Actually, I agree with it. I'm a Linux noob, and even I (the target idiot?) can't find anything in the latest version of Ubuntu without having to constantly search. The older version was quite discoverable for me though. I'm also looking around for something more useable.
Is searching that bad? Personally, I find pushing the windows button on my keyboard and typing what I want (just like I do in Win7) is pretty convenient.
I have a lot of software installed that I use once a month or less. How do I search for something I don't know the name of? "I think I had some vector graphics programs installed. Or was that my other computer?"
I am a linux n00b too. Last weekend, I installed Ubuntu 11.10 is a shiny new Intel i3 machine. Just started learning the Unity interface. It is very difficult. The alt-tab does not show the each window of the open apps. The windows of the same program are clubbed together. WTF, how do I select them?
To me, Unity is a usability nightmare. As I have recently migrated from WindowsXP, this seems to be very hard. I hope I can learn to live with Ubuntu.
Also tried Gnome 3 shell, but quickly reverted to Unity as Gnome shell was even more horrible.
When you get to the app you want, hit alt-` (or you can hit alt-` directly if you're already on the app you want) and then you'll get a preview of all the individual windows.
This made me chuckle after just reading a rant about someone leaving Linux and going back to Windows because of all the secret handshakes and tribal knowledge required.
FWIW, only Windows behaves likes this. Most other window managers and OSes behave as you described. So this is technically not an issue of functionality, but an issue of your preconceptions of how a app switcher should work.
I usually call my programs directly with dmenu (or the Alt+F2 run dialog when I'm on Ubuntu), but even I like the way the older Ubuntu versions organize programs in the menu. It's very intuitive, especially if you're not familiar with the system you're on.
Nothing against Optimizely (I'll go see what it is after I post), but man I'm getting tired of the cutsey -ly names. This is one fad I wish would fade away.
That works in theory. But have YOU read all the fine print when opening an account with your bank? I haven't either -- everything we do is based on some common sense and trust. If we had to verify everything we did with everyone we did it, our way of life would end.
> But have YOU read all the fine print when opening an account with your bank?
Yes. Paraphrased:
Bank agent: “You'll also have to sign this.” (Hands over a sheet of paper.)
Me: “Let's see here… […] ‘comply with the Deposit Agreement and Disclosure’. I need to see a copy of the Deposit Agreement and Disclosure, please.”
Agent: “Of course.” (Hands over a booklet.)
Me: “All right. Well, you may have to wait a bit…” (Starts leafing through the booklet. Cut to analog clock, then to clock fifteen minutes later.)
It was the same thing with signing up for public storage. “… ‘agrees to the Privacy Policy, which is incorporated by reference’. I don't seem to have a copy of the Privacy Policy here.” “Here you go,” and another sheaf of paper appears.
Note that in these cases I'm still basing my interpretation on a lot of contextual and cultural information, because while the alternative of trying to get them to lock down all the definitions separately would be amusing, it would fail. In many cases, every one of the relevant providers is in a position to drop me, whereas I'm reliant on at least one of them accepting me, so the power balance is tipped heavily in their favor.
I completely agree with Josh though. In my case, I haven't watched more than 30 minutes of TV (usually zero) in a week for probably 10 years now. Instead, during the evenings I worked on my business while my spouse watched TV. Now I have a great business to show for all those hours. Don't have anything to show for the TV-watching hours from the previous 10 years though. YMMV (though you'll never know 'til you try it!)
A friend and I were discussing this once. I don't like horror films because of the gore. He told me that when he first started watching them, the gore creeped him out and made him uncomfortable. After years of watching them though, it doesn't faze him at all. To me, that's the very definition of media changing someone. Of course that doesn't mean he's going to become an axe murderer, but it had a noticable impact on his thought patterns. Take someone that is unstable to start with, and maybe... ?
As I mentioned above, Authorize.Net's CIM (Customer Information Manager) works in a similar way -- you send the credit card info from your website to Authorize.net (and never store it in between) and you get a token back which you can store, and which you can use to make charges later.
They also have CIM, Customer Information Manager, where you send the credit card info (thus never storing it yourself) and you get back a token. Anytime you need to charge that card, you charge the token instead. PCI compliance is then on Authorize.net
Even if you aren't storing card information you still are subject to PCI compliance if the card information passes through your application/server. In the case where you are processing but not storing you would need to complete the SAQ-C questionnaire and still probably be subject to quarterly scans (the self-assessment where are you storing data is SAQ-D)
Pretty much every gateway has some kind of tokenization solution (or reference transaction solution) that accomplishes the same thing. They all call it something different and try to make it seem like it is unique, which can be confusing.
Unless you're also using one of those subscription-as-a-service startups to host the payment forms, no, PCI compliance is on you with CIM. The payment information passes through your server, so you're 100% required to meet all 200+ of the requirements of the standard, quarterly scans of your servers, etc. Secure storage is only one small subset of the requirements.
So did mine, but that was 1994 so it didn't seem so bad :) (which is another way of saying that context is _very_ important, like year, what part of the country, web programming vs kernel drivers, DBA, etc)
Leave. Your hard work is being wasted there. I was in almost an identical situation. When I left the company folded, but funding was getting short anyway (the first time a check bounced I used that as my excuse). The boss won't be happy, but you can only go up from where you're at.
Happy side note: 10 years later I'm running my own startup (only founder) and it's great. However, working in big companies between the two was definitely helpful.
Am I the only one saddened by the fact that this would have been a piece of cake back in high school/college, but can't remember how to do them (integrals) anymore? :(
>if you learned them once you can learn them again
I doubt this personally. I didn't have any problems with the partial differential I was set. I mean on a general level that something once learnt can be relearned.
You may not be as sharp at it as you were when you spent hours pounding it into your head on a frequent basis, but it's surely within a person's grasp. At least as far as math goes; something like language fluency may be another story.
I did a lot of maths in college before I moved onto programming and computer science, but I also found the problem hard. I think I could probably work it out from first principles eventually, but it's surprising how much calculus and trig comes down to memorising rules.
