On 2006-07-31, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
> __/ [ Bitrot ] on Monday 31 July 2006 07:44 \__
>> First, when I go to the start/programs menu, I don't get the whole
>> list. Fine, fine. Now I expand the list and see... well, what I see
>> is a mess.
>>
>> For example, I have some apps here for authoring, ripping and burning
>> CDs; each of them has its own top-level menu entry. Others, such as
>> games published by MS, don't - they're in "Microsoft Games" - but other
>> games are installed at the top level.
>
>
> Another issue: names. While people make fun of Linux application names
> because they are weird (as in "not ordinary" or "not quite the norm"), most
> distribution choose rhetorical names for the applications that reside in
> menus (or have both a name and a description). This is not the case with
> Windows and Mac OS. To name just one example among many: Microsoft Outlook
> is a program that will most possibly deliver to your some weather forecasts.
'Photoshop' is for dealing with cameras.
'Excel' is used to make one a better manager (business or otherwise),
athlete, student, something.
'Outlook Express' is to provide short synapses of weather forecasts,
possibly for multiple locations at once.
'Word' is a dictionary.
'Scandisk' is a disk cataloging program.
'Works' is a lie. Or, it's subject to interpretation as a minimum.
--
Buy microsoft products. It's not like you needed that money or those
rights anyway.
|
|
