Sign In
Register
Help
I started with MacPaint in the old days, then SuperPaint and then on to a PC, where I was at least minimally happy with Paint plus Paintshop Pro 7. I did a lot of graphics with these two. When I had to get a new machine, I decided to look into Apple. I went to the bookstore and looked through a couple of guides to the Mac. I couldn't find the word "graphics" in the index! And the Mac used to be a wonderful graphics machine.So I gave up and got a Vista machine(not really by choice). Not knowing if PSP 7 was available or could work under Vista, I got the latest (PhotoProX2).
The program is so photo-oriented that I have great difficulty doing the simplest of tasks.
I wonder if PSP7 runs on Vista.
zrdavo
Before They Spoiled the Software
MultiQuote
#42
Catmoves 
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 24-October 06
Posted 26 December 2007 - 11:51 AM
Remember Google? The good search engine?
If you want your eyes opened read Google's TOS and privacy pages. If you can. (Try using Eulalyser, it's eye opening.)
Those docs are bloatware, absolving Google from everything and letting you know that any of their software you download or use, has the ability to spy on you. And to serve you ads that somehow seem to know what you are looking at, have looked and likely should look at. about:blank in action. That piece of crap spyware they bought and use now.
Yes, I still blog there and use their search, but they have not endeared themselves to me.
It seems the bigger companies get, the more they want to get your hard earned buck. What's needed is a control over what TOS can contain in regard to the programs.
If you want your eyes opened read Google's TOS and privacy pages. If you can. (Try using Eulalyser, it's eye opening.)
Those docs are bloatware, absolving Google from everything and letting you know that any of their software you download or use, has the ability to spy on you. And to serve you ads that somehow seem to know what you are looking at, have looked and likely should look at. about:blank in action. That piece of crap spyware they bought and use now.
Yes, I still blog there and use their search, but they have not endeared themselves to me.
It seems the bigger companies get, the more they want to get your hard earned buck. What's needed is a control over what TOS can contain in regard to the programs.
#43
morenofranco
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 30-November 08
Posted 30 November 2008 - 05:56 AM
I am a marketing person who works with web developers and programmers. I have worked with many and they all have one thing in common.
The ability to build stuff. Even if it is not required, or might cause confusion in the users mind. Some nifty gets built because it can be.
This is not "solution to the problem" thinking application. This is Feature Creep... and it has been allowed to get out of control, if not actually encouraged.
The problem is that it is so easy to keep adding features... lets add more! After all more is better?
Being in marketing, I want to make the end users experience as hassle free as possible, so I can get them to concentrate, and hsend me money... not complaints.
In the majority of times, the programmers have never bothered to actually TRY OUT THIS NIFTY FEATURE. It looks okay in the code... but on the page? Or even if they are too rushed to do public research, they could try the Nifty Feature out with fellow workers who are not programmers and see if the average person can figure it out
For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and WRONG.
This is apart from that fact that the rush to implement something is always the reason that some previous GOOD "features" are overlooked or forgotten. Or even worse half-patched.
Problem is: Programmers dont have a product testing review policy, like manufacturers of electrical appliances, motor vehicles and building materials. So they are at liberty to build junk.
Great Article, guys. It goes along way to adding to my research on Stupid Design.
I am just waiting to be able to by a camera that I can make phone calls from.
Or a computer where the CD tray button is ABOVE the tray where you can see it, like any cheap CD sound system.
Franco
The ability to build stuff. Even if it is not required, or might cause confusion in the users mind. Some nifty gets built because it can be.
This is not "solution to the problem" thinking application. This is Feature Creep... and it has been allowed to get out of control, if not actually encouraged.
The problem is that it is so easy to keep adding features... lets add more! After all more is better?
Being in marketing, I want to make the end users experience as hassle free as possible, so I can get them to concentrate, and hsend me money... not complaints.
In the majority of times, the programmers have never bothered to actually TRY OUT THIS NIFTY FEATURE. It looks okay in the code... but on the page? Or even if they are too rushed to do public research, they could try the Nifty Feature out with fellow workers who are not programmers and see if the average person can figure it out
For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and WRONG.
This is apart from that fact that the rush to implement something is always the reason that some previous GOOD "features" are overlooked or forgotten. Or even worse half-patched.
Problem is: Programmers dont have a product testing review policy, like manufacturers of electrical appliances, motor vehicles and building materials. So they are at liberty to build junk.
Great Article, guys. It goes along way to adding to my research on Stupid Design.
I am just waiting to be able to by a camera that I can make phone calls from.
Or a computer where the CD tray button is ABOVE the tray where you can see it, like any cheap CD sound system.
Franco
