New Ground for Ken Hess: A venture into the utterly moronic
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2011 9:04 AM EDT |
OK, Ken has said some dumb things in the past and he certainly overestimates his own knowledge, but... This one is completely moronic, in line with people who use 'dinosaur' to represent failure even though dinosaurs dominated the planet for 150 million years, and their descendants continue to zip around overhead. Let's be very clear about this: Commercial computing began 60 years ago with the delivery of the Census bureau's first computer. The origin of desktop computing as we know it is a little fuzzier, but arguably began in 1976 with the release of Electric Pencil for CP/M machines in 1976, and certainly no later than 1978, by which time you could by TRS-80s, Apple IIs, and Wordstar. Even if you insist that ubiquity is an essential ingredient of modern desktop computing, that only moves the line forward to 1981, and the release of the IBM PC. That means desktop computing, which is still going strong -- all those notebooks are simply desktop computers you can carry around with you -- has been around for at least half the existence of commercial computing. In a world where yesterday's latest and greatest is today's junk, that ain't bad and it certainly ain't failure. The real story is the success and growth of mobile platforms. Just as cars don't mean that railroads failed, tablets and mobiles don't mean desktops failed. New stuff came along that did some things better. Railroads still carry freight, desktops will continue to do certain kinds of work, even if the software changes and the form factor shrinks. And...oh!!...Ken --- It has ALWAYS been about the apps, not the O/S. I cannot believe that somebody who fancies himself a technical commentator would believe otherwise. Microsoft certainly understood that when it introduced Windows 3.0 with a nice DOS box that would let people dip their toes in GUI land without giving up their Lotus 1-2-3 and Wordstar for DOS. Macs were a moribund flop until they were teamed up with Postscript and laser printers to become desktop publishing stations. And -- there was the Commodore Amiga, which all but invented multimedia and, couple with the Video Toaster, became a must-have for many video-production operations. Apps, apps, apps. Without them, Windows would be a footnote, and computing wouldn't matter. |
| hkwint Sep 15, 2011 9:16 AM EDT |
May I add: It depends on the user if he's using the bloat and complexity or not. If I start this Win7 box at my work, within 3 minutes I'm only using my applications and don't care about the desktop. And what else is the desktop than just 'another application'? Of which you can get rid, at least in Linux: You don't have to use a desktop to use graphical applications.. Moreover, apps might suffer from the same bloat as the desktop, so what's the difference? Of course, many OS'es were not designed with limited requirements for end users. Symbian for example was. So it's not the fault of users, such an argument simply sucks. Let's consider the ISS: It's complex by design, but if it was as insecure and bloated as Windows was, people would not blame the users for 'wanting too much'. They would blame the developers, and rightly so! Thing is, most desktops have never been designed from the ground up to only fulfull limited specific tasks - while at the same time being complex. They became bloated by adding and adding more stuff, and patching stuff. You don't do that to the ISS or a bridge: Putting on more and more weight which the core was never designed to carry. Everybody understands it collapses. And if there's 3000 holes in the ISS, you don't use 3000 patches, The fact that there's 3000 holes in it, proves the developers did a very bad job. You're not going to blame the user for such! It is lame and doesn't make any sense. So the real problem is end users like you, Mr Hess, expecting things from OS'es for which the core was not designed. You're not going to use the case of a 1950 typewriter to build a Playstation - and then complaining it's bloated and the fault of the users because they wanted it. Bad desing is bad design, period. |
| khess Sep 15, 2011 9:51 AM EDT |
LOL, what awesome diatribes and such a wonderful "you were there history story" to boot. Here is/was my point: desktop computing has failed because end users can't effectively use them. There are many reasons for this. If you don't believe it, give a computer with a standard OS on it to someone who doesn't work with them and say, "Be productive." You'll be fixing that computer a lot for them. In fact, you'll be their personal fix it person and trainer. You'll rue the day you did it. Fat OSs are not good for ordinary users. Too many things to break. Most people only need web browsers through which they can get email, buy stuff, check their ever-decreasing stock values, and look at porn. If they need to do something not covered by a web browser, there's an app for that. Light OSs are not for you and me--the tech crowd. Desktop computing has failed in the same way gas-guzzling autos are. They are failures because they fail to meet the current needs and economy. You guys should learn to read the words written and not listen to the voices in your heads. |
| r_a_trip Sep 15, 2011 10:44 AM EDT |
If you don't believe it, give a computer with a standard OS on it to someone who doesn't work with them and say, "Be productive." You'll be fixing that computer a lot for them. In fact, you'll be their personal fix it person and trainer. You'll rue the day you did it. I did just that with my family and they still haven't broken their Linux desktops. Must mean that the Linux desktop is a "lightOS"... "We" read the words, "we" saw the premise and "we" decided you are off your rocker. Our voices in our heads seem to be more sane than yours. Maybe the computing amoeba are better off with a locked down tablet, but don't discount the vast numbers of intermediate users, who do know to do more with their desktop than Facebook and still aren't techies. |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2011 10:47 AM EDT |
@ken - I'm glad you can laugh better than you can think. Your point demonstrates a complete lack of perspective and reasoning: Quoting: Here is/was my point: desktop computing has failed because end users can't effectively use them. End users have effectively used desktop computers for 30 years. Secretaries have used their word processors and even developed boatloads of customized templates. H#ll, even my 77 year-old mother has done her work on computers since here employer moved on from the old Wang word processors. I wonder how many salespeople get by without Act! or GoldMine, businesses without Quickbooks. Do they make maximum use out of everything their computers could theoretically do? Probably not? Do they make effective use of them? That one is easy for anybody but you: If you can justify the cost and you can get your work done, you are making effective use of the technology. You should really learn to understand the words you write before you ask us to read them. |
| lcafiero Sep 15, 2011 11:29 AM EDT |
It's interesting, Ken, that the best argument that you can come up with is belittling the folks here. Is that really the best you've got? |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 15, 2011 11:51 AM EDT |
ken: the main issue i have with your idea is that i found that android breaks just as easely. in fact to me it feels less stable than my desktop. the desktop is also easier to fix when it breaks. if my phone is broken i am stuck. and it just takes one badly written app to take the whole thing down. i haven't tried meego, but i doubt it is any better. greetings, eMBee. |
| khess Sep 15, 2011 1:09 PM EDT |
Really Larry? Me, belittling you bunch of know-nothings? Wow. That's rich. It's you losers who've drawn first blood. Don't blame me if you can't take it in return. You personally harassed me on a Yahoo group for no reason so get over it. You all need to find something better to do with your time. I doubt you have anything better to do but it might be worth the effort to find something. |
| lcafiero Sep 15, 2011 1:18 PM EDT |
What's rich is that you seem to know everyone so well here when actually you don't know anyone here at all. But then, opining on things you know nothing about seems to be a hallmark of your writing. Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. |
| khess Sep 15, 2011 1:48 PM EDT |
No, I don't know any of you. And, you don't know me. BTW, your attempt at undermining me was futile and laughable. You are the one who is a "laughing stock." |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2011 2:15 PM EDT |
@khess - At this point, I have to agree with you. You couldn't possibly belittle us. And, for what it's worth, nobody's made an effort to undermine you. We couldn't possibly do that. |
| khess Sep 15, 2011 2:32 PM EDT |
@dinotrac I'm afraid you're wrong. You don't know the true nature of some of your cohorts. All I have to say is that, if you get so upset by what someone has written about technology, you need to do something more productive with your time. You might not agree with what I say but to say stuff like 'utterly moronic' is insulting. And, you'll also have to agree that I never start any cr@p with any of you. You are the ones who start it by saying stupid and moronic things about what I write. That's one of the problems with the Internet is that every bastard with a piece of virtual chalk can spew his stupidity like graffiti on a wall. And, you throw your stones from a distance. It would be far more interesting if you were to say them at close range. |
| tuxchick Sep 15, 2011 2:37 PM EDT |
Quoting:This one is completely moronic, in line with people who use 'dinosaur' to represent failure even though dinosaurs dominated the planet for 150 million years, and their descendants continue to zip around overhead. Thank you, that is one of my (admittedly numerous) peeves. Humans, at best, have a million-year history, with only a tiny fraction of that as Lords of the Planet. |
| flufferbeer Sep 15, 2011 2:44 PM EDT |
@khess And, you'll also have to agree that I never start any cr@p with any of you. You are the ones who start it by saying stupid and moronic things about what I write. No, _YOU_ are the one who originally posted _YOUR OWN_ ZDNet cr@p. It seems to me that YOUR "stupid and moronic" posting ---- your virtually-chalked wall graffiti ---- started all this heated reaction in the 1st place! That's one of the problems with the Internet is that every bastard with a piece of virtual chalk can spew his stupidity like graffiti on a wall. _YOU_ need to look into a mirror 1st! 2c |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2011 2:48 PM EDT |
@khess - Throw stones at close range? You sound like a six year old: "I dare you to come over here and say that!" Seriously, even you should be able to do better than that. |
| tmx Sep 15, 2011 3:07 PM EDT |
@mbaehrixer
" the desktop is also easier to fix when it breaks. if my phone is broken i am stuck. and it just takes one badly wirtten app to take the whole thing down. i haven't tried meego, but i doubt it is any better. greetings, eMBee." Android security and stability is not as good as it can be, infact I had lots of crashing with it over the 6 different devices I used, its in a way how Google set it up. But I do not have the same stability issue with Sybiam and most definitely not with Maemo, which is actually a fork of Debian. I can't say Meego is the same. But its not because its a portable or a desktop OS, more to do with Google digressing from linux precautions (and from times allowing malware and uncontrolled spying, not just for itself, but thirdparty apps, the platforms gears around ads and data collection for revenue). On top of that you have a more locked down hardware of mobile devices, so things like corrupting a phone's partition table = trashed. |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 15, 2011 4:19 PM EDT |
Oh Spurious Author ...,Quoting: [...] [O]ne of the problems with the Internet is that every bastard with a piece of virtual chalk can spew his stupidity like graffiti on a wall. [...] So true and even call themselves an author or an opinion maker or a tech. guru or ... Quoting: [...] And, you throw your stones from a distance. [...] Again, so true ... ah you noticed this is not where you published. You are so perceptive. In my case, I learned the hard way that interesting text lines associated with the name Ken Hess were not worth my time. Therefore, if I do not read it why should I post even a mini-critique on that site? Do you need the clicks that badly? You are here. Why are you so sensitive when this mostly would not be seen were it not for your named presence? Does the old adage hold that 'there is no bad press'? Or is it simply you just like to see your name in print and indexed? If not, don't have your opinion pieces listed here. Most of us will ignore you completely. YBT |
| tracyanne Sep 15, 2011 4:23 PM EDT |
khess wrote:You might not agree with what I say but to say stuff like 'utterly moronic' is insulting. And yet you write stuff that fits that description, what in the world do you expect commenters to say? |
| khess Sep 15, 2011 5:10 PM EDT |
And, thanks for helping make my story the top story AGAIN on lxer.com. LOL-ing all the way to the bank. |
| tracyanne Sep 15, 2011 5:25 PM EDT |
There's a simple remedy ken, I could simply delete your stories like every other peice of spam. It's a sad fact of life that sh1t floats to the top. You really shouldn't complain about what lxer readers etc say about your writing, and you really shouldn't be so antagonistic, when they write scathing comments. Given that, by your words, you are getting lots of extra click thoughs, lxer is clearly doing it's job as a news agreggator. Clearly, from what you write, a better job than the others. The fact that most people are going to zdnet to read your articles first hand because they want to see just how asinine your writing is, should not be anything that troubles you, so long as you get the click throughs. |
| BernardSwiss Sep 15, 2011 8:24 PM EDT |
It is so sad when some one, who claims (or at least strongly implies) that he's so much more insightful, enlightened and intelligent than his collocutors, is so busy denigrating the other participants opinions and manner of expression, that he can't even recognize a direct insult, simply because it requires a smidgeon of thought to recognize it as one. But it's also good for a laugh. |
| ComputerBob Sep 15, 2011 10:17 PM EDT |
Quoting:And, thanks for helping make my story the top story AGAIN on lxer.com. LOL-ing all the way to the bank.I'd like to suggest that, from now on, we all just let Ken's articles die on the vine by not discussing them. |
| tracyanne Sep 15, 2011 11:03 PM EDT |
I can do that. |
| jdixon Sep 16, 2011 12:49 AM EDT |
> Me, belittling you bunch of know-nothings? No nothings? I guess I should return my BSEE then. > You personally harassed me on a Yahoo group for no reason so get over it. You? I've done nothing of the kind. You might want to be more specific in your accusations. > ...but to say stuff like 'utterly moronic' is insulting. That would depend entirely on whether it is utterly moronic, now wouldn't it? |
| lcafiero Sep 16, 2011 1:32 AM EDT |
jdixon - I think Ken referring to me when he says, "You personally harassed me on a Yahoo group for no reason so get over it." If it's an occurrence I'm thinking of, it was a disagreement over an issue -- which in and of itself was a reason -- and how disagreeing becomes harassing is a mystery. Also, it was on a Google group (Linux Dairy Council), not a Yahoo group. Those are minor details, I know. |
| jdixon Sep 16, 2011 1:55 AM EDT |
> I think Ken referring to me... Thanks for the info, Larry. The generic "you" didn't make any sense in context. But then, that's par for the course with Ken's writing. |
| tuxchick Sep 16, 2011 2:01 AM EDT |
Maybe he meant 'group of yahoos', which sure sounds like the LXer crew. Maybe we should get matching t-shirts. |
| hkwint Sep 16, 2011 7:30 AM EDT |
Hey Ken, time and time again I did my best to argue with you on the contents of your article and explaining to you why I think your arguments are lame and way off. Like I did in my post above. But seems you never give me a serious reply, always you ask for serious comments but then when I do, you're gone or you're whining about all other comments. Which is lame in my opinion, I found out the best remedy if you want to discuss something serious is to ignore all the people who aren't serious. But if you're only at LXer for click whoring and whining, I think I can spend my time in a much better way than seriously reading / analyzing / replying to your writings. Proofs indeed TA & Carla (Tuxchick) were right, and both discussing with you or reading your articles is a waste of time. BTW many LXer readers have installed desktops for other people, and most of those other people - even the ones fairly new to desktop computing - have no problem to use them. My sister insisted on Windows (XP), so we installed XP for her and she doesn't have any problems. It's not true I have to "support" her all the time, maybe once in a year and that's all. Same for my grandmother: Her laptop is not connected to the internet so she never has any problems. Which shows the desktop is not the problem; much more the design of the core of the OS - which in the case of Windows was not designed with an 'insecure internet' in mind. |
| dinotrac Sep 16, 2011 8:18 AM EDT |
@hans - You can see that behavior right here in this thread. Ken, I suppose, is lashing out to preserve his hurt feelings, but I didn't start this thread out simply by calling names. I provided a complete rationale for my characterization of his position. Moronic is harsh, but this is Ken Hess we're talking about and you've seen the way he writes and reacts. Polite discourse is not in his playbook. |
| ComputerBob Sep 16, 2011 8:31 AM EDT |
Quoting:A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.Don't discuss his articles. Problem solved. |
| hkwint Sep 16, 2011 9:05 AM EDT |
Thanks Dino & Bob, can't agree more. I'm fed up with the hit 'n run mr. Hess displays. I better spend my time writing a new article, so people can bash me, ahum. |
| skelband Sep 16, 2011 12:54 PM EDT |
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Well perhaps that is a bit extreme in this case :D but it is the responsibility of all right thinking men and women to challenge ideas expressed by people that you disagree with. Ignoring Mr Hess will not solve anything. Our silence will be treated as assent by default. |
| ComputerBob Sep 16, 2011 4:51 PM EDT |
Quoting:Well perhaps that is a bit extreme in this case :D but it is the responsibility of all right thinking men and women to challenge ideas expressed by people that you disagree with.If everyone ignores him, and sites like this one stop repeatedly falling for his trollbait and sending him clicks, then his employer will make him go away -- which would be the exact opposite of what has been happening here every time he has published a new article. If you must challenge him, do it on his site, where the only people who see it will be those who are already there. |
| caitlyn Sep 18, 2011 11:07 PM EDT |
This isn't the most moronic thing he's written. Y'all are forgetting his tirade about how all physical servers are ready for the dumpster and simply everything must be virtualized or else you're a stupid dinosaur. That was as one of my customers went away from the cloud and virtualization and saved a boatload of money in the process. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!