If I take my keys and guess a random house to try them on, and get in, it isn't the locksmith's, homeowner's, nor key's fault I trespassed.
You're right, but the owner has a reasonable expectation of security... he bought a lock and key. The manufacturer who produced the faulty lock should have some liability... and they do if they guarantee the lock (or if their government has laws holding them liable).
The fact that the trespasser is to be held criminally liable is a separate, but still important, issue.
Since when have OS designers optimised their code to milk every cycle from the available CPUs?
I meant to imply that OS design may not matter so much... if there's an O(n^3) algorithm running in your web browser, it makes little difference whether the OS algorithm running beside it is O(n^2) or O(n).
I wasn't clear... I never meant to imply that OS designers were already perfect, just that application software designers typically aren't.
The GV number is still a real telephone number, just connected through Google's servers. So no, this law wouldn't apply.
This law prevents putting anything you want as the number. For example, spammer from area code 999 calls the number 555-555-1234. The caller ID says 555-555-9876, so the person answers thinking it is a local number when it is not.
Another example of abuse, someone calls with the caller ID number of your ISP. They ask for username/password or credit card info to "fix" a problem with your account.
Good user experience has nothing to do with UI. In other words, it doesn't matter where you put the buttons... it matters that the user can figure out how to do what they want to do.
Microsoft figured this out, sort of, by creating a completely new UI for Office 2007. Google figured out a long time ago that most users would rather have a box and a button than a page full of stuff. Apple did very well with the iPhone... albeit, the phone part is actually a little harder than most, but the rest of the device is dirt simple to use.
My point... I don't think users care about familiarity as much as software designers think they do.
I would pay more for the option. But I'm still waiting for AT&T to enable tethering on the iPhone.
While I'm here... my biggest gripe is no multi-tasking. Apple enables multi-tasking, they sell me an iPad... it's that simple. Heck, I'd take limited background APIs. But the fact that no third-party multitasking is allowed will keep the device out of my hands.
I modify and "utilize" them for the specific task at hand. And this is fine, as you don't see me on the street corner trying to sell modified black and decker pecker wreckers at a markup. I think think that 1) that would infringe patents
I don't think so (but IANAL, etc.). Say I buy a DVD drive from Toshiba for $50, full of patented stuff. Then I put it in a computer case, add a motherboard, hard drive, etc. I sell the computer for $500. Toshiba cannot claim patent protection... I paid for the DVD drive and everything in it. Essentially, I fulfilled any royalty by purchasing the product. In fact, they cannot claim trademark protection either, so long as the only thing with their trademark is the DVD drive and any manuals it came with, which they printed before I purchased the device. (I cannot sell the computer as a Toshiba computer... that would be trademark infringement.)
Obviously, if I legally purchase 1000 DVD drives from Toshiba, I can make 1000 of these computers and sell them at markup.
Now, say I buy one DVD drive from Toshiba for $50, take it apart, and figure out how to make more. Then I sell 1000 computers, each with a clone Toshiba DVD drive, and make $500,000. NOW I'm on the hook for patent violations, because I violated their patent in 999 of those cases. I'm also on the hook if I printed their trademark on each drive.
Agreed that you can choose the UI, but when there's not much to choose from... I guess I would have to write my own. But I'd rather pay Microsoft a couple hundred instead of doing that.
I like Linux. I'm on the LFS list. Been through most of the distros over the years. But I give credit where it is due... Microsoft has an edge in the UI world. Apple had an edge over Microsoft for years (not as much any more). Personally... I think the Ubuntu Netbook Remix UI is the direction of the future that could take it past both Microsoft and Apple.
And before I get flamed like the other poster, I use my Windows 7 computer for programming work. And it's invaluable for a user like me who tends to open a dozen explorer windows at the same time, a half-dozen Chrome windows (each with 2-10 tabs), 3 or 4 Visual Studios, and at least another 6 or 7 programs. So yeah... I think that qualifies me to have an opinion.
And like the other poster, I appreciate how much more natural the rendering technology in Aero feels as compared to the older more pixelated window managers. Considering the GPU is handling most of the work, Aero seems to have improved performance as compared with having it turned off on the same computer. (Of course YMMV... depends entirely on your video card.)
I love the new window dragging features. Dragging a window to the top maximizes. Dragging to the side takes up half the screen. Dragging the top or bottom bar makes it go full-vertical. Windows Key + Arrow Keys also do those actions (as well as Restore/Minimize). Ctrl + Windows Key + Arrow Keys move windows across monitors.
Pinned taskbar icons remind me of the OS X dock, both of which keep everything ordered and uncluttered. Windows Key + Number 1 key will open a new window for the first taskbar icon, number 2 key for the second taskbar icon, and so on. Jump lists give you quick access to common tasks.
Just the fact that the taskbar buttons can be icon-only (square) means I can dock it on the left of the screen without it being difficult to use. (Again, like the OS X dock... that's how I've run both OS's for quite a while.)
Other than the steps backwards they took with Vista that are still around (like some of the layers of control panel/networking/etc. you have to go through to get anywhere), I generally have nothing but positive to say about the direction Microsoft went with the Windows 7 UI.
I don't care so much about the color scheme as the general UI. Windows has come a long way since 2002. Gnome hasn't.
Not complaining... the Windows guys get more money. But still... competition is competition, and money or not, Gnome isn't competing with Windows 7 like it could with Windows XP.
The next to last solve (at 41s) takes 21 moves*, and is the only cube claimed to be random... thus, I don't see any dishonesty. It takes around 1.9 seconds to analyze, about 0.4 seconds to reset/process, and the remaining 8+ seconds to solve. Therefore, it makes on average between 2 and 3 turns per second.
Humans do not include inspection time in the speed calculation (at least, that's the case in the accompanying video of the world record). An apples-to-apples comparison, therefore, would be the human time at 7 seconds and the robot at a little over 8. I couldn't follow the world-record video, but I think I saw at least one mistake (a move followed by the opposite move) and a little hesitation. So, you're probably correct in the 3-5 moves per second for humans.
*21 includes twice that the computer simultaneously moves two faces, each counted as two separate moves. 180 degree moves are counted once.
Why not replace with a hardware-crippled 3GS? Remove a GPS chip here, limit the flash available there, and voila! We have an original iPhone, with maybe a newer outside appearance.
That strategy might not save much money, but it would reduce incentive for fraud.
You missed the point entirely. I never said that corporations pass on taxes by raising costs. My point was about shelf price perception, not about actual cost passing.
But let's turn to your point. Since gas includes tax, it is a good model to discuss (because it is not affected by the perception factor I described above). Let's assume that a ten-cent additional tax on gas was passed today. Are you saying, all other market factors aside, that the price of gas would not go up by ten cents?
Frankly, that's absurd, and mostly incorrect. Check out at the graphic here... it shows that taxes did not eat into profits, but rather added to the price. In other words, passed on to the consumer.
What about off-road diesel? The tax decrease is passed on to consumers as a direct decrease in sales price per gallon... they don't pad corporate profits.
Fuel aside, look at other items... does Walmart charge a different sticker price for a DVD player in two different cities that have different taxes? Does a Wii cost more (pre-tax) in one city than another? No.
I'd like to see how these talking points are "provably false" as you claim. I don't think you have any general proof... there may be one-off situations you can find, but I want to see something general.
Product prices will be the highest the market can bear, regardless of expenses. Software already has massive profit margins, so taxes merely eat into those profits, thus depriving the company from money they can use to buy other companies, run ad campaigns, pay bribes and manipulate market in other ways.
Which costs more, $9.99 worth of gas, or a video game priced at $9.99 on the shelf? The video game, of course, because tax is included in the price of gas but not the price of software. You're not wrong, but perception is key. There's a reason that game doesn't cost $10.00; it's the same reason that $999 is a magical price point for many desktop/notebook makers.
Let's go to a different world for a minute, where all sales prices include tax... do you think a laptop would still go for $1078? Probably not. Maybe $1049, but $999 would draw enough attention to be worth the loss of some per-unit profit. In either case, there is an overall loss of some profit.
So, taxes really don't eat into profits as much as you seem to suggest by asserting that the corporations directly pay them. In other words, the market can "bear" the taxes a little more simply because perception of the pricing structure tends to pass more of that burden on to the naive consumer.
Of course, maybe we the people of Alabama are tired of being stepped all over by the rest of the nation. WE didn't run our car industry off the road, WE didn't push our banks into bankruptcy, but WE are the people who get screwed by the government by first taking manufacturers away, and then taking jobs away in Huntsville.
By the way, that "pork" you talk about was guaranteed jobs coming in the form of an air tanker contract that would build the tankers in Mobile. Of course, after it was all decided, plans were conveniently changed and everything started back from scratch, with favoritism toward the competition.
Slashdot Mirror
You can play it here. I'd say it's undecidable.
If I take my keys and guess a random house to try them on, and get in, it isn't the locksmith's, homeowner's, nor key's fault I trespassed.
You're right, but the owner has a reasonable expectation of security... he bought a lock and key. The manufacturer who produced the faulty lock should have some liability... and they do if they guarantee the lock (or if their government has laws holding them liable).
The fact that the trespasser is to be held criminally liable is a separate, but still important, issue.
Since when have OS designers optimised their code to milk every cycle from the available CPUs?
I meant to imply that OS design may not matter so much... if there's an O(n^3) algorithm running in your web browser, it makes little difference whether the OS algorithm running beside it is O(n^2) or O(n).
I wasn't clear... I never meant to imply that OS designers were already perfect, just that application software designers typically aren't.
Just because OS designers milk every cycle from every CPU, doesn't mean web browser designers will.
And taxpayers are liable for the actions of the government. Yes, it is you and I who will wind up footing this bill, somehow.
In the Bush days, the President was responsible for everything that happened, regardless if he directed one way or the other.
(Looking forward to that mod-down now, thanks much.)
...you mean this wasn't already illegal? Strange.
I hope you didn't give out your SSN to that caller claiming to be the IRS.
The GV number is still a real telephone number, just connected through Google's servers. So no, this law wouldn't apply.
This law prevents putting anything you want as the number. For example, spammer from area code 999 calls the number 555-555-1234. The caller ID says 555-555-9876, so the person answers thinking it is a local number when it is not.
Another example of abuse, someone calls with the caller ID number of your ISP. They ask for username/password or credit card info to "fix" a problem with your account.
Good user experience has nothing to do with UI. In other words, it doesn't matter where you put the buttons... it matters that the user can figure out how to do what they want to do.
Microsoft figured this out, sort of, by creating a completely new UI for Office 2007. Google figured out a long time ago that most users would rather have a box and a button than a page full of stuff. Apple did very well with the iPhone... albeit, the phone part is actually a little harder than most, but the rest of the device is dirt simple to use.
My point... I don't think users care about familiarity as much as software designers think they do.
I would pay more for the option. But I'm still waiting for AT&T to enable tethering on the iPhone.
While I'm here... my biggest gripe is no multi-tasking. Apple enables multi-tasking, they sell me an iPad... it's that simple. Heck, I'd take limited background APIs. But the fact that no third-party multitasking is allowed will keep the device out of my hands.
I modify and "utilize" them for the specific task at hand. And this is fine, as you don't see me on the street corner trying to sell modified black and decker pecker wreckers at a markup. I think think that 1) that would infringe patents
I don't think so (but IANAL, etc.). Say I buy a DVD drive from Toshiba for $50, full of patented stuff. Then I put it in a computer case, add a motherboard, hard drive, etc. I sell the computer for $500. Toshiba cannot claim patent protection... I paid for the DVD drive and everything in it. Essentially, I fulfilled any royalty by purchasing the product. In fact, they cannot claim trademark protection either, so long as the only thing with their trademark is the DVD drive and any manuals it came with, which they printed before I purchased the device. (I cannot sell the computer as a Toshiba computer... that would be trademark infringement.)
Obviously, if I legally purchase 1000 DVD drives from Toshiba, I can make 1000 of these computers and sell them at markup.
Now, say I buy one DVD drive from Toshiba for $50, take it apart, and figure out how to make more. Then I sell 1000 computers, each with a clone Toshiba DVD drive, and make $500,000. NOW I'm on the hook for patent violations, because I violated their patent in 999 of those cases. I'm also on the hook if I printed their trademark on each drive.
Troll...find something else to do. Maybe a life or a member of the opposite sex..if you are into that.
(Slashdot is smart... it won't let me post the same thing again... so I'm posting this line explaining why I'm posting this line.)
Haha... so that's what the unlabeled checkbox does... makes me an AC. :)
See my previous response.
KDE doesn't look/behave like Windows either.
Agreed that you can choose the UI, but when there's not much to choose from... I guess I would have to write my own. But I'd rather pay Microsoft a couple hundred instead of doing that.
I like Linux. I'm on the LFS list. Been through most of the distros over the years. But I give credit where it is due... Microsoft has an edge in the UI world. Apple had an edge over Microsoft for years (not as much any more). Personally... I think the Ubuntu Netbook Remix UI is the direction of the future that could take it past both Microsoft and Apple.
And before I get flamed like the other poster, I use my Windows 7 computer for programming work. And it's invaluable for a user like me who tends to open a dozen explorer windows at the same time, a half-dozen Chrome windows (each with 2-10 tabs), 3 or 4 Visual Studios, and at least another 6 or 7 programs. So yeah... I think that qualifies me to have an opinion.
And like the other poster, I appreciate how much more natural the rendering technology in Aero feels as compared to the older more pixelated window managers. Considering the GPU is handling most of the work, Aero seems to have improved performance as compared with having it turned off on the same computer. (Of course YMMV... depends entirely on your video card.)
Windows 7 has many improvements over Vista.
I love the new window dragging features. Dragging a window to the top maximizes. Dragging to the side takes up half the screen. Dragging the top or bottom bar makes it go full-vertical. Windows Key + Arrow Keys also do those actions (as well as Restore/Minimize). Ctrl + Windows Key + Arrow Keys move windows across monitors.
Pinned taskbar icons remind me of the OS X dock, both of which keep everything ordered and uncluttered. Windows Key + Number 1 key will open a new window for the first taskbar icon, number 2 key for the second taskbar icon, and so on. Jump lists give you quick access to common tasks.
Just the fact that the taskbar buttons can be icon-only (square) means I can dock it on the left of the screen without it being difficult to use. (Again, like the OS X dock... that's how I've run both OS's for quite a while.)
Other than the steps backwards they took with Vista that are still around (like some of the layers of control panel/networking/etc. you have to go through to get anywhere), I generally have nothing but positive to say about the direction Microsoft went with the Windows 7 UI.
I don't care so much about the color scheme as the general UI. Windows has come a long way since 2002. Gnome hasn't.
Not complaining... the Windows guys get more money. But still... competition is competition, and money or not, Gnome isn't competing with Windows 7 like it could with Windows XP.
Puh-lease. You need eight just to get to the Pegasus galaxy.
Noob.
The next to last solve (at 41s) takes 21 moves*, and is the only cube claimed to be random... thus, I don't see any dishonesty. It takes around 1.9 seconds to analyze, about 0.4 seconds to reset/process, and the remaining 8+ seconds to solve. Therefore, it makes on average between 2 and 3 turns per second.
Humans do not include inspection time in the speed calculation (at least, that's the case in the accompanying video of the world record). An apples-to-apples comparison, therefore, would be the human time at 7 seconds and the robot at a little over 8. I couldn't follow the world-record video, but I think I saw at least one mistake (a move followed by the opposite move) and a little hesitation. So, you're probably correct in the 3-5 moves per second for humans.
*21 includes twice that the computer simultaneously moves two faces, each counted as two separate moves. 180 degree moves are counted once.
We look for things, things that make us go. Do not try to trick us. We can tell.
* Beholds the Crimson Forcefield *
They are strong now...
Right, but you open yourself up to fraud.
Why not replace with a hardware-crippled 3GS? Remove a GPS chip here, limit the flash available there, and voila! We have an original iPhone, with maybe a newer outside appearance.
That strategy might not save much money, but it would reduce incentive for fraud.
You missed the point entirely. I never said that corporations pass on taxes by raising costs. My point was about shelf price perception, not about actual cost passing.
But let's turn to your point. Since gas includes tax, it is a good model to discuss (because it is not affected by the perception factor I described above). Let's assume that a ten-cent additional tax on gas was passed today. Are you saying, all other market factors aside, that the price of gas would not go up by ten cents?
Frankly, that's absurd, and mostly incorrect. Check out at the graphic here... it shows that taxes did not eat into profits, but rather added to the price. In other words, passed on to the consumer.
What about off-road diesel? The tax decrease is passed on to consumers as a direct decrease in sales price per gallon... they don't pad corporate profits.
Fuel aside, look at other items... does Walmart charge a different sticker price for a DVD player in two different cities that have different taxes? Does a Wii cost more (pre-tax) in one city than another? No.
I'd like to see how these talking points are "provably false" as you claim. I don't think you have any general proof... there may be one-off situations you can find, but I want to see something general.
Product prices will be the highest the market can bear, regardless of expenses. Software already has massive profit margins, so taxes merely eat into those profits, thus depriving the company from money they can use to buy other companies, run ad campaigns, pay bribes and manipulate market in other ways.
Which costs more, $9.99 worth of gas, or a video game priced at $9.99 on the shelf? The video game, of course, because tax is included in the price of gas but not the price of software. You're not wrong, but perception is key. There's a reason that game doesn't cost $10.00; it's the same reason that $999 is a magical price point for many desktop/notebook makers.
Let's go to a different world for a minute, where all sales prices include tax... do you think a laptop would still go for $1078? Probably not. Maybe $1049, but $999 would draw enough attention to be worth the loss of some per-unit profit. In either case, there is an overall loss of some profit.
So, taxes really don't eat into profits as much as you seem to suggest by asserting that the corporations directly pay them. In other words, the market can "bear" the taxes a little more simply because perception of the pricing structure tends to pass more of that burden on to the naive consumer.
Of course, maybe we the people of Alabama are tired of being stepped all over by the rest of the nation. WE didn't run our car industry off the road, WE didn't push our banks into bankruptcy, but WE are the people who get screwed by the government by first taking manufacturers away, and then taking jobs away in Huntsville.
By the way, that "pork" you talk about was guaranteed jobs coming in the form of an air tanker contract that would build the tankers in Mobile. Of course, after it was all decided, plans were conveniently changed and everything started back from scratch, with favoritism toward the competition.