Re:Complexity is like a liquid...incompressible
on
Gartner Slams Linux
·
· Score: 1
The user interface is "fine" (in fact, far more usable for a naive user than Linux, IMO) because MS spends beaucoup bucks testing usability and hiring human factors people. That, and they stole a good base UI from the Mac (who, in their turn, stole it from Xerox).
Not to nit-pick, but Apple licensed the Xerox GUI. Also, while MS might spend a lot of money to test usability, but I find many aspects of Windows to be counter-intuitive.
For example, when I first started using Win95 at home (before then I used mostly MacOS/Solaris)I had a problem with file associations. I tried just about everything trying to find where you controlled file associations. I was expecting to find it in the document properties or in a control panel or something. Finally, I picked up Windows Annoyances and found that it was in Windows explorer under View:Options
Now does this make any sense, that you would change settings with the View menubar???? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGG!!!!!!!
I agree that Linux GUIs have a long way to go, but I have yet to come across anything near as boneheaded as this in my one year of Linux use. And while Windows users are dependent on MS to make improvements. If a Linux user sees an improvement or wants to change something, s/he can change it themself. In the long term, this is going to result in a very refind GUI. And not just one GUI, we have a choice of GUIs that are compatable with Linux applications.
Putting aside the ethical arguments about this for the moment, this reminds me of what one of my professors told me about his days as a programmer when he was in the military years and years ago....
Basically, they judged the programmers' productivity on how often the successfully compiled a program. There are several problems with this. First, just because a program compiles doesn't mean it is a good program, and second, they could just compile the same program over and over again looked the same is compiling new programs. It got to the point where no programming was being done because everyone was compiling the same programs over and over again because if they didn't they would look bad in comparison to the others.... (and just think of the CPU cycles devoted to compiling useless programs.)
Monitoring software these days is more sophisticated, but there is still probably a way to fool it. What it all comes down to is, is the work that you are getting paid to do being done?
Consider that some companies will spend millions of dollars trying to find a way to get one more minute of productivity out of every work hour. They might be successful, but by trying to squeaze blood out of a turnip they've spent more money than they have gained from the increased productivity. And then because of the bad moral, the general productivity will probably go down. People don't work good under constant stress.
To re-iterate, think of it this way, what if your company hired an extra person for everyone to stand and watch over their shoulder all day. Anything they gain in productivity is lost in payroll because they have to hire two people, one to do the work, and another to watch over them. And then it is a double loss because no one works their best with someone watching over them.
Finally consider turnover. Employees would not want to stick around long in such an environment. At best the company would lose their best employees, and probably have a high turnover in general. Turnover is not good for productivity.
The Price of Liberty is Eternal Vigilance
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
Please understand this when we fight any infringment on our freedom.
"Those who would have security over liberty deserve neither." -Thomas Jefferson
Didn't Ben Franklin say that? (It is one of my favorite quotes.)
Anyway, while for the most part I'm against government regulation (Censorship) of the internet, and internet taxes and such, I do think that consumer protection and privacy laws might be a "good thing." If a company posts their customers' credit card numbers, or something equally boneheaded, they should be held responsible.
Furthermore, I think that Corporate regulation (censorship) of the internet is more likely to happen, which is just part of the reason I use a loal ISP. (I wouldn't want an ISP that didn't give me shell account.)
Slashdot Mirror
The user interface is "fine" (in fact, far more usable for a naive user than Linux, IMO) because MS spends beaucoup bucks testing usability and hiring human factors people. That, and they stole a good base UI from the Mac (who, in their turn, stole it from Xerox).
Not to nit-pick, but Apple licensed the Xerox GUI.
Also, while MS might spend a lot of money to test usability, but I find many aspects of Windows to be counter-intuitive.
For example, when I first started using Win95 at home (before then I used mostly MacOS/Solaris)I had a problem with file associations. I tried just about everything trying to find where you controlled file associations. I was expecting to find it in the document properties or in a control panel or something. Finally, I picked up Windows Annoyances and found that it was in Windows explorer under View:Options
Now does this make any sense, that you would change settings with the View menubar???? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGG!!!!!!!
I agree that Linux GUIs have a long way to go, but I have yet to come across anything near as boneheaded as this in my one year of Linux use. And while Windows users are dependent on MS to make improvements. If a Linux user sees an improvement or wants to change something, s/he can change it themself. In the long term, this is going to result in a very refind GUI. And not just one GUI, we have a choice of GUIs that are compatable with Linux applications.
Putting aside the ethical arguments about this for the moment, this reminds me of what one of my professors told me about his days as a programmer when he was in the military years and years ago....
Basically, they judged the programmers' productivity on how often the successfully compiled a program. There are several problems with this. First, just because a program compiles doesn't mean it is a good program, and second, they could just compile the same program over and over again looked the same is compiling new programs. It got to the point where no programming was being done because everyone was compiling the same programs over and over again because if they didn't they would look bad in comparison to the others.... (and just think of the CPU cycles devoted to compiling useless programs.)
Monitoring software these days is more sophisticated, but there is still probably a way to fool it. What it all comes down to is, is the work that you are getting paid to do being done?
Consider that some companies will spend millions of dollars trying to find a way to get one more minute of productivity out of every work hour. They might be successful, but by trying to squeaze blood out of a turnip they've spent more money than they have gained from the increased productivity. And then because of the bad moral, the general productivity will probably go down. People don't work good under constant stress.
To re-iterate, think of it this way, what if your company hired an extra person for everyone to stand and watch over their shoulder all day. Anything they gain in productivity is lost in payroll because they have to hire two people, one to do the work, and another to watch over them. And then it is a double loss because no one works their best with someone watching over them.
Finally consider turnover. Employees would not want to stick around long in such an environment. At best the company would lose their best employees, and probably have a high turnover in general. Turnover is not good for productivity.
Please understand this when we fight any infringment on our freedom.
"Those who would have security over liberty deserve neither." -Thomas Jefferson
Didn't Ben Franklin say that?
(It is one of my favorite quotes.)
Anyway, while for the most part I'm against government regulation (Censorship) of the internet, and internet taxes and such, I do think that consumer protection and privacy laws might be a "good thing." If a company posts their customers' credit card numbers, or something equally boneheaded, they should be held responsible.
Furthermore, I think that Corporate regulation (censorship) of the internet is more likely to happen, which is just part of the reason I use a loal ISP. (I wouldn't want an ISP that didn't give me shell account.)
New slashdot Poll:
Favorite Gothic Folk Music:
The Legendary Pink Dots
Current 93
(Or should we just all sing "It's the end of the world as we know it....")