Re: What about his history is interesting?

Post #243,215 by systems 2/2/06 3:10:43 AM 2/2/06 3:40:40 AM Reply	Re: What about his history is interesting? Well [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristen_Nygaard\|Kristen Nygaard] "...is acknowledged as the co-inventor of object-oriented programming and the programming language Simula with Ole-Johan Dahl in the 1960s" -- (As quoted from the wikipedia link) This was the reason why, i was interested to read about what he think and stuff. Anyway, why do I find his thoughts (if I got them correctly) interesting, well, I am interested in software development methods and part of my work is to sit with clients, listen to them, write down what they want, negotiate what can be done, with both the clients and developers, I am some sort of buffer. Kinda funny we are talking about this now, [link\|http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/images/dilbert20060121046729.jpg\|this comics from dilbert] is very relevant to this discussion (please check the link) Whats interesting in this comic, is that, its no joke, its true, when people learn more what can be done, with computer, they will have better requirement, many developer, take this knowledge for granted, did pivot table start as a requirement, did AutoCad start as a requirement, I doubt it, I think its the imagination of a developer. I want to say that, creative and powerful use of computer is mostly initiated from a developer (involved in this domain) not a user. (note, that sometimes the domain will be a particular organization not a field of knowledge/science, so the best tool for an organization need someone involved with it) Part of the problems I face is sometimes in software development, or if we may identify the need as information processing, sometimes what you want is a moving target, whichs makes relying on someone else not very practical. A good software case to consider, which I always had in head while thinking, was "Excel" from MS Office, many people, ask for the programs they use, the db forms, to act like an excel sheet, or in other words, they ask for a great deal of possible manipulation for the data they see on screen, they want pivot tables vs static reports, they want very advanced filters, they want a Query Language They want to program, but as you said, its not very practical at least with the current tool. So we end with two impractical situation, if they hire someone else to built it for them, its not very practical, or won't be very creative and powerful, on the other hand teaching people how to program is also not very practical So what...so we progress both ways, we create more programmable tools which act like a programming language in many way, and teach people how to use them and be creative, we create easier to use DBMSes, we create better Spreadsheets, we create better components that allow users to program fundamental needs We teach people, how to program using very high level language, so I guess in the end, we didn't end, with something very original, we end up with an old idea. Component-oriented development, or language oriented development.We Need Better More Fundamental Tools! and we need to be more loud about it. We need to empower the individual, by providing better tools, that help the user achieve independance, those tools, must be programmable/extendable. For many people, if you ask them they will tell you, computers are great because when you edit a document, in word, you don't have to worry, about deleting a work, or adding a section in the middle. It's like they are saying that cut'n'paste is the greatest computer achievement. I do realize that lots of development was made in sharing documents and ideas, throught emails, the web, chat programs. But still there should be more ... more manipulation to information More effort and attention should be made to create such tools, and less effort towards things like RUP and Xp or the next best development methedology. Excel, is obviously is such, a powerful tool, that give users manipulation processing power, not just data. With InfoPath, microsoft, seem to recognize this, it's a movement, along the same trend line, give the user more manipulation power, obviously, to do more with information you have to give it structure (here we fear moving in circles and building a dbms), but to not loose focus, the trick here, is the interface, the HOW, not the WHAT, the winner will be the technology, that makes this manipulation easier I would like to compared, creating a form to access a dbms, is like creating a highly formated file in word. You do need someone with considerable knowledge or MS Word to create such file, but still this guy isn't a programmer, Word Processing succeeded where DBMS technology failed, it gave power to indivuduals not experts, still after so many years of DBMS development, you can't ask your secretary to create a form for you, you need to hire an expert I think, we hate to relinquish power, so the idea of giving more power to more people, agonize us, this is why we speak less about it, we need to make programming easier, more accessible, one way, is through education and the other is through creating better tools. We prefer to believe that what we do is more complex, harder than it is, because this makes us superior, more intelligent more powerful. Manipulating information, especially when you call "information" as opposed to a more fearsome name "computer science" doesn't seem like a big deal, and it shouldn't, cause we all need to do it! Sorry for being long, but I really like those ideas. Edited by systems Feb. 2, 2006, 03:16:37 AM EST Edited by systems Feb. 2, 2006, 03:30:37 AM EST Edited by systems Feb. 2, 2006, 03:34:43 AM EST Edited by systems Feb. 2, 2006, 03:40:40 AM EST Expand All History
Post #243,291 by tuberculosis 2/2/06 4:04:27 PM Reply	You would do better to read Alan Kay Who believes that computers are all crap, but definitely don't have to be. The problem is that the current generation of developers is already damaged by what has come before and there is way too much cargo-cultism. Why do we have editors, compilers, and runtimes? Because we have always had compilers editors and runtimes. Why do we focus on efficiency? Because we have always focused on efficiency. Why does ECMAScript retain most of the syntax of Java which retains most of the syntax of C++ which retains much of the syntax of C.....? We are in a rut my friend. Casual computing is definitely a goal that has been given short shrift. It reaches its zenith in tools like the Unix shell, Hypercard, Perl, Html/Javascript, and Smalltalk. It is at its nadir in C, C++, Java, J2EE, DBMS tools, etc... The [link\|http://opencroquet.org\|Croqueteers] (read the whitepapers there) are busy trying to change all that. It remains to be seen if they will rewrite the future. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #243,462 by Arkadiy 2/4/06 8:59:38 PM Reply	Wow. That's the first time I see Smalltalk and Perl mentioned in one list. I sort of see how that came about, but please, could you show some Smalltalk tricks comparable with -e stuff (since you're talking about "casual" and "shell" kind of thing)? I assume it's someting you'd be doing in a workspace... ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #243,640 by ben_tilly 2/6/06 4:09:49 PM Reply	Did you see HTML on the list? It doesn't do that either. If you're looking for "shell convenience", then you misunderstood what was common among the members of Todd's list. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #244,277 by Arkadiy 2/11/06 7:03:26 PM Reply	OK, could you explain? From Todd's answer below, it may just be exactly "shell convenience". HTML does excatly that - write up quick and dirty fragment, show it beautifully in a browser. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,278 by jake123 2/11/06 7:24:33 PM Reply	I think the point is that they're tools that are pretty easy for someone to learn and be able to Do Stuff pretty quickly. For example, I like rexx as the language that you can read and understand a year later; it's very easily comprehensible, which means that once you learn it you can pump out programs quickly and relatively painlessly. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #244,297 by tuberculosis 2/11/06 11:04:34 PM 2/11/06 11:13:34 PM Reply	Here's an example First, I take the very idea of "applications" to be an abomination. Unix is an IO architecture with a set of tools that all work within that IO model. So the literate user can do anything he needs to, its simply a matter of composition. I've been given the job at work of finding all the underutilized hardware and getting it released back to the common pool. There are a number of nifty web page reports that present this information, but its hard to use that to make my own report. Fortunately in Squeak I have a number of tools - so I begin composing: HtmlParser on: 'http:.......' asUrl and I do "inspect it" on it. This gets me a window representing the parser. In the evaluator I execute self parse tagsNamed: 'table' Now I have an array of 3 table dom elements - only one is the one with the data I care about and its the one with the most rows so.... ((self max: [:x :y \| x children > y children]) tagsNamed: 'tr') copyWithoutFirst which locates the table with the most rows, then gives a collection containing the rows - the first of which is column headers so I copy the collection without the first row. I could go on but basically I'm issuing commands that get me closer and closer to a comma separated format that I can import into excel. OK, big deal, so I'm programming. Or am I? I'm manipulating data using various facilities in the environment. I'm doing it in real time. And this is how computers should work. Look at some of the things on Squeakland.org - these are physics simulations or robotic control systems using feedback loops thrown together by kids who don't know an int from a double. Computers ought to be less about making marks on paper and space efficient filing cabinets and more about helping me try stuff and see what happens. Think about Star Trek for a second - why is it that Data can rewire the ship's control systems reroute control paths with a few keystrokes from a touch screen? Maybe the Enterprise runs on Smalltalk or its successors. Tools for making apps are lame. Tools for augmenting our thinking are the goal. We seem to have forgotten that. Right now, how good is your computer at helping you plan, design, and visualize, and buy materials for a back yard tree house? Not particularly good I'll wager. That's gotta change. This little video is thought provoking: [link\|http://mrl.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/\|http://mrl.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/] "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush Edited by tuberculosis Feb. 11, 2006, 11:13:34 PM EST Expand All History
Post #244,299 by boxley 2/11/06 11:09:25 PM Reply	lrpd the whole damn thing Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,315 by Arkadiy 2/12/06 12:45:02 PM Reply	I admire your pattern of use for computers However, it's absolutely beyond the capabilities of 90% of the population. "Applications" are a crutch those 90% need to benefit from computers at all. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,316 by pwhysall 2/12/06 12:53:11 PM Reply	Not necessarily so (the "beyond 90%" part). Go have a play with Automator on a Mac - it may change your mind. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #244,319 by Arkadiy 2/12/06 3:29:48 PM Reply	I've got no Mac (yet?) How about something that runs on the inferior OS? ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,325 by tuberculosis 2/12/06 4:22:21 PM Reply	squeak.org "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,328 by pwhysall 2/12/06 5:19:59 PM Reply	Python? I'm the most unprogrammerish person in the world, and even I can get stuff done with that. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #244,443 by Arkadiy 2/13/06 6:27:52 PM Reply	I've seen Python and Squeak They are both fine tools, but you know, Peter - youre emphatically _not_ "the most unprogrammerish person in the world". You're in those damned 10% that make life harder for the rest of the humanity. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,483 by pwhysall 2/14/06 1:44:42 AM Reply	I'm shocked, sir. What 10% is that? I'm trying to work out if I've been insulted or complimented. Given that I have to ask, I suspect the former, in which case, bravo! Or, as they say on the CS:S servers, "pwned" Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #244,539 by Arkadiy 2/14/06 12:07:20 PM Reply	The 10% who understand things like iteration, arrays, the idea of restricted syntax, the fact that DWIM is not a command in any known computer language. As for the rest of us - someone I know asked a user to input a list of things into Word using Tab as separator. The user did what she was told, but she used spaces. When asked how the hell the computer should distinguish between the spaces that separate groups and the spaces inside groups, she smiled. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,540 by drewk 2/14/06 12:09:17 PM Reply	I've seen that smile It's usually followed by, "The same way I do, it looks at them." === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,541 by Arkadiy 2/14/06 12:13:45 PM Reply	The worst part is, she is righ. In most cases, it's possible to figure out that she uses more than one space to separate groups. But _she_ would be utterly incapable of writing the ad-hoc code that does it. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,992 by jb4 2/16/06 2:09:11 PM Reply	DWIM?!? Driving While Intoxicated, Mostly? jb4 "Every Repbulican who wants to defend Bush on [the expansion of Presidential powers], should be forced to say, 'I wouldn't hesitate to see President Hillary Rodham Clinton have the same authority'." &mdash an unidentified letter writer to Newsweek on the expansion of executive powers under the Bush administration
Post #244,994 by boxley 2/16/06 2:13:24 PM Reply	do what I meant Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,322 by tuberculosis 2/12/06 4:16:58 PM 2/12/06 4:21:57 PM Reply	I don't believe the "crutch" is necessary I just think its habit. [link\|http://squeakland.org\|http://squeakland.org] It requires a plugin and runs stuff in your browser. BTW I can't think of an OS with a UI that Squeak doesn't run on. Applications are stovepipes - constructs that erect barriers to getting things done. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush Edited by tuberculosis Feb. 12, 2006, 04:21:57 PM EST Expand All History
Post #244,336 by boxley 2/12/06 7:00:51 PM Reply	disagree, recently sent a example of an application being used totally inapropriatly to the point of hindering workers efforts to the listusers. I think american productivity would grow by 10% if excell sudenly was incapable of being used and people were forced to look at anything else. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,444 by Arkadiy 2/13/06 6:29:12 PM Reply	A crutch with a nail in it. ------ 179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link\|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm\|.]
Post #244,484 by pwhysall 2/14/06 1:48:21 AM Reply	I need to have me a look at that I have yet to find time to give that the attention it deserves. I suspect that I'm going to come to the same conclusion that I have now, which is that you can't develop the same functionality "properly" without spending a lot more money and/or time. Whether it's a net win/lose for the users is anyone's guess, because the alternative doesn't exist. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #244,342 by drewk 2/12/06 7:25:14 PM Reply	I'd like that to be true, but don't think it is So the literate user can do anything he needs to, its simply a matter of composition. You're a literate user. What percentage of the population do you think fits that description? So I can put your answer in context, have you ever done level 1 help desk? Computers ought to be less about making marks on paper and space efficient filing cabinets and more about helping me try stuff and see what happens. Your computers ought to be about that. I don't think you are the general case. Think about Star Trek for a second - why is it that Data can rewire the ship's control systems reroute control paths with a few keystrokes from a touch screen? Maybe the Enterprise runs on Smalltalk or its successors. Or maybe it's because it's a freaking TV show. Tools for making apps are lame. Tools for augmenting our thinking are the goal. We seem to have forgotten that. Right now, how good is your computer at helping you plan, design, and visualize, and buy materials for a back yard tree house? Not particularly good I'll wager. That's gotta change. How good is your hammer at cutting a straight line? How good is your pipe wrench at driving a screw? IMO computer apps are tools that people use to accomplish tasks. Not everyone using a computer wants to invent something new. Some people just want to use the tools. Does a graphic artist want to create a new filter every time he sits down at his graphics workstation, or does he usually want to use familiar tools in a familiar way to accomplish his goal? Is he any less a computer user than a programmer? Oh, and as for the treehouse. If I want to design one of those, I'll go to the Home Depot down the street. Not only do they have the wood, they have the computer with the treehouse planning application on it. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,345 by boxley 2/12/06 7:51:29 PM Reply	Ive used that treehouse design, didnt think too much of it step one, dig a hole thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,366 by tuberculosis 2/12/06 11:53:09 PM Reply	You are a prisoner of your assumptions and conditioning Can you operate a pay phone, ATM, pay your bills, read traffic signs, file income tax returns? That stuff is way more complicated than computers ought to be. How good is your hammer at cutting a straight line? How good is your pipe wrench at driving a screw? WTF? Look, if I decide to play along with your very lame analogy, please tell me how you're going to assemble a lawnmower where every screw, nut, bolt, wrench, driver and component is hand forged and sized according to the whims of its maker. Because that's the state of my computer right now. I'm still waiting for the standard sized wrenches and interchangeable parts to arrive. Box mentioned that the world would be vastly better off if excel spontaneously vanished from the universe. While that may or may not be true, its popularity goes to show that there is a data type (table or tuple) and set of operations for manipulating same that are generally missing from most computing environments. Bears looking into I think. Certainly, I have no use at all for a spreadsheet program when I have a malleable environment that copes well with data sets and makes dependent calculations easy. I only need to make spreadsheets to give to people who insist on seeing spreadsheets. As for your TV show crack - these things are useful precisely because they show original thinking. I seem to recall the US Navy examining the sick bay set of ST I because they thought there were some good ideas there. If all you can say is "you can't do that because...." then you will never do anything of significance at all. As for me being a general case - again I urge you to see kids doing complex control systems at [link\|http://squeakland.org\|http://squeakland.org] ue "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,373 by boxley 2/13/06 8:30:08 AM Reply	my point is that people use what they know and all problems are solved with that singular tool. Ask Barry how many times he's been told that "why use perl, plsql can probably do that." Ben is probbly the only perl user that might see a benefit of using something besides perl. Recently after buy the dbi book and asking a lot of dumb questions I was able to finish the script that a co-worker had started for me in perl. Even though in 2 hours I could have re-written it in ksh and it would have worked. Idea being, I need to keep up with the rest of the world. Now unfortunately the largest telco in the US does all of its inventory, architechture on excel so many of facility folks and admins use that exclusively as a provisioning tool. It sucks mightily with no constraints. How many shops have excell as the static IP master? Almost all yet people still have problems manageing that. How long would it take to write a constraint using table based http front end to provision stuff without handing out duplicate IP's? squeek is great and even I can use it but with having to load the standard image file means I cant email code snippets to an ignorant user, I have to have them download a new image for code changes, not as usefull thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,436 by tuberculosis 2/13/06 4:42:47 PM Reply	Yes - exactly but why do they know that instead of something more appropriate? I totally get where you're coming from BTW when I started researching LNP requirements as one major LEC was storing TN's in a filemaker database. People use what they have - it would be good if they had better stuff though. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,442 by boxley 2/13/06 6:24:45 PM Reply	sounds like a fax lnp project to me :-) Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,377 by drewk 2/13/06 9:04:53 AM Reply	There's a central point we seem to differ on Let's take Box's example of static IP provisioning. Right now that's done through Excel. Let's just all agree that's a bad way to do it. Now let's say you or Box (or soemone else) figures out a better way to do it. That better way goes into production. It's the best way possible to do static IP provisioning. Congratulations, you just made Static IP Provisioner 1.0. Now, do you make a copy of that new application available to the ops people who need to do that? Or do you give them a new computer and make them figure it out again? If you're sane, you give them access to your app, they use that app, and you go write a new app to solve someone else's problem. My point is that most people who use computers don't need the computer to help them "try stuff and see what happens." They do need "space efficient filing cabinets" that help them "make marks on paper." Try this: You do your taxes this year starting with Squeak and a copy of the US Tax Code. I'll use TurboTax. Let's see which one of us finishes first. Then if your return (accurately) shows that you owe less taxes, offset the difference by your hourly rate for how much longer you were working on it. When I'm doing something that I'm the subject matter expert, I want something that augments my thinking. The rest of the time I want something that guides me to an appropriate choice. And yes, that means limit my options to the ones selected by someone who understands the domain better than I do. I have no problem admitting there are a lot more things I'm not an expert on than things I am an expert on. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,439 by tuberculosis 2/13/06 4:55:43 PM Reply	Yes, you can only think of one thing at a time Congratulations, you just made Static IP Provisioner 1.0. Now, do you make a copy of that new application available to the ops people who need to do that? Or do you give them a new computer and make them figure it out again? If you're sane, you give them access to your app, they use that app, and you go write a new app to solve someone else's problem. Hmmmm. I know exactly the right answer to this problem as I've lived through it with residential line side provisioning. The correct answer is C - you don't need an app to do provisioning, you need a process that does the provisioning automatically based on order due date. Users ought not to be involved. (I can elaborate on the entire story but it will require at least an hour, several beers, and a pair of comfy chairs - in the end I killed off the provisioner app after much effort and re-education). But this is being picky so lets move up a level of abstraction. In the example - people are using excel as a database. This tells me that databases are too hard to use. To move onto your Turbotax thing - great you can do one thing with that data - howabout analyze your household energy useage, figure out whether replacing appliances with more energy efficient ones will help next year's bottom line (also figuring in current vs expected operating costs). The answer is no - you can only make marks on paper in one little way. Turbotax is a nifty tool and it does a nice job of automating a really onerous task. I'd probably take you up on your challenge actually if: 1) Turbotax's data formats were transparent - they're not and I have a LOT of history that I'm not too happy about retyping for no good reason 2) TT has lots of logic in it I'd have to build from scratch. But you've missed my point again - there's a wall between your turbo tax data and everything else on your computer and that wall is why computers continue to suck today. Tear down the walls I say. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,458 by drewk 2/13/06 9:00:32 PM Reply	If I missed your point, it's because you forgot to make it But you've missed my point again - there's a wall between your turbo tax data and everything else on your computer and that wall is why computers continue to suck today. You never said that. I completely agree that opaque data formats are a serious problem. The point you had been making was that applications were a limiting concpet that should be done away with. I still disagree with that. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,468 by tuberculosis 2/13/06 10:50:05 PM Reply	But the applications are the walls This is my central complaint. There's a lot of good capability in TurboTax (depreciation calculations for example) - but I can only use it inside the TurboTax wall. This is why I find myself using Squeak more and everything else less all the time. Its just a big parts bin with a nice direct manipulation capability that allows me to build ad-hoc goodies all the time. Frankly, I hope the $100 third world laptop ends up with a tiny bsd core and Squeak as the primary shell/UI (integrate gecko as a plugin). Imagine what these people will create on their own with no walls in their systems? "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,517 by drewk 2/14/06 9:32:04 AM Reply	They're also inevitable Take Greg's example from a week or so back where he was massaging some fugly data. It took about a hour to figure out. Looking back at the one line that does all the work, it would take at least twice that for anyone else to figure out what it's doing. Now let's say you want to hand that off to an ops person to run on each new dataset. They don't know how it works, and frankly don't need to know. You probably don't want them messing with it and breaking it, so you put it behind a GUI with a "Browse" button to select the input file and a "Go" button. Two years down the road the source format changes slightly. Is it faster to reverse engineer the existing "application" and figure out where to change it, or re-build it from scratch? Well, that depends on whether you still have Greg working for you. Which, again, is why I said you don't need applications, but the majority of users do need them. And before you say I'm not giving "average users" enough credit, instead of pointing me to the kids doing robotics control, answer my question: did you ever do level 1 helpdesk? That isn't arrogance or condescension, either. The average 18-year-old taking an auto-shop class knows more about how my car works than I do. No one has the time to know everything. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,526 by ben_tilly 2/14/06 10:56:41 AM Reply	Necessary for other reasons as well Let's think about a couple of important applications. Email. Email is pretty simple in principle. But I don't happen to want Todd to have access to my email. In other words the walls constructed by that application happen to be desireable for privacy reasons. Todd's work. I don't know about anyone else, but I think that a company that is going to handle credit cards and deliver actual stuff has an obligation to protect that data. Which means lots of walls that the provider wants for financial reasons. A web browser. Yeah, it would be great if we could just take the simple approach and let websites run whatever they want on your machine. Simple, powerful, and flexible. Unfortunately there are a bunch of people who want to run software on your machine that you don't want running software on your machine. And one of the biggest complaints about Internet Explorer is not that it has walls, but that it doesn't have effective walls to prevent that! I agree with Todd that a lot of programs could be made a lot nicer by making them expose more of how they work. And this is a vision that many people have tried to explore (eg it was the idea behind Microsoft's OLE). But it would generally be a bad idea to try to achieve it by removing the idea of applications entirely. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #244,544 by tuberculosis 2/14/06 1:15:51 PM Reply	There's a couple projects aimed at addressing security one is squeak-e - capability based security that lots of others are playing with. The other is something called islands - literally hunks of runtime/data with no references in or out. If you can't reach it you can mess with it. I'm not particularly well versed on these technologies but they are being addressed. Finally, you can get "walls" by running things in different VM's as they're just different unix processes. I'm not saying walls are bad - just that we've put a whole lot of them in stupid places (and not enough in others it seems). I think this horse is pretty much done. Fun discussion - thanks. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,547 by drewk 2/14/06 1:42:58 PM Reply	Bah, break for lunch and people go and end the discussion === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,566 by tuberculosis 2/14/06 3:09:58 PM Reply	I've made it back to the office - gotta catch up! "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,600 by boxley 2/14/06 7:22:35 PM Reply	email has walls? think again every keystroke in that message body travels thru multiple public points that have accesss to every keystroke. At the receiptiant end it sits on someone elses server who can read all of it until you pop it to your local machine. If you have delete server side after pop it is then (somewhat) safe on your machine unless upstream a pipe is being made to redirect copies. Email is about the most unsafe application available in use today. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,601 by drewk 2/14/06 7:26:09 PM Reply	That's what client-side encryption is for === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,602 by ben_tilly 2/14/06 7:29:26 PM Reply	As far as most recipients are concerned, it does Don't believe me? Ask a secretary to read your email to you. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #244,609 by boxley 2/14/06 8:25:23 PM Reply	like windows, its the perception of security that counts Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,615 by ben_tilly 2/14/06 9:50:40 PM Reply	It is more complex than that People actively want slightly insecure systems. The classic example is our cars. Nobody wants their car to be broken into. But if any auto manufacturer produced cars that police officers etc can't break into after your key gets locked inside, you'd wind up with a lot of very pissed off people. That's why slim jims still work, even though it would be trivial to make a car that can't be broken into that way. Everyone knows that some very technical people can read their emails. Everyone knows that some bad people can likewise. But their friends and aquaintances can't, so they have reasonable privacy. And the capability for violation isn't a big issue - in fact if they develop email problems, they hope those same technical people will be able to use their control of the system to solve their problems. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #244,543 by tuberculosis 2/14/06 1:10:28 PM Reply	I was the king of level 1 help desk I give great help desk. It's how I got started in the industry. Eventually I got tired of taking shit for the boneheaded moves of idiot programmers just because I picked up the phone and figured I could do better. Turns out I was right. Specifically I was the the entire tech support department/product manager/release coordinator and wrote most of the quick start leaflets for Affinity Microsystems - a little 5-person Mac utilities company in 1990. [link\|http://www.google.com/search?q=affinity+tempo+macintosh\|http://www.google.co...y+tempo+macintosh] And incidentally, we had users make amazingly elaborate sequences of events simply by saying "watch this" doing their thing, going back and tweaking wait conditions (users could snap a picture of a button and have the sequence wait until the button became enabled, or watch for a progress indicator to hit 100% before proceeding). This is another form of end user programming and the stories I got from users about what they did with this facility was astonishing. (We also counted Herbie Hancock as a user and he stopped by our MacWorld booth to say thanks and hi). I'm not saying you can't make tools with GUI controls BTW, just that I think the whole thing needs to fit into a single architecture runtime. [link\|http://squeaksource.com\|http://squeaksource.com] can be run by anyone (its a little like cpan) and in fact I've just installed a copy for my own use at [link\|http://ss.blackbagops.net\|http://ss.blackbagops.net]. The distro is a squeak image that shows a single window with a field for port number and 2 buttons, 'start' and 'stop'. Sounds a little like what you're talking about - right? "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,546 by drewk 2/14/06 1:41:29 PM Reply	Followed a link from the google search This link to a [link\|http://www.prefab.com/playerbrochure.html\|description of Player]. It sounds like it allows you to record scripts on a Mac UI. So it's an application that allows you to automate the use of another application. Okay, so maybe that wasn't an example of how things should work, it was just the place you did help desk. But when answering questions about scripting, didn't you ever encounter people who didn't get the concept of iterations or pattern matching? Scripting the behavior "click the down arrow three times" is very different from "click the down arrow until the cursor is on the line that ends with a date -- and here is what a date looks like". This is trivial to someone who thinks that way, to normal humans it's not. To normal humans you get things like space-delimited files where you asked for tab-delimited, and they don't understand why it makes a difference. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,553 by tuberculosis 2/14/06 2:03:30 PM Reply	Hey, I had people who didn't know a menu from a window I was just answering where I did my tech support. I don't think scripting systems like that (the current one is appleEvents and automator) are the answer although they do get a lot of people "most of the way" there. As for files - I reckon maybe 5% of users even know there are files and directories in their machine. My mom certainly has never grasped the concept. Again, why should they care? Why is there more than one file format? "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,560 by drewk 2/14/06 2:18:58 PM Reply	I don't want to keep reinventing things To me, an application (a good one) represents the solution to a problem. To continue using TurboTax as an example, that is how you do taxes. (Actually TurboTax Pro is how my friend, the accountant, does taxes. But I digress.) There may be a better way, there may be a more open way. But until I'm trying to do complex financial analysis, it works for me. And I disagree that the calculations are what TurboTax is valuable for. It's the tax code and forms that are built into it. By "forms" I don't just mean the printable forms, although that is part of it. I mean the description of what data is required for each IRS form. Could you write something that does what TurboTax does, but leaves the data in an open format? Sure. Could you build in wizards to walk you through the process, asking all the right questions? Yes. And when you're done, how would that thing not be an "application"? === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,565 by Another Scott 2/14/06 2:59:29 PM Reply	Taxes are probably a bad example. I think that Todd wants computers to have a built-in toolbox full of tools that let people build things in any way they want to do whatever they like with their own information. Without understanding OOP and Indentation and Dictionaries and Persistence and Scope and Shapes and DLLs and Compilers and Stuff. A virtual Erector Set or set of fine woodworking + metal working tools in the machine. Taxes are a bad example because there are lots of laws that determine how the numbers should be crunched. A toolbox approach won't work very well there. But a toolbox approach would work very well for figuring out materials needed to do a room remodeling project or making a recipe collection (has anyone ever done that with a home PC?) or making a jukebox + movie player + ... "Hey Martha! I just figured out a way to record the Olympics while we're at the Bingo Hall! We can watch our favorite shows any time we want now! You just drag this thingy here, and add this thingy here and IT WORKS!" rather than the KnoppMyth/MythTV approach... My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #244,573 by drewk 2/14/06 4:05:05 PM Reply	Depends on what you want an example of For me, it's a good example of why "applications" work. And while I love the idea of Bob showing Martha that he figured out how to record the Olympics, I think there's only two ways he's going to get that experience: All the parts to do it are already built, and he is really just assembling them. Strong AI. Obviously I think assembling pre-built parts is more likely. It is also the Unix philosophy of small tools that each do one thing, which I agree with. That's not the same thing as "no applications". === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,614 by tuberculosis 2/14/06 9:32:13 PM Reply	Bingo I love the idea of Bob showing Martha that he figured out how to record the Olympics, I think there's only two ways he's going to get that experience: 1. All the parts to do it are already built, and he is really just assembling them. Well duh. WTF do you think Squeak is? Maybe a small number of direct types (numbers, characters), of which are composed a fairly rich set of complex types, all of which are work together using a syntax that's dead simple. What I object to is shit that doesn't work together because, well, it just doesen't work together. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,618 by drewk 2/14/06 10:02:41 PM Reply	You're fighting human nature Bob figures out how to record the Olympics. He's so proud of himself as he starts to show Martha. Martha says, "I don't care how you made it. What do I have to click?" Most people don't want to make things, they want to use them. If someone else already made something that's pretty close to what they want, they'll use that. Hell, I'm using KDE right now because the people driving Gnome borked it -- meaning simply that it no longer does what I want it to, and which it used to do. KDE also doesn't do quite what I want it to, but it's closer than Gnome. I could probably get it the last 10% with a few more hours tweaking, but I just don't care that much. People use Windows because other people have already written programs for that platform that do what they want. (For people buying their first computer, I think you could substitute one of the new distros like Mepis or Ubuntu.) If you told the average user that you had a Brave New System where they're going to have to figure out everything for themselves, they'll take Windows in a heartbeat. They just want to turn it on and use it. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,624 by Another Scott 2/14/06 10:59:50 PM Reply	Take your last thought a little farther... They just want to turn it on and use it. People really want their PC to be their personal computer, to be intuitive and work the way it does in science fiction. They want it to be a general purpose machine as it was promised to be. Remember the way an 80-year-old approaches a PC or Mac for the first time? CPUs have enough power, and memory is cheap enough now, that it should be possible for PCs to have discoverable interfaces and built-in capabilities to allow a reasonable person to figure out how to make a PC do what they want. It's the legacy of Windows that's holding that capability back. Cheers, Scott.
Post #244,681 by tuberculosis 2/15/06 1:47:00 PM Reply	Evidence runs to the contrary Most people don't want to make things, they want to use them. Really? Sure you don't want to take that back? The act of creation if fundamentally rewarding. Everybody likes to make things. Steve Jobs bet the company on the idea that people generally like to create things (songs, playlists, websites, photo albums, pictures, DVDs, etc). It seem to be paying off - more and more people are buying the things because they like the things they can make with it. If you were right, people would only turn on the TV and sitin front of it full time (yes some people do this - they generally have no impact on the world and can safely be ignored). "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,684 by boxley 2/15/06 1:59:17 PM Reply	you can safely ignore drewk [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=241272\|http://z.iwethey.org...?contentid=241272] :-) thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,697 by drewk 2/15/06 3:06:11 PM Reply	You have a much looser definition of "make stuff" than I do Steve Jobs bet the company on the idea that people generally like to create things (songs, playlists, websites, photo albums, pictures, DVDs, etc). It seem to be paying off - more and more people are buying the things because they like the things they can make with it. People have been making pictures and photo albums for decades. We've computerized it. Big whoop. Same with DVDs, people have been shooting on VHS and before that on Super 8, also for decades. Songs? Either you're playing an instrument, you're sampling, or you're writing sheet music and having the computer play it. None of those seem to be new. Websites? Lots of people are happy with the AOL site creater -- whatever they call it -- at least judging by the number of sites built with it. Apple doesn't seem to have lead that charge. Playlists? You're kidding, right? You never made a mix tape? So we boosted the capacity and put it in a nice form factor. Great piece of hardware and really well executed, though. But all of these prove my point, not yours. Each one of these is a tool or application that Apple produced that does one thing very well. No user took a general-purpose device and figured out how to burn DVDs from it. When I said people don't want to "make stuff", I meant invention of new things. They want to make another iteration of something they've seen before. Most new songs sound like something else you've heard before. Most pictures of the Grand Canyon look just like the same picture everyone else has taken of the Grand Canyon. If you were right, people would only turn on the TV and sitin front of it full time (yes some people do this - they generally have no impact on the world and can safely be ignored). Just checking: you do know that's completely wishful thinking, don't you? === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,766 by tuberculosis 2/15/06 5:28:06 PM Reply	Complete Bollocks And I don't have any more time to argue with someone who lives under a rock. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,773 by admin 2/15/06 5:43:12 PM Reply	You're kidding me, right? Do you realize exactly how far "no, you have to figure out how to build your own web browser out of these 'parts'" would go with my wife? Hell, she won't even learn how to use a spreadsheet herself, let alone build one. There will always be "applications". Whether or not they work well with each other and have open data formats is what's up for grabs. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,776 by tuberculosis 2/15/06 5:48:02 PM Reply	There will always be people too old to learn my uncle calls me to adjust his digital thermostat for him. What of it? As for the web browser - its a component (in my environment it is). So? I'm not arguing against assembling components and calling them "things" (applications if you like) I'm arguing against making them opaque and indivisible. To me, that's stupid. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,778 by admin 2/15/06 6:04:06 PM Reply	I'll let you tell her she's "too old" to learn And sit back behind the Lexan shield while she disabuses you. It's not "too old to learn". It's "couldn't give a rat's arse, that's someone else's job". Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,787 by tonytib 2/15/06 7:03:06 PM Reply	It's also called respecting someone else's domain and not expecting everyone to be fascinated by yours. I'm in agreement with AdminScott. Just because Todd's a geek, doesn't mean everyone is. Sure, it's nice to be able to modify something to fit yourself perfectly - if it's in a field you care about. Heck, a lot of people mod their cars to get them perfect for them (coilovers, shocks, exhaust, chipping, turbos, wheels, seat covers, etc), but most people don't care. My wife wouldn't care about anything Todd is excited about. She's fine never using a computer except for an occasional e-mail. So what? There's much more to life than computers, and she's excellent at her work, much better than I could ever be. --Tony Life is too short to worry about perfection
Post #244,795 by tuberculosis 2/15/06 7:47:15 PM Reply	Point missed again and I'm gonna make it one more time with no support. Computers suck. They suck because we build shit called apps rather than systems. So nothing works with anything. Which sucks. You might be happy living with shit that sucks. I aspire to better. Sheesh. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,797 by admin 2/15/06 7:50:19 PM Reply	And you're missing the point we're trying to make. Lots of people would rather deal with "apps" than with "systems", because they sit down to do one thing at a time. Whether those apps deal with each other well is immaterial. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,799 by jake123 2/15/06 7:54:20 PM Reply	I wouldn't say immaterial I hear users bitch all the time about the fact that they can't do this with that. One of the reasons MP3 is so popular is because it works with just about everything, despite the fact that it's not that good. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #244,837 by admin 2/15/06 9:36:37 PM Reply	MP3 is a data format, not an architecture. Just about everything works with CSV, too. No one here is saying that open data formats are bad. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,873 by jake123 2/16/06 1:01:46 AM Reply	Not my point My point is that it's wildly popular because it travels well across different applications. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #244,810 by tuberculosis 2/15/06 8:35:24 PM Reply	I don't give a flip about your point because its orthogonal to mine. And besides, you've completely missed the bit about the tangerine. I'm calling for standardization and you're arguing that everybody is happy dragging a giant duffle bag of wall warts around because we can't agree on a standard for voltage for small devices. That's your position. Fine whatever. I'm arguing architecture with the first two little pigs. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,817 by boxley 2/15/06 8:42:25 PM Reply	ICLRPD (new thread) Created as new thread #244816 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=244816\|ICLRPD] Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #244,833 by admin 2/15/06 9:32:45 PM 2/15/06 9:35:01 PM Reply	Uh, yeah. I bow to the "superior intellect", Khan. It's not orthogonal, because ordinary users DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT ARCHITECTURE. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..." Edited by admin Feb. 15, 2006, 09:34:11 PM EST Edited by admin Feb. 15, 2006, 09:35:01 PM EST Expand All History
Post #244,842 by drewk 2/15/06 9:56:02 PM Reply	I don't have to bow to nobody! Until I'm working again, that is. :-/ I just thought of a perfect example of the type of thing I believe Todd would like to see. Taxes and grocery shopping. Huh? Okay, there are applications -- written for web-enabled refrigerators -- that help you track what food you have on hand, make menus from it, and put together a shopping list for what you'll need. Kind of cool, actually. There are also applications that help you do your taxes. What these two things have in common is that both of them deal with expenses. Wouldn't it be cool if the money you spend on your groceries, according to the fridgePod, were automatically debited from your net worth calculation and listed as non-tax expenses? No more duplicated data entry. Odds are, there are no two such apps that would make this easy for the average user. If they both had the same data model for money, it might be easy to make them work together, so it's a good idea. But if that happens, it's still going to be a programmer doing the integration. I could give my mother a fridgePod and a copy of TurboTax that are designed with the same currency model, and she would never try to figure out how to make them talk to each other. Unless the installation routine from one app discovered the other and built the connection, hers would remain unconnected. So yes, small apps with open, standard interfaces are good. Tools that can be easily plugged together are good. Making it easier for developers to create new things is good. But saying it's users who want to plug them together is IMO wishful thinking. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,847 by admin 2/15/06 10:05:11 PM Reply	Exactly. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,871 by tonytib 2/16/06 12:30:54 AM Reply	Right on! When I take photos, I don't care what chip, processor, and language the camera uses - I just want it to work well as a good tool (which is why I have a KM7D - it has the best interface of any digital camera). When I want to edit and print those photos, I don't care how the program is made; I just want to be able to edit and print with ease (so I use PS7). I can be very creative making photographs - and Squeak doesn't help my photographic creativity one bit. --Tony Of course, the real key to photography is light and composition anyway, not the camera or editor. But it helps to use good tools, and not have to create them myself.
Post #244,879 by tuberculosis 2/16/06 1:16:11 AM 2/16/06 1:17:38 AM Reply	The ignorance around here is staggering [link\|http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2411\|http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2411] [link\|http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3269\|http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3269] And you'd be pissed if every single camera out there used a proprietary image format, wouldn't ya. So you do care at some level about the implementation of your camera. I will toss out one more little datapoint. Remember Hypercard? It was a dead easy sort of "thing" maker you could use to produce content with a great little language that was a LOT like english. People with no technical skills at all built all kinds of things with it to solve problems of their own. End user programming remains an unfilled need. Better apps isn't the answer - better components that are easy to stick together to do things is. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush Edited by tuberculosis Feb. 16, 2006, 01:17:38 AM EST Expand All History
Post #244,907 by drewk 2/16/06 9:06:14 AM Reply	We disagree with you, so we're ignorant ... good call === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #244,949 by tuberculosis 2/16/06 11:33:15 AM Reply	Something about photos - not capable - links what did I miss there? "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,965 by tonytib 2/16/06 11:54:38 AM Reply	Something about Photoshop, easy to use, etc not webcams and filters. Usefulness to me: zero. Photoshop filters are quite easy to use, and besides PS does so much more that's critical; for example, using magic wand to select areas that I want to apply the filter to. I'm sure that could be done in Squeak, but I highly doubt it has. I have no doubt there's a lot of value in Squeak. Heck, I like components a lot; even COM components can add a lot of value (I know COM components can also add a lot of pain). But Squeak isn't going to replace applications. There's a lot of value in putting together the components to make a polished finished product. After all, it's not that hard to make your own MP3 player using standard components (Circuit Cellar has articles on it), but it is hard to make one with a good user interface like the iPod. --Tony
Post #244,972 by folkert 2/16/06 12:18:35 PM Reply	Heck... I can do all that stuff using ImageMagick from teh sukcy command line. If I were to have to run a squeak VM just to do video / image processing, I'd refrain. Anything that they were showing can be done in Photoshop, yes even scriptable. But why script with Photoshop when ImageMagick is about a trillion time faster for doing the simple to very complex things Photoshop does. Not to mention re-inventing the wheel for image and video processing in squeak. But each has its points. It is just a matter of using what you have. -- [link\|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net\|greg], [link\|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry\|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ *i_wethey* Freedom is not FREE. Yeah, but 10s of Trillions of US Dollars? SELECT * FROM scog WHERE ethics > 0; 0 rows returned.
Post #244,909 by admin 2/16/06 9:09:16 AM Reply	The arrogance around here is staggering. Get off your fucking high horse, Todd. No where did I say that components are bad. Yes, scriptable/programmable things are nice... for about 5% of the public. In the end, the user could care less if everything is written in GOTOs and INTERCAL, as long as it does what they want it to do. And once again, oh-so-enlightened one: DATA FORMAT IS NOT IMPLEMENTATION. It can drive it, yes, but you can have completely non-componentized cameras that all use the same image format. So quit pissing on everyone here because they don't agree with you about user's wants, and stop trying to represent that disagreement as stupidity and ignorance. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,950 by tuberculosis 2/16/06 11:34:53 AM Reply	Fine - you're all wrong and we'll leave it at that becuase I can barely cope with the UI complexity of my cell phone - but the teenagers are all over them. You say users can't deal with complexity and don't care. I see different. You can stop replying any time. Cool huh. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #244,969 by admin 2/16/06 12:07:44 PM Reply	As soon as you stop misrepresenting me I will I didn't say "can't" and I didn't say they all don't care. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #244,806 by tonytib 2/15/06 8:19:16 PM Reply	You keep missing the point First, many people don't care if computers are a turd or a diamond. They're just not important to their lives. Second, for many people (such as my wife), they're not interested in doing fancy things, they're basically interested in a very simple way of doing the things they want to (e.g. turn on the computer, check e-mail, answer e-mail). So well designed applications are perfect for them, whether it's a monolithic app designed by megacorp or something put together from components just for them (e.g. by their geeky husband). The issue of how best to solve problems is another matter. My feeling is that applications are typically the best answer (including web apps), although there's a good cause for making them out of pieces (e.g. typical Unix approach). --Tony
Post #246,673 by lincoln 3/3/06 12:07:05 PM Reply	ICLRPD (new thread) Created as new thread #246672 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=246672\|ICLRPD] lincoln "Chicago to my mind was the only place to be. ... I above all liked the city because it was filled with people all a-bustle, and the clatter of hooves and carriages, and with delivery wagons and drays and peddlers and the boom and clank of freight trains. And when those black clouds came sailing in from the west, pouring thunderstorms upon us so that you couldn't hear the cries or curses of humankind, I liked that best of all. Chicago could stand up to the worst God had to offer. I understood why it was built--a place for trade, of course, with railroads and ships and so on, but mostly to give all of us a magnitude of defiance that is not provided by one house on the plains. And the plains is where those storms come from." -- E.L. Doctorow Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem. I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *Citizen* of the United States. [link\|mailto:bconnors@ev1.net\|contact me]
Post #244,416 by jb4 2/13/06 2:38:04 PM Reply	ICLRPD (new thread) Created as new thread #244415 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=244415\|ICLRPD] jb4 "Every Repbulican who wants to defend Bush on [the expansion of Presidential powers], should be forced to say, 'I wouldn't hesitate to see President Hillary Rodham Clinton have the same authority'." &mdash an unidentified letter writer to Newsweek on the expansion of executive powers under the Bush administration
Post #243,646 by tuberculosis 2/6/06 4:38:29 PM Reply	The idea is that these are tools for adhoc computing for use by end users - not systems engineers. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #243,313 by ChrisR 2/2/06 8:13:20 PM Reply	The short history.... ...Nygaard and Dahl invent Simula in the mid '60s. Kay stumbles upon Simula while working at Univ. of Utah and has light bulb go off - invents Smalltalk. A decade later, Bjarne Stroustrap writes C with Classes which borrows heavily from Simula but ignores the advances of Smalltalk. Bottom line is that every OO language has borrowed from the Simula language. The biggest problems with Simula were related to static typing and inheritance. Simula only supported single inheritance. For the simulations that it was designed for at the time, that was sufficient. There have been some improvements in static OO languages since that time but not that much. In turn, most of the modern OO languages ignored some cool features of Simula such as coroutines. Of course, if you ask Todd, He'll probably inform you that Smalltalk is probably the only OO language that actually went about improving upon Simula. :-) Nygaard later worked on the BETA programming language but it never really caught on. The compiler and associated libraries had to be purchased and it was anything but an open project. And the syntax is a bit strange - borrowing a lot from Lisp. Anyhow, Nygaard is well respected for his accomplishments. That said, I can't say that the paper you pointed to is very enlightening. Better to go play with [link\|http://onestepback.org/articles/poly/simula.html\|Simula] or [link\|http://onestepback.org/articles/poly/beta.html\|Beta], if you want to see his less nebulous accomplishments.

Welcome to IWETHEY!