A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old August 21st 18, 11:06 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
pyotr filipivich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:38:32 -0500 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 21:10:49 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"Bill in Co" on Mon, 20 Aug 2018
19:49:38 -0600 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:


Windows has always suffered from "Hey, wouldn't this be neat?"
syndrome as computer geeks "improve" things. Never mind the millions
of users who are not enamored of all the latest web design fads, etc,
etc; the Programmers really know what the users want. They don't,
but that's because we want to use the computer to do _our_ work, not
work on the computer _as_ our work.


You hit the nail on the head. My biggest beef about all these hotshot
programmers is they think they have to put everything they know into a
program, and then screw it up more with updates containing everything
new they've learned since creating the earlier versions.

Good programmers creates intuitive programs. Bad programmers insist
on turning the average user into a tech geek because they aren't
creative enough to simplify the usage of a program. They themselves
are text book geeks. Their programming is technically pretentious and
perpetuates complexity. Programmers should keep the average user in
mind, not the geeks.


As we used to say back when I was taking classes: "User friendly"
is "programmer hard". That is, not only do I have to figure out how
it is to be done, but how it can be misunderstood, trap for those
errors, and in addition, try to make it so that when they come up with
the one way I hadn't considered, the program "dies gracefully."



Granted, I did not have the month or so to explore/play with
Windows 7 before I had to use it. And I had to make several kludges
to get to where I needed to be, and I've not really seen a means to
"start from scratch". So, I'm stuck with the shortcuts, links,
directories on the desktop, and other related kludges in order to get
what I want done, done.


It's called *bad* programming.

--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
Ads
  #17  
Old August 21st 18, 11:29 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default OT: Your web site clock is off

On 08/21/2018 09:59 AM, Big Al wrote:
On 08/21/2018 10:34 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

--
MarkÂ*Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/


You've got a oops in your clock algorithm.Â*Â* I'm in Baltimore and your
clock shows chicago.Â* The first two hops on traceroute are BALT routers.

Just FYI.


It seems to be working now. A simple bug that prevented the page from
refreshing when Javascript detected a different timezone. Timezone is
detected as America/New_York, the standard value for Eastern Time.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Religion: just say `no'." [Tim Smith]
  #18  
Old August 21st 18, 11:33 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On 08/21/2018 10:20 AM, John B. Smith wrote:

[snip]

It's always been my contention that Microsoft craps up the user
interface on any new Windows just to convince us boneheads we got a
NEW operating system.


It feels like they're also trying to punish anyone who actually knows
how to use the computer.

I finally bit the bullet and got Win7 when the Google Chrome browser
started issuing dire warnings about it wouldn't update any longer if
my OS was XP.


Firefox was the last major browser to drop XP/Vista support (it's on the
last version now).

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Religion: just say `no'." [Tim Smith]
  #19  
Old August 21st 18, 11:42 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 15:06:05 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:38:32 -0500 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:


Good programmers creates intuitive programs. Bad programmers insist
on turning the average user into a tech geek because they aren't
creative enough to simplify the usage of a program. They themselves
are text book geeks. Their programming is technically pretentious and
perpetuates complexity. Programmers should keep the average user in
mind, not the geeks.


As we used to say back when I was taking classes: "User friendly"
is "programmer hard". That is, not only do I have to figure out how
it is to be done, but how it can be misunderstood, trap for those
errors, and in addition, try to make it so that when they come up with
the one way I hadn't considered, the program "dies gracefully."



I don't know for sure how things are done at Microsoft, nor even how
they are done at other companies these days, but back in the days
before I retired, I worked in application development. Programmers
didn't design the programs. It wasn't up to them to make programs
"use, friendly," "simplify the usage of a program," "make the program
die gracefully," or do anything else other than follow the directions
of the designer of the program, the systems analyst.

Assuming that Microsoft still works the same way, don't blame the
programmers for things you don't like. The programmer follows the
directions that the systems analyst designs, and the Quality Assurance
department tests what he created to be sure that the programmer
followed the design. If you don't like the results, the fault is that
of either the systems analyst, QA, or both.
  #20  
Old August 22nd 18, 12:21 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
pyotr filipivich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

Ken Blake on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 15:42:05 -0700
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 15:06:05 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:38:32 -0500 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:


Good programmers creates intuitive programs. Bad programmers insist
on turning the average user into a tech geek because they aren't
creative enough to simplify the usage of a program. They themselves
are text book geeks. Their programming is technically pretentious and
perpetuates complexity. Programmers should keep the average user in
mind, not the geeks.


As we used to say back when I was taking classes: "User friendly"
is "programmer hard". That is, not only do I have to figure out how
it is to be done, but how it can be misunderstood, trap for those
errors, and in addition, try to make it so that when they come up with
the one way I hadn't considered, the program "dies gracefully."



I don't know for sure how things are done at Microsoft, nor even how
they are done at other companies these days, but back in the days
before I retired, I worked in application development. Programmers
didn't design the programs. It wasn't up to them to make programs
"use, friendly," "simplify the usage of a program," "make the program
die gracefully," or do anything else other than follow the directions
of the designer of the program, the systems analyst.

Assuming that Microsoft still works the same way, don't blame the
programmers for things you don't like. The programmer follows the
directions that the systems analyst designs, and the Quality Assurance
department tests what he created to be sure that the programmer
followed the design. If you don't like the results, the fault is that
of either the systems analyst, QA, or both.


Yep. I realize that once you leave college, the care free days
when you could do it however you wanted were over. You'd get a
program spec, the expected inputs and outputs, and told "Make it
happen, and follow the guidelines."
As an end user, I realize that the design stage didn't consider
all the possible errors, and QA didn't test for them either. Friend
of mine was the one who did the "ID Ten T User" check, and discovered
that if you hit the spacebar after the program started, it failed
"gloriously". Not good for a back up program in the seventh release.
But who would hit the spacebar (or any other key) once the program is
running? "Gamma testers."

tschus
pyotr

.... the universe keeps making better idiots.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
  #21  
Old August 22nd 18, 12:48 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Bill in Co
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,927
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

Ken Blake wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 15:06:05 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:38:32 -0500 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:


Good programmers creates intuitive programs. Bad programmers insist
on turning the average user into a tech geek because they aren't
creative enough to simplify the usage of a program. They themselves
are text book geeks. Their programming is technically pretentious and
perpetuates complexity. Programmers should keep the average user in
mind, not the geeks.


As we used to say back when I was taking classes: "User friendly"
is "programmer hard". That is, not only do I have to figure out how
it is to be done, but how it can be misunderstood, trap for those
errors, and in addition, try to make it so that when they come up with
the one way I hadn't considered, the program "dies gracefully."



I don't know for sure how things are done at Microsoft, nor even how
they are done at other companies these days, but back in the days
before I retired, I worked in application development. Programmers
didn't design the programs. It wasn't up to them to make programs
"use, friendly," "simplify the usage of a program," "make the program
die gracefully," or do anything else other than follow the directions
of the designer of the program, the systems analyst.

Assuming that Microsoft still works the same way, don't blame the
programmers for things you don't like. The programmer follows the
directions that the systems analyst designs, and the Quality Assurance
department tests what he created to be sure that the programmer
followed the design. If you don't like the results, the fault is that
of either the systems analyst, QA, or both.


I agree, and it's good the OP called this out. It's NOT the programmers
fault! It's what they are "instructed" to do - by upper management.
(Whether or not the customer wants the changes is another story). I had to
add this since I think it's really unfair to blame the programmers. But
what really should happen is for management to SEEK out customer input on
all these changes, and not just drop them into the marketplace and let the
chips fall where they may. A simple example being the Office Ribbon, and MS
having the nerve to remove the option to disable it, in the later editions
of Office. That is NOT listening to the customers - that is effectively
dictating to them "the best way" to do things.


  #22  
Old August 22nd 18, 01:38 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 17:48:26 -0600, "Bill in Co"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 15:06:05 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

on Tue, 21 Aug 2018 13:38:32 -0500 typed in
alt.windows7.general the following:


Good programmers creates intuitive programs. Bad programmers insist
on turning the average user into a tech geek because they aren't
creative enough to simplify the usage of a program. They themselves
are text book geeks. Their programming is technically pretentious and
perpetuates complexity. Programmers should keep the average user in
mind, not the geeks.

As we used to say back when I was taking classes: "User friendly"
is "programmer hard". That is, not only do I have to figure out how
it is to be done, but how it can be misunderstood, trap for those
errors, and in addition, try to make it so that when they come up with
the one way I hadn't considered, the program "dies gracefully."



I don't know for sure how things are done at Microsoft, nor even how
they are done at other companies these days, but back in the days
before I retired, I worked in application development. Programmers
didn't design the programs. It wasn't up to them to make programs
"use, friendly," "simplify the usage of a program," "make the program
die gracefully," or do anything else other than follow the directions
of the designer of the program, the systems analyst.

Assuming that Microsoft still works the same way, don't blame the
programmers for things you don't like. The programmer follows the
directions that the systems analyst designs, and the Quality Assurance
department tests what he created to be sure that the programmer
followed the design. If you don't like the results, the fault is that
of either the systems analyst, QA, or both.


I agree, and it's good the OP called this out. It's NOT the programmers
fault! It's what they are "instructed" to do - by upper management.
(Whether or not the customer wants the changes is another story). I had to
add this since I think it's really unfair to blame the programmers. But
what really should happen is for management to SEEK out customer input on
all these changes, and not just drop them into the marketplace and let the
chips fall where they may. A simple example being the Office Ribbon, and MS
having the nerve to remove the option to disable it, in the later editions
of Office. That is NOT listening to the customers - that is effectively
dictating to them "the best way" to do things.



As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft does some things very well and some
things very badly. "Not listening to the customers and effectively
dictating to them 'the best way' to do things" is a good example of
something they are terrible at.
  #23  
Old August 22nd 18, 09:19 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike S[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 496
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

snip

As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft does some things very well and some
things very badly. "Not listening to the customers and effectively
dictating to them 'the best way' to do things" is a good example of
something they are terrible at.


Well said.

  #24  
Old August 22nd 18, 12:27 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
mechanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 17:48:26 -0600, Bill in Co wrote:

That is NOT listening to the customers - that is effectively
dictating to them "the best way" to do things.


But if Steve Jobs taught us anything, it's that customers don't know
best.
  #25  
Old August 22nd 18, 02:11 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

"mechanic" wrote

| That is NOT listening to the customers - that is effectively
| dictating to them "the best way" to do things.
|
| But if Steve Jobs taught us anything, it's that customers don't know
| best.

No, he taught us that Steve Jobs thinks he
knows better than anyone. There's a difference.
He also taught us that customers can be
suckered. Selling ice cream to diabetics means
you're a good salesman. It doesn't mean you
know best what the customer needs.

He also demonstrated what I would call
psychopathic fantasies of grandeur, combining
extreme ambition with a car salesman's style
and a half-baked, New Age notion of "spitirual"
design. (Thus the cult.)

There was a well known
quote from Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker.
The architect of Jobs's pretentious donut office
building was discussing having windows that open.
Jobs said he didn't want any windows to open and
explained that if you let people open things it just
allows them to screw things up.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...urrentPage=all

Is that really the kind of person you want
teaching you things?


  #26  
Old August 22nd 18, 08:02 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
mechanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:11:09 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

"mechanic" wrote

| That is NOT listening to the customers - that is effectively
| dictating to them "the best way" to do things.
|
| But if Steve Jobs taught us anything, it's that customers don't know
| best.

No, he taught us that Steve Jobs thinks he
knows better than anyone.


Well he certainly made a lot more money than most of us! And a lot
of that because he was an innovator, whereas the average Joe just
sits and moans about his lot. But clearly any lesson from him is
wasted on you.
  #27  
Old August 22nd 18, 08:34 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

"mechanic" wrote

| No, he taught us that Steve Jobs thinks he
| knows better than anyone.
|
| Well he certainly made a lot more money than most of us! And a lot
| of that because he was an innovator, whereas the average Joe just
| sits and moans about his lot. But clearly any lesson from him is
| wasted on you.

Indeed. I have no respect for Jobs. I'm not
impressed by people who make lots of money.
It's the sign of a nongenerous person who exploits
others. There are very few ways to profit without
doing it off the backs of others. In Jobs's case
that's slave labor, hypnotized customers willing
to pay too much, and dishonest lawsuits.

Innovation? He eliminated options and as I
understand it, Johnny Ive did most of the actual
design. But I will give Jobs credit for a certain
aesthetic sense. Apple products are beautiful
to look at, for the most part.

Is it innovation to create a bauble that allows
all of young America to walk around with constant
pop music in their heads? I'd call that exploitation.
On the other hand, Jobs probably didn't know any
better, thinking it was "enlightened" to merely
make things that please people.

From the same link I linked earlier, a typical story
of how Jobs thought everything was his brainstorm:

[MS came out with Windows, using a similar
GUI to Macs]...
----------------------------------------------
Jobs was outraged and summoned Gates from Seattle to Apple's Silicon Valley
headquarters. "They met in Jobs's conference room, where Gates found himself
surrounded by ten Apple employees who were eager to watch their boss assail
him," Isaacson writes. "Jobs didn't disappoint his troops. 'You're ripping
us off!' he shouted. 'I trusted you, and now you're stealing from us!' "

Gates looked back at Jobs calmly. Everyone knew where the windows and the
icons came from. "Well, Steve," Gates responded. "I think there's more than
one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich
neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and
found out that you had already stolen it."
---------------------------------------------

In any case, I wonder why you're arguing so stridently
to make the case that product makers shouldn't produce
products that you want. You started out equating Jobs's
anti-social arrogance with brilliance, because he didn't
listen to customers. Would he have done worse if he'd tried
to do what people wanted. Maybe going along with Wozniak's
desire to give people more control? Maybe. Maybe not.
It would have been a different product. As it is, I
have no interest in any of their products and have never
bought one. So I don't find them especially brilliant. Just
pretty.


  #28  
Old August 22nd 18, 08:58 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ant[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 554
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

Mike S wrote:
snip

As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft does some things very well and some
things very badly. "Not listening to the customers and effectively
dictating to them 'the best way' to do things" is a good example of
something they are terrible at.


Well said.


Ditto.
--
Quote of the Week: "Look not to the windmill's turning while the ant still burrows." --unknown
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )
  #29  
Old August 22nd 18, 10:43 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
mike[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,073
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

On 8/22/2018 12:34 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"mechanic" wrote

| No, he taught us that Steve Jobs thinks he
| knows better than anyone.
|
| Well he certainly made a lot more money than most of us! And a lot
| of that because he was an innovator, whereas the average Joe just
| sits and moans about his lot. But clearly any lesson from him is
| wasted on you.

Indeed. I have no respect for Jobs. I'm not
impressed by people who make lots of money.
It's the sign of a nongenerous person who exploits
others. There are very few ways to profit without
doing it off the backs of others. In Jobs's case
that's slave labor, hypnotized customers willing
to pay too much, and dishonest lawsuits.

Innovation? He eliminated options and as I
understand it, Johnny Ive did most of the actual
design. But I will give Jobs credit for a certain
aesthetic sense. Apple products are beautiful
to look at, for the most part.

Is it innovation to create a bauble that allows
all of young America to walk around with constant
pop music in their heads? I'd call that exploitation.
On the other hand, Jobs probably didn't know any
better, thinking it was "enlightened" to merely
make things that please people.

From the same link I linked earlier, a typical story
of how Jobs thought everything was his brainstorm:

[MS came out with Windows, using a similar
GUI to Macs]...
----------------------------------------------
Jobs was outraged and summoned Gates from Seattle to Apple's Silicon Valley
headquarters. "They met in Jobs's conference room, where Gates found himself
surrounded by ten Apple employees who were eager to watch their boss assail
him," Isaacson writes. "Jobs didn't disappoint his troops. 'You're ripping
us off!' he shouted. 'I trusted you, and now you're stealing from us!' "

Gates looked back at Jobs calmly. Everyone knew where the windows and the
icons came from. "Well, Steve," Gates responded. "I think there's more than
one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich
neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and
found out that you had already stolen it."
---------------------------------------------

In any case, I wonder why you're arguing so stridently
to make the case that product makers shouldn't produce
products that you want. You started out equating Jobs's
anti-social arrogance with brilliance, because he didn't
listen to customers. Would he have done worse if he'd tried
to do what people wanted. Maybe going along with Wozniak's
desire to give people more control? Maybe. Maybe not.
It would have been a different product. As it is, I
have no interest in any of their products and have never
bought one. So I don't find them especially brilliant. Just
pretty.


Asking customers what they want is an exercise in futility.
Sure, you need to ask, but the answer likely won't help you.

Back in the day, I was responsible for designing logic analyzers.
When we asked customers what they wanted, the answer was almost
always the same, "faster, wider, deeper".

A much better tactic is EMPATHY.
You don't ask what they want. You ask what they are doing,
how they're doing it, what's costing them money, what industry
trends do they predict. Then, YOU decide what the industry
needs. YOU have to understand enough about THEIR industry,
problems, and opportunities to INNOVATE for them.

Instead of giving them more memory to sort thru, we gave
them triggering capability that let the analyzer give them the
ANSWER they needed.
You can bounce the ideas off critical customers, but that
gives away the store to the competitors.

The problem with all that is that it is very difficult to find
people who can do that. When you add the requirement that they
be able to convince management that their idea deserves funding,
the pool dries up rapidly.
The shortcut is to be the founder. That strips away all the
roadblocks.

People who know HOW to do are plentiful.
People who know WHAT to do are rare.
  #30  
Old August 22nd 18, 11:37 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default The transition from Windows XP to Windows 7

"mike" wrote

| Asking customers what they want is an exercise in futility.
| Sure, you need to ask, but the answer likely won't help you.
|
| Back in the day, I was responsible for designing logic analyzers.
| When we asked customers what they wanted, the answer was almost
| always the same, "faster, wider, deeper".
|
| A much better tactic is EMPATHY.
| You don't ask what they want. You ask what they are doing,
| how they're doing it, what's costing them money, what industry
| trends do they predict. Then, YOU decide what the industry
| needs. YOU have to understand enough about THEIR industry,
| problems, and opportunities to INNOVATE for them.
|

I suppose that's true in anything. People usually
want something specific but often are not conscious of
it or don't have the words. As a contractor I consider
it my job to figure out what people want and give it
to them, whether or not they can articulate it. If you
can't do that you end up with a lot of angry people,
because they thought they told you what they wanted.

But that's all within the realm of serving the customer.

I think the Jobs approach was more like the spoiled
architect who makes promouncements based on his
or her alleged genius. Frank Lloyd Wright comes to mind.
He was highly regarded as a genius, but he knew little
about building proper structures and his clients were
really hiring him because they worshipped him. He
prescribed how they should live in order to partake
of his rarefied sensibility.

That came to mind because I read last week that
the engineer who had stopped Falling Water from
falling had died recently. He had to do extensive
reinforcing because Wright was too arrogant to admit
to himself that he actually didn't know how to build
with concrete. Like Jobs, he was too proud to be
a normal person. He had to be an "artist".

Another example is Frank Gehry. He told MIT they
could do whatever they wanted inside his building,
as long as he controlled the outside. And control it
he did. It looks like a funhouse.

https://thetech.com/2007/11/09/lawsuit-v127-n53

Rooves that drain the wrong way.... Very dumb
design mistakes. But that's not his problem. He's
an artist. Laws of nature and desires of the people
who pay him are beneath his regard.

MIT sued him over it. But they had no one but
themselves to blame in hiring such a diva.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.