In line with my recent inclusion of personal philosophy:

I try quite hard never to eat outside my house.

The intent is to minimise exploitation of others through labour.

Perhaps I simply dislike the notion of “classes” in society.

Without restaurants, you see, people would do what they have passion for.

Many waiters, waitresses, cooks (not chefs), and cashiers seem unhappy.

People at a production-line fast food kitchen feel imprisoned.

I would know because I worked at Burger King for a year.

I still believe that many of us could cater for our own culinary needs.

Having let my opinion be heard, I feel quite relieved, so thanks for reading.

Sidal, timely note: I am beginning to feel that I would rather blog about personal opinions at the expense of news items and some daily ‘geekery’ of mine.

Season of the playful penguins from Oyonale

INUX is spreading exponentially, or is at least nearing that pace. But how does the expansion work or what is it based upon?

One person learns Linux, thereby acquiring experience and knowledge (not necessarily expertise). It is a self-taught approach which involves a valuable learning curve. In turn, parents the friends, among other parties, get exposed and that ‘Linux knowledge’ is passed on. Colleagues form a more positive mental image — that which breaks preconceptions as to what Linux looks like (no bug-riddled applications and command-line stereotypes). That impression is then passed on, it propagates.

Knowledge is power. The ability to support the operating system of peers makes Linux adoption like an avalanche going down the hill. Knowledge and familiarity only needs that flame that lights it up and starts the domino effect. Linux will spread like fire as soon as it gains steady inertia. It is only a question of momentum and we are on the cusp of significant changes.

HERE is a certain stigma or two among Web designers. Blaming of Web design be attributed to miscomprehension of design principles. Take for example some astigmatic accessibility issues, among other key factors such as browser ‘racism’. These mistakes illusrate clumsiness in Web design and infuriate minorities, which comprise equally-important Net citizens.

Pedagogues in the field of design are either unaware of accessibility matters, or they cannot be bothered with them. In due time, they recommend Flash, user-agent (Web browser/reader) sniffing and the like — all of which are bad practices for the large majority of sites, if not all. It is dishonourable to many users who must suffer due to such cretins, owing to laziness in learning and implementation.

Then comes the issue of content, which can assume user proficiency at times and thus leaves many surfers baffled. The author must escort the less technically-inclined hand-in-hand. For example, one should always abstain from equivocal text that does not attempt to clarify the main points made. In my sites, I tried to incorporate a full ‘acronym striping’ facility, using style sheets. Those of us to whom English is not the mother’s tongue should hopefully be able to digest the key points.

In summary, there seems to be dissociation and estrangement when it comes to the small majority of visitors or customers, i.e. there is no desire to give contentment to all. This is one of the biggest crimes committed in Web development, authoring and design, more so in cases where the site gives exclusive information, e.g. where it serves as a gatway to governmental agencies.

EOPLE’S opinions and favourite choices are respresentative of their individuality. Mocking these things is like mocking the person. In practice, admitting that you detest a particular film or song would upset anyone who likes it, not only those involved in the production. To expand on this point, merely anything we choose is a representation of our choice and judgement, so it can be a person’s default search engines or primary operating system.

One way to be liked by others is to praise everything they like and stay quiet otherwise. Either like everything, remain impartial and rave about nothing that gets you hyped up. An outspoken character has very few merits, but we sometimes need to unburden ourselves and be critical.

The Wall Street Journal has taken an overview on per-for-use campaigns, which have become the norm among search engines.

Microsoft Corp. launched a campaign last week
offering $1 million in prizes…
…to users of its MSN search engine

…roughly a cent to a charity of the user’s
choice every time a search is conducted on
its Yahoo-based search engine…

…Amazon.com Inc. offers regular users of
its A9 search engine a 1.57% discount on
most Amazon.com purchases…

… Blingo.com, powered by Google, gives
away prizes like iPods and movie tickets
to lucky users who happen to search at
random times…

Users are getting paid to get served (and absorb advertisements in the process). In due time, this builds up loyalty and dependency. Yahoo offer many other benefits, which are not mentioned in this article. Google rewards people for using Firefox, which is a separate-yet-related matter altogether.

Digits on a telephone’s keypad and keyboard arrangements of numbers (the right-hand-side of standard keyboards) are inconsistent in terms of layout. Have you ever wondered why? I sure has to stop and ponder myself . I tried to flip the telephone upside down to achieve consistency, to no avail. The zero ends up at the wrong end (top) and the whole ‘image’ is reversed; “mirrored”, to be precise.

Isn’t such layout supposed to be standardised for the user’s sake? It definitely simplifies habits and make keypresses more instinctive. There must be some historical motives. The pulse phone and the dial probably predate computer keyboards. In other words, tone dialling with the modern one-stroke input came after computers, so could possibly inherit the same, perfectly-acceptable layout.

Most of us can switch easily between the two layouts. Many use both the phone and the ‘NumLock setting’ on for numerical data entry (highly popular among accountants). I hear that the same arguments apply to alternative layouts of characters, e.g. Dvorak keyboard layout, which need not necessarily interfere with QWERTY habits. QWERTY is an arbitrary scheme, which if I recall correctly was only justifiable as it avoided mechanical collisions in typewriters. It is not optimised for quick input, however, and it almost neglects entirely the frequency of keys being pressed. On the other hand, one must consider the issue of universality since not all languages use a given character at similar frequencies. it all boils down to the question: is greater (keyboard) diversity a positive thing?

PEN formats are based upon a standardised specifications, which ensure global collaboration among applications. Without common formats, hardware are software are simply unable to communicate, unless they come from the same vendor. Formats are also analogous to the notion of a language, or technically speaking, “protocols” and “standards”. They are often agreed upon by an ample panel, which involves industry experts and industry/academy leaders.

What happens, however, when a company goes astray and implements its own formats, which it is unwilling to disclose for competitive reasons? What happens when a format is extended without acceptance by others who already use and depend on it? When common language is violated, disaster is foreseen. An industrial majority (or a monopoly) can use miscommunication as a ‘tool’ which drives competitors away. The temptation to use that tool as a weapon is often there, yet the seminal formats must always be honoured. If not, conversion facilities must be made available, so that a non-lossy route can be followed to ‘sanitise’ the unknown data structures and appendages.

I have already complained about proprietary formats that lock one’s personal data. The context in this blog was Palm-powered devices, as well as software packages from Microsoft. It is a terrible scenario when one chooses an appliance or a software package over open formats and is thereafter obliged to use it perpetually. It is an utter lock-in, which has even reached the Web that is openness-motivated. Internet Explorer-only beame more commonplace, yet Firefox has shouted out for a change in recent years.

Let us illustrate the primary contention with the aid of yet another specific example. In question are the advantages of open fromat and exportable data, so let us consider address book (contacts) data on a variety of platforms. I currently hold my address books on Palm’s Address, KDE’s KMail, and Mozilla Thunderbird. Maybe I base my statements on the wrong factors, but experience shows that address confusion and poor organisation skills are prevalent among those that still rely on Microsoft to organise and manage their data. I used to be among those who delegate data organisation to applications (packages) rather than formats. As a consequence, I struggled to move between application, inter-operate or even decipher my own data in the absence of one particular commercial application. Sounds familiar?

In summary, as food for thoughts to ponder: maybe it’s the obscurity of moving data without adherence to standard formats. Maybe it is the lack of import/export utilities and maybe frequent hard-drive re-formatting due to virus attacks and the like. Either way, Linux and Mac users appear to have extensive data which is easily-locatable, inter-changeable, rocoverable and resilient. Openness entails true benefits, which are better understood in the long term.