* Martha Adams peremptorily fired off this memo:
> "Sinister Midget" <fardblossom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> On 2008-05-01, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
>>
>>> Microsoft developing 'senior PC'
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7375286.stm
>>
>> Oldsters will probably need to buy Vista and "upgrade" to the codger
>> version at additional cost.
>>
>> A scheme like that could bring the attorneys general out in force
>> again. A lot of them are very proactive about going after scammers who
>> target seasoned citizens to bilk them out of their retirement savings.
^^^^^^^^ What are you? A cannibal?
> But also, there's a point to this. To me, it's that the
> current trends in 'user friendly' are thoroughly bad. This
> 'user friendly' was said at its beginning to make using a
> computer more easy and accessible. But I think that if you
> compare all the dodgy unpredictable little keystroke jobs
> that fill up Windows, vs the simple and powerful unix
> resources of command-line, this Windows complexity is
> simply out of sight. Here in Windows, there's a reason I
> have a Cygwin for my serious work, which I do thru emacs.
> (I also use emacs directly in my Windows.)
Windows -- The OS with "senior moments".
> On this topic, I hope Microsoft can someday replace its
> crummy editor with something up-to-date 30 years ago --
> Like-emacs would be best; there's also vi. Why Microsoft
> is so late on this escapes me, but there it is.
The why is this: "how many boxes will it sell?"
Luckily, open-source coders provide vi (as well as more conventional
editors) for Windows.
> For this reason, I don't see any need for a codger version
> of Windows. Rather, just a reversion to the common-sense
> and efficient command-line technology we had before Windows
> came along with its 'user-friendly.'
See the sig.
--
There never was a chip, it is said, that Bill Gates couldn't slow down with a
new batch of features.
-- James Coates, The Chicago Tribune
|
|
