Hey Guys --

I downloaded Windows 8 after it was released at the BUILD conference a couple of weeks ago, and as a Mac and Linux user I have to say I was impressed with it. The whole UEFI thing though has me pissed, so hopefully MS won't require it to be enabled by hardware vendors.

Sam

... Join us at The X-BIT BBS --> http://x-bit.org

---
■ Synchronet ■ The X-BIT BBS * http://x-bit.org * http://x-bit.org/777.htm

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Sam Alexander to All on Sat Oct 01 2011 02:44 pm

it. The whole UEFI thing though has me pissed, so hopefully MS won't requir it to be enabled by hardware vendors.

its one thing thats preventing me from buying a Lenovo pc.
~ I am on twitter: @thinktank79 on Twitter ~

---
■ Synchronet ■ Inland Utopia - inlandutopia.etowns.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Sam Alexander to All on Sat Oct 01 2011 14:44:09

I downloaded Windows 8 after it was released at the BUILD conference a coupl of weeks ago, and as a Mac and Linux user I have to say I was impressed with

It's a change from the norm, which is good to see. The tiles are a great idea, but it's really aimed at touch sceens. Don't see me using a touch screen on my desktop anytime soon. Maybe as a screen builtin to a coffee table or something that would be great.

Bring on cheaper pricing for the MS surface.

-=[LurcH]=-

---
■ Synchronet ■ -=[TAF BBS - Telnet://taf.org.nz]=-

Hey Guys --

I downloaded Windows 8 after it was released at the BUILD conference a couple of weeks ago, and as a Mac and Linux user I have to say I was impressed with it. The whole UEFI thing though has me pissed, so hopefully MS won't require it to be enabled by hardware vendors.

We've been testing a bit with Windows 8 where I work. So far I haven't used
it much, but from what I've seen, I haven't been really excited about it. It doesn't seem much different at all from Windows 7 in normal UI mode, and I'm not sure I see much point in the tablet interface on a desktop PC. And some things seem a bit slow (network communication, for instance), and IE crashes often, but it's still beta, so I want to wait & see the final version.. But
so far, I'm not sure I see much point in upgrading from Windows 7, as it doesn't appear to add anything significant.

Nightfox

It's a change from the norm, which is good to see. The tiles are a great idea, but it's really aimed at touch sceens. Don't see me using a touch screen on my desktop anytime soon.

I don't see much appeal of having a touch-screen interface on a desktop PC.
PC makers have been able to do that for quite some time (in fact, I seem to remember seeing some HP all-in-one PCs with touch screens), yet touch screens on desktops haven't gained much popularity. I think one main reason is that a touch screen would tend to get dirty with fingerprints. I certainly wouldn't feel like cleaning my computer screen very often. Also, for a touch screen to work, the screen really needs to be right in front of you. For those with
home theater PCs, where the screen is probably far from you, a mouse really works better.

Also, tablet PCs tend to have a different style of running apps, where if you exit an app, the app is still running in the background. I don't really like that style of operation; when I exit out of an app, I want it closed so that it's no longer using memory & other resources and is not connected to online servers (if it's an online app).

Nightfox

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Sam Alexander on Tue Oct 11 2011 11:08 am

Windows 8 Developer Preview isn't much yet. Start menu is replace with Metro screen to give it an iOS or Droid look and the desktop is used for legacy apps. The BSOD is replaced with a :( sad face to show users that same thing the Mac showed in 1984 the Sad Mac meaning the OS had an error and had to reboot or crash.

It isn't ready yet, but Visual Studio 2011 will develop Metro apps on the Windows Store and users can buy them. VS 2011 will develop Javscript apps for the tablet and smart phones that use ARM chips to run Windows 8 as Nokia adapts to it in 2016 and dumps SymbiaOS for Windows 8. Nokia has like 350+ million SymbiaOS phones (I hope I spelled it right) and will switch to Windows 8 in the future to beat Apple and Google iPhone and Droid phones. So you can tell that Windows 8 will have iOS and Droid features and Metro is a tablet interface for touch screens. X86 and X64 PC systems will also have Metro interfaces. I assume eventually VS 2011 will compile ARM binaries as well as X86 and X64 to use C++, C#, and Visual BASIC to make even ARM binaries.

---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ telnet://vert.synchro.net

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Sam Alexander on Tue Oct 11 2011 11:08 am

Hey Guys --

I downloaded Windows 8 after it was released at the BUILD conference a couple of weeks ago, and as a Mac and Linux user I have to say I was impressed with it. The whole UEFI thing though has me pissed, so hopeful MS won't require it to be enabled by hardware vendors.

We've been testing a bit with Windows 8 where I work. So far I haven't used it much, but from what I've seen, I haven't been really excited about it. I doesn't seem much different at all from Windows 7 in normal UI mode, and I'm not sure I see much point in the tablet interface on a desktop PC. And some things seem a bit slow (network communication, for instance), and IE crashes often, but it's still beta, so I want to wait & see the final version.. But so far, I'm not sure I see much point in upgrading from Windows 7, as it doesn't appear to add anything significant.

Nightfox

The tablet interface has been tried in Ubuntu Linux with the "Unity" desktop environment. I believe it was largely critised. I don't think MS can really innovate, or many other companies for that matter. Tablet GUI's are "the new black", and thats what the current OS's will be wearing to the ball this year.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Lurch on Tue Oct 11 2011 12:58 pm

It's a change from the norm, which is good to see. The tiles are a great idea, but it's really aimed at touch sceens. Don't see me using a touch screen on my desktop anytime soon.

I don't see much appeal of having a touch-screen interface on a desktop PC. PC makers have been able to do that for quite some time (in fact, I seem to remember seeing some HP all-in-one PCs with touch screens), yet touch screen on desktops haven't gained much popularity. I think one main reason is that touch screen would tend to get dirty with fingerprints. I certainly wouldn' feel like cleaning my computer screen very often. Also, for a touch screen work, the screen really needs to be right in front of you. For those with home theater PCs, where the screen is probably far from you, a mouse really works better.

Also, tablet PCs tend to have a different style of running apps, where if yo exit an app, the app is still running in the background. I don't really lik that style of operation; when I exit out of an app, I want it closed so that it's no longer using memory & other resources and is not connected to online servers (if it's an online app).

Nightfox

I think the only real reason people pushed touchscreens for PC's, is that they consider the keyboard anachronistic and that touch screens are the way of the future. My guess is its probably because that is how the future was portrayed in many science fiction movies, so the marketing and development team just assumed that progression must go Keyboard -> touch screen.

Holding your arm up at eye level to touch the screen all day just isn't practical. Putting the screen in the desk, so you are looking down at it, isn't ergonomic.

Desktop UI changes and technology changes in general seem to be guided by
pre existing, but completely baseless and unfounded notion of what 'futuristic' is. The reality is, that the technology in the future will be what is most useful and efficient, not what someone preconceived decades ago.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Orion Blastar to Nightfox on Tue Oct 11 2011 14:31:54

Windows 8 Developer Preview isn't much yet. Start menu is replace with Metro screen to give it an iOS or Droid look and the desktop is used for legacy ap

Calling them "legacy" apps makes it sound like desktop apps will become obsolete.. That sounds strange to me. I really hope desktop apps won't be made obsolete. I really feel like the tablet interface doesn't make sense on a desktop PC - That's why it's called a "tablet" interface. ;) The desktop user interface has been in place and working just fine for a long time, and there's a reason for that.. I'd rather have that than a tablet interface on my desktop. Although I sit fairly close to my PC screen, I don't feel like it's close enough to want to touch the screen. I don't want to get my screen smudged up with fingerprints all the time, either..

The BSOD is replaced with a :( sad face to show users that same thing the Ma showed in 1984 the Sad Mac meaning the OS had an error and had to reboot or crash.

Now that's innovation! ;)

Nightfox

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Wed Oct 12 2011 21:32:22

The tablet interface has been tried in Ubuntu Linux with the "Unity" desktop environment. I believe it was largely critised. I don't think MS can reall innovate, or many other companies for that matter. Tablet GUI's are "the ne black", and thats what the current OS's will be wearing to the ball this yea

Interesting, I didn't know Ubuntu had tried a tablet interface. And if it was heavily criticized, I have to wonder why Microsoft is trying it with Windows. I really don't see the point in this move.. If Microsoft ends up removing the standard desktop interface in Windows for desktop PCs, I can imagine people moving away from Windows in droves. I'm not sure if I'd want to use a desktop OS with a tablet interface.. I have a tablet, and I think a tablet OS works great on a tablet though - just seems like it would be rather clumsy to use a desktop PC that way.

Nightfox

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Wed Oct 12 2011 21:36:36

Holding your arm up at eye level to touch the screen all day just isn't practical. Putting the screen in the desk, so you are looking down at it, isn't ergonomic.

I agree.. I can't see a tablet/touch-screen interface catching on for people with desktop PCs. Mice & keyboards have worked well for a long time, and I think there's a reason for that. If touch screens were really so much better, I think the switch would have already been done some time ago.

Nightfox

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sat Oct 15 2011 03:30 pm

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Wed Oct 12 2011 21:32:22

The tablet interface has been tried in Ubuntu Linux with the "Unity" desk environment. I believe it was largely critised. I don't think MS can re innovate, or many other companies for that matter. Tablet GUI's are "the black", and thats what the current OS's will be wearing to the ball this

Interesting, I didn't know Ubuntu had tried a tablet interface. And if it w heavily criticized, I have to wonder why Microsoft is trying it with Windows I really don't see the point in this move.. If Microsoft ends up removing t standard desktop interface in Windows for desktop PCs, I can imagine people moving away from Windows in droves. I'm not sure if I'd want to use a deskt OS with a tablet interface.. I have a tablet, and I think a tablet OS works great on a tablet though - just seems like it would be rather clumsy to use desktop PC that way.

Nightfox

It's called lack of imagination and lack of innovation. The IT industry has been describes as being more fashion oriented than the fashion industry, and I belive this to be true. The Tablet style desktop is 'in vogue', and basically for immediate sales, these software companies are making their products appear to be 'in vogue' too. Just wait a couple of years, when a "new" product appears basically bringing back the old desktop.

I think its user driven. Users don't ask for functionality. They don't ask that their computer which is 10x more powerful than the last one do 10x more. They don't ask for greater freedom, capability. They purchase based on marketing, based on the 'in thing'. So the OS desktop has to look 'fashionable'.

I really don't think there is anything more to it than that. Microsoft has long since given up being an innovator or advancing the cyber world. Users have long since given up asking for anything more powerful (most wouldn't have a clue what they are buying or what their computers can do anyway).


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sat Oct 15 2011 03:32 pm

Holding your arm up at eye level to touch the screen all day just isn't practical. Putting the screen in the desk, so you are looking down at it isn't ergonomic.

I agree.. I can't see a tablet/touch-screen interface catching on for peopl with desktop PCs. Mice & keyboards have worked well for a long time, and I think there's a reason for that. If touch screens were really so much bette I think the switch would have already been done some time ago.

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces in
the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can communicate
a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't that more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

I catch myself a lot trying to use my netbook display as a touchscreen. (Hopefully people who see me do it think I'm cleaning a smudge off the
screen.)

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new
improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates the need to even touch the screen.


---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Sun Oct 16 2011 18:56:46

I think its user driven. Users don't ask for functionality. They don't ask that their computer which is 10x more powerful than the last one do 10x more They don't ask for greater freedom, capability. They purchase based on marketing, based on the 'in thing'. So the OS desktop has to look 'fashionable'.

I suppose you're right.. It's rather annoying though, when newer versions of things seem to get worse.. ;)

I really don't think there is anything more to it than that. Microsoft has long since given up being an innovator or advancing the cyber world. Users have long since given up asking for anything more powerful (most wouldn't ha a clue what they are buying or what their computers can do anyway).

I seem to remember a quote from someone at Apple who said something to the effect of they decide what their customers want because their customers don't know what they want. I suppose in some ways that's true.. And sometimes I wonder how they come up with their ideas.. Like the iPhone - When it first came out, I thought it was way overkill for a phone, and I wondered who would relaly want/need an iPhone.. Usually I just use my cell phone to actually call people, as cell phones were intended. But these days I can see the value in having a phone that does more. Similarly with the iPad, when it first came out, I wondered that nobody asked for something like that, and I wondered what use it would serve, but now that I have my own tablet, I think it can be handy to have something that's easy to take with you and read books, check email and look up things online, and sometimes play a game, etc..

Nightfox

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to Nightfox on Sun Oct 16 2011 00:26:00

I agree.. I can't see a tablet/touch-screen interface catching on for pe with desktop PCs. Mice & keyboards have worked well for a long time, and think there's a reason for that. If touch screens were really so much be I think the switch would have already been done some time ago.

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces in the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can communicate a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't that more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

Perhaps in some cases, but if your work involves using a computer for any length of time, would you really want to have to be holding your arms up and touching a PC screen all day? And the thing that bugs me the most is that your screen would get dirty with fingerprints, and you'd probably have to clean the screen fairly often.. It seems like that would be a bit of a hassle.

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates the need to even touch the screen.

Ah, but I think eye tracking has its issues as well.. Often times we need to move our eyes to look at something not on the PC - to list a couple examples, say you hear something on the TV and glance over to catch a look; or, if you have children and your children need something from you.. Can the computer know you aren't trying to interact with it in such cases?

Nightfox

Quoting Nightfox to Reverend Shaft <=-

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces in the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can communicate a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't that more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

Perhaps in some cases, but if your work involves using a computer for
any length of time, would you really want to have to be holding your
arms up and touching a PC screen all day? And the thing that bugs me
the most is that your screen would get dirty with fingerprints, and
you'd probably have to clean the screen fairly often.. It seems like
that would be a bit of a hassle.

I have to agree on both points. Few things drive me absolutely guano like having to clean the smudge marks off my smartphone every 15 minutes.

Still, there has to be a better way to interact with the representations
on the display. Maybe touchscreens are the answer, and we need to adjust
the way we utilize them. For instance, we obviously won't be able to set
a 32" display a few feet away from our nose and expect to be productive,
but that's not to say that a smaller display angled up at us from the
desktop wouldn't work. For that matter, maybe the days of the desk as
we know it are numbered.

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates the need to even touch the screen.

Ah, but I think eye tracking has its issues as well.. Often times we
need to move our eyes to look at something not on the PC - to list a couple examples, say you hear something on the TV and glance over to
catch a look; or, if you have children and your children need something from you.. Can the computer know you aren't trying to interact with it
in such cases?

Valid points. And it's entirely possible that this is something that will
run the same course as speech recognition: 30 years of "it's right around
the corner" only to have it be just slightly more real than the unicorn.

Still, I don't think there's any denying that we need more efficient ways
of interfacing with the hardware.

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

I agree.. I can't see a tablet/touch-screen interface catching on for with desktop PCs. Mice & keyboards have worked well for a long time, think there's a reason for that. If touch screens were really so much I think the switch would have already been done some time ago.

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can communic a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't t more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

Perhaps in some cases, but if your work involves using a computer for any NI>length of time, would you really want to have to be holding your arms up and NI>touching a PC screen all day? And the thing that bugs me the most is that y NI>screen would get dirty with fingerprints, and you'd probably have to clean t NI>screen fairly often.. It seems like that would be a bit of a hassle.

The only touch screen I have ever touched was at a Rest Area on a
Interstate Highway.

I was standing up when I used it.

I am not in favor of using a Desktop TouchScreen but I had this thought
while reading the comments on this topic.

Remember the Graphic TouchPads?

Something like that laying on a wooden Desk or integrated into a
Keyboard could be used with your finger or a tool to operate the Win8
Metro thing a ma jig.

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates need to even touch the screen.

Ah, but I think eye tracking has its issues as well.. Often times we need t NI>move our eyes to look at something not on the PC - to list a couple examples NI>say you hear something on the TV and glance over to catch a look; or, if you NI>have children and your children need something from you.. Can the computer NI>know you aren't trying to interact with it in such cases?

You all will have to excuse me for saying this, but when reading the
above I thought of the Microsoft XBox 360 Kinect device.


* SLMR 2.1a #T348 * He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly

---
■ Synchronet ■ Capitol City Online - telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - 502-875-8938

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to Nightfox on Sun Oct 16 2011 12:26 am

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces in the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can
communicate a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't that more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

My screen is 2 feet from me and vertical... my mouse is eight inches and horizontal... I don't need to lift my elbow to use my mouse.

I really don't care about intuitive... and my finger tip is about eight times the size of my regular desktop font. Positioning or selecting in text would become impossible unless I greatly lowered the amount of information on my screen. Since I'm constantly trying to figure out how to fit MORE information on my screen, this would be unacceptable.

Further, there is no hover detection and thus no tooltips to help decode the stupid little pictures.

Nope, touchscreen is useless at my desk and would make my experience worse in almost every measurable way.

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates
the need to even touch the screen.

Not a speed reader I assume. Eye tracking is only useful if you use your eyes to lock on to something. Learning how to read/view things less efficiently would be crazy.

There is research into what the eyes do while working on a computer... it's not contudtive to being a pointing device.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to NIGHTFOX on Sun Oct 16 2011 10:38 pm

the way we utilize them. For instance, we obviously won't be able to set
a 32" display a few feet away from our nose and expect to be productive,
but that's not to say that a smaller display angled up at us from the desktop wouldn't work. For that matter, maybe the days of the desk as
we know it are numbered.

Many professions commonly have a large number of moniters connected.

For people who are surfing the internet and checking their mail and facebook acconts for a couple hours total per day, any interface would work - but for serious users, it's not not an option. Try designing 3D animations with your set-up.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Quoting Deuce to Reverend Shaft <=-

My screen is 2 feet from me and vertical... my mouse is eight inches
and horizontal... I don't need to lift my elbow to use my mouse.

And in a proper configuration, I think your elbows would find themselves
just as comfortable as before.

I really don't care about intuitive... and my finger tip is about
eight times the size of my regular desktop font. Positioning or
selecting in text would become impossible unless I greatly lowered the amount of information on my screen. Since I'm constantly trying to
figure out how to fit MORE information on my screen, this would be unacceptable.

I fell into that trap for quite a while. For a year or more, I had three screens at my desk, showing all manner of things from source code and
debug traces to production and shipping statistics and schedules. There
came a day where the brain just refused to accept all that data, and I
had to leave the office early that day just to clear my head.

It's not multi-tasking, it's mult-overload. There's certainly a reason
why we look back on those more innocent days of computing, and it's
partially for that reason; there wasn't a need to demand users to interact
with dozens of (often unrelated) processes simultaneously.

It's since been proven that too multi-tasking -- with the added pressure
from a superior demanding results yesterday, causes a mar greater loss
in productivity than what one would see if they single tasked or time
switched the whole project.

Further, there is no hover detection and thus no tooltips to help
decode the stupid little pictures.

Nope, touchscreen is useless at my desk and would make my experience
worse in almost every measurable way.

Tools have specific purposes. An airplane wouldn't be useful in going to
get groceries at the downtown farmer's market or walk my dog, but that
doesn't mean airplanes should be categorically dismissed as useless.

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates
the need to even touch the screen.

Not a speed reader I assume. Eye tracking is only useful if you use
your eyes to lock on to something. Learning how to read/view things
less efficiently would be crazy.

This is a very Luddite-like view of a given technology. I'm not saying
it's THE answer, and I hope you noticed the pretext that I suggested
"PERHAPS" this is a technology that could offer a better interface.

There is research into what the eyes do while working on a computer... it's not contudtive to being a pointing device.

If implemented well, I think it could be very condusive. It's not a
technology I would necessarily champion, but it has merits and aspects
that could be used to further advance the way we interact with a device.

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Quoting Deuce to Reverend Shaft <=-

the way we utilize them. For instance, we obviously won't be able to set
a 32" display a few feet away from our nose and expect to be productive,
but that's not to say that a smaller display angled up at us from the desktop wouldn't work. For that matter, maybe the days of the desk as
we know it are numbered.

Many professions commonly have a large number of moniters connected.

For people who are surfing the internet and checking their mail and facebook acconts for a couple hours total per day, any interface would work - but for serious users, it's not not an option. Try designing 3D animations with your set-up.

I don't think a 3D animator would mind working here. I have quite the
spacious setup, a 37" primary with two 24" secondary displays flanking
the primary. Lots of real estate, and a 6-core CPU under the hood for
handling the model renders would be just fine. What I'm saying is that
this really ISN'T the ideal way to be developing. We lose in translation
when we want mouse cursor to go somewhere and it has other plans. We create unnecessary bugs with our quaint little typographical errors. We can't
stay trapped in the fallacy that what we have here -- technologies that
are only one generation ahead of the punch card -- are the permanent
solition.

Rev.
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Mon Oct 17 2011 09:25 pm

I fell into that trap for quite a while. For a year or more, I had three screens at my desk, showing all manner of things from source code and
debug traces to production and shipping statistics and schedules. There came a day where the brain just refused to accept all that data, and I
had to leave the office early that day just to clear my head.

I only use one screen at work (two at home) and rarely have it displaying more than one window... and it's usually full of text. The reason for more information on the screen is to prevent me from having to move anything except my eyes.

Tools have specific purposes. An airplane wouldn't be useful in going to
get groceries at the downtown farmer's market or walk my dog, but that doesn't mean airplanes should be categorically dismissed as useless.

I dismissed a touchscreen as useless at my desk. Much as I would dismiss a helicopter as useless as a replacement for my motorcycle.

Not a speed reader I assume. Eye tracking is only useful if you use your eyes to lock on to something. Learning how to read/view things less efficiently would be crazy.

This is a very Luddite-like view of a given technology. I'm not saying
it's THE answer, and I hope you noticed the pretext that I suggested "PERHAPS" this is a technology that could offer a better interface.

I don't think you understand the Luddite ideal. I'm saying it would be a step backward and require more work. Luddites protested steps forward requiring less work.

If implemented well, I think it could be very condusive. It's not a technology I would necessarily champion, but it has merits and aspects
that could be used to further advance the way we interact with a device.

I disagree. I think it would be a PITA that would require redevloping usage patterns and not result in more efficient usage at the end. Add that to hardware which would, at the least, cost more than the keyboard/mouse (or even perhaps touchscreen) interfaces of today, and yet still require at least the keyboard (or touchscreen) for many purposes.

I think eye tracking would be useful in advertising, autopilots, and doubtless many other fields - computer interface (as I use computers) not so much.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Mon Oct 17 2011 09:40 pm

For people who are surfing the internet and checking their mail and facebook acconts for a couple hours total per day, any interface would work - but for serious users, it's not not an option. Try designing
3D animations with your set-up.

I don't think a 3D animator would mind working here. I have quite the spacious setup, a 37" primary with two 24" secondary displays flanking
the primary. Lots of real estate, and a 6-core CPU under the hood for handling the model renders would be just fine. What I'm saying is that
this really ISN'T the ideal way to be developing. We lose in translation when we want mouse cursor to go somewhere and it has other plans. We create unnecessary bugs with our quaint little typographical errors. We can't
stay trapped in the fallacy that what we have here -- technologies that
are only one generation ahead of the punch card -- are the permanent solition.

By "your" setup, I meant the small tilted touchscreen, not the many out of reach vertical screens.

I'm not sure what you develop, but I agree that three monitors is likely overkill for software devlopment. Most of the people I watch with two monitors don't even use them efficiently.

The thought that you think the mouse/keyboard/high resolution display is a single generation ahead of punch cards is surprising though. I would say there are at least two in between there (and I would more likely go three).
Teletypes and text modes being the most obvious.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to Nightfox on Sun Oct 16 2011 12:26 am

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sat Oct 15 2011 03:32 pm

Holding your arm up at eye level to touch the screen all day just isn' practical. Putting the screen in the desk, so you are looking down at isn't ergonomic.

I agree.. I can't see a tablet/touch-screen interface catching on for pe with desktop PCs. Mice & keyboards have worked well for a long time, and think there's a reason for that. If touch screens were really so much be I think the switch would have already been done some time ago.

Sometimes I wonder about this. One of the problems with human interfaces in the past is that we were so limited by the technology. If we can communicate a desired set of coordinates on the screen by simply touching it, isn't that more efficient and intuitive than using an extra device to move a representation of our finger on the screen?

I catch myself a lot trying to use my netbook display as a touchscreen. (Hopefully people who see me do it think I'm cleaning a smudge off the screen.)

I like to think that the ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved as they have been with other interface devices. Perhaps lead to a new improvement, such as an eye movement tracking technology that eliminates the need to even touch the screen.

If thats actually important. I think the IT industry, like all other industries, groslly exaggerate "problems" in order to sell solutions. But because IT is "the way of the future", people don't question that industry as much and take what they say for granted (and are willing to throw money at them, so as not to be 'left behind', or whatever).

I'm far more cynical about it all. I've seen and heard it all, and what appears to be clear is this. If the industry is working on a problem, you can bet your bottom dollar, that there working on a MARKETABLE problem they can provide a solution for, rather than a real problem.

Touch screens haven't taken off on the desktop, because in my work, as with 99% of other poeple who use a computer, that kind of increase in efficiency is so, so, far down the list of things which we want improved, its practically not a consideration at all. No wait, its NOT a consideration, because no one really needs it. (aside from maybe, maybe CAD stuff, but even thats better with a mouseYes, maybe touching the screen is more efficient, but really, big deal? A)our workflows so streamlined that tenths of a second need to be shaved off computer interaction in order to increase productivity? It's rather silly.

Once an interface is no longer clumsy and can be used smoothly, its done. All these silly attempts to make things easier and easier are just laughable.




---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Sun Oct 16 2011 09:22 am

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Sun Oct 16 2011 18:56:46

I think its user driven. Users don't ask for functionality. They don't that their computer which is 10x more powerful than the last one do 10x m They don't ask for greater freedom, capability. They purchase based on marketing, based on the 'in thing'. So the OS desktop has to look 'fashionable'.

I suppose you're right.. It's rather annoying though, when newer versions o things seem to get worse.. ;)

I really don't think there is anything more to it than that. Microsoft h long since given up being an innovator or advancing the cyber world. Use have long since given up asking for anything more powerful (most wouldn't a clue what they are buying or what their computers can do anyway).

I seem to remember a quote from someone at Apple who said something to the effect of they decide what their customers want because their customers don' know what they want. I suppose in some ways that's true.. And sometimes I wonder how they come up with their ideas.. Like the iPhone - When it first came out, I thought it was way overkill for a phone, and I wondered who woul relaly want/need an iPhone.. Usually I just use my cell phone to actually c people, as cell phones were intended. But these days I can see the value in having a phone that does more. Similarly with the iPad, when it first came out, I wondered that nobody asked for something like that, and I wondered wh use it would serve, but now that I have my own tablet, I think it can be han to have something that's easy to take with you and read books, check email a look up things online, and sometimes play a game, etc..

Nightfox

The iPhone, all smartphones are just computers with a phone attached. If you view it for what it really is, a computer, its not overkill at all. In fact, its underkill, if such a thing exists.

The marketing hasn't caught up to this fact yet. Phones are dead. Its now computers with embedded telecommunications devices.

When "customers" realise this, then simply 'phoney' (haha!) devices will be seen as cheap, limited pieces of crap. But I suppose they need to make money off a 'transition' or 'entry level' device.
'

---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Mon Oct 17 2011 09:25 pm

It's not multi-tasking, it's mult-overload. There's certainly a reason
why we look back on those more innocent days of computing, and it's partially for that reason; there wasn't a need to demand users to interact with dozens of (often unrelated) processes simultaneously.

It's since been proven that too multi-tasking -- with the added pressure from a superior demanding results yesterday, causes a mar greater loss
in productivity than what one would see if they single tasked or time switched the whole project.

Thats why I still use just a plain text console, ie, DOS mode style console. I can just purely concentrate on the task at hand. Sure, there might be MSN running in another virtual console, music playing as well, but I'm able to put my mental energies into what it is I'm trying to do. Yes, I usually use the GUI, but its good sometimes to have a simulated single tasking environment. Having multiple windows on multiple monitors, as I've seen people do seems overkill. I see people at work doing this, when they are only working on one or two problems. I can maybe understand an air traffic controller having this set up, but elsewhere?


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:25 pm

The marketing hasn't caught up to this fact yet. Phones are dead. Its now computers with embedded telecommunications devices.

Except "feature phones" have battery lives over one week while "smart phones" have a battery life around a day or two. This is part of the reason I not longer have one of your dead phones.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Deuce to Boraxman on Tue Oct 18 2011 10:31 am

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:25 pm

The marketing hasn't caught up to this fact yet. Phones are dead. Its no computers with embedded telecommunications devices.

Except "feature phones" have battery lives over one week while "smart phones have a battery life around a day or two. This is part of the reason I not longer have one of your dead phones.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!

huh?
my lg gt540 gets like 2 weeks on standby.
which is a android with GPS on all the time.

"Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


---
■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org

Quoting Deuce to Reverend Shaft <=-

I dismissed a touchscreen as useless at my desk. Much as I would
dismiss a helicopter as useless as a replacement for my motorcycle.

That's because there's no such thing as a replacement for a motorcycle. :)

I don't think you understand the Luddite ideal. I'm saying it would
be a step backward and require more work. Luddites protested steps forward requiring less work.

I think I have a solid grasp of the concept, and I still maintain that
there are means -- perhaps undiscovered -- of performing our work more efficiently. I'm not here debating the effectiveness of eye-tracking
technology specifically. What I'm saying is that the keyboard and mouse
were early solutions to a problem of interfacing the human mind to the
machine, and that we are more than ripe for innovation that does a better
job of bridging the gap.

I think faster than 60 WPM, and it would be nice to have that data go from
my brain to the screen without getting filtered through my arthritic
fingers. My eyes can move from one side of the screen to the other far
faster and with greater accuracy than my mouse with the lint on the sensor.

Any changes to these methods will, of course, require that we change the
way we handle our work, and for us to say that we foster the development
of new technology while turning a blind eye to the innovations that have recently peered up over the horizon seems like a hypocritical thing to do.

It's a cumulative effort. And if we start dismissing solutions because
they aren't perfect at revision 0.1, we miss out on a lot of really fun
stuff that could lead to perfect.

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Quoting Deuce to Reverend Shaft <=-

By "your" setup, I meant the small tilted touchscreen, not the many
out of reach vertical screens.

Gotcha. My mistake.

I'm not sure what you develop, but I agree that three monitors is
likely overkill for software devlopment. Most of the people I watch
with two monitors don't even use them efficiently.

It was a unique case where I was wearing too many hats at once. A fun
challenge for a while, but grew old in a hurry. One display was dedicated
to monitoring an automotive production floor so that we could respond to problems before production personnel knew they had an issue. Another was
for database administration, while the third had all the dev voodoo.

The thought that you think the mouse/keyboard/high resolution display
is a single generation ahead of punch cards is surprising though. I
would say there are at least two in between there (and I would more
likely go three). Teletypes and text modes being the most obvious.

I was refering to the input devices, not the display.

I'm a little rusty on my history, but my thought was that the teleprinters
with their QWERTY keyboards came along as an interface to the punch cards.
All that notwithstanding, it's still a QWERTY keyboard -- the same method
we use today. What's so interesting about that is that the key placement
on these things was intentionally designed to slow us down, and knowing
this, we continue to use them even though more efficient layouts have been introduced.


Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Corey to Deuce on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:15 am

Except "feature phones" have battery lives over one week while "smart phones have a battery life around a day or two. This is part of the reason I not longer have one of your dead phones.

huh?
my lg gt540 gets like 2 weeks on standby.
which is a android with GPS on all the time.

The LG Cosmos 2 gets over a month on standby... and will spend more time in standby than your GT540.

The trouble starts when one begins to use their phone (which is presumably what it's for).

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:38 am

I think I have a solid grasp of the concept, and I still maintain that
there are means -- perhaps undiscovered -- of performing our work more efficiently. I'm not here debating the effectiveness of eye-tracking technology specifically. What I'm saying is that the keyboard and mouse
were early solutions to a problem of interfacing the human mind to the machine, and that we are more than ripe for innovation that does a better job of bridging the gap.

I'm not saying there's nothing better, I'm simply saying that touchscreen and eye tracking aren't better... just as I say that speech recognition isn't.

Something better is fine and I would welcome it. Something worse that's "cooler" is not fine and is unwelcome.

Any changes to these methods will, of course, require that we change the
way we handle our work, and for us to say that we foster the development
of new technology while turning a blind eye to the innovations that have recently peered up over the horizon seems like a hypocritical thing to do.

You seem to think I haven't looked at touchscreens or eye tracking and have dismissed them out of hand. I try out a great many different interface innovations and reseach a great many more. But very few actually have a positiv increase in efficiency (the last big one for me was the rotated display).

It's a cumulative effort. And if we start dismissing solutions because
they aren't perfect at revision 0.1, we miss out on a lot of really fun stuff that could lead to perfect.

I dismiss "solutions" that don't solve a problem. If it's not better than other stuff that's available, it's not a solution. Touchscreens are far beyond 0.1... they've been around far longer than I have. Eye tracking has been around for quite some time as well (productized for well over five years).

I also dismiss use foot boards without even trying to develop the skills involved.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Tue Oct 18 2011 12:00 pm

The thought that you think the mouse/keyboard/high resolution display is a single generation ahead of punch cards is surprising though. I would say there are at least two in between there (and I would more likely go three). Teletypes and text modes being the most obvious.

I was refering to the input devices, not the display.

Well, the entire thing is a single integrated interface. A mouse in a text mode is significantly different to a mouse in graphics mode for example... and a mouse with a keypunch is silly.

WordPerfect 5.0 with the mouse was a generation different to WP6 with a mouse.

I'm a little rusty on my history, but my thought was that the teleprinters with their QWERTY keyboards came along as an interface to the punch cards.

Keypunches were an interface to punched cards. Some had QWERTY keyboards, but not as you know them (most didn't have number keys for example). And they were obviously diffent to teletypes.

Teletypes had a built in printer which makes them obviously different to the keyboard of today... the teletype was replaced by the keyboard AND monitor, not either alone.

The keyboard and monitor allowed screen based interfaces for the first time as opposed to the line based interfaces of the teletype era. A huge change.

The graphics + pointer + keyboard again was a generational change from the screen based interfaces of the VT era.

The touchscreen interface however has grown up alongside the pointer interface. the mouse and the touchscreen are about the same age and share many aspects.
In general, touchscreen+keyboard has never really gained traction and a pure touchscreen keyboard (or other flat low feedback keyboards) are disliked for extensive text input.

All that notwithstanding, it's still a QWERTY keyboard -- the same method
we use today. What's so interesting about that is that the key placement
on these things was intentionally designed to slow us down, and knowing this, we continue to use them even though more efficient layouts have been introduced.

I have yet to see convincing evidence that any "more efficient layout" is more efficient. Further, the key placement of QWERTY was designed to separate letters commonly used together to avoid jams. By avoiding jams, the speed increased.

http://home.earthlink.net/~dcrehr/whyqwert.html

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Deuce to Corey on Tue Oct 18 2011 04:14 pm

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Corey to Deuce on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:15 am

Except "feature phones" have battery lives over one week while "smart phones have a battery life around a day or two. This is part of the reason I not longer have one of your dead phones.

huh?
my lg gt540 gets like 2 weeks on standby.
which is a android with GPS on all the time.

The LG Cosmos 2 gets over a month on standby... and will spend more time in standby than your GT540.

The trouble starts when one begins to use their phone (which is presumably w it's for).

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!

What battery does it have? I bought the 1500mah for lg.
even using everyday from calls to where am I, I am still set for like a week. heck, I heard palms and blackberrys have to be charged everyday.

"Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


---
■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

Thats why I still use just a plain text console, ie, DOS mode style console. I can just purely concentrate on the task at hand. Sure,
there might be MSN running in another virtual console, music playing as well, but I'm able to put my mental energies into what it is I'm trying
to do.

I've been trying to do this more over the past couple years, and get ever
so frustrated with console windows that won't go full screen (I don't even
want to remember that I'm on a GUI), or if they do, they either leave the titlebar on the top or leave my flat panel scaled to 1920x1080 while showing
me an itty bitty 320x200 viewport.

Normally, I would thank my linux console for this, but as most of those machines are virtualized, I'm SOL on that front as well.

*grumble*

Any hints?

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Corey to Deuce on Tue Oct 18 2011 06:25 pm

huh?
my lg gt540 gets like 2 weeks on standby.
which is a android with GPS on all the time.

The LG Cosmos 2 gets over a month on standby... and will spend more time in standby than your GT540.

The trouble starts when one begins to use their phone (which is presumably w it's for).

What battery does it have? I bought the 1500mah for lg.
even using everyday from calls to where am I, I am still set for like a week. heck, I heard palms and blackberrys have to be charged everyday.

I think the standard battery is 900mAh.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Deuce wrote to Reverend Shaft <=-

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Tue Oct 18 2011 12:00 pm

All that notwithstanding, it's still a QWERTY keyboard -- the same method
we use today. What's so interesting about that is that the key placement
on these things was intentionally designed to slow us down, and knowing this, we continue to use them even though more efficient layouts have been introduced.

I have yet to see convincing evidence that any "more efficient layout"
is more efficient. Further, the key placement of QWERTY was designed
to separate letters commonly used together to avoid jams. By avoiding jams, the speed increased.

I had no idea about the arrangement of the key placement until now. That
was informative and have actually learned something today. It makes sense.
I'm glad I learned how to type. Even in the dark. :-]

I'd hate to own a touch monitor or think of current monitors being totally replaced by them. I'm repulsed by the very idea.


Sincerely,
Jon Justvig
R14C (1:298/5)
telnet://vintagebbsing.com
http://www.vintagebbsing.com
e-mail: jjustvig@vintagebbsing.com
yahoo: jonathanjustvig@yahoo.com

--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
■ Synchronet ■ Stepping Stone BBS - telnet://vintagebbsing.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Deuce to Boraxman on Tue Oct 18 2011 10:31 am

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Nightfox on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:25 pm

The marketing hasn't caught up to this fact yet. Phones are dead. Its no computers with embedded telecommunications devices.

Except "feature phones" have battery lives over one week while "smart phones have a battery life around a day or two. This is part of the reason I not longer have one of your dead phones.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!

I get a week with my phone, maybe 5 days with moderate use. Mines technically a smart phone.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Tue Oct 18 2011 11:38 am

Quoting Deuce to Reverend Shaft <=-

I dismissed a touchscreen as useless at my desk. Much as I would dismiss a helicopter as useless as a replacement for my motorcycle.

That's because there's no such thing as a replacement for a motorcycle. :)

I don't think you understand the Luddite ideal. I'm saying it would
be a step backward and require more work. Luddites protested steps forward requiring less work.

I think I have a solid grasp of the concept, and I still maintain that
there are means -- perhaps undiscovered -- of performing our work more efficiently. I'm not here debating the effectiveness of eye-tracking technology specifically. What I'm saying is that the keyboard and mouse
were early solutions to a problem of interfacing the human mind to the machine, and that we are more than ripe for innovation that does a better job of bridging the gap.

I think faster than 60 WPM, and it would be nice to have that data go from my brain to the screen without getting filtered through my arthritic fingers. My eyes can move from one side of the screen to the other far faster and with greater accuracy than my mouse with the lint on the sensor.

Any changes to these methods will, of course, require that we change the
way we handle our work, and for us to say that we foster the development
of new technology while turning a blind eye to the innovations that have recently peered up over the horizon seems like a hypocritical thing to do.

It's a cumulative effort. And if we start dismissing solutions because
they aren't perfect at revision 0.1, we miss out on a lot of really fun stuff that could lead to perfect.

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a way to go yet.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to BORAXMAN on Wed Oct 19 2011 12:53 am

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

Thats why I still use just a plain text console, ie, DOS mode style console. I can just purely concentrate on the task at hand. Sure, there might be MSN running in another virtual console, music playing as well, but I'm able to put my mental energies into what it is I'm trying to do.

I've been trying to do this more over the past couple years, and get ever
so frustrated with console windows that won't go full screen (I don't even want to remember that I'm on a GUI), or if they do, they either leave the titlebar on the top or leave my flat panel scaled to 1920x1080 while showing me an itty bitty 320x200 viewport.

Normally, I would thank my linux console for this, but as most of those machines are virtualized, I'm SOL on that front as well.

*grumble*

Any hints?

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

The good thing about Linux, is you can switch to runlevel three, or if you do have the GUI up and running, switch to a framebuffer console by pressing CTRL-ALT-F1, and you have other consoles by pressing CTRL-ALT-F2, F3 and so on.
CTRL-ALT-F7 usually gets you back to GUI.

For Windows, I dont know how to solve that problem.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic
text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a way to go yet.

I remember having this conversation with a friend back in the early '90s.
I still maintain that as soon as the technology is available, I'll be the
first one in line for the RJ-45 implant. :)

Rev
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

I've been trying to do this more over the past couple years, and get ever
so frustrated with console windows that won't go full screen (I don't even want to remember that I'm on a GUI), or if they do, they either leave the titlebar on the top or leave my flat panel scaled to 1920x1080 while showing me an itty bitty 320x200 viewport.

Normally, I would thank my linux console for this, but as most of those machines are virtualized, I'm SOL on that front as well.

The good thing about Linux, is you can switch to runlevel three, or if
you do have the GUI up and running, switch to a framebuffer console by pressing CTRL-ALT-F1, and you have other consoles by pressing
CTRL-ALT-F2, F3 and so on. CTRL-ALT-F7 usually gets you back to GUI.

For Windows, I dont know how to solve that problem.

Yeah, the Linux keystrokes I knew about. There's another one I discovered
on Ubuntu 11.10 (don't know if it exists in other distros or in prior revisions). If you're already in one of the consoles, you can hit
ALT-LeftArrow or ALT-RightArrow to go to the next/previous console.

I found it by accident while using lynx to resolve a display issue I was
having on one of my servers. Go figure.

The problem with this is that I virtualize most of my machines on one
central server, then use another machine to either RDP or VNC into them.
So I'm stuck with whatever OS or display I'm using at the remote location, which is often a Win7 box (which doesn't allow for full screen console mode)
or worse, DOSbox, which can't have the openGL modes displayed via RDP.

/first world problems

Rev

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Reverend Shaft on Wed Oct 19 2011 09:53 pm

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a way to go yet.

I sudder at the concept of anything I think being put into action. My handbrake is AFTER the thought, not before.

I don't even want to think what an IRC chat would look like if my thoughts went directly in unfiltered.

People who have used the eye tracking interface though have compared it to the computer eading their mind.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Deuce to Boraxman on Wed Oct 19 2011 11:31:39

I don't even want to think what an IRC chat would look like if my thoughts w directly in unfiltered.

Shit, that's really saying something. :|

echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com - 416-273-7230

---
■ Synchronet ■ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: cr1mson to Deuce on Wed Oct 19 2011 06:17 am

Deuce wrote to Reverend Shaft <=-

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to DEUCE on Tue Oct 18 2011 12:00 pm

All that notwithstanding, it's still a QWERTY keyboard -- the same method we use today. What's so interesting about that is that the key placement on these things was intentionally designed to slow us down, and knowing this, we continue to use them even though more efficient layouts have bee introduced.

I have yet to see convincing evidence that any "more efficient layout" is more efficient. Further, the key placement of QWERTY was designed to separate letters commonly used together to avoid jams. By avoiding jams, the speed increased.

I had no idea about the arrangement of the key placement until now. That was informative and have actually learned something today. It makes sense. I'm glad I learned how to type. Even in the dark. :-]

I'd hate to own a touch monitor or think of current monitors being totally replaced by them. I'm repulsed by the very idea.

Sincerely,
Jon Justvig
R14C (1:298/5)
telnet://vintagebbsing.com
http://www.vintagebbsing.com
e-mail: jjustvig@vintagebbsing.com
yahoo: jonathanjustvig@yahoo.com

Me too. I'll stick with a keyboard, untill I can carry a portable device which can record my thoughts as text. Even that would really only be useful in writing drafts of essays and articles.

Also, I'm not sure whether the QWERTY layout really slows people down that much. After all, some people can type pretty fast and I'm limited by the speed of my fingers. Perhaps if they didn't have to move as far I could get a bit more speed, but not that much more.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to BORAXMAN on Wed Oct 19 2011 12:49 pm

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a way to go yet.

I remember having this conversation with a friend back in the early '90s.
I still maintain that as soon as the technology is available, I'll be the first one in line for the RJ-45 implant. :)

Rev
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

Haha, I'm going for the USB2 implant. Greater compatibility, I can just insert a flash device into the back of my head.



---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Reverend Shaft to BORAXMAN on Wed Oct 19 2011 12:51 pm

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

I've been trying to do this more over the past couple years, and get ever so frustrated with console windows that won't go full screen (I don't eve want to remember that I'm on a GUI), or if they do, they either leave the titlebar on the top or leave my flat panel scaled to 1920x1080 while show me an itty bitty 320x200 viewport.

Normally, I would thank my linux console for this, but as most of those machines are virtualized, I'm SOL on that front as well.

The good thing about Linux, is you can switch to runlevel three, or if you do have the GUI up and running, switch to a framebuffer console by pressing CTRL-ALT-F1, and you have other consoles by pressing CTRL-ALT-F2, F3 and so on. CTRL-ALT-F7 usually gets you back to GUI.

For Windows, I dont know how to solve that problem.

Yeah, the Linux keystrokes I knew about. There's another one I discovered
on Ubuntu 11.10 (don't know if it exists in other distros or in prior revisions). If you're already in one of the consoles, you can hit ALT-LeftArrow or ALT-RightArrow to go to the next/previous console.

I found it by accident while using lynx to resolve a display issue I was having on one of my servers. Go figure.

The problem with this is that I virtualize most of my machines on one central server, then use another machine to either RDP or VNC into them.
So I'm stuck with whatever OS or display I'm using at the remote location, which is often a Win7 box (which doesn't allow for full screen console mode) or worse, DOSbox, which can't have the openGL modes displayed via RDP.

/first world problems

Rev

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

Hmm, maybe you can use the Linux Terminal Server Project? Just set up one of your Linux virtual machines as an LTSP server, then boot the other machine as a client. All you need to be a client, is to boot from the network, either using a NIC boot rom, or a Floppy/CDROM.

I've used LTSP, and its very easy. Just a matter of installing a few packages on the server, then creating a boot disk (or boot ROM) for the client. The client then downloads a basic kernel and (if you want) X client over the network once its booted from the ROM or disk and away you go. Just configure the client to use run level 3, and you'll get a text mode login prompt (virtual consoles included). What better, is you bypass completely the OS on the client.
Go to
http://ltsp.org for more information.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Deuce to Boraxman on Wed Oct 19 2011 11:31 am

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Reverend Shaft on Wed Oct 19 2011 09:53 pm

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a wa to go yet.

I sudder at the concept of anything I think being put into action. My handbrake is AFTER the thought, not before.

I don't even want to think what an IRC chat would look like if my thoughts w directly in unfiltered.

People who have used the eye tracking interface though have compared it to t computer eading their mind.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!

I thought IRC was all about people putting their thoughts forward unfiltered.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Deuce on Thu Oct 20 2011 08:45 pm

I thought IRC was all about people putting their thoughts forward unfiltered.

Hang out with me sometime when I'm drunk.

---
Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!


---
■ Synchronet ■ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

I direct "brain to computer" interface would be good. First basic text, then images, sound and movies. I have interfaces my mind with a computer and used thought to "type" onto the screen. Quite cumbersome, quite a way to go yet.

I remember having this conversation with a friend back in the early '90s.
I still maintain that as soon as the technology is available, I'll be the first one in line for the RJ-45 implant. :)

Haha, I'm going for the USB2 implant. Greater compatibility, I can
just insert a flash device into the back of my head.

Figures... I always get stuck with the over-priced, buggy beta version.

Rev.

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Quoting Boraxman to Reverend Shaft <=-

Hmm, maybe you can use the Linux Terminal Server Project? Just set up
one of your Linux virtual machines as an LTSP server, then boot the
other machine as a client. All you need to be a client, is to boot
from the network, either using a NIC boot rom, or a Floppy/CDROM.

I've used LTSP, and its very easy. Just a matter of installing a few packages on the server, then creating a boot disk (or boot ROM) for the client. The client then downloads a basic kernel and (if you want) X client over the network once its booted from the ROM or disk and away
you go. Just configure the client to use run level 3, and you'll get a text mode login prompt (virtual consoles included). What better, is
you bypass completely the OS on the client.
Go to
http://ltsp.org for more information.

Hmmm... I hadn't considered this. The old underpowered garage PC sounds
like a perfect place to test this. New weekend project! Aww, yeah.

Rev

___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Reverend Shaft on Thu Oct 20 2011 08:44 pm

Hmm, maybe you can use the Linux Terminal Server Project? Just set up one o your Linux virtual machines as an LTSP server, then boot the other machine a client. All you need to be a client, is to boot from the network, either us a NIC boot rom, or a Floppy/CDROM.

I've used LTSP, and its very easy. Just a matter of installing a few packag on the server, then creating a boot disk (or boot ROM) for the client. The client then downloads a basic kernel and (if you want) X client over the network once its booted from the ROM or disk and away you go. Just configur the client to use run level 3, and you'll get a text mode login prompt (virt consoles included). What better, is you bypass completely the OS on the client. Go to http://ltsp.org for more information.

I just finished experimenting with this, and wanted to thank you for the heads-up. I haven't tried messing around with console mode yet, but it's exactly what the doctor ordered for breathing life into an old box I had collecting dust out in the garage. Perfect for streaming music while I'm out there tinkering, or doing a quick web lookup while turning a wrench.

I was surprised that it actually worked well over the wireless bridge to the garage, but it did, and it's smoother than an RDP connection.

Rev


---
■ Synchronet ■ The Arena BBS | Bryan, OH | telnet:arena.ourhobby.com

Re: LTSP
By: Reverend Shaft to Boraxman on Fri Oct 21 2011 07:02 pm

Re: Anyone tried Windows 8?
By: Boraxman to Reverend Shaft on Thu Oct 20 2011 08:44 pm

Hmm, maybe you can use the Linux Terminal Server Project? Just set up on your Linux virtual machines as an LTSP server, then boot the other machin client. All you need to be a client, is to boot from the network, either a NIC boot rom, or a Floppy/CDROM.

I've used LTSP, and its very easy. Just a matter of installing a few pac on the server, then creating a boot disk (or boot ROM) for the client. T client then downloads a basic kernel and (if you want) X client over the network once its booted from the ROM or disk and away you go. Just confi the client to use run level 3, and you'll get a text mode login prompt (v consoles included). What better, is you bypass completely the OS on the client. Go to http://ltsp.org for more information.

I just finished experimenting with this, and wanted to thank you for the heads-up. I haven't tried messing around with console mode yet, but it's exactly what the doctor ordered for breathing life into an old box I had collecting dust out in the garage. Perfect for streaming music while I'm out there tinkering, or doing a quick web lookup while turning a wrench.

I was surprised that it actually worked well over the wireless bridge to the garage, but it did, and it's smoother than an RDP connection.

Rev

No problem, its a great project. I don't have much use for it at home, but I could imagine its usefulness in a small office or school computer lab setting. It could save a LOT of hardware from being an environmental problem in landfill somewhere.


---
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org