11–20 of 57 posts
Writers: stop being so damned bossy. The imperative title has had its run in the fussy etiquette pieces that so often pass as 'opinion' in newspapers. It wasn't any good there, and doesn't merit wider adoption.
Writers: stop being so damned bossy. The imperative title has had its run in the fussy etiquette pieces that so often pass as 'opinion' in newspapers. It wasn't any good there, and doesn't merit wider adoption.
I have different high expectations for something I pay for. They need to be marketed to me, proving to me that they solve my real life problems competently. They can have a reasonable learning curve.
How can you identify a benefiter of a product, without knowing the problem that the product is going to solve (help them where they want to be)?
>hacks are temporary fixes at best. They (the high expectation customers) need a single solution that meets all their demands.
This isn't true, a hack doesn't imply that it's temporary, its longevity depends on the underlying problem and problem space. And even if they would be temporary, quick hacks can be more flexible and make it easier to react to a changing environment, so if that's important..
Writers: stop being so damned bossy. The imperative title has had its run in the fussy etiquette pieces that so often pass as 'opinion' in newspapers. It wasn't any good there, and doesn't merit wider adoption.
Try not understanding such titles as commands and get outraged, but instead as advice or suggestions that you are free to take or leave.
Hallelujah! Maybe this will put a dent in the current dumbification trend of all apps/UIs etc. that's probably due to 'designing for the lowest common denominator'. Hint: any app/tool/etc. that's "designed for the average user", will only help its user be(come) average and below average! Now try imagining selling a product with the slogan "XYZ - Helping you stay mediocre, and even drop below the average! Use us every…
I have high expectations for free apps/services: They need to work immediately without a learning curve. See "hallway testing". They need to be competent but only modestly useful, if better alternatives are not available. I have different high expectations for something I pay for. They need to be marketed to me, proving to me that they solve my real life problems competently. They can have a reasonable learning curve…
Example: I own a ramnode VM, and it lets me do 90% of the studying and hacking i like because the people who make it happen are probably really interested in Linux like me. ramnode gives me space to really, really screw up a lot and learn how to recover or learn how to push forward. I get a good back-door to un-screw whatever it was i thought was a good idea (last week it was dd)
why not listen to the sysadmins and the SRE?