"Charlie Wilkes" <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> stated in post
[email]pan.2008.03.09.08.31.01@users.easynews.com[/email] on 3/9/08 1:31 AM:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>> how to install an OS. :)[/color]
>
> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
> same thing.[/color]

I think it is more true that old systems are sometimes replaced when things
go screwy because it is decided getting a new system is preferable to
spending the time / money to fix the old. The older the system and the
greater the need the more likely they are to replace it.

People do the same thing with cars and other tools.

With that said: I have on multiple occasions been able to clean up a system
that the user figured they would soon replace and make it so it worked well
enough for them to decide to keep it for several more years.

--
BU__SH__

"Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:fr07d7$9e1$1@registered.motzarella.org...[color=blue]
> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>> wrote:[/color][/color][/color]

[color=blue][color=green]
>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>> same thing.[/color]
>
> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.[/color]

Not nonsense at all. The majority of my calls are from people wanting to
buy
a new PC when all they need is an OS repair or reinstall.

Tom Lake

"Tom Lake" <toml_12953********.com> writes:
[color=blue]
> "Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:fr07d7$9e1$1@registered.motzarella.org...[color=green]
>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>>> wrote:[/color][/color]
>
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>> same thing.[/color]
>>
>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.[/color]
>
> Not nonsense at all. The majority of my calls are from people wanting
> to buy
> a new PC when all they need is an OS repair or reinstall.
>
> Tom Lake
>[/color]


I will take your word for it that it is not nonsense that the majority
of people that call you might want that. It is nonsense to say that the
majority of people who do not call you want that. And one group
significantly outsizes the other.

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:24:33 +0100, Hadron wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Tom Lake" <toml_12953********.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:fr07d7$9e1$1@registered.motzarella.org...[color=darkred]
>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose
>>>>>> <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:[/color]
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in
>>>> any way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've
>>>> seen the same thing.
>>>
>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare
>>> indeed.[/color]
>>
>> Not nonsense at all. The majority of my calls are from people wanting
>> to buy
>> a new PC when all they need is an OS repair or reinstall.
>>
>> Tom Lake
>>
>>[/color]
>
> I will take your word for it that it is not nonsense that the majority
> of people that call you might want that. It is nonsense to say that the
> majority of people who do not call you want that. And one group
> significantly outsizes the other.[/color]

Why do people need to upgrade? Just so they can run Vista?

As far as I can tell, the gaming and video processing are the two main
consumer activities that call for high-end hardware. The rest of it is
mostly surfing the web, email, downloading and playing music or TV shows,
and running office applications. That's 90% of what people do with their
computers. What value do such people get from an upgrade? Any machine
made in the last 5 years will do fine.

That is why these "ultra-mobile PCs" are selling. People look at them
and think, "how convenient." They don't care if the hard drive is
miniscule and the CPU is a 900 mhz clunker... because they know any ****
computer will be good enough for what they do.

That would not have been true 10 years ago. Back then, there was a HUGE
performance difference between a new machine versus one that was 3 years
old. That is why Bill Gates got to be the richest guy in the world. His
company was selling expensive software licenses that had to be replaced
every 2 or 3 years. But not any more!

Charlie

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:38:04 -0700, Snit wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Charlie Wilkes" <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> stated in post
> [email]pan.2008.03.09.08.31.01@users.easynews.com[/email] on 3/9/08 1:31 AM:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>>> how to install an OS. :)[/color]
>>
>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in
>> any way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen
>> the same thing.[/color]
>
> I think it is more true that old systems are sometimes replaced when
> things go screwy because it is decided getting a new system is
> preferable to spending the time / money to fix the old. The older the
> system and the greater the need the more likely they are to replace it.[/color]

That's half true. People think it will be almost as expensive to fix as
to replace... but that is only because they don't understand what is
wrong. They think their computer is getting worn out the way an old
engine wears out... but in fact, the hardware is as good as it was brand-
new. All they need is a fresh reinstall from the ground up.

Of course, the OEMs make it difficult for customers to get factory disks,
because they want people to buy new machines. But the disks are
available.
[color=blue]
>
> People do the same thing with cars and other tools.
>
> With that said: I have on multiple occasions been able to clean up a
> system that the user figured they would soon replace and make it so it
> worked well enough for them to decide to keep it for several more years.[/color]

Exactly. I have done that as well. Sometimes all it takes is a registry
cleaner and a program to get rid of spyware.

Charlie

"Charlie Wilkes" <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> stated in post
[email]pan.2008.03.09.11.49.33@users.easynews.com[/email] on 3/9/08 4:50 AM:
[color=blue]
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:38:04 -0700, Snit wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "Charlie Wilkes" <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> stated in post
>> [email]pan.2008.03.09.08.31.01@users.easynews.com[/email] on 3/9/08 1:31 AM:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>>>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>>>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>>>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>>>> how to install an OS. :)
>>>
>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in
>>> any way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen
>>> the same thing.[/color]
>>
>> I think it is more true that old systems are sometimes replaced when
>> things go screwy because it is decided getting a new system is
>> preferable to spending the time / money to fix the old. The older the
>> system and the greater the need the more likely they are to replace it.[/color]
>
> That's half true. People think it will be almost as expensive to fix as
> to replace...[/color]

Or just do not want to put much money into an older system.
[color=blue]
> but that is only because they don't understand what is wrong.[/color]

Right - if they really understood what was going on they would fix it
themselves.
[color=blue]
> They think their computer is getting worn out the way an old engine wears
> out... but in fact, the hardware is as good as it was brand- new. All they
> need is a fresh reinstall from the ground up.[/color]

They often know that - but do not want to lose their data... and might not
even know how to start from scratch with the machine. Or want to spend the
time it would take them.
[color=blue]
> Of course, the OEMs make it difficult for customers to get factory disks,
> because they want people to buy new machines. But the disks are
> available.[/color]

They are... but it is absurd to not ship them with machines.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> People do the same thing with cars and other tools.
>>
>> With that said: I have on multiple occasions been able to clean up a
>> system that the user figured they would soon replace and make it so it
>> worked well enough for them to decide to keep it for several more years.[/color]
>
> Exactly. I have done that as well. Sometimes all it takes is a registry
> cleaner and a program to get rid of spyware.[/color]

What registry cleaner do you use? I often just use AVG and Spybot - the
latter to not just get rid of spyware but also to stop all the BS startup
items from starting.


--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
--Albert Einstein

Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
[color=blue]
> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:24:33 +0100, Hadron wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "Tom Lake" <toml_12953********.com> writes:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fr07d7$9e1$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose
>>>>>>> <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in
>>>>> any way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've
>>>>> seen the same thing.
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare
>>>> indeed.
>>>
>>> Not nonsense at all. The majority of my calls are from people wanting
>>> to buy
>>> a new PC when all they need is an OS repair or reinstall.
>>>
>>> Tom Lake
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>> I will take your word for it that it is not nonsense that the majority
>> of people that call you might want that. It is nonsense to say that the
>> majority of people who do not call you want that. And one group
>> significantly outsizes the other.[/color]
>
> Why do people need to upgrade? Just so they can run Vista?[/color]

One reason. I am nit necessarily supporting or ****ing Vista
here. Personally I dont like Vista. But "most" people do not buy a new
machine when XP could be tidied up. We didn't even mention Vista. You
are throwing in a strawman.

But I guess that most people who move to Vista will upgrade at the same
time.

Jesus, I know people who upgraded for Quake III!
[color=blue]
> As far as I can tell, the gaming and video processing are the two main
> consumer activities that call for high-end hardware. The rest of it is
> mostly surfing the web, email, downloading and playing music or TV shows,
> and running office applications. That's 90% of what people do with their
> computers. What value do such people get from an upgrade? Any machine
> made in the last 5 years will do fine.[/color]

You are correct. But flawed in your interpretations. Even if it IS only
10% of the time playing games, then the PC must still be up to it.
[color=blue]
>
> That is why these "ultra-mobile PCs" are selling. People look at them
> and think, "how convenient." They don't care if the hard drive is
> miniscule and the CPU is a 900 mhz clunker... because they know any ****
> computer will be good enough for what they do.[/color]

Which in a mobile environment does not involve gaming or video rendering
etc etc. I use a years old laptop - a Thinkpad x30. But guess what?
Despite a gig of ram it runs Open Office like a dog. It's simply not
powerful enough IMO.
[color=blue]
>
> That would not have been true 10 years ago. Back then, there was a HUGE
> performance difference between a new machine versus one that was 3 years
> old. That is why Bill Gates got to be the richest guy in the world. His
> company was selling expensive software licenses that had to be replaced
> every 2 or 3 years. But not any more![/color]

What is not anymore? MS just made record profits.

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:24:52 +0100, Hadron wrote:
[color=blue]
> I am nit[/color]

[url]http://www.head-lice-gone.com/[/url]

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 06:51:26 -0700, Snit wrote:
[color=blue]
> What registry cleaner do you use? I often just use AVG and Spybot - the
> latter to not just get rid of spyware but also to stop all the BS
> startup items from starting.
>[/color]
I use RegscrubXP and Regseeker for really old (w98) systems.

I don't know that they are the best, but they have never caused me any
problems.

Charlie

On 2008-03-09, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I install Ubuntu on it. You know what happened to her plans to buy a
>>>>>new Vista computer? They went down the drain. She's perfectly happy now
>>>>>with her machine and saved herself quite some money.
>>>>>
>>>>>So that is one person who tried Linux and the only thing that was
>>>>>quickly dumped was the idea of buying a Vista computer.
>>>>
>>>> Fine. Not everyone has a guru to do installs for them.
>>>
>>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>>> how to install an OS. :)[/color]
>>
>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>> same thing.[/color]
>
> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.[/color]

My mother-in-law recently did just this. Her old machine got bogged
down by malware so she thought she needed to get a new machine. So
she goes out and buys this new machine...

....just to get it loaded down with malware crap.

We clean it off a couple of times for her and tell her to be
more careful. She just ignores us and gets herself re-infected.

Plenty of people thing "slow machine" -> "need to buy new machine".

That's been the usual consumer thinking for the first 20 years of the
consumer computer industry where the progress of software actually
made this somewhat reasonable.

--
Nothing quite gives you an understanding of mysql's |||
popularity as does an attempt to do some simple date / | \
manipulations in postgres.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
[url]http://www.usenet.com[/url]

On 2008-03-10, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>[color=green]
>> On 2008-03-09, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I install Ubuntu on it. You know what happened to her plans to buy a
>>>>>>>new Vista computer? They went down the drain. She's perfectly happy now
>>>>>>>with her machine and saved herself quite some money.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So that is one person who tried Linux and the only thing that was
>>>>>>>quickly dumped was the idea of buying a Vista computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fine. Not everyone has a guru to do installs for them.
>>>>>
>>>>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>>>>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>>>>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>>>>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>>>>> how to install an OS. :)
>>>>
>>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>>> same thing.
>>>
>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.[/color]
>>
>> My mother-in-law recently did just this. Her old machine got bogged
>> down by malware so she thought she needed to get a new machine. So
>> she goes out and buys this new machine...[/color]
>
> One in a blue moon. I am always amazed at how in COLA people think
> everyone else are incompetent. And at the same time COLA advocates
> demand "proof" that a consistent UI is a good thing. Amazing.[/color]

Simple and functional trumps consistent.

This is why Xsane has always been better than the "more
consistent" windows scanner interfaces. It hides a lot of the
potential complexity of scanning.

There's more to UI design than just having the file menu
layed out in a particular order.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>>
>> ...just to get it loaded down with malware crap.
>>
>> We clean it off a couple of times for her and tell her to be
>> more careful. She just ignores us and gets herself re-infected.
>>
>> Plenty of people thing "slow machine" -> "need to buy new machine".[/color]
>
> No. SOME people do. Most people never even get this slow down because
> they set up XP properly and do not run exes from porn sites.[/color]

Yes, it's all because my mother-in-law surfs for _porn_.

Sometimes you people are better at making our point than we are.

--
....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform.
|||
/ | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
[url]http://www.usenet.com[/url]

JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
[color=blue]
> On 2008-03-10, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On 2008-03-09, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I install Ubuntu on it. You know what happened to her plans to buy a
>>>>>>>>new Vista computer? They went down the drain. She's perfectly happy now
>>>>>>>>with her machine and saved herself quite some money.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So that is one person who tried Linux and the only thing that was
>>>>>>>>quickly dumped was the idea of buying a Vista computer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fine. Not everyone has a guru to do installs for them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That goes for Windows as much as it goes for Linux though. This person
>>>>>> is about as capable of installing windows as she is installing linux:
>>>>>> Not at all. I suspect that is the reason for the success of companies
>>>>>> such as Dell...preinstalled systems which don't need the user to know
>>>>>> how to install an OS. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>>>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>>>> same thing.
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.
>>>
>>> My mother-in-law recently did just this. Her old machine got bogged
>>> down by malware so she thought she needed to get a new machine. So
>>> she goes out and buys this new machine...[/color]
>>
>> One in a blue moon. I am always amazed at how in COLA people think
>> everyone else are incompetent. And at the same time COLA advocates
>> demand "proof" that a consistent UI is a good thing. Amazing.[/color]
>
> Simple and functional trumps consistent.[/color]

Ye gods. They go together.
[color=blue]
>
> This is why Xsane has always been better than the "more
> consistent" windows scanner interfaces. It hides a lot of the
> potential complexity of scanning.
>
> There's more to UI design than just having the file menu
> layed out in a particular order.[/color]

Do you really think that is all we mean by "consistent"?

There is a LOT to UI design as you acknowledge. But consistency and
component reuse is a major "must have" in any performing desktop.

> Hadron wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>>
>> Charlie Wilkes writes:[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> The significant point (to me at least) is that people replace their
>>> systems not because the hardware is too old or too slow or damaged in any
>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>> same thing.[/color]
>>
>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.[/color][/color]

LOL

You stupid POS, Quack. Your pathetic attempt to defend your beloved
Microshaft Corp is known to be false. "Once in a blue moon indeed."
It happens A LOT.

On 2008-03-11, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>[color=green]
>> On 2008-03-10, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2008-03-09, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:[/color][/color][/color]
[deletia][color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>>>>> same thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.
>>>>
>>>> My mother-in-law recently did just this. Her old machine got bogged
>>>> down by malware so she thought she needed to get a new machine. So
>>>> she goes out and buys this new machine...
>>>
>>> One in a blue moon. I am always amazed at how in COLA people think
>>> everyone else are incompetent. And at the same time COLA advocates
>>> demand "proof" that a consistent UI is a good thing. Amazing.[/color]
>>
>> Simple and functional trumps consistent.[/color]
>
> Ye gods. They go together.
>[color=green]
>>
>> This is why Xsane has always been better than the "more
>> consistent" windows scanner interfaces. It hides a lot of the
>> potential complexity of scanning.
>>[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> There's more to UI design than just having the file menu
>> layed out in a particular order.[/color]
>
> Do you really think that is all we mean by "consistent"?
>
> There is a LOT to UI design as you acknowledge. But consistency and
> component reuse is a major "must have" in any performing desktop.[/color]

Component reuse != consistency.

Don't be a clueless moron.

Although I've brought up the idea of "system menuing" before
where these consistent menus you guys like to fixate on so much are
provided by the OS/API rather than just being something you mock up
in visual studio.

--
....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform.
|||
/ | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
[url]http://www.usenet.com[/url]

JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
[color=blue]
> On 2008-03-11, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On 2008-03-10, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2008-03-09, Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:57:54 -0600, Stephan Rose wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:16:01 -0800, Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0600, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:[/color][/color]
> [deletia][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>>> way, but because the OS has gotten screwed up over time. I've seen the
>>>>>>> same thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nonsense. It might happen once in a blue moon but it is very rare indeed.
>>>>>
>>>>> My mother-in-law recently did just this. Her old machine got bogged
>>>>> down by malware so she thought she needed to get a new machine. So
>>>>> she goes out and buys this new machine...
>>>>
>>>> One in a blue moon. I am always amazed at how in COLA people think
>>>> everyone else are incompetent. And at the same time COLA advocates
>>>> demand "proof" that a consistent UI is a good thing. Amazing.
>>>
>>> Simple and functional trumps consistent.[/color]
>>
>> Ye gods. They go together.
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> This is why Xsane has always been better than the "more
>>> consistent" windows scanner interfaces. It hides a lot of the
>>> potential complexity of scanning.
>>>[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> There's more to UI design than just having the file menu
>>> layed out in a particular order.[/color]
>>
>> Do you really think that is all we mean by "consistent"?
>>
>> There is a LOT to UI design as you acknowledge. But consistency and
>> component reuse is a major "must have" in any performing desktop.[/color]
>
> Component reuse != consistency.[/color]

Oh dear me. It's one of the baselines. If you know what component
means in this context that is. And you obviously don't.
[color=blue]
>
> Don't be a clueless moron.
>
> Although I've brought up the idea of "system menuing" before
> where these consistent menus you guys like to fixate on so much are
> provided by the OS/API rather than just being something you mock up
> in visual studio.[/color]

WTF are you waffling on about?

The "OS" provides sweet FA in Linux case. The components and standards
are defined by Gnome/KDE/QT/X etc.