[OT] Was: totally satisfied :D

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:16:14 -0400, Nick Sabalausky  
<SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 08:46:00 -0400
> "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:05:35 -0400, Nick Sabalausky
>> <SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote:
>>
>> > There's also a separate one for alarms/alerts:
>> >  
>> http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/12/01/13/user.unaware.that.alarm.going.off.was.his/
>>
>> This makes sense.  Why would you ever want your alarm clock to
>> "alarm silently"
>
> I don't carry around my alarm clock everywhere I go.

You don't have to use it as an alarm clock.  An alarm clock is for waking  
you up.  Why would you set it to wake you up in a music performance?

> Aside from that, if it happens to be set wrong, I damn sure don't want
> it going off in a library, in a meeting, at the front row of a show,
> etc.

Can't help you there :)  It's *really* hard to set it wrong (just try it).

Besides, it doesn't sound like that person was using the right tool for  
the job.  If he's awake at that time, he's using it as a reminder, for  
which the reminders app is better suited.

>
>> How would you wake up?
>
> By using a real alarm clock?

What if you don't have one?  You are camping, sleeping on the couch at a  
friends house, etc.

> Besides, we can trivially both have our own ways thanks to the simple
> invention of "options". Unfortunately, Apple apparently seems to think
> somebody's got that patented or something.

Huh?  Just don't use it as an alarm clock?  Why do you need an option to  
prevent you from doing that?

>> I don't know any examples of sounds that disobey the silent switch
>
> There is no silent switch. The switch only affects *some* sounds, and
> I'm not interested in memorizing which ones just so I can try to avoid
> the others.

s/some/nearly all

Again, I gave you the *two* incidental sounds it doesn't affect.  Sorry  
you can't be bothered to learn them.

> The only "silent switch" is the one I use: Just leave the fucking thing
> in the car.

That works too, but doesn't warrant rants about how you haven't learned  
how to use the fucking thing :)

>> > It's just unbelievably convoluted, over-engineered, and as far from
>> > "simple" as could possibly be imagined. Basically, you have "volume
>> > up" and "volume down", but there's so much damn modality (something
>> > Apple *loves*, but it almost universally bad for UI design) that
>> > they work pretty much randomly.
>>
>> I think you exaggerate.  Just a bit.
>>
>
> Not really (and note I said "pretty much randomly" not "truly
> randomly").
>
> Try listing out all the different volume rules (that you're *aware* of -
> who knows what other hidden quirks there might be), all together, and I
> think you may be surprised just how much complexity there is.

1. ringer volume affects all sounds except for music/video/games
2. Silent switch will ringer volume to 0 for all sounds except for  
find-my-iphone and alarm clock
3. If playing a game/video/music, the volume buttons affect that volume,  
otherwise, they affect ringer volume.

Wow, you are right, three whole rules.  That's way more than 1.  I stand  
corrected :)

> Then compare that to, for example, a walkman or other portable music
> player (iTouch doesn't count, it's a PDA) which is 100% predictable and
> trivially simple right from day one. You never even have to think about
> it, the volume **just works**, period. The fact that the ijunk has
> various other uses besides music is immaterial: It could have been
> simple and easy and worked well, and they instead chose to make it
> complex.
>
> Not only that, but it would have been trivial to just offer an *option*
> to turn that "smart" junk off. But then allowing a user to configure
> their own property to their own liking just wouldn't be very "Apple",
> now would it?

I detect a possible prejudice against Apple here :)

>> Well, for music/video, the volume buttons *do* work in locked mode.
>>
>
> More complexity and modality! Great.

This is the one thing I agree with you on -- the volume buttons should  
just work in locked mode, following the rules of when the phone is not  
locked.  I can't envision how the volume buttons would accidentally get  
pressed.

>> > How often has anyone ever had a volume POT go bad? I don't think
>> > I've *ever* even had it happen. It's a solid, well-established
>> > technology.
>>
>> I have had several sound systems where the volume knob started
>> misbehaving, due to corrosion, dust, whatever.  You can hear it
>> mostly when you turn the knob, and it has a scratchy sound coming
>> from the speakers.
>>
>
> Was that before or after the "three year old" mark?

Not sure.  I don't have any of these things anymore :)  POTs aren't used  
very much any more.

>
> The *only* thing unfortunately missing without a mac is submission to
> the Big Brother store.
>
>> I have recently
>> experienced the exact opposite.  I love my mac, and I would never go
>> back to Windows.
>
> Not trying to "convert" you, just FWIW:
>
> You might like Win7. It's very Mac-like out-of-the-box which is exactly
> why I hate it ;)

No, it's nowhere near the same level.  I have Win 7, had it from the day  
of its release, and while it's WAY better than XP, I'd drop it in a  
heartbeat if it wasn't so damn expensive to buy an iMac.

For instance, when I want to turn my Mac off, I press the power button,  
shut down, and when it comes back up, all the applications I was running  
return in exactly the same state they were in.  This is not hibernation,  
it's a complete shutdown.  Every app has built in it, the ability to  
restore its state.  This is because it's one of the things Mac users  
expect.

You can't do that with Windows or even Linux.  Ubuntu has tried to make  
their UI more mac like, but because the applications are not built to  
handle the features, it doesn't quite work right.

>> Mac + VMWare fusion for running XP and Linux is
>> fucking awesome.
>>
>
> Virtualization is indeed awesome :) Personally I prefer VirtualBox
> though. (Although I worry about it now being under the roof of Oracle.)

VMWare fusion was $50, and runs XP apps just like they were native ones  
(even gives you a searchable start menu).

I actually was forced to use VMWare fusion, because a development project  
I'm working on includes a VMWare Linux image with the correct SDK/cross  
compiler.  So I didn't really shop around for other VM solutions.

>> I recently learned objective C, and I'd hate to use it without
>> xcode, which is a fantastic IDE.  Obj-C is extremely verbose, so
>> without auto-complete, it would be torturous.
>>
>
> Hmm, I'm glad I don't have to deal with Obj-C then. Sounds like the Java
> development philosophy. Not that C++ is all that great either, but at
> least I already know it :/

Objective C isn't actually terrible, I much prefer it to C++.  But if I  
had to develop it without an IDE, I would hate it.  And xcode is very very  
good at helping you develop with it.

I haven't used xcode for anything else, so I'm not sure how good an IDE it  
is for other languages.

It's git integration is very good too, especially for viewing differences.

>> The *screen* wasn't broken, it's just the plastic starts
>> deteriorating. Jobs famously had an early iPhone prototype with a
>> plastic screen and pulled it out at a designer meeting and yelled at
>> them saying "this fucking thing is in with my keys, it's getting all
>> scratched up!  we need something better."  That's when they started
>> thinking about using the glass screens.
>>
>
> Yea, he never did grow up, did he? Still throwing tantrums all the way
> up to, what was he, like 60?
>
> And he never did learn about such things as "covers", did he?

Interesting that's what you see as the defining point of that story :)   
Especially considering your calm, controlled statements about Apple  
products...

-Steve