Don't need to. We have PowerShell instead. On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Jonathan Link <jonathan.l...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I doubt any of the "geezers" here want to bring back DOS. > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:15 PM, MarvinC <marv...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> All of this is "ok", I guess. Whether you, we, us, or anyone likes it, it >> still represents "change". Good, bad, progressive or re-gressive is left to >> individual interpretation. I for one don't have a problem with it because >> again, I have the ability to not use the option. Therefore my little world >> of searching isn't turned upside down because some college graduate >> at Google suggested this feature as a way to appeal to a "younger and more >> captive" audience. Thankfully the decision to implement didn't come down to >> anyone from this list because most techies wanna get one fix in place and >> keep it forever.while old tech geezers will always complain about "ANY" form >> of change. >> Bring back DOS!!! >> Get off my lawn!!! >> >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Ben Scott <mailvor...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 4:19 PM, MarvinC <marv...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Yes, normal people, outside of the >>> > technical industry, make purchases based on the fancy images. >>> >>> Sure. And we all know how well that works out for them. >>> >>> > The search process is just that a simple query which >>> > requires no effort. >>> >>> Exactly. So don't make it more complicated just for the sake of >>> making it more complicated. >>> >>> Simplicity has beauty in itself. >>> >>> "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but >>> when there is nothing left to remove." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery >>> >>> This is something a lot of computer industry types don't seem to >>> understand. They think the longer the feature list, the more >>> bells-and-whistles, the more *things* a program has, the better it >>> must be. In practice, it's often the opposite that's true. The more >>> stuff they add, the slower it gets, the more bugs there are, the more >>> security issues, the higher the support burden, the harder it is to >>> learn. >>> >>> > So again why not add some life to it. >>> >>> What you are calling "life" I would call "gaudiness". Now, that's a >>> purely personal, aesthetic thing. But I've got just as much as right >>> to call it "obnoxious" as you do to call the classic page "stale". >>> >>> On a more practical note, it takes longer to load a giant background >>> image, and consumes more system resources. Individually, it's a drop >>> in the bucket, but how many times per day does the Google home page >>> get loaded across the world? >>> >>> > Not only is change good, it's also necessary. >>> >>> Again: Change for the sake of change alone is not progress. >>> >>> <reductio ad absurdum> Let's tear down every building on the planet >>> and build new ones out of paper mache. Change is good and necessary, >>> right? </reductio ad absurdum> >>> >>> -- Ben >>> >>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >>> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
