Amiga.org
Operating System Specific Discussions => Other Operating Systems => Topic started by: ElPolloDiabl on October 19, 2010, 06:40:22 AM
-
$4 billion profit. Hats off to them.
:flame: :hat:
Let the flames begin.
-
Relentless marketing, boutique prices, and a meticulously managed supply chain are good strategies, apparently.
-
$4 billion profit. Hats off to them.
:flame: :hat:
Let the flames begin.
I am guessing most of this is in IPods, IPads and Phones more than computer.
But you got to give it to Steve Jobs, he knows what a large amount of people want.
-
Yeah Apple's Mac business is very modest. Mostly iPhone, iPad and iPod. Works for me, I don't want OSX getting so popular that malware becomes an issue. Lack of malware campaigns against OSX is really the Macs killer app.
-
.....and every headline seems to end with "but iPad sales disappoint."
-
AmigaOS has one of them, maybe they need to work on the other two...
Relentless marketing, boutique prices, and a meticulously managed supply chain are good strategies, apparently.
-
.....and every headline seems to end with "but iPad sales disappoint."
If 4.x million sold is disappointing, sign me up.
I think only reason some folks say this is they were expected to sell 5 million but with such high demand, were unable to make enough to do so.
I really doubt they are disappointed in selling 4.x million of these in such a short time.
tj
-
.....and every headline seems to end with "but iPad sales disappoint."
I'd rather have one of these (again!)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Oaetch2000.jpg)
-
Fairplay.
Although I only used OS X for the first time the other day, I couldn't believe how laggy it was. I actually prefer XP.
Never ever thought i'd say that.
-
Fairplay.
Although I only used OS X for the first time the other day, I couldn't believe how laggy it was. I actually prefer XP.
Never ever thought i'd say that.
I had a similar reaction when I first tried an older Mac, but I just got myself a new Mac Mini 2.4GHz with 2 gigs of ram this month.
I have to say I love it for what I use it for. I have it Midi connected to my Yamaha Clavinova and an Akai keyboard. Finale runs fine on it. Granted I just got it a couple weeks ago. It's small and quiet. I don't feel like I have a beast beside my piano anymore.
I've been playing World of Warcraft on it and I was pleasantly surprised.
I've been an XP fan for years but I find myself using the Mac more now.
Well. I'm a bit off topic. Yes, over 4bn and their shares slide (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69H4UX20101019?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29)...
-
I had a similar reaction when I first tried an older Mac, but I just got myself a new Mac Mini 2.4GHz with 2 gigs of ram this month.
I have to say I love it for what I use it for. I have it Midi connected to my Yamaha Clavinova and an Akai keyboard. Finale runs fine on it. Granted I just got it a couple weeks ago. It's small and quiet. I don't feel like I have a beast beside my piano anymore.
I've been playing World of Warcraft on it and I was pleasantly surprised.
I've been an XP fan for years but I find myself using the Mac more now.
Well. I'm a bit off topic. Yes, over 4bn and their shares slide (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69H4UX20101019?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29)...
How the shares slid is beyond me. Of course I am not money guru. They just had over 20billion quarter. Highest they have EVER had. Because instead of 5 million iPads they sold like 4.3m or something, and it slides. Every single item they are selling is selling rather well and their quarter goes to prove it.
Oh well, I don't own any of their shares so no biggeee. I wish I had some! :laughing:
tj
-
The shares slid because that level of revenue is unsustainable, and it's all downhill from here.
-
I've been an XP fan for years but I find myself using the Mac more now.
Oh my, you had better watch what you say on this board, in front of the fanatical Amiga armada -- OK, not quite an armada. :-)
-
The shares slid because that level of revenue is unsustainable, and it's all downhill from here.
OK, time for an AAPL stock short-sale? (I wouldn't risk it.)
-
4 millions purchased with overpriced hardware, phones without coverture, ipods (with their itunes dictadure) ipads (whats this?) and some more stupid accesories for ipods, iphones, i...
World becomes crazy.
-
Oh my, you had better watch what you say on this board, in front of the fanatical Amiga armada -- OK, not quite an armada. :-)
Actually since xp came out and now with 7 MS has a very decent os. MS slaggers are becoming more of a joke now. Especially ones that mispell MS like M$ or winblows or any of that childishness.
the "armada" is growing up and coming to terms with reality.
-
I disagree, Windows 7 needs a gig of Ram, a GHz of processor, 16 gig of HD space and at least a DX9 GFX card. What do I get in return for this over a 32Meg 486? Not enough IMHO. I now run a machine that's over 100 times faster than my old blue lightning but it's far from 100 times quicker in practice, so much power is eaten up by the OS. Even mundane background programs like the BBC iPlayers updater use over 30Mb of RAM and as for the file structure, who knows what half of those .dll files do, why many of them are repeated over your hard disk or if they are even necessary. Even MS themselves have admitted that they have lost track of the file interdepedencies in Windows. The only reality is that MS has a monopoly that can't be broken. I use Windows because I have to (my university software requires it), not because I like it. Windows needs trimming down, I don't need half of the extra nanny managers nor do I need a stack of built in drivers for hardware I don't have and when I uninstall a piece of hardware and reboot I certainly don't need Windows installing it's own drivers when I boot up again without bloody well asking me or deciding to reboot because it's updated myself and I loose the last half hour of my Galactic Civ II game. I know, I know, I can change the update options.....and then it nags me to change them back to what MS thinks is best for me. Grrr...decent OS? your joking surely.
-
I disagree, Windows 7 needs a gig of Ram, a GHz of processor, 16 gig of HD space and at least a DX9 GFX card. What do I get in return for this over a 32Meg 486? Not enough IMHO. I now run a machine that's over 100 times faster than my old blue lightning but it's far from 100 times quicker in practice, so much power is eaten up by the OS. Even mundane background programs like the BBC iPlayers updater use over 30Mb of RAM and as for the file structure, who knows what half of those .dll files do, why many of them are repeated over your hard disk or if they are even necessary. Even MS themselves have admitted that they have lost track of the file interdepedencies in Windows. The only reality is that MS has a monopoly that can't be broken. I use Windows because I have to (my university software requires it), not because I like it. Windows needs trimming down, I don't need half of the extra nanny managers nor do I need a stack of built in drivers for hardware I don't have and when I uninstall a piece of hardware and reboot I certainly don't need Windows installing it's own drivers when I boot up again without bloody well asking me or deciding to reboot because it's updated myself and I loose the last half hour of my Galactic Civ II game. I know, I know, I can change the update options.....and then it nags me to change them back to what MS thinks is best for me. Grrr...decent OS? your joking surely.
It just shows you that Microsoft aren't talented just lucky. Except for maybe Windows 95 (imho) nothing they have done has been particularly imaginative or user-friendly. And of course Office 97-2003 seems to cross all the t's, dot all the i's.
Is it true they got outside developers to do Windows XP?
Compared to MacOS 68k/PPC it's a finely crafted user interface with easy to understand preferences etc.
AmigaOS, I wouldn't say out of the box user-friendly, but you can learn how do everything in a hour (and not forget it because it's intuitive).
-
Actually since xp came out and now with 7 MS has a very decent os. MS slaggers are becoming more of a joke now. Especially ones that mispell MS like M$ or winblows or any of that childishness.
the "armada" is growing up and coming to terms with reality.
http://www.securecomputing.net.au/News/157767,nsw-police-dont-use-windows-for-internet-banking.aspx
http://www.esecurityplanet.com/views/article.php/3844311/Windows-and-Online-Banking-A-Dangerous-Mix.htm
Of course, Google jumped ship half a year ago
http://mashable.com/2010/05/31/google-windows/
-
Ive used OSX on and off for years, just started using my macmini again and I have to say while its not perfect, OSX feels like it had a lot more polish and playtesting than Win7. I'm a bit sick of Win7 bombarding me with updates every time it starts, how many problems are there with the code that it need 20+ updated per week?
-
Here in italy some days ago, a news said: two apple italy employees fired because "their thoughts were not compatible with apple thought". If this weren't enough their chief asked them to go out by "the back door".
...
4 billions made with stalinist methods is horror to me.
- their thoughts were compatible with those of their company... anyone has ever heard of 1984? george orwell?
- exit by the back door. this is terrific. even in china workers are not so humiliated.
edit: and most terrific the two workers were, and today still are, two fanboys.
some time ago a book was published by penguin: "in the mind of steve jobs. people doesn't know what they want. sj knows what people wants."
even more terrific to me.
-
I disagree, Windows 7 needs a gig of Ram, a GHz of processor, 16 gig of HD space and at least a DX9 GFX card
so? You can have all of that for such a small amount of money today it is really not an issue at all. Remember that Win7 has to be able to boot on all kind of x86 hardware which is numerous and some of it even unsupported(not tested that is) before you complain about the drivers.
Sure, there are nice alternatives today, but truth be told, none of them are anywhere near as good as windows.
-
I disagree, Windows 7 needs a gig of Ram, a GHz of processor, 16 gig of HD space and at least a DX9 GFX card.
So basically youre saying you need a computer made in the last 5 or so years to use the latest Windows OS? I hardly see that as a reason to cry outrage. Sure there's extra unneccesary stuff, but dont like it, just remove it, it's not rocket science. Personally Im over the whole bashing Windows thing. Theyve made a pretty decent OS by now, considering its audience (ie. needs to be well and truly idiot proof). Im not a Windows fan as such, but neither do I dislike it. It drives some very nice software that I enjoy, but that's as far as my "relationship" with it goes. As for Apple, well I must admit theyve driven the wave of electronic consumerism better than probably anyone else. I guess they were a big part of creating the market so they'd want to. Im a bit disappointed that they do so well on such average products, but thier marketting tells people Apple products are good, and for the most part people believe them. Personally Ive yet to see an Apple product that has impressed me, although to be fair theyve not made any products I thought were terrible either. Just normal, albiet reasonably presented stuff. My quirk with them though is theyve somehow managed to convince people that this stuff is good. Im more of a person who likes to see things do well on the back of the quality, not the marketting. ("music" drives me nuts these days due to this, its 95% marketting, 5% product, although thankfully there's still good stuff if you look outside the box (which ironically is true of computers too))
-
@rebraist
So you judge an entire company by a memory of something you saw or read or think you saw or read about what two ex-Apple employees said in a vague sort of way? Both Apple and Microsoft have wonderful reputations as employers. I know people that have been working for Microsoft or Apple for twenty years and they can't imagine leaving, they love their jobs.
Yes, Steve Jobs has a vision but he turned a company that had to borrow 150 million dollars from Microsoft to survive into a company that now has a market cap of more than Microsoft. It's having a vision that makes Apple different.
Steve Jobs understands that the average user doesn't want or need complexity. iOS devices are, on the surface, simple. There may be an entire OS X style OS in your iPhone/iPod/iPad, but you don't need to know about it. It's user friendliness, where Amiga began all those years ago when it was the most user friendly system. Had the original Amiga vision stood you would have had AmiPods, AmiPads and AmiPhones that wouldn't be very different from iPods, iPads and iPhones.
-
4 billions made with stalinist methods is horror to me.
- their thoughts were compatible with those of their company... anyone has ever heard of 1984? george orwell?
- exit by the back door. this is terrific. even in china workers are not so humiliated.
Is this sarcasm or are your views of private enterprise really so wrong?
-
I disagree, Windows 7 needs a gig of Ram, a GHz of processor, 16 gig of HD space and at least a DX9 GFX card. What do I get in return for this over a 32Meg 486? Not enough IMHO.
Ok, let me see...
A 32MB 486 would absolutely CRAWL when browsing most modern websites.
I find it unlikely that you could find a workable 486 configuration that could play simultaneous audio streams. It would probably be a bit of a stretch playing an mp3 and continuing to multitask.
I bet most modern graphical web browsers would take an age to load on it.
What operating systems would work well for a user on such hardware? Perhaps a granny with Win311 and Office 4.3 would be happy typing her letters and printing them, but I can't imagine many more would be.
Skype + mic or even including a webcam (including hypothetical USB ports)? Good luck.
Downloading images from a digital camera and doing minor editing work like rotation? In those days, today's typical camera resolutions would have been classed as impossibly high-res, to rotate one image would probably take about 10 minutes.
Synchronising an mp3 collection with an mp3 player? Good luck.
Computer games? Ok, UFO: Enemy Unknown absolutely rocked. So do a few other games possibly of a similar age, but any Flash game for example?
I imagine a 486 would be fairly taxed with a NIC pushed to say 10Mbit/sec, so downloading a file off the Internet at high speed would very likely be a single-tasking experience, practically speaking.
Automatic updating of the operating system would also be fairly taxing.
I now run a machine that's over 100 times faster than my old blue lightning but it's far from 100 times quicker in practice, so much power is eaten up by the OS. Even mundane background programs like the BBC iPlayers updater use over 30Mb of RAM and as for the file structure, who knows what half of those .dll files do, why many of them are repeated over your hard disk or if they are even necessary.
Oh, thanks for pointing one out. BBC iPlayer. On a 486? Even with say 1GB RAM and a hypothetical DX10 graphics card with video decoding acceleration capabilities?
The rules of the game have changed with regard to designing apps for modern computers. RAM back then was expensive. Now it is dirt cheap, as is storage space. Having 4GB RAM and 99% unused as opposed to using say 25% of it and having everything run faster should be a no-brainer for most people to work out, it's just a case of good memory management if case a user wished to use 80% for a particular set of tasks. You're complaining about the BBC iPlayer using 30MB RAM. Just think about what you're saying! The BBC iPlayer application in the days of the 486 would have been considered the realm of supercomputing, the resolutions involved are enormous. The 486 handling the rendering could probably do a frame every minute if you're lucky. More reasonably, a frame every ten minutes.
To make the example fairer, taking a video format and a player specially compiled for the 486 platform, it would still be unwatchable by most peoples' standards.
The expectations for computers have also changed drastically.
Even MS themselves have admitted that they have lost track of the file interdepedencies in Windows. The only reality is that MS has a monopoly that can't be broken. I use Windows because I have to (my university software requires it)
Blah, blah, blah. Insert any modern OS into the examples I gave for a 486 to run and it would crawl, and please note that I picked tasks that the average user would currently expect their computer to perform to their satisfaction.
Yes, Windows is broken in quite a few ways, but your argument has so many holes in that I'm surprised you even managed to get to the end of your post without rethinking it.
Computers have grown, Windows has grown larger still, but I would say that's largely because Microsoft is going too far in terms of backwards compatibility (and that a pruning job is needed), but I think if you gave a teenager a 486 PC with the most ideal user-orientated software platform and optimised as much as possible for the hardware, even if you added a gig of RAM and today's performance in hard disk speeds, the teenager would feel that you had just put MS-DOS 6.22 in front of them and said "enjoy", purely because of the amount of extras that come with most modern operating systems these days.
-
Talk about missing my point completely!!
I'm not saying a 486 could do the things a modern PC can do, If it could I wouldn't have paid out for a modern PC, I'de still be running my old 486. What I am saying is that the relative power is wasted, you can quote all the "but it costs less now" arguments you like, I don't care! It doesn't change the fact does it. The BBC iPlayer app was a great case to point and you didn't even read what I said did you. No, read it again man, this time pay attention. I said that the UPDATER used over 30Mb of RAM, not the app, it's not processing any video or doing anything clever, it's just checking every 5 minutes or so to see if an update is present. Tell me a 486 couldn't do that and I'll laugh at you. Next time you comment on my post, do me favour and read it first.
-
Talk about missing my point completely!!
I'm not saying a 486 could do the things a modern PC can do, If it could I wouldn't have paid out for a modern PC, I'de still be running my old 486. What I am saying is that the relative power is wasted, you can quote all the "but it costs less now" arguments you like, I don't care! It doesn't change the fact does it. The BBC iPlayer app was a great case to point and you didn't even read what I said did you. No, read it again man, this time pay attention. I said that the UPDATER used over 30Mb of RAM, not the app, it's not processing any video or doing anything clever, it's just checking every 5 minutes or so to see if an update is present. Tell me a 486 couldn't do that and I'll laugh at you. Next time you comment on my post, do me favour and read it first.
I second that.
You buy a simple puzzler game online and most of it is bloatware. First you download a small exe file. You run that and it downloads a downloader. The downloader downloads a shell for running games. Then finally you can download the game and run it via the shell.
Except for flash which I've seen use up to 80% CPU time you could easily view anything on the net with 16MB-32MB.
-
I think it is funny when people talk about bloatware, and how programs are so much larger now.
Do you really think programs are actually that much larger? They really arent. I'll give you an example. Say you take a puzzle game from 1990 that takes say a meg of ram for the code and associated data and another meg with the graphics and sound. compressed that would fit on a 1.44 meg floppy right.
That is probably using vga 256 color 320x200 graphics and 22khz stereo audio loops. games on the BBS networks at the time were smaller and even more simple.
Nowadays practically identical game programming can use a gig or more of graphics data and hundreds of megs of mp3's.
And the horsepower and storage to do all that is out there and is very cheap.
programs today and 20 years ago are very similar but they are working with staggeringly different amounts of data in completely different environments. Our demands on the hardware has matched the increase in capabilities, so no it doesnt feel 100 times faster unless you are useing the same programs and data.
-
Nonsense. Software today is bloated as hell because making efficient use of space is no longer a priority, but bundling crapware is. There are plenty of non-bloated programs out there for comparison, but most commercial software is full of unnecessary and unwanted data.
-
I am guessing most of this is in IPods, IPads and Phones more than computer.
But you got to give it to Steve Jobs, he knows what a large amount of people want.
Correction: .. he does know *how to make* a large amount of people want.
But regardless whether you like Apple or not it is a fact that this business result is outstanding.
-
Say you take a puzzle game from 1990 that takes say a meg of ram for the code and associated data and another meg with the graphics and sound. compressed that would fit on a 1.44 meg floppy right.
Nowadays practically identical game programming can use a gig or more of graphics data and hundreds of megs of mp3's.
Thats nonsense. A "puzzle game" with over a gig of graphics data?
Alarm bells should be ringing.
-
Balderdash! Poppycock!
-
Thats nonsense. A "puzzle game" with over a gig of graphics data?
Alarm bells should be ringing.
Alarm bells? little dramatic don't you think? I'm not talking about a simple internet game but a really good installible puzzle game.
I have a majohng game from 2001 that has 326megs of back ground screens and another 100 megabytes for game graphics. All the background screens are 1280x1024 x 24bit and all the game graphics are 24 bit as well. And all the audio is stored as full songs for playback adding another 96 megs. The actual program itself is only a few megs.
That is a non hd 2d game from 2k1 on cd. Newer games use dvd background graphics and multiple mipmap level textures all in truecolor. I also have the Myst puzzle game which if memory serves requires a significant mount of space to install, all because of graphics and audio storage.
My point (obviously missed or ignored) is that hires truecolor graphics and even mp3 audio will make modern games look "bloated" even though they really aren't. And computer power is wasted if we only use 1990 storage and memory requirements in mind.
here is a modern puzzle game like I am talking about: Moraff's MahJongg 2009
http://www.softwarediversions.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=99
hmmm what are the system requirements on that?
Minimum System Requirements:
1.0GHz CPU, 512MB RAM, 38MB - 670MB Disk Space
OMG you expect me to splurge on a computer with a 1ghz cpu, half gig of ram, and up to 670MB of storage space for a Mahjongg Game?!?!
Oh wait my cpu is more than twice that fast, I have 4 times more memory and 670MB won't make even a tiny dent in my hd.
And a I've played Moraff's Mahjongg and it is beautiful and fun.
-
Most modern games also have a few hundred megabytes of video splashscreens to remind you of who developed the game, what middleware and codecs they licenced, who published the game, etc. every single time you launch it. That is bloat. Many also install other useless or redundant bits of software that take up space and cycles. We really can do without the GFWL client, GameSpy Arcade, etc.
-
Most modern games also have a few hundred megabytes of video splashscreens to remind you of who developed the game, what middleware and codecs they licenced, who published the game, etc. every single time you launch it. That is bloat. Many also install other useless or redundant bits of software that take up space and cycles. We really can do without the GFWL client, GameSpy Arcade, etc.
You may consider that to be bloat, but if you developed said middleware and it's splash screen is your only credit in the game you may think differently, in other words the developer may be required by the license to include spashscreens. And honestly 99% of the people out there don't care if a few hundred megs of their 500gig harddrive is "wasted" on a video (which may or may not look cool, ive seen some that look very cool).
As for the other stuff I agree to a point, but I have many games and have had zero problem with any of that. It is skippable, or uninstallable. The only one I don't like is steam but I don't usually buy games online so I don't use it the way it is intended.
-
$4 billion profit. Hats off to them.
:flame: :hat:
Let the flames begin.
I don't need to flame them really, just shows that selling flawed products (and the iPhone and iPad not being capable of surfing Flash content on the internet is certainly as big a flaw as one could get on internet devices like those) to morons is big business ;)
-
I don't need to flame them really, just shows that selling flawed products (and the iPhone and iPad not being capable of surfing Flash content on the internet is certainly as big a flaw as one could get on internet devices like those) to morons is big business ;)
If they sell that well in spite of not having flash, I'd wager a bet that flash just isn't very important to most consumers
-
if apple is so great then can someone please tell me why they are a pain in the a** to use? People keep on telling me (on internet) how easy they are to use and how brilliant they are but i just don't get it. The dockbar is confusing, i'm constantly resizing windows, maximizing windows that don't maximize and everytime i open a few programs i get lost of where everything is on the screen with everything overlapping everything else i end up trying to layout my windows so i can access it easily which is extremely annoying. :madashell:
Everything on windows is easier whereas the osx is extremley clumsy. I would say i am 2x more productive on a pc then the osx. At least 2x.
We have a table in the uni library with 10 pretty imacs on it and another 50 dull dell pcs in the same big room on different tables. No one uses the imacs because they are so hard to use. Everyone i know avoids the imacs like the plaque. :rolleyes:
Please explain. :huh:
-
if apple is so great then can someone please tell me why they are a pain in the a** to use? People keep on telling me (on internet) how easy they are to use and how brilliant they are but i just don't get it.
I don't blame you wondering this. OS X user experience really is crap. YOu can't use the finder for anything without knowing the keyboard shortcuts. Same for preview. When you need to search something you get no feedback. YOu don't even know if it's carrying on it's task. I could go on for ages but I wont.
I like it because it's a better desktop environ than *nix and gives me all the *nix stuff I care about. It's the slowest OS money can but we just throw hardware at it.
My girlfriend can't use it because when she hops on my machine shit starts flinging around on the screen because I have expose set for the corners and dock to hide and zoom on cursor overs.
-
Pretty much every GUI has usability problems, but I would agree that OSX isn't really any more intuitive than Windows. They both have their idiosyncrasies, they both have plenty of extraneous features that I prefer to disable, and neither one ships with a decent file manager.
Apple is just very good at marketing and packaging their products, and by avoiding the bottom end of the market, they create a false image of quality and reliability as compared to Windows PCs. There are plenty of ugly, unreliable, crapware-filled Windows boxes out there making the PC look bad, but not so many junk Macs.
-
Pretty much every GUI has usability problems, but I would agree that OSX isn't really any more intuitive than Windows. They both have their idiosyncrasies, they both have plenty of extraneous features that I prefer to disable, and neither one ships with a decent file manager.
Apple is just very good at marketing and packaging their products, and by avoiding the bottom end of the market, they create a false image of quality and reliability as compared to Windows PCs. There are plenty of ugly, unreliable, crapware-filled Windows boxes out there making the PC look bad, but not so many junk Macs.
A Snow Leopard might eat you for saying that.
:)
-
Hi,
@MikeyMike,
Long time no see, maybe I haven't been on the boards that much. Anywhoose, glad to see that you are still here.
smerf
-
Having a job where I have the misfortune of occasionally having to teach basic computer tasks to people who have no idea about computers, the notion that windows is somehow "intuitive" is hogwash.
People use "intuitive" when they should have said "what I am used to"
-
Having a job where I have the misfortune of occasionally having to teach basic computer tasks to people who have no idea about computers, the notion that windows is somehow "intuitive" is hogwash.
People use "intuitive" when they should have said "what I am used to"
Amiga and 68k MacOS is intuitive. I've seen people who have never used a computer before get the hang of it in around a minute. My cousin who is actually quite thick had no trouble remembering amigados commands and any other tinkering, but gave up on computers (meaning PC) when the playstation 2 came out.
I found Windows 95 simple enough to pick up after only knowing how to use a dos based directory manager.
Use to be that you could learn the basics without ever consulting a book or guide.
-
Amiga and 68k MacOS is intuitive. I've seen people who have never used a computer before get the hang of it in around a minute. My cousin who is actually quite thick had no trouble remembering amigados commands and any other tinkering, but gave up on computers (meaning PC) when the playstation 2 came out.
I found Windows 95 simple enough to pick up after only knowing how to use a dos based directory manager.
Use to be that you could learn the basics without ever consulting a book or guide.
My theory is this:
Some people "get" computers. They can find their way around most systems without too much fuss.
Some people don't "get" it. They can memorize how to use specific systems and where to click on a specific screen, but they'll always need help or new directions even for a slight change.
Some people of course may "get" everything but a given system, and some may never "get" it except for a given system that just somehow makes sense to them.
-
@kedawa
And that's what makes the whole "user friendliness" argument impossible to resolve. Most GUIs are user friendly but they take their own approach at things. If you fight that approach then the OS seems non-user friendly, if you go along with it then it is user friendly...
-
Some people of course may "get" everything but a given system
You must be talking about me and Windows. I always use Windows like I knew it for less than a year, while I have to use it since 1995. All other OSs just seem fine.
That doesn´t mean I like everything about Mainframes, Mac OS, Java or Linux, but at least I understand why it is the way it is.
-
You must be talking about me and Windows. I always use Windows like I knew it for less than a year, while I have to use it since 1995. All other OSs just seem fine.
That doesn´t mean I like everything about Mainframes, Mac OS, Java or Linux, but at least I understand why it is the way it is.
right :) Sometimes a given system just won't make sense, and sometimes everything BUT a given system makes no sense at all!