannies, and perhaps even parents, being easily confused by all of these different music players and other devices when considering them as gifts for children.
But how crowded is such transportation? Such a device would most likely be quite difficult to use while standing on a tube, or on a crowded bus.
While they may be more usable on a commuter train, which generally offer some space, I doubt the usability of such devices on buses or tubes.
I do have children. They just grew up far before this nonsense with parents thinking that they only way for kids to be entertained was for them to be watching TV or playing video games. Hell, on long trips we'd give our children books to read. And you know what? They were usually quite quiet and well behaved. They might've even learned something, too.
The last thing I ever wanted to do on my lunch break was watch a movie. I'd rather go outside and enjoy the outside, rather than just watching some TV show or movie outside.
While I could see these sort of portable media devices being used in places like Japan or Europe, where they have developed mass transit systems that are widely used, are they used much in the more auto-dependent countries, like the US, Canada and Australia? I mean, chances are that if you're driving, you probably can't watch a movie or a TV show on such a device. Now I'm sure some people will try, but I'd image they'd get thrown through their windshield soon enough. But if you've got a 40 minute train ride to work, then yes, you might get by watching a movie on a device such as this.
I hope Michael Moore shows up at your party.
Do you or I need it? Of course not. We'd get a phone to increase our productivity. But that's just because we're into getting work done.
They've reached a point where basically everyone has a cell phone that does everything they _need_ it to do. Now they need to start throwing in gimmicks like this to get people to upgrade. This is especially true for the "teenyboppers" or "hardcore gamerz" who are easily amused by gadgetry such as this. Chances are there'll be many 13-year-old boys and girls begging their parents for a phone with 3D graphics support, even though it has very little practical benefit.
Would it be possible for you to release the source code to this engine that you've written, so we can verify your claims?
How much would it cost these days for a phone that did not have any unnecessities like 3D graphics, address books, calendars, clocks, and so forth? I'm talking about a cell phone equivalent feature-wise to your typical 1960s telephone. How terribly cheap could something like that be produced for? I'd almost be inclined to think that you could find them in vending machines.
"Usability testing" isn't like unit testing or even strength testing of concrete. There's no definite "this is broken" and "this is working".
It doesn't matter how many millions of dollars or how many "experts" they've used. What they have been coming up with for the past few years has not made me more productive. That is why I continue to use late 1980s and early 1990s GUI designs that do make me more productive.
Whoa! Are you a Republican? Because having that much hatred would easily make sense.
My good Republican fool, why do you hate homosexuals so much? Why do you hate abortionists? Why do you hate liberals? Why do you hate freedom?
For someone who accuses others of hate, you are by far the most active practitioner of it.
Indeed, I have been using computers for over 30+ years now. Probably longer than a lot of people here have even been alive. And the only real innovation was from NeXT. They produced the only GUI really worth using. Apple has bastardized it somewhat, to make it appeal to those who aren't very computer-oriented.
"Looking cool" is pointless if it interferes with productivity. Even if it's just sending an email to a friend, today's GUIs offer far too much distraction. Thankfully most Linux GUIs offer a way to eliminate most of that by using a NeXTSTEP- or CDE-like theme. It's unfortunate that that isn't the case with Windows and Mac OS X.
Taking your advice, I went and watched one of the demonstration videos on MSDN (or some other part of Microsoft's site). It was long enough, that's for sure. Nothing they did really impressed me. I was hoping I'd see something revolutionary, but all I saw was wasted screen space. It's different, yes, but to suggest that it will increase productivity is questionable.
I hope they do not draw inspiration from Office 12. The screenshots I have seen of it, with it's awful combined toolbar/menu monstrosity, sicken me. I do not want to use a Linux/BSD/Solaris desktop that uses a similar idea. It's nothing but a terrible waste of space.
Such a guideline will be useless if nobody uses it. I mean, the first thing many KDE/GNOME/etc. users do is switch the theme they're using. So unless it's the only theme provided by default, chances are people will switch away from it for an icon set they prefer.
Seriously, I couldn't agree more. The XP and OS X GUIs are perfect for ditzy teen girls. All round, bubbly and colourful. As such, they're more apt for looking at, rather than using. And I don't think that will fly in the Linux/BSD/Solaris world. Most users of UNIX use UNIX because they want to get work done. And getting work done is impeded by excessively round buttons and crap like that.
Indeed, your typical NeXTSTEP- or Motif/CDE-inspired theme often allows for the most productivity, with the minimal amount of confusion.
I think that some of the icons are too detailed, and as such are difficult to interpret when 22x22 px or 16x16 px. The 16x16 px document-print icon, for instance, looks more like a filing cabinet drawer with a document coming out. If used in a toolbar, it could easily be misinterpreted as the "Open" action rather than the "Print" action.
My big question is whether or not it will be usable. I get the impression that it will end up looking like a cross between Windows XP and Mac OS X. It'll be bubbly, and wasteful of screen real estate.
I find I usually use a NeXTSTEP-inspired theme, no matter if I'm using GNOME, KDE, or XFCE. That's because such a theme is all about usability, and less about just looking "pretty". In the Linux, *BSD and Solaris worlds, the focus is on productivity. So I think there may be some conflict between creating a GUI that emulates the bubbliness of Windows and OS X, and creating a GUI that allows people to get work done efficiently and effectively.
That's because only a fool fails to know such examples. France, Australia, Britain, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
I know you'll deny that I'm correct. That's okay. Republicans such as yourself have no option but to deny the truth. Why is that? Because Republicans such as yourself are wrong.
Would they only have worked on missles? I doubt that. Suppose Germany had taken control of Europe, and perhaps portions of Russia. Eventually there would've come a time when there was nobody else for them to fight, be it because they got the territory they wanted/needed, or because there was nobody else to oppose them, or whatnot. Perhaps then they would've started looking into space exploration.
Like we agreed on earlier, your system is horribly broken. You speak of democracy, yet you know not of it!
Actually, I think you should cut off your penis. And then eat it. But don't forget to put tartar sauce on it! It should at least taste good when you eat your own genitals.
I think "Republican" would be the perfect term for such fools. It conveys a potent image of idiocy, combined with a penchant for cock suckery.