Re: [OT] How far have we come?
Irv,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Irv Mullins" <irvm at ellijay.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] How far have we come?
>
> On Sun, 06 May 2001, Gerardo wrote:
>
> Correct. And most working programmers had their own text-mode windowing
> routines, complete with listboxes, pop-up messages, menus, etc., the
majority
> of which worked and looked better than Microsoft's efforts.
Most good packages came with wonderful and efficient libraries, that would
let you do almost anything you needed with little or no sweat. Has everyone
forgotten Clipper? Ralf Brown's interrupt lists?
> All of which made Microsoft look amateurish, and worse than that,
irrelevant.
> Once you had a copy of DOS and a programming language, you could
> create useful, saleable programs. Microsoft was effectively out of the
> cash flow loop. They couldn't stand that.
> I've had several clients ask for Windows programs that could be operated
> entirely from the keyboard, just like the old dos programs they were used
> to using. Why? Because they found using the mouse, keyboard, and juggling
> paperwork required more hands than they were born with, and slowed down
their
> work.
Two things I've never understood:
1) Why didn't Microsoft keep the traditional and tested control methods,
i.e. use mouse if you want, but your favorite keystrokes will still work.
They'd have half of us grumps on their side. And
2) If they insisted on replacing our venerable keys, why didn't they push
farther still? One mouse with two or three keys is a lousy semi-replacement
for 100+ keys with literally thousands of possible combinations. Why not two
mice, or a mouse and a joystick? Most things I manipulate, I use both hands.
Perhaps it sounds outlandish, but possibly it would have been more
human-like. Or are Windows users supposed to use the other hand for some
strange purpose that escapes my imagination?
> If you could get Bill Gates to pay back $1 for every hour lost to Windows
> inefficiencies and crashes, he wouldn't be the richest man in the world.
If he
> paid back another $1 for every hour spent playing games on those office
> computers, he'd be broke ;)
Well, let's not blame the man for everything. He's just a succesful
predator. Sooner or later he'll eat more than he can chew. And then we'll
come up with a slightly aged diskette containing Sidekick, saying "Outlook
requires what, you say? here I have this combination directory, calculator
and phone dialer, a 50K TSR, ..."
> > So, turn your spyglass around. It's not that Windows should improve
> > anything. Windows is just a tool, a medium. ...
>
> Yes, but suppose you were a landscaper, and everyone who wanted you
> to plant a petunia insisted that you bring a bulldozer to do the job.
>
> Bulldozer costs a lot more than a shovel.
> Bulldozer is a lot more difficult to operate.
> Bulldozer uses a lot of fuel and is subject to expensive breakdowns.
> Bulldozer makes a mess of the yard, which you're responsible for cleaning
up.
>
> So, the price of planting that petunia just went up to $5,000
>
> Is it not true that the only winner in this deal is the maker of the bull-
> erm... dozer.? ;)
>
> Regards,
> Irv
Ha. The bulldozer feeds the bulldozer maker, his employees, the driver, the
vehicle registration employee, your friendly neighborhood mechanic... need I
go on? Try to put them out of a job. Besides, if you were a real landscaper,
you would charge $50 for the petunia, and $7,500 for additional landscaping
required by the less-than-careful operation of a massive bulldozer in a
small garden. Perhaps you could accidentally crash into a wall, too, or
something. And it wouldn't be a petunia. It would be an Enhanced Natural
Solanacea, One Billion Years Evolving Just For You, Satisfaction Guaranteed
Or Your Money Back (the $50).
By the way, I have a pen here that can write in several languages. Anyone
interested?
Gerardo
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
