On 10/30/2013 5:18 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/30/2013 11:01 AM, Chris wrote:
"Poorly designed firmware caused unintended operation, lack of driver
training made it fatal."
So it's the driver's fault, who couldn't possibly know what was going on
in that car-gone-mad? To put the blame on the driver is cynicism of
the worst kind.
Unfortunately, that's a common (and dangerous) attitude I've come across
among programmers and engineers.
There are also misguided end users who believe there cannot be any other
way (and sometimes even believe that the big players in the industry are
infallible, and hence the user is to blame for any failure).
I have a deep hatred for such people. (I've come across far too many.)
The user has to adapt to anything they
fail to implement or didn't think of. However, machines have to adapt to
humans not the other way around (realizing this was part of Apple's
success in UI design,
AFAIK Apple designs are not meant to be adapted. It seems to be mostly
marketing.
This is very true (at least for Apple's "Return of Jobs" era). And it's
not surprising: Steve Jobs had a notoriously heavy hand in Apple's
designs and yet Jobs himself has never, realistically, been much of
anything more than a glorified salesman. The company was literally being
run by a salesman. And that easily explains both the popularity and the
prevalence of bad design.
Ubuntu is very good now too).
The distribution is not really indicative of the UI/window manager
you'll end up using, so what do you mean?
Ordinarily, yes, but I would think there'd be an uncommonly strong
correlation between Ubuntu users and Unity users.
