Thread: A New Reason to Hate Windows

Originally Posted by whiteflags

It is entirely a windows fault, because of what a file extension really is in windows. The only other API function that needs to be called, if you use an application to change file associations, is SHChangeNotify function (Windows). If an application has permission to change the registry, which it does sometimes, under the UAC model, then it can change file associations.

I know they can, which is one of the reasons desktop if broken today. Programs have access to change whatever they bloody want, while they should not.
So again, in my opinion, it is a Windows fault and an API faulty, but essentially we are agreeing on the same here, just with different views of whose fault it is.

Also, regarding touch screens. Imagine a 42 inch TV sitting roughly ½-1 meter away from you. Then imagine Windows being entirely touch screen. No mouse. No keyboard.
Oh goodie, now I must get close to the TV (which is not a touch screen, btw) in order to do something or type something.
Or, you know, I could just use the mouse and it done in much less time it takes me to get close and stretch out my hand.
Now add to that that today's touch screens just aren't responsive enough to capture quick keyboard typing, and they get full of smudges and it gets just tiresome to do that in front of a computer all the time.
Nah. I agree with others have said with touch screens; I'm sticking with mouse & keyboard. Windows 8 is such a disaster in so many ways IMO.

Windows already handles file type associations by letting you specify what programs can open it. It's ungraceful, I'll agree. But it is so because the filesystem itself doesn't try to make a distinction between file types. NTFS ACEs are inadequate for this purpose. I suppose any of you could argue it's the task of the OS to provide that functionality. I argue that it would be much easier if the filesystem itself carried associations information, fully removing from the context even the need to define a file extension. Get a filetype aware filesystem with full metadata support and have your API expose the necessary functionality and you have your problem gracefully solved.

Originally Posted by Cat

User fatigue. Keyboards and mice are actually fairly well designed in terms of being operable with the hands in a neutral, supported position, and even they can lead to repetitive strain injuries. While some of our muscles evolved to be in nearly constant use (the postural muscles, for example), our arms and hands simply aren't evolved to be held up unsupported for many hours in a row.

That assumes that you are using a device that requires user input for a long period of time. Typically, you are most likely doing professional work on a desktop. I can press on the screen to launch my programming environment and then use my mouse, the touchscreen doesn't prevent this. When I give my laptop to my kid or wife to watch a movie then the mouse is required to select it where it would have been more convenient just to use a touchscreen.

To put it better, I believe that there is a good chance that touchscreens will be a commodity if companies push the market as such. So most devices might have it. In that case it makes more sense for me for the main input to be touchscreen based as you might not have or cannot use a mouse. The touchscreen will always be there. I don't thing there is a disagreement that for each device a more specialized OS is better for the users, but if I am the one that needs to develop those specialized OS I rather push for one as, it benefits me the programmer.

The keyboard is another story. That is hard to replace and voice recognition seems the only alternative but it seems very far away to actually be able to replace a keyboard (and good luck translating my accent...). If a touchscreen though is present in every laptop and OS, applications and webpages supports them enough then it is likely that you see laptops being like a tablet with the keyboard as a separate piece. A mouse just optional.

Originally Posted by C_ntua

That assumes that you are using a device that requires user input for a long period of time. Typically, you are most likely doing professional work on a desktop. I can press on the screen to launch my programming environment and then use my mouse, the touchscreen doesn't prevent this.

And yet, it does. If, or when, we get a common way to handle both mouse and touchscreen input in code, then maybe I'll concede to you (for sure I see an increase in productivity if I could handle my application input with both my right hand on the mouse and my left hand on the screen when dealing with typical lengthy mouse operations). But until then it's very unlikely Windows programmers will want or remember to handle both input devices because of the code replication it entails.

Originally Posted by C_ntua

To put it better, I believe that there is a good chance that touchscreens will be a commodity if companies push the market as such.

I'm skeptic. For one, the Touchscreen technology hasn't proved to be the life and marriage savior it was marketed as. It's cumbersome to some people and it's been the source of more difficulties to physically disabled people than the mouse/keyboard ever were. Another reason is that Touchscreen is notoriously more prone to invoke medical conditions. Finally touchscreens the size of modern computer screens are much more expensive to build (and purchase), making the possibility of mass adoption very unlikely for a long while.

Originally Posted by phantomotap

Seriously, why can't we just kill this "the future of" crap and stick with the things that, you know, actually work!?

Hmmm, if everyone thought like that, wouldn't we all still be watching VHS tapes at home and riding chariots to work?

Hmmm, if everyone thought like that, wouldn't we all still be watching VHS tapes at home and riding chariots to work?

O_o

^- Actually, that face is probably sufficient to my purposes.

Soma

Originally Posted by phantomotap

O_o

^- Actually, that face is probably sufficient to my purposes.

Soma

I apologize, for the confusion, allow me to illustrate.

http://i.imgur.com/xAeld.jpg

Originally Posted by Neo1

Hmmm, if everyone thought like that, wouldn't we all still be watching VHS tapes at home and riding chariots to work?

No Neo, we wouldn't. I really am bored already with this type of argumentation every time someone as much as hints at the idea that some progress may be flawed. It never occurred to you this is a typical straw man (Reductio ad absurdum)?

I'll answer you in what I hope is a more constructive way than what you put up here:

No, we wouldn't. Once you separate the essential from the accessory. And if you think, "but who says what is essential?", that's exactly the point. No one and everyone. That's why everyone is allowed to have their own ideas of what is and isn't essential.

Originally Posted by Mario F.

No Neo, we wouldn't. I really am bored already with this type of argumentation every time someone as much as hints at the idea that some progress may be flawed.

Countless scientific or engineering breakthroughs have been made by pursuing something that even the inventor thought of as non-essential at the time, but which later on changed the world. The thought that we could just stop pursuing non-essential research and development, and not be worse off, seems naive at best.

It never occurred to you this is a typical straw man (Reductio ad absurdum)?

It certainly did not, since i never intended to make a serious point about the matter.

I'll answer you in what I hope is a more constructive way than what you put up here:

You should try and be less constructive sometimes, it's really constructive!

Originally Posted by Neo1

Countless scientific or engineering breakthroughs have been made by pursuing something that even the inventor thought of as non-essential at the time, but which later on changed the world. The thought that we could just stop pursuing non-essential research and development, and not be worse off, seems naive at best.

Riight. No countless bad inventions and technological dead ends. Those you wisely choose to omit from your logic.

I feel like putting your argumentation in the toilet.
The Middle Show: Pay Toilet - YouTube
(BTW, not shown here, but it also had the interesting habit of automatically open the door when the time was up)

Originally Posted by Mario F.

Riight. No countless bad inventions and technological dead ends. Those you wisely choose to omit from your logic.

I said countless, i never said all. In fact i never even said the majority. Invention works through trial-and-error, please enlighten me, how would you propose we dropped all the bad inventions and only worked towards the good and succesful ones? All the good stuff is built using the experience we gain from coming up with useless or bad stuff. The entire field of chemistry originated from something as greedy and pointless as alchemy, just to name one thing.

I feel like putting your argumentation in the toilet.

My argumentation is bad, so it should be a breeze for you to respond to it rather than dodge it.

Countless scientific or engineering breakthroughs have been made by pursuing something that even the inventor thought of as non-essential at the time, but which later on changed the world. The thought that we could just stop pursuing non-essential research and development, and not be worse off, seems naive at best.

The Middle Show: Pay Toilet - YouTube
(BTW, not shown here, but it also had the interesting habit of automatically open the door when the time was up)

Red herring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's the emoticon for flapping my hand imitating a duck quacking?

Originally Posted by Mario F.

What's the emoticon for flapping my hand imitating a duck quacking?

Talk about being constructive.

Here, this should help!

Anyone have tips for getting sand out of a vagina? - Yahoo! Answers

Let me get back my claim of touchscreens replacing the mouse. I can also agree that for the next 5 years lets say desktop monitors will not be in the majority touchscreens, making the mouse mandatory.

All the projections I have seen show that desktop will sales will decrease a lot compared to tablets, notebooks and laptops. That means that the majority of devices won't be desktops. Thus from MS point of view it makes sense that the main focus of Windows won't be desktops. So let us talk about laptops, as tablets and smartphones cannot really replace a desktop for business. Do you think that a touchscreens will be a standard future for laptops in the near future? Lets say at least 30% of laptops will have it in the next 3-5 years.

For my profession I use my laptop in a lot of ways. Usually it is docked attached to a mouse and keyboard and two monitors. I also use it while travelling for business. I use it for presentations. Except when I am on a desk having it docked, I would benefit from a touchscreen. When my laptop is on a desk and I am standing to make a presentation the mouse stops becoming ergonomic for example. Most of the time I am on a desk, but still the remaining time is long enough to benefit me using a touchscreen, even if the main input overall will be a mouse.

Apart from that I prefer to use a keyboard than a mouse and a mouse than a touchscreen. I would love if OS became more keyboard oriented, but the moment I cannot sit on a desk to type that device becomes cumbersome.