On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:16:14 -0400, Nick Sabalausky
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 08:46:00 -0400
"Steven Schveighoffer" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:05:35 -0400, Nick Sabalausky
<[email protected]> 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
