Windows 7 Released to Manufacturing

This is a discussion on Windows 7 Released to Manufacturing within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by MK27 Well, maybe first you guys should ask for more than one workspace I have more than ...

  1. #76
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by MK27 View Post
    Well, maybe first you guys should ask for more than one workspace
    I have more than one workspace in windows since 98SE, thank you. Now, hush.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  2. #77
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Quote Originally Posted by sean View Post
    For someone who thinks 'want' and 'need' mean the same thing, you've started an awfully long argument that's all about semantics, and now you're being picky about the word 'sell'. You're trying to 'sell' us on the idea that you should try things before dismissing them, when nobody ever really dismissed Win7, they just said they didn't need it - you can bet they've at least looked at what Windows 7 offers, and if MS's marketing fails to show them exactly how it can help them, nobody needs to investigate further. That's exactly the same as saying that you dismissed Linux because you won't try all the distros. Well of COURSE you're not going to do that, because nobody's been able to show you a compelling reason why your particular situation demands Linux.

    You're trying to defend a company that's made billions of dollars on less-than-unquestionable business practices, telling us we need to give them a chance? Yeah right. If you like it, more power to you. But you can't honestly say that anyone in this thread has made an ignorant, uneducated decision to ignore anything. Abachler makes a very good argument as to why he doesn't need Linux, and I think it's abundantly clear in everyone's post why they're choosing to not investigate Win7 further. I haven't seen any of the typical MS-bashing in this thread, it's all be very moderate statements like "I can't afford to upgrade" or "I'm going to wait a year to see how it does in the battlefield".
    Now we're working with an alternative version of sell too? I guess it could be used that way, too, although not the word of choice I would prefer, but oh well.
    Anyway, I don't think there's any need to further my "arguments" anymore. I think I've lined out them a lot! That should do, shouldn't it? It's up to people to choose, after all.
    Oh and I'm defending the "try before you judge" approach, not just Microsoft. I'd do the same for any other product.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  3. #78
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    I have more than one workspace in windows since 98SE, thank you. Now, hush.
    Whew!

    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    Anyway, I don't think there's any need to further my "arguments" anymore. I think I've lined out them a lot!
    Use a red pen more next time
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  4. #79
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Quote Originally Posted by MK27 View Post
    Use a red pen more next time
    I don't like red, how about black?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  5. #80
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    I don't like red, how about black?
    I think we should poll to bring back <blink>
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  6. #81
    Unregistered User Yarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,597
    Some people. Even if you've never used either one before, there are some things that tip it off. Like would Microsoft eliminate their oh so precious logo to make room for KDE's? Or replace their regiment of native software for a completely new set, that, again doesn't say MICROSOFT anywhere? He he.
    A class that doesn't overload all operators just isn't finished yet. -- SmugCeePlusPlusWeenie
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God. -- Alan J. Perlis

  7. #82
    and the hat of sweating
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    3,545
    I think Elysia is just trying to get her # of posts to catch up with Salem.
    "I am probably the laziest programmer on the planet, a fact with which anyone who has ever seen my code will agree." - esbo, 11/15/2008

    "the internet is a scary place to be thats why i dont use it much." - billet, 03/17/2010

  8. #83
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarin View Post
    Some people. Even if you've never used either one before, there are some things that tip it off. Like would Microsoft eliminate their oh so precious logo to make room for KDE's? Or replace their regiment of native software for a completely new set, that, again doesn't say MICROSOFT anywhere? He he.
    The "problem" is that it isn't people's fault. For years now the "easy of use" pattern has been dominating the collective thought of everyone involved in the computer market. From developers to customers. There is a complete and utter aversion to anything that is slightly more complicated. Even if more usable, even if with more features, you sure can expect a negative note on user-friendliness... the worst term ever invented. And anything that is visibly difficult to use is coined "for experts", even if it's not that difficult and just demands a little of study. Like reading a user manual.

    User-friendly is a term that will hopefully one day be defined on Merriam-Webster's as:

    Adjective
    1. Having or being of no use. Not being able to service or aid.
    2. Lacking or promoting the lack of intelligence or reason.

    User-friendly was a late 20th century pop culture sub-movement (see 2nd Millennium cultures), that promoted
    usability through easy of use. A concept we know today is incompatible with -- or delays -- technological
    advancements. It was particularly dangerous during the early 21st century when it started to become obvious
    it also resulted in user mental and physical apathy. In the year 2057, in December 13 at 12:45 the Cleansing
    took place. Defenders of this concept which included notable software critics at the time, magazines staff,
    software developers and product management teams around the world, where all arrested and executed
    shortly after.
    Jokes aside, one cannot really expect these and many other people around the world to understand much about computers when there is clearly an attempt at having them not need to understand anything about a computer in order to use it. The only comfort I take of this is that the situation has became so out of hand that, apparently, not even branding escaped.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  9. #84
    int x = *((int *) NULL); Cactus_Hugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Banks of the River Styx
    Posts
    902
    The "problem" is that it isn't people's fault. For years now the "easy of use" pattern has been dominating the collective thought of everyone involved in the computer market. From developers to customers. There is a complete and utter aversion to anything that is slightly more complicated. Even if more usable, even if with more features, you sure can expect a negative note on user-friendliness... the worst term ever invented. And anything that is visibly difficult to use is coined "for experts", even if it's not that difficult and just demands a little of study. Like reading a user manual.
    Amen, but fail with those [code] tags. I don't mind it being 'user-friendly', as long as the power is there. Give me the command line version, if possible. Don't hide stuff from me, and keep things simple so as to be easy to inter-operate.
    long time; /* know C? */
    Unprecedented performance: Nothing ever ran this slow before.
    Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
    Real Programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas, because dec 25 == oct 31.
    The best way to accelerate an IBM is at 9.8 m/s/s.
    recursion (re - cur' - zhun) n. 1. (see recursion)

  10. #85
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    I think I agree with you (Mario F. and Cactus_Hugger). The main reason for that, is that "ease of use" has gotten many people to use the Internet who simply don't have the knowledge to use it safely. They don't understand why it's a bad idea to give out personal information, they have a hard time recognizing scams, they pick poor passwords, etc... However I can't help but thinking that the whole point of technology is to make life easier. I think the 'user-friendly' attribute causes plenty of problems, but if the average person can't get the job done easily with alternative operating systems, then I don't think either camp is entirely correct.

  11. #86
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,590
    The good thing is that DX11 will work on Vista too. Yay for DX11 - it's the future.
    I was not implying that DX11 is the future b/c we all know that company line and it just doesn't hold water anymore.

    But I will be forced to upgrade even if I do not want to b/c when they drop support it's like the SDK's disappeared off the face of the earth. Then when you install the new DX runtimes you get a mismatch between the export libs you link with and the actual DLLs that are loaded. Then you also have a document mismatch. And while DX11 has DX10 and DX10 has DX9 and DX9 has DX8 from a pure binary standpoint - the SDKs do not have the documentation for older versions of DirectX. So even though older versions still 'work' good luck trying to find any good documentation on them.

    For DX8 I've been using the Windows CE reference and so far it has worked. Other than that I'm left with the horrible task of parsing through the headers to figure out the params for certain calls.

    For Microsoft to say that DX will run on this or that version of their OS but not another is pure marketing. It is the same concept as saying my abstract base class will not run on your computer. It doesn't make any sense at all. This is probably one reason why so many outright rejected 10. We knew deep down that it very well could run on XP and the real reason behind the issue was Microsoft was trying to strong arm you into Vista. I really do not think that approach worked well at all since most games even now are usually for DX9.0c with a small blurb about DX10 if you want to use it.

  12. #87
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by sean View Post
    However I can't help but thinking that the whole point of technology is to make life easier. I think the 'user-friendly' attribute causes plenty of problems, but if the average person can't get the job done easily with alternative operating systems, then I don't think either camp is entirely correct.
    It's a strong argument, indeed. But we cannot successfully promote easy of use with the current methods. There's something really scary about modern, sophisticated, users not being able to properly use a technological tool such as a computer.

    I always supported the notion that, at least in the computing area, users must be knowledgeable enough. That a computer should promote knowledge and not hide it. You, I and many others in here started our computing experience in our early teens, back in the 80s. Without internet, little or no access to books and virtually the only person in the hood with a computer. With just manuals and our 15 year old wits we managed to "decode" MSDOS and/or UNIX. We managed to connect to BBSs, tamper with our home phones and spread the knowledge to our friends and family.

    I'm not arguing this should stay the same. But I sure am arguing that it isn't that difficult. Meanwhile, today there is a big gap that continues to grow between the technological offerings and usability.Through "easy of use", users have been consistently distancing themselves from the technology. No matter how hard we try a computer isn't today (and hardly will ever be in the near future) an innocuous tool such as a television.

    The result is an hefty investment in security with little to no results, primarily because the technology is still young (and should have never been used outside testing conditions), but mostly because "easy of use" places the responsibility solely on the hands of the creators, exactly where there is less an ability to provide a secure system.
    Last edited by Mario F.; 07-30-2009 at 05:10 PM.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  13. #88
    and the hat of sweating
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    3,545
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    The "problem" is that it isn't people's fault. For years now the "easy of use" pattern has been dominating the collective thought of everyone involved in the computer market. From developers to customers. There is a complete and utter aversion to anything that is slightly more complicated. Even if more usable, even if with more features, you sure can expect a negative note on user-friendliness... the worst term ever invented. And anything that is visibly difficult to use is coined "for experts", even if it's not that difficult and just demands a little of study. Like reading a user manual.
    I don't see why an OS can't be powerful AND easy to use?
    All you'd need to do with take the GUI from Windows and pop it into Linux and then you've got Lindows, a powerful & easy to use OS.

    Why should non-computer nerds be excluded from the wonderful world of computing? How would you like to be excluded from the world of driving, just because you're not a mechanic?
    "I am probably the laziest programmer on the planet, a fact with which anyone who has ever seen my code will agree." - esbo, 11/15/2008

    "the internet is a scary place to be thats why i dont use it much." - billet, 03/17/2010

  14. #89
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by cpjust View Post
    I don't see why an OS can't be powerful AND easy to use?
    All you'd need to do with take the GUI from Windows and pop it into Linux and then you've got Lindows, a powerful & easy to use OS.

    Why should non-computer nerds be excluded from the wonderful world of computing? How would you like to be excluded from the world of driving, just because you're not a mechanic?
    I'm not sure what any of that has to do with what I'm saying.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  15. #90
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    All you'd need to do with take the GUI from Windows and pop it into Linux and then you've got Lindows, a powerful & easy to use OS.
    I believe Ubuntu and Kubuntu have already accomplished that - with very polished final products that are very familiar to Mac and Windows users. Unless you _want_ to do UNIX-hacker-type things, you really don't have to, and it's very easy to learn, anyway. I think the only problem is the fear of switching and the lack of support from commercially reputable companies.

    But I sure am arguing that it isn't that difficult.
    If you're into that, of course it's not. Problem is, most people aren't interested enough to put that much work in - they just expect it to do the job without them having to think about. That being right or wrong, is up for debate. But there are definitely different expectations people have from their computers in all parts of the spectrum.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone using Windows 7?
    By Sharke in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 07-12-2009, 08:05 AM
  2. dual boot Win XP, win 2000
    By Micko in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-30-2005, 02:55 PM
  3. SDL and Windows
    By nickname_changed in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-24-2003, 12:19 AM
  4. Dos differences in Windows NT and Windows XP
    By Ruchikar in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-17-2003, 11:36 PM
  5. IE 6 status bar
    By DavidP in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-23-2002, 05:31 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21