"Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision
because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it
does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft programs..."
Where? Where do I begin?
Is that a non-reason reason? Let's translate:
"The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
Serviceable?
kt
ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
On 18 May, 21:03, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
< SNIP boring stuff completely unrelated to Lisp >
You could begin by adding an OT in the title of your post.
--
Who's your mama?
On May 18, 3:09 pm, Spiros Bousbouras <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 May, 21:03, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> < SNIP boring stuff completely unrelated to Lisp >
>
> You could begin by adding an OT in the title of your post.
>
> --
> Who's your mama?
Kenny thought he was writing an email to his imaginary friend again.
P.S. The grocery store down the street didn't carry my favorite salad
dressing.
On May 18, 4:03 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
Reasonable... But Microsoft?? What are they thinking??
··············@excite.com writes:
> On May 18, 4:03�pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
>> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
>
> Reasonable... But Microsoft?? What are they thinking??
Removing bugs by removing code. In this instance, by removing executable code.
Swift!
Let's pray they go on...
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
> ··············@excite.com writes:
>
>> On May 18, 4:03 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
>>> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
>> Reasonable... But Microsoft?? What are they thinking??
>
> Removing bugs by removing code. In this instance, by removing executable code.
> Swift!
>
> Let's pray they go on...
>
Ah, happy thought. First IBM stops making software, then Microsoft. Time
to load up on Apple stock.
kt
---
"I am too new to programming to give more than an average mark"
-- CNET review
http://download.cnet.com/Database-Design-Studio-Professional/9241-10254_4-10261066-1.html?tag=uo;uo
On 18 May 2009 21:46:00 GMT, <···@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>
> Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
>>pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
>>lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
>
> �Hughes stayed in the studio's darkened screening room for
> more than four months
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes#Mental_and_physical_decline
Well, if you want to believe his murderers.... the murderers of the
very rich are rather interesting, as they get away with stuff that the
poor cannot. I blame that on effective bribery.
But it was fitting justice, since he had wiped out his parents much
eariler.
Some saying about 'live by the sword, die by' comes to mind.
Might as well join these stupid threads, since no one is
posting/answering lisp posts.
PS. Kenny, when you finally give up on the Once-Evil Empire, don't
switch to Ublunt2 as there isn't any difference. They both discard
stuff they cannot understand, as you noted. They both do stupid
things to keep you from using your computer (your mouse has moved, do
you want to restart to to accept this move?).
Oh and congrats to the multi-troll. I have never seen someone so
completely capture a newsgroup, your one liners must be good. Plus,
considering how much work that the effort entails, you get stamina
points for outlasting the vast majority of trolls. beam me up scotty
On 18 maio, 17:03, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
> Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
> component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision
> because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it
> does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft programs..."
This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
usability.
> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
>
> pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
> lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
Many people call this computer / Internet addiction. I call it Lisp
disease :)
På Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
<··········@gmail.com>:
>
> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
> usability.
Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user interface
work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things already in the
system. It seems most people don't read help files and if they can't find
what they are looking for in a minute they just don't use it. If anything
other companies could probably learn something from Microsoft's design
process.
---------------------
John Thingstad
On 19 maio, 11:56, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> På Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
> <··········@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
> > This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
> > maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
> > usability.
>
> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
> version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user interface
> work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things already in the
> system. It seems most people don't read help files and if they can't find
> what they are looking for in a minute they just don't use it. If anything
> other companies could probably learn something from Microsoft's design
> process.
Ok, you are right. But:
Usability for users: ok (except for installing (free) software from
the Internet).
Usability by big companies (which have money): ok.
Usability by small companies and lonely developers (which don't have
money): ...
You can disagree with me, this is just a personal opinion.
John Thingstad wrote:
> På Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
> <··········@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>> usability.
>
> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
> version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user interface
> work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things already in
> the system. It seems most people don't read help files and if they can't
> find what they are looking for in a minute they just don't use it.
Which in no way justifies pulling the plug on the help files they once
supported. The YouTube user won't use help, but Windows also supports
enterprise data modelling software and those users do. And please do not
tell me they could not afford to maintain a frickin reader app of a
frozen spec.
kt
On Tue, 19 May 2009 13:43:45 -0400, <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Thingstad wrote:
>> P� Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
>> <··········@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>>> usability.
>>
>> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
>> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
>> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
>> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
>> version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user interface
>> work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things already in
>> the system. It seems most people don't read help files and if they can't
>> find what they are looking for in a minute they just don't use it.
>
> Which in no way justifies pulling the plug on the help files they once
> supported. The YouTube user won't use help, but Windows also supports
> enterprise data modelling software and those users do. And please do not
> tell me they could not afford to maintain a frickin reader app of a
> frozen spec.
Well, considering their massive brain-loss to Google, it's quite
possible. Anyone that understood the code is gone, and the newbies
are even dumber that those who went before, so a strong case of NIH
arose. Then they used the sad-sack justification of "no one reads it
anyway', and poof, no more program. "We're too busy trying to get the
current generation of crap to work".
Re-read 'Accidental Millionaires'.
meanwhile, there certainly seems to be a brain-drain here too....
På Tue, 19 May 2009 19:43:45 +0200, skrev Kenneth Tilton
<·········@gmail.com>:
>
> Which in no way justifies pulling the plug on the help files they once
> supported. The YouTube user won't use help, but Windows also supports
> enterprise data modelling software and those users do. And please do not
> tell me they could not afford to maintain a frickin reader app of a
> frozen spec.
Oddly Microsoft is usually criticized for not removing obsolete interfaces
instead of re-factoring and causing non portable changes like Mac's
sometimes do.
Anyhow the reason is simply that they prefer you don't use it. (More
annoying in Vista is the fazing out of GL. It still works but it is much
less efficient than directX. Also windows32 is being phased out in support
of WindowsFX and MSFC for .net Forms.)
Anyhow found this file on doing a conversion.
http://www.help-info.de/en/Help_Info_WinHelp/hw_converting.htm
---------------------
John Thingstad
John Thingstad wrote:
> På Tue, 19 May 2009 19:43:45 +0200, skrev Kenneth Tilton
> <·········@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>> Which in no way justifies pulling the plug on the help files they once
>> supported. The YouTube user won't use help, but Windows also supports
>> enterprise data modelling software and those users do. And please do
>> not tell me they could not afford to maintain a frickin reader app of
>> a frozen spec.
>
> Oddly Microsoft is usually criticized for not removing obsolete
> interfaces instead of re-factoring and causing non portable changes like
> Mac's sometimes do.
> Anyhow the reason is simply that they prefer you don't use it. (More
> annoying in Vista is the fazing out of GL. It still works but it is much
> less efficient than directX. Also windows32 is being phased out in
> support of WindowsFX and MSFC for .net Forms.)
>
> Anyhow found this file on doing a conversion.
> http://www.help-info.de/en/Help_Info_WinHelp/hw_converting.htm
>
Oh, OK, that's not so bad. It was the software publisher that dropped
the ball.
Sorry, Bill!
kt
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:56:28 +0200, John Thingstad wrote:
> På Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
> <··········@gmail.com>:
>
>
>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>> usability.
>
> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
Whoa, I didn't know that. I wonder how they came up with the design
of the BSOD - I guess that the people they were filming were pretty
angry when their computer crashed, so they decided to use a nice
soothing blue. Such diligent attention to fine detail surely
contributes to the stellar quality of MS software.
Tamas
On 19 May 2009 15:32:05 GMT, <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:56:28 +0200, John Thingstad wrote:
>> P� Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
>> <··········@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>>> usability.
>>
>> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
>> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
>> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
>> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The last
>
> Whoa, I didn't know that. I wonder how they came up with the design
> of the BSOD - I guess that the people they were filming were pretty
> angry when their computer crashed, so they decided to use a nice
> soothing blue. Such diligent attention to fine detail surely
> contributes to the stellar quality of MS software.
*touche*
"John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> writes:
> P� Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
> <··········@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>> usability.
>
> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The
> last version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user
> interface work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things
> already in the system. It seems most people don't read help files and
> if they can't find what they are looking for in a minute they just
> don't use it. If anything other companies could probably learn
> something from Microsoft's design process.
Hey! Why do you think programmers don't like to write documentation?
We know it's useless: we don't read it, we know users don't read it.
Then why should Microsoft should provide a program to read it?
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
På Tue, 19 May 2009 17:04:13 +0200, skrev Pascal J. Bourguignon
<···@informatimago.com>:
>
> Hey! Why do you think programmers don't like to write documentation?
> We know it's useless: we don't read it, we know users don't read it.
> Then why should Microsoft should provide a program to read it?
>
They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was
used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more
easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
---------------------
John Thingstad
On May 19, 11:09 am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was
> used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more
> easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
icon?
/------------\
| +---+ |
| | | |
| | |+-+ |
| +---++-+ |
| +--++--+ |
| | || | |
| | |+--+ |
| +--+ |
\------------/
Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
On May 19, 4:47 pm, ··············@excite.com wrote:
> So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
> fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
> like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
> icon?
>
> Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
logo buttons for the os have been around for quite some time -- the
apple menu? (I don't regularly use a mac, but is that menu even
context sensitive?)
Kevin
··············@excite.com writes:
> On May 19, 11:09 am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
>
>> They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was
>> used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more
>> easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
>
> So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
> fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
> like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
> icon?
>
>
> /------------\
> | +---+ |
> | | | |
> | | |+-+ |
> | +---++-+ |
> | +--++--+ |
> | | || | |
> | | |+--+ |
> | +--+ |
> \------------/
>
> Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
What the heck does "File" mean, anyway? Seems to have something to do
with printing and quitting... and why should I assume that any text on
my screen is a clickable menu in the first place?
The point being that /------------\
| +---+ |
| | | |
| | |+-+ |
| +---++-+ |
| +--++--+ |
| | || | |
| | |+--+ |
| +--+ |
\------------/ isn't markedly more obtuse. "File"
is only meaningful because we've learned it. I'm not sorry to see it go.
A picture of the Office 2007 icon is fine by me.
Paul Donnelly <·············@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> ··············@excite.com writes:
>
>> On May 19, 11:09�am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
>>
>>> They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was �
>>> used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more �
>>> easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
>>
>> So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
>> fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
>> like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
>> icon?
>>
>>
>> /------------\
>> | +---+ |
>> | | | |
>> | | |+-+ |
>> | +---++-+ |
>> | +--++--+ |
>> | | || | |
>> | | |+--+ |
>> | +--+ |
>> \------------/
>>
>> Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
>
> What the heck does "File" mean, anyway? Seems to have something to do
> with printing and quitting... and why should I assume that any text on
> my screen is a clickable menu in the first place?
Indeed. "File" should only be meaningful when given in a command, such as:
open file "MyLetterToThePresident".
or: find files containing "Bush".
or: replace "Bush" by "Obama" in all these files.
or: delete all useless files.
or: archive old files.
etc.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
··············@excite.com writes:
> On May 19, 11:09�am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
>
>> They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was �
>> used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more �
>> easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
>
> So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
> fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
> like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
> icon?
>
>
> /------------\
> | +---+ |
> | | | |
> | | |+-+ |
> | +---++-+ |
> | +--++--+ |
> | | || | |
> | | |+--+ |
> | +--+ |
> \------------/
>
> Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
I don't know. But I assume to illiterate people, it's not less
telling that "File". Perhaps if the icons have discriminating colors,
it might even be more recognizable.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
On 19 May, 23:03, ····@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
wrote:
> ··············@excite.com writes:
> > On May 19, 11:09 am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> >> They didn't provide a program to read it. (Although the little helper was
> >> used for this in the past.) They redesigned the UI so people could more
> >> easily find things without reading the documentation. (Office 2007)
>
> > So now to get the file menu, you must push a button that looks like a
> > fancy coat button... Is the button labelled with a title, something
> > like, "file menu"? No... Surely it is labelled with a meaningful
> > icon?
>
> > /------------\
> > | +---+ |
> > | | | |
> > | | |+-+ |
> > | +---++-+ |
> > | +--++--+ |
> > | | || | |
> > | | |+--+ |
> > | +--+ |
> > \------------/
>
> > Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
>
> I don't know. But I assume to illiterate people, it's not less
> telling that "File". Perhaps if the icons have discriminating colors,
> it might even be more recognizable.
cool. A word processor for illiterate people! Journalists?
På Wed, 20 May 2009 14:40:00 +0200, skrev
<····················@hotmail.com>:
>>
>> I don't know. But I assume to illiterate people, it's not less
>> telling that "File". Perhaps if the icons have discriminating colors,
>> it might even be more recognizable.
>
> cool. A word processor for illiterate people! Journalists?
Perhaps you're the illiterate one? File is a Subject. "Open File" is a
meaningful sentence. File is not. It's like saying "What are you doing?
Book!". So in a sense the icon is better. Besides it can be shown that
icons are processed faster than words. The idea of using the Microsoft
icon I guess is that it represents a systems command and "Open file" is
command affecting global state. The idea of having a interface
"philosophy" is consistency. You might not agree with it, but in time you
will understand it. Besides trying to satisfy everybody will probably end
up satisfying nobody.
---------------------
John Thingstad
John Thingstad escribió:
> På Wed, 20 May 2009 14:40:00 +0200, skrev
> <····················@hotmail.com>:
>
>>>
>>> I don't know. But I assume to illiterate people, it's not less
>>> telling that "File". Perhaps if the icons have discriminating colors,
>>> it might even be more recognizable.
>>
>> cool. A word processor for illiterate people! Journalists?
>
> Perhaps you're the illiterate one? File is a Subject. "Open File" is a
> meaningful sentence. File is not. It's like saying "What are you doing?
> Book!". So in a sense the icon is better. Besides it can be shown that
> icons are processed faster than words. The idea of using the Microsoft
> icon I guess is that it represents a systems command and "Open file" is
> command affecting global state. The idea of having a interface
> "philosophy" is consistency. You might not agree with it, but in time
> you will understand it. Besides trying to satisfy everybody will
> probably end up satisfying nobody.
>
> ---------------------
> John Thingstad
Come on. After years of adoctrination everyone knows what is the "File"
menu for, across OSes and across applications. Now that we all have
learned what was doing that "File" word hanging in our windows they come
and replace it with a little drawing, and there we go back to the time
before Champollion and the Rosetta Stone. Adherence to established
convention (naming schemes, APIs, protocols, whatever) should be before
any other revolutionary consideration. Change, if necessary and
beneficial, should be introduced only gradually. The redesign of the UI
all at once can only annoy and irritate users; at least my users get
very angry when I introduce changes that alter their workflow.
Leandro
Leandro Rios <··················@gmail.com> writes:
> Come on. After years of adoctrination everyone knows what is the
> "File" menu for, across OSes and across applications. Now that we all
> have learned what was doing that "File" word hanging in our windows
> they come and replace it with a little drawing, and there we go back
> to the time before Champollion and the Rosetta Stone. Adherence to
> established convention (naming schemes, APIs, protocols, whatever)
> should be before any other revolutionary consideration. Change, if
> necessary and beneficial, should be introduced only gradually. The
> redesign of the UI all at once can only annoy and irritate users; at
> least my users get very angry when I introduce changes that alter
> their workflow.
I see your point. Perhaps they should have replaced the word "File" with
a little icon, changing nothing else. In some situations that would be
much better.
But really, how else were they supposed to roll out the changes they
thought need making? Change the icon in Word 2007, and wait until Word
2011 (or whatever comes next) to make another little change, then
finally morph it into its current state a couple decades from now? Or
makes lots of frequent updates, each one of which changes the interface
in some small way?
IMO, if a big change needs making, make it and move on. Your users might
moan about it, but they're going to moan about a constantly changing
piece of software more, and with better reason. Better to implement the
new state of affairs as quickly as is safe, so people can get used to
the full thing right away and settle into a new workflow immediately,
rather than constantly adapting to changes as they come over a period of
years. You wouldn't give someone a shot in slow motion because they were
afraid of needles.
Paul Donnelly escribi�:
> I see your point. Perhaps they should have replaced the word "File" with
> a little icon, changing nothing else. In some situations that would be
> much better.
>
> But really, how else were they supposed to roll out the changes they
> thought need making? Change the icon in Word 2007, and wait until Word
> 2011 (or whatever comes next) to make another little change, then
> finally morph it into its current state a couple decades from now? Or
> makes lots of frequent updates, each one of which changes the interface
> in some small way?
>
> IMO, if a big change needs making, make it and move on. Your users might
> moan about it, but they're going to moan about a constantly changing
> piece of software more, and with better reason. Better to implement the
> new state of affairs as quickly as is safe, so people can get used to
> the full thing right away and settle into a new workflow immediately,
> rather than constantly adapting to changes as they come over a period of
> years. You wouldn't give someone a shot in slow motion because they were
> afraid of needles.
LOL, that's true, but I don't know if this analogy is very adequate. I
would say that if you have to give 30 shots to a patient you won't give
them all at once in order to reduce the duration of the painful moment
to a minimum. You'll try to apply the shots at intervals, to minimize
the intensity of the pain. And we better stop with the bad analogies
before we start comparing UI development with more painful medical
practices. :) Perhaps I'm just old fashioned and becoming more
change-resistant as my age increases.
Regards,
Leandro (who promises not to keep adding to the offtopicness of this
completely offtopic thread)
Leandro Rios <··················@gmail.com> writes:
> Paul Donnelly escribió:
>
>> I see your point. Perhaps they should have replaced the word "File" with
>> a little icon, changing nothing else. In some situations that would be
>> much better.
>>
>> But really, how else were they supposed to roll out the changes they
>> thought need making? Change the icon in Word 2007, and wait until Word
>> 2011 (or whatever comes next) to make another little change, then
>> finally morph it into its current state a couple decades from now? Or
>> makes lots of frequent updates, each one of which changes the interface
>> in some small way?
>>
>> IMO, if a big change needs making, make it and move on. Your users might
>> moan about it, but they're going to moan about a constantly changing
>> piece of software more, and with better reason. Better to implement the
>> new state of affairs as quickly as is safe, so people can get used to
>> the full thing right away and settle into a new workflow immediately,
>> rather than constantly adapting to changes as they come over a period of
>> years. You wouldn't give someone a shot in slow motion because they were
>> afraid of needles.
>
> LOL, that's true, but I don't know if this analogy is very adequate. I
> would say that if you have to give 30 shots to a patient you won't
> give them all at once in order to reduce the duration of the painful
> moment to a minimum. You'll try to apply the shots at intervals, to
> minimize the intensity of the pain.
Good catch. And I do think that it's appropriate to make gradual changes
sometimes, but given that Office 2007's new form was a necessary thing
to switch to (and some might argue, although I think the old UI was a
nightmare), I don't think constant gradual changes would have made it
more painless.
That's my two cents, and my three and four as well. ;)
Paul Donnelly wrote:
> Leandro Rios <··················@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Paul Donnelly escribió:
>>
>>> IMO, if a big change needs making, make it and move on. Your users might
>>> moan about it, but they're going to moan about a constantly changing
>>> piece of software more, and with better reason. Better to implement the
>>> new state of affairs as quickly as is safe, so people can get used to
>>> the full thing right away and settle into a new workflow immediately,
>>> rather than constantly adapting to changes as they come over a period of
>>> years. You wouldn't give someone a shot in slow motion because they were
>>> afraid of needles.
Ah, but look how We are migrating the great unwashed from Cobol to Lisp:
Basic to C to C++ to Java to Python to Ruby to Javascript to Lisp.
Gifted people like us can go straight from Cobol to Lisp, but ordinary
intellects need a conceptual ramp.
kt
Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
> Paul Donnelly wrote:
>> Leandro Rios <··················@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Paul Donnelly escribió:
>>>
>>>> IMO, if a big change needs making, make it and move on. Your users might
>>>> moan about it, but they're going to moan about a constantly changing
>>>> piece of software more, and with better reason. Better to implement the
>>>> new state of affairs as quickly as is safe, so people can get used to
>>>> the full thing right away and settle into a new workflow immediately,
>>>> rather than constantly adapting to changes as they come over a period of
>>>> years. You wouldn't give someone a shot in slow motion because they were
>>>> afraid of needles.
>
> Ah, but look how We are migrating the great unwashed from Cobol to
> Lisp: Basic to C to C++ to Java to Python to Ruby to Javascript to
> Lisp.
>
> Gifted people like us can go straight from Cobol to Lisp, but ordinary
> intellects need a conceptual ramp.
>
> kt
Well, if you can't lead a horse to water, you can't make it drink. Give
me a captive audience and I'll turn out as many sullen, resentful
Lispers as you need.
On 2009-05-19, ··············@excite.com <··············@excite.com> wrote:
> /------------\
>| +---+ |
>| | | |
>| | |+-+ |
>| +---++-+ |
>| +--++--+ |
>| | || | |
>| | |+--+ |
>| +--+ |
> \------------/
>
> Well! That says, "FILE!" to me! How about you?
If it means the same thing today that it did yesterday, and if its
appearances in different contexts have the same or at least
analogous meanings, I'm happy. If the picture is evocative of
these meanings, bonus. :)
"John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> writes:
> P� Tue, 19 May 2009 04:12:14 +0200, skrev gugamilare
> <··········@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>> This does not surprise me very much, Microsoft is a very bad decision
>> maker monopolist company. It makes decisions based on profit, not
>> usability.
>
> Seriously you are just showing total ignorance of the Microsoft design
> process. You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs. The
> last version of Microsoft Word, for instance, had a total user
> interface work-over because 50% of the user requests were for things
> already in the system. It seems most people don't read help files and
> if they can't find what they are looking for in a minute they just
> don't use it. If anything other companies could probably learn
> something from Microsoft's design process.
>
> ---------------------
> John Thingstad
Wow. Now I know why it took me several days before reaching the same
productivity level as with the previous version. Or, maybe it's just me
with my Old World German brain and habits ...
;-)
- Meaning to say: A basic principle of product change is to make changes
transparent and to use extensive communication and training to
introduce changes in a step-by-step approach. Why only Microsoft does
put out new software with massive changes without prior communication
to its registered customers is beyond me - if they had psychologists
at work they should have known hos to do this ...
Thanks to Apple there are alternatives, but sometimes I have to use
Microsoft products for business reasons. My 186 pages powerpoint file
makes Powerpoint to crash, reliably, repeatedly. Bug fixing? Hehe, dream
on. Nobody does 186 page PPTs. Support even really laughed when I asked
when I will be delivered a bug fix.
Sigh (BIG sigh). It had to be said ;-)
Frank
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:56:28 +0200, John Thingstad wrote:
>You could argue that Microsoft and Mac are the only companies
> that do extensive usability tests. This include a staff of interface
> psychologists, and hours of filming people using the programs.
Being, as I am, a one-time Microsoft "subject" I have to say this is all
proper, from my squinty- they are thorough. If I could just yank the
"Choral" from my noggin (and the bleeding gum from my peepers, and the
bolshy wire from my bleeding gums) I'd be most pleased with the entire
slooshy bum-te-dum-dum-fiddle.
I jest, me droogs. In troof, compared to the gloopy gorgeousity of what
viddies itself out of the murks when I give the old surprise visit to the
F1 key, a good stiff kick in the Dr. Yarbles might just sharpen me up and
make me ready for a bit of the old ultraviolent emacs session.
Stefan Ram wrote:
> Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
>> pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
>> lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
>
> �Hughes stayed in the studio's darkened screening room for
> more than four months, never leaving. He subsisted
> exclusively on chocolate bars and milk, and relieved
> himself in the empty bottles and containers. (...)
>
> He wrote detailed memos to his aides on yellow legal pads
> giving them explicit instructions not to look at him,
> speak to him, and only to respond when spoken to. (...)
>
> When he finally emerged in the Spring of 1948, his hygiene
> was terrible, as he had not bathed or cut his hair and
> nails for weeks.�
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes#Mental_and_physical_decline
>
Great citation!
Is Vista the plywood airplane?
kt
Kenneth Tilton wrote:
> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
No, it is not the OS support, just the WinHlp32.exe. At least you can
download it, like I did, if you want to see help for older programs:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=6ebcfad9-d3f5-4365-8070-334cd175d4bb
But it is strange, not to include it as default in Vista. The old help
format is as useful as the new CHM format (index and fulltext search). I
assume they mean GUI related standards, but then Microsoft should have
enough money to let a programmer polish the WinHlp32.exe, e.g. to look like
an Aero application. Looks like GUI is more important than function for
Microsoft.
BTW: I like Aero. Now Microsoft has caught up a little bit to MacOS and
Linux :-)
--
Frank Buss, ··@frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de
Frank Buss wrote:
> Kenneth Tilton wrote:
>
>> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
>> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
>
> No, it is not the OS support, just the WinHlp32.exe.
Right, and if they eliminated all the trains the NYC transit authority
would still support subway travel as long as the third rail was hot.
You People scare me sometimes.
> At least you can
> download it
I did, thx. It was a 22-step process, including proving to Microsoft I
had their software by downloading /another/ program, running that, and
pasting a magic code into a box all to make sure I was not pirating the
software. Which they had abandoned.
Howard Hughes, move over.
kt
On 19 maio, 01:30, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did, thx. It was a 22-step process, including proving to Microsoft I
> had their software by downloading /another/ program, running that, and
> pasting a magic code into a box all to make sure I was not pirating the
> software. Which they had abandoned.
Wow. I was wrong. Microsoft does not care about its profit. They let
you use all their programs for free :)
Now, this is really inconvenient. Everyone that distribute a program
which depends on this executable should be able to distribute this
executable, or at least provide the link to the download. But, after
following the link, the user will just give up because of all this
anti-piracy neurosis. On a software they had abandoned. Laughable.
gugamilare wrote:
> On 19 maio, 01:30, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I did, thx. It was a 22-step process, including proving to Microsoft I
>> had their software by downloading /another/ program, running that, and
>> pasting a magic code into a box all to make sure I was not pirating the
>> software. Which they had abandoned.
>
> Wow. I was wrong. Microsoft does not care about its profit. They let
> you use all their programs for free :)
>
> Now, this is really inconvenient. Everyone that distribute a program
> which depends on this executable should be able to distribute this
> executable,...
Bill explicitly bans that option. I like the attention to detail.
>... or at least provide the link to the download. But, after
> following the link, the user will just give up because of all this
> anti-piracy neurosis. On a software they had abandoned. Laughable.
And curious. I detect a solomonic solution: how can we kill this product
yet not make all the help files out there obsolete? A 22-step process!
I wonder if they had a dinner to celebrate coming up with that solution.
kt
* Kenneth Tilton <························@cv.net> :
Wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 07:14:27 -0400:
|>> I did, thx. It was a 22-step process, including proving to Microsoft I
|>> had their software by downloading /another/ program, running that, and
|>> pasting a magic code into a box all to make sure I was not pirating the
|>> software. Which they had abandoned.
Butthen If you didnt have to enter those code numbers this would be
indistinguishable from The OpenSource Experience.
| And curious. I detect a solomonic solution: how can we kill this
| product yet not make all the help files out there obsolete? A 22-step
| process!
Sheer brilliance! (it may just a leaf from the opensource book, but the
implementation is genius!)
| I wonder if they had a dinner to celebrate coming up with that solution.
They did better than that!
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10227175-56.html
--
Madhu
On Tue, 19 May 2009 00:30:26 -0400, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did, thx. It was a 22-step process, including proving to Microsoft I
> had their software by downloading /another/ program, running that, and
> pasting a magic code into a box all to make sure I was not pirating
> the software. Which they had abandoned.
I sense the possibility of a KennyLinux distribution in the future.
That's awesome :)
Kenneth Tilton wrote:
> "Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
> Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
> component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision
> because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it
> does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft programs..."
>
> Where? Where do I begin?
>
> Is that a non-reason reason? Let's translate:
>
> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
Yes, it sucks. I noticed it the first time I had to lookup something in
Delphi's docs...
The nice thing is that I didn't even need to sing my anti-MS chant at
work: Vista is now hated by its many own merits...
Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
> "Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
> Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
> component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this
> decision because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many
> years, and it does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft
> programs..."
>
> Where? Where do I begin?
>
> Is that a non-reason reason? Let's translate:
>
> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
>
> Serviceable?
Well you can use the help facilities as outlined
at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms228232(VS.80).aspx
Regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
On May 18, 3:03 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
> Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
> component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision
> because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it
> does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft programs..."
>
> Where? Where do I begin?
>
> Is that a non-reason reason? Let's translate:
>
> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
>
> Serviceable?
>
> kt
>
> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
>
> pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
> lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
what do you get out of the help "application" that you can't get from
a webpage / webbrowser? I mean help browsers like this predate the
web, so I can easily see why they were invented, and why now MS just
says well create HTML everyone has IE (or some webbrowser) so we don't
have to maintain this thing anymore.
Do they offer you some ability to call back into your app to change
things (it seems like the help in Word and Excel can do things like
that). I guess that would be a more tricky thing to get from a
browser - but you could just link to links that are being served
locally from your app (that would require it to have a bit of a
browser built in, but that's not that much)
I am also not familiar with the help file format, is it something that
can be fairly straightforwardly translated into html?
Surely there is still some MS help system? What is it that Word and
Excel are using to provide me with help? (is that an inseparable
piece of Office now?)
Kevin
On May 19, 7:08 pm, K Livingston <······················@gmail.com>
wrote:
> locally from your app (that would require it to have a bit of a
> browser built in, but that's not that much)
I mean a bit of a server built in.
Kevin
On May 18, 11:03 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Starting with the release of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008,
> Microsoft has decided to no longer include in WinHlp32.exe as a
> component of the Windows operating system. Microsoft made this decision
> because WinHlp32.exe has not had a major update for many years, and it
> does not meet our standards for all new Microsoft programs..."
>
> Where? Where do I begin?
>
> Is that a non-reason reason? Let's translate:
>
> "The Help feature of this application does not work in Vista because
> Microsoft abandoned the requisite OS support for no reason."?
>
> Serviceable?
>
> kt
>
> ps. I am not going out tonight because I have not bathed for many days
> and I no longer meet my standards for going out. k
>
> pps. Yes, I have fifteen bathrooms and enough money to hire several
> lovelies at once to assist but I have not bathed for many days. k
Well, .chm has been around for many years now, and I think it was
obvious that it was the recommended help format. So application
developers should have switched to it years ago. Those that haven't
just didn't want to bother with the conversion. Now they have to. It's
that simple.