Well Timmy,
When I was young, we used to walk 5 miles to school, uphill, in 4 foot of
snow - And We Liked It!
All we had to cook on was the open fireplace, for which we had to chop up
huge trees with dull axes - And We Liked It!
We talked on party line phones that had to be cranked to ring an operator to
try and connect you - And We Liked It!
We had to crank the phonograph 20 times every two minutes to hear a song-
And We LIked It!
Back then, we had to buy the cow to get some milk - And We Lik.. umm, ok,
tolerated it.
These new fangled devices are just too complicated anymore... I miss those
good ole' days...
-s
On Tuesday 05 June 2001 05:04 pm, you wrote:
> Dear guys:
>
> Yes, I misused the word "paranoia" (I gave it the sense it nowadays has in
> slang Spanish) so probably I got slightly misunderstood. Sorry for that.
>
> But it was a critic anyway.
>
> Again I want to declare my sympathy towards the Linux community. It's a
> nice idea that matches part of what I think computers should be. But again
> don't expect the crowd to abandon their Windows-based machines at this
> time. Most people will pay to be able to click the "add any hardware" icon
> and start printing, scanning or connecting to the Internet immediately.
>
> I'm not saying you surrender. I'm just saying: read History and learn the
> Macintosh lesson.
>
> I leave you with an open letter I found, about the real importance of an
> operating system.
>
> --
> Pablo Garcia-Duran
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> A letter to operating system designers
> Written By: Timothy Nordloh
> Linux, Microsoft, Apple! It's so confusing! which operating system is best?
> I'm here to tell you, as briefly as possible, that it doesn't matter. First
> of all, the majority of users are like me; they see their operating system
> for no more than three seconds, before launching their favorite
> application. Second, we know you all want money, even the Linux companies.
> also, we know you're in bed with the hardware companies.
>
> After reading the line on the bottom of the new Mac OS X, display box, I
> now know that it is the "Most Advanced Operating System in the World". All
> this statement tells me is that even Apple can't be trusted to be
> completely honest.
>
> I worry that the chief operating system companies out there are getting
> away from the true meaning of 'operating system.' I think back on the days
> of DOS. I typed 'edit', and I'm editing documents. I typed 'menu' and I got
> a menu. Best of all, I got a printed instruction manual that told me these
> things. What ever happened to instruction manuals? They went from
> explaining the ins and outs of DOS to describing how to double-click.
>
> We need to examine the computer of yesterday. It was simple and reliable.
> We could print our documents. There were about 20 options on any one
> product. Anyone could jump in and be 'certified' on a word processor in
> under thirty minutes. An example of how computers have gotten away from
> simplicity; back in 1990, if I pressed the button labeled 'print screen',
> guess what happened? the words on my screen were magically transported to
> my printer! I miss that. Also, my computer booted up in less than two
> minutes.
>
> When did we lose sight of that simplicity? Stepping back to the present, I
> have a computer that forgets what kind of monitor I have in Windows, and
> doesn't shut down properly in Linux. I still have the default background on
> my computer. I think it's light blue, but I'm not sure. The only time I see
> my background is during the two seconds it takes me to click on an
> application icon. I also don't spend a lot of time personalizing my
> settings. I sit down and start typing on a word processor. Or I install the
> latest version of Quake. Or I surf the internet.
>
> Typically, the only part of the operating system I see is the taskbar. I've
> seen the pretty Whistler screenshots, and I like the lovely Mac OS
> interface, but it's all going in the wrong direction. I want to get to
> where I'm going in one click, or with a simple typed command. No menus, no
> searches, just give me my games or my web browser.
>
> What's up with the .NET concept? First of all, it's silly to think about
> selling me the chance to use Microsoft Word; I already paid 300 bucks for
> the 4 year old version, and it has more features than I'll ever use!
>
> Do you think you're fooling us, Microsoft? We know you're scheme; you're
> trying to take over the entire internet! You're going to sell us entire
> dictionaries, gaming networks, and information sources; I'll be able to
> download music and movies, I'll get regular software upgrades, all for one
> low monthly fee. Someday soon, I'll log on to Hotmail, and discover that in
> order to continue using my e-mail, all I have to do is submit credit card
> number to .NET.
>
> If I buy a cell-phone, it just works. I don't know or care who wrote it's
> operating system, and the whole instruction set is nicely stored on a
> silicon chip. With a computer, I have to pay to get my hardware to even
> work! That's right, it costs me money to activate features! I want my next
> computer's operating system to be on a rom chip, and I want it to boot up
> in less than a second, like a cell phone.
>
> The other day, I caught my wife using Netscape Communicator to create a
> document. At first I laughed, but then I realized it was a damn clever
> idea. It's got word wrap, which is more than I can say for notepad. And she
> always has her e-mail open anyway. It was a natural step for her. This
> whole time, it's been taking me two or three clicks to open a word
> document, and she's doing it by clicking on 'new'.
>
> For many of us, the computer is a novel toy, and it's fun to see all the
> neat things it can do, but let's face it; the computers of the future are
> going to be like the Sega Dreamcast, and web tv. We'll take palm-tops over
> laptops. Most people simply don't need or use much of their computers'
> potential power. Case in point, there are a hundreds of thousands of people
> using wasted cpu idle time to process Seti records. Let's face it, none of
> us need a big chest full of tools to change the oil in our cars, and we
> don't need a 3,000 dollar computer to check e-mail. Besides, most of us pay
> someone else to change our oil.
>
> It's time for all operating system companies to think about streamlining
> their software. Stop building operating systems that eat 10 percent of my
> computer's resources. I'm not launching my pc into space, so it doesn't
> matter too much to me if the operating system in 'outer space' capable. Get
> a low profile. The average user wants nothing more than a simple interface
> and a speedy response. Some of us spend a lot of time in online
> communities; I have a friend who uses his computer almost exclusively to
> chat on Yahoo. Others create databases of their cd collections, or browse
> pictures on the web. We like drawing pictures and editing photos.
>
> We want to frag the our opponents, and play chess. But we don't care too
> much whether our desktop background is centered or tiled. We don't even
> freakin' notice when the mouse changes as we roll it over an icon! My
> advice is this; go back to the drawing board and make my computer simpler.
> Make it quicker. Where do I want to go today? Today I want to go play Quake
> III. I don't care if your name is Bill Gates, I don't care if your name is
> Steve Jobs. Just get me there in under ten seconds. But if you're name is
> Linus, I'll give you fifteeen seconds, because I like penguins.
----------------------------------------
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="Attachment: 1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description:
----------------------------------------
