Well, if it's something different, then it's something different. But if you say, "hey it has Conversation View" I'm going to call you an idiot because it's had that for years and years and years.
Maybe you're just getting older, your tastes are changing, and your response has nothing at all to do with the games industry. Or maybe you're buying crummy games, I suppose that's a possibility too.
Outlook finally catches up to Gmail with "conversation view."
Outlook has that now... heck it was in Outlook 2003 (and possibly earlier versions.) Go into a mailbox, click "Arranged By:" and select "Conversation."
I really have to wonder about any Office review written by somebody who seems to have no clue what features are already in Office... no personal offense intended.
But MS made it downright *IMPOSSIBLE* to reply selectively to quoted parts of an e-mail. I think it used to work in 2003, but in Outlook 2007 you can no longer do it. You MUST put 100% of your reply at the top, no matter how much you want to reply to a quote of the original (well you can copy/paste and reply to your own "pasted quote" but it is retarded).
Bullcrap, I did it about 10 minutes ago in Outlook 2007.
Pay attention because this is a really, really complicated procedure:
1) Click Reply 2) Position your cursor at the end of the line you want to reply to 3) Press Enter 4) Type your reply
That was pretty fucking hard, wasn't it, you complete retard?
And what if you are intimately familiar with it already? Is it really that hard to include an option to revert to the menu bar?
And double (or triple) the burden of: * QA? * Internationalization? * UI design? * UI testing? * Creative development?
No, that would be retarded. You obviously don't develop software, or if you do, you're pretty awful at doing risk/benefit analysis.
So MS totally sold me out (or would have if I were still using their products in 2007).
If you don't use their products, why the fuck are you even posting here? Go away.
As for all those functions found in a deep menu structure, well a lot of those functions are gone now too.
Name one.
Oh well - it's fun at the expense of others when they spend hours trying to include a 5.25" title section at the top of their document when it's as easy as \textwidth{width}{text} in Latex. A true victory for the ribbon, right? Just goes to show that you lose lots of basic functionality when you make other functions simpler.
I could potentially help you with that, but I don't know what a "title section" is, and Googling it turns up absolutely nothing relevant.
Well, a correct GUI has keyboard shortcuts for everything of consequence, so maybe you just really suck at writing a GUI.
Once you learn all the keyboard shortcuts in, for example, Visual Studio you can work just as fast as somebody using EMACs or VI. Admittedly, the shortcuts are slightly harder to learn, but then again, unlike those other editors they aren't *required*.
Wrap your head around this one. Remember that shitty movie Armageddeon? Look at their cast&crew list.
Armageddeon had:
1) An asteroid consultant ("Yes, I recommend that the asteroid has millions of tiny rocks flying around at all times, and makes a scary sawblade sound regularly.")
2) A Mission Control Advisor ("I think that it would make more sense if the only two world-saving shuttles we have available were launched simultaneously.")
3) A guy who specialized in space helmets ("Sure, the helmet could just constantly jet gas up to simulate gravity-- it makes perfect sense! And just so happens to make your production much cheaper.")
And of course, 4) A science consultant. I'm giving Marian Rudnyk here a pass since he had his name removed from the credits apparently.
They probably wanted to keep it a light science fiction action series and not a dense philosophical dirge by completely over-thinking every possible detail.
Most video games are like that, too. It's actually kind of irritating in more realistic games like STALKER, when you're running low on ammo for your weapon and you keep finding the wrong kind. ("Damn this Soviet crap, I need NATO!")
Note: I'm not a gun nut, so I probably sound like an idiot too.
No, the dumb part wasn't that they were using communication satellites-- any invading army with their resources would be doing that. (If nothing else, they'd probably want to put GPS satellites in orbit so they know where the hell they are.)
The truly retarded part was that they were using humanity's pre-existing satellites for that purpose instead of launching their own. Seriously? They can pack in two dozen city-sized flying saucers and millions of laser fighters in a moon-sized mothership, but they couldn't manage a few dozen 10-meter satellites?
Nope, instead of using our own satellites, let's give the humans an easily-detected warning that we're coming (complete with a countdown to the exact second of attack!), and let them decode our communication protocols while we're at it. It'll save a couple bucks.
Aliens that dumb deserved to be nuked by Mac from Earth Girls are Easy.
Actually... maybe not, now that I think about it. In that movie, the computer was programmed to be "curious" in that it would seek out information it hadn't previously been told about... I could see an argument that that's almost the same thing as sentience.
But in the movie it doesn't actually begin acting independently until it begins communicating to the Russian computer of similar capability.
Do you actually *watch* people typing IMs? I think the vast, vast, vast majority of people just wait for the "ding" and then check what was typed.
Anyway, I hated that feature. I didn't want people to know how many mistakes I made. Plus, I frequently start typing one IM, decide it's a bad reply for some reason, then delete the whole thing and start over... I don't need other people seeing that.
The lingo is awful, but the entire premise makes no sense whatsoever-- how do you hide a spreadsheet in a Xbox which can only be viewed if you make it to "level 10" on Prince of Persia? Moreover, does Prince of Persia even have a "level 10?" (No, it does not; the levels are names of different areas of the palace.)
Truly hilariously awful. Watch the actress whose fingers twitch while watching someone else playing the game.
I hope Ubisoft didn't pay anything for this product placement.
Who, oh who decided that having a sound every time you clicked on an item in the start menu? One of the first things I turn off on a new installation of Windows.
Nobody?
What version of Windows does that? Maybe one of the International builds is funky or something...?
I always wondered why in the first Star Wars, they couldn't just *transmit* (using whatever faster-than-light tech they normally use for communication) before the Death Star plans before the Empire got wind of their escape.
Although, I guess that would be easy to explain-away as the plans being super-huge files and the Empire chasing them as soon as they took off.
- The magical interface that allows Data to type whole programs by pressing one of 6 buttons on the side of a touchscreen.
Or that scene in Insurrection where Picard presses *literally two buttons* on the control panel of a *shuttlecraft* and it brings up the soundtrack of the H.M.S. Pinafore, complete with sing-along lyrics.
Of course that movie was awful, but... scenes like that make movies awful.
Hans... I've just noticed something. Have you looked at our caps recently? The badges on our caps, have you looked at them? They've got skulls on them.
If you want someone to blame, go blame the website operators, who've forced users to block ads because they got steadily more and more obnoxious, until they were simply too unbearable to endure any longer.
You have an interesting definition of the word "forced."
So should we submit a Slashdot article for every bug in every Linux distro of this approximate severity?
Look, if you don't like Windows, that's fine. I can understand that, and I can even emphasize with it. But articles like this are just embarrassing. If you have to stretch *this* far to make Windows 7 look bad, then Windows is looking pretty goddamned good.
This is not news. It's certainly not "stuff that matters."
It's awesome that you have to scroll through 30+ off-topic "System Restore sucks" posts before you get to the first post discussing the actual story and, more importantly, why it's complete crap.
I used to think that only the editors of this site sucked, now I'm starting to think the entire thing is beyond hope.
Haha, I just realized one of my "crap story" examples was the one I'm posting in! The hazards of responding to the emails, sorry.
I do enjoy that you have to read through two dozen "System Restore sux!" comments before you get to one actually discussing the issue. (And pointing out how crap the story is.) Of course they aren't modded off-topic, because they're critical of Microsoft.
First of all, your typing teacher must be spinning around in his grave. Who taught you that -> is acceptable punctuation in English? Or completely unnecessary double-nested parenthesis?
Secondly, the Register sucks donkey. Much like Slashdot, it's only a "good" news site if you compensate for the fact that a full third of the articles are flat-out lies, and that you need to read the comments for corrections. Which, given, might be the evil master plan here: "Hey, if we post flat-out lies, people will go to the comments to get the real story!" But I sure don't consider that as being a "good" news source.
It would be more accurate to say that Slashdot and El Reg, once in awhile, go an entire day without posting a single misleading story.
What's more scary is that I bet you just read the Slashdot homepage, and not the comments most of the time. (Because if you posted in the comments, I'd recognize your particular brand of pissing on the written English language.) Meaning, you're seeing the *uncorrected* version of the bullshit they're shoveling out... I can't even conceive of what kind of sick twisted BS-filled head that gives you.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if it's something different, then it's something different. But if you say, "hey it has Conversation View" I'm going to call you an idiot because it's had that for years and years and years.
Maybe you're just getting older, your tastes are changing, and your response has nothing at all to do with the games industry. Or maybe you're buying crummy games, I suppose that's a possibility too.
Outlook finally catches up to Gmail with "conversation view."
Outlook has that now... heck it was in Outlook 2003 (and possibly earlier versions.) Go into a mailbox, click "Arranged By:" and select "Conversation."
I really have to wonder about any Office review written by somebody who seems to have no clue what features are already in Office... no personal offense intended.
But MS made it downright *IMPOSSIBLE* to reply selectively to quoted parts of an e-mail. I think it used to work in 2003, but in Outlook 2007 you can no longer do it. You MUST put 100% of your reply at the top, no matter how much you want to reply to a quote of the original (well you can copy/paste and reply to your own "pasted quote" but it is retarded).
Bullcrap, I did it about 10 minutes ago in Outlook 2007.
Pay attention because this is a really, really complicated procedure:
1) Click Reply
2) Position your cursor at the end of the line you want to reply to
3) Press Enter
4) Type your reply
That was pretty fucking hard, wasn't it, you complete retard?
And what if you are intimately familiar with it already? Is it really that hard to include an option to revert to the menu bar?
And double (or triple) the burden of:
* QA?
* Internationalization?
* UI design?
* UI testing?
* Creative development?
No, that would be retarded. You obviously don't develop software, or if you do, you're pretty awful at doing risk/benefit analysis.
So MS totally sold me out (or would have if I were still using their products in 2007).
If you don't use their products, why the fuck are you even posting here? Go away.
As for all those functions found in a deep menu structure, well a lot of those functions are gone now too.
Name one.
Oh well - it's fun at the expense of others when they spend hours trying to include a 5.25" title section at the top of their document when it's as easy as \textwidth{width}{text} in Latex. A true victory for the ribbon, right? Just goes to show that you lose lots of basic functionality when you make other functions simpler.
I could potentially help you with that, but I don't know what a "title section" is, and Googling it turns up absolutely nothing relevant.
Well, a correct GUI has keyboard shortcuts for everything of consequence, so maybe you just really suck at writing a GUI.
Once you learn all the keyboard shortcuts in, for example, Visual Studio you can work just as fast as somebody using EMACs or VI. Admittedly, the shortcuts are slightly harder to learn, but then again, unlike those other editors they aren't *required*.
Wrap your head around this one. Remember that shitty movie Armageddeon? Look at their cast&crew list.
Armageddeon had:
1) An asteroid consultant ("Yes, I recommend that the asteroid has millions of tiny rocks flying around at all times, and makes a scary sawblade sound regularly.")
2) A Mission Control Advisor ("I think that it would make more sense if the only two world-saving shuttles we have available were launched simultaneously.")
3) A guy who specialized in space helmets ("Sure, the helmet could just constantly jet gas up to simulate gravity-- it makes perfect sense! And just so happens to make your production much cheaper.")
And of course, 4) A science consultant. I'm giving Marian Rudnyk here a pass since he had his name removed from the credits apparently.
Wow that meme is like 3 days old and already incredibly unamusing.
They probably wanted to keep it a light science fiction action series and not a dense philosophical dirge by completely over-thinking every possible detail.
Just a guess there, though.
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy.
Lucky. My power was out. :)
In Hollywood, all guns use the exact same ammo.
Most video games are like that, too. It's actually kind of irritating in more realistic games like STALKER, when you're running low on ammo for your weapon and you keep finding the wrong kind. ("Damn this Soviet crap, I need NATO!")
Note: I'm not a gun nut, so I probably sound like an idiot too.
What's TPM? I Googled it and got nothing (well, except a political blog.)
Just as a tip: acronyms should only be used if you're sure the party you're talking to is going to understand what the holy hell you mean.
No, the dumb part wasn't that they were using communication satellites-- any invading army with their resources would be doing that. (If nothing else, they'd probably want to put GPS satellites in orbit so they know where the hell they are.)
The truly retarded part was that they were using humanity's pre-existing satellites for that purpose instead of launching their own. Seriously? They can pack in two dozen city-sized flying saucers and millions of laser fighters in a moon-sized mothership, but they couldn't manage a few dozen 10-meter satellites?
Nope, instead of using our own satellites, let's give the humans an easily-detected warning that we're coming (complete with a countdown to the exact second of attack!), and let them decode our communication protocols while we're at it. It'll save a couple bucks.
Aliens that dumb deserved to be nuked by Mac from Earth Girls are Easy.
I can't, off the top of my head, think of any examples of an ordinary computer system developing self awareness independent of human interaction.
Colossus: The Forbin Project has one.
Actually... maybe not, now that I think about it. In that movie, the computer was programmed to be "curious" in that it would seek out information it hadn't previously been told about... I could see an argument that that's almost the same thing as sentience.
But in the movie it doesn't actually begin acting independently until it begins communicating to the Russian computer of similar capability.
Do you actually *watch* people typing IMs? I think the vast, vast, vast majority of people just wait for the "ding" and then check what was typed.
Anyway, I hated that feature. I didn't want people to know how many mistakes I made. Plus, I frequently start typing one IM, decide it's a bad reply for some reason, then delete the whole thing and start over... I don't need other people seeing that.
I bring you NBC's Life's take on Prince of Persia: http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/prince-of-persia-on-nbcs-life/129534 (Sorry for the ad-filled site; I can't find it on YouTube anymore.)
The lingo is awful, but the entire premise makes no sense whatsoever-- how do you hide a spreadsheet in a Xbox which can only be viewed if you make it to "level 10" on Prince of Persia? Moreover, does Prince of Persia even have a "level 10?" (No, it does not; the levels are names of different areas of the palace.)
Truly hilariously awful. Watch the actress whose fingers twitch while watching someone else playing the game.
I hope Ubisoft didn't pay anything for this product placement.
Who, oh who decided that having a sound every time you clicked on an item in the start menu? One of the first things I turn off on a new installation of Windows.
Nobody?
What version of Windows does that? Maybe one of the International builds is funky or something...?
I always wondered why in the first Star Wars, they couldn't just *transmit* (using whatever faster-than-light tech they normally use for communication) before the Death Star plans before the Empire got wind of their escape.
Although, I guess that would be easy to explain-away as the plans being super-huge files and the Empire chasing them as soon as they took off.
- The magical interface that allows Data to type whole programs by pressing one of 6 buttons on the side of a touchscreen.
Or that scene in Insurrection where Picard presses *literally two buttons* on the control panel of a *shuttlecraft* and it brings up the soundtrack of the H.M.S. Pinafore, complete with sing-along lyrics.
Of course that movie was awful, but... scenes like that make movies awful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEle_DLDg9Y
Hans... I've just noticed something. Have you looked at our caps recently? The badges on our caps, have you looked at them? They've got skulls on them.
If you want someone to blame, go blame the website operators, who've forced users to block ads because they got steadily more and more obnoxious, until they were simply too unbearable to endure any longer.
You have an interesting definition of the word "forced."
So should we submit a Slashdot article for every bug in every Linux distro of this approximate severity?
Look, if you don't like Windows, that's fine. I can understand that, and I can even emphasize with it. But articles like this are just embarrassing. If you have to stretch *this* far to make Windows 7 look bad, then Windows is looking pretty goddamned good.
This is not news. It's certainly not "stuff that matters."
It's awesome that you have to scroll through 30+ off-topic "System Restore sucks" posts before you get to the first post discussing the actual story and, more importantly, why it's complete crap.
I used to think that only the editors of this site sucked, now I'm starting to think the entire thing is beyond hope.
Haha, I just realized one of my "crap story" examples was the one I'm posting in! The hazards of responding to the emails, sorry.
I do enjoy that you have to read through two dozen "System Restore sux!" comments before you get to one actually discussing the issue. (And pointing out how crap the story is.) Of course they aren't modded off-topic, because they're critical of Microsoft.
First of all, your typing teacher must be spinning around in his grave. Who taught you that -> is acceptable punctuation in English? Or completely unnecessary double-nested parenthesis?
Secondly, the Register sucks donkey. Much like Slashdot, it's only a "good" news site if you compensate for the fact that a full third of the articles are flat-out lies, and that you need to read the comments for corrections. Which, given, might be the evil master plan here: "Hey, if we post flat-out lies, people will go to the comments to get the real story!" But I sure don't consider that as being a "good" news source.
It would be more accurate to say that Slashdot and El Reg, once in awhile, go an entire day without posting a single misleading story.
But, hell, remember this story? Load of crap. And, more recently, this one from just this weekend? Completely misleading.
What's more scary is that I bet you just read the Slashdot homepage, and not the comments most of the time. (Because if you posted in the comments, I'd recognize your particular brand of pissing on the written English language.) Meaning, you're seeing the *uncorrected* version of the bullshit they're shoveling out... I can't even conceive of what kind of sick twisted BS-filled head that gives you.