Why is Everybody so clueless on the importance of Desktop Search to the Masses?



  • Re:Who hit SpectateSwamp with the stupid stick?

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've answered QUITE a few questions. My turn. Has anybody got mpeg video and tried the software?

    Prompt #2 "gf" (for get files. It started out as part of a directory function and changed later, thus the poor name)
    that should lead you through the auto catalog of the mpg files.

    once you have the output file created from the step above. Start the program again. and at Prompt #1 give it the file from above mpg.txt etc
    at prompt #2 enter 'rand' to pick a random file
    at prompt #2 enter 'randa' to pick a random start point
    at prompt #2 enter 'tt8' to play 8 seconds of random video
    at prompt #2 enter 'ww' to start the screen saver random play and sit back.

    to restart at any time most of the above are the defaults. So just enter enter enter
    when you are finished with "rand" and "randa" disable them at prompt #2 using "norand" and "noranda"
    for text it becomes a little confusing.

    Who's doing video, anybody?

     

    Nobody. Your 'search' is useless and everyone hates it and you.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Keeping every format under the sun is a Fools game and bad for sharing. I get powerpoint and word documents emailed to me and don't have or want the software to view them. (Delete)
    My home computer has no time for indexing. When it's on, I'm using it. Few documents and reports ever see the light of day once archived. Dump them to text and put the originals away. Cleaning up the directories

    I seldom use the search MERGE myself. When doing telco conversions I merged and searched the .frm and .cls VB source code modules. As well we merged 16 or 18 maxed out excel files that had customer toll records. In "s" single line match mode. the search would put a full screen of customer records at a time. Very fast.

    There are 8 or 10 main text files that I use most of the time. I do use the merge when I have my notes files for these forums ie temp01.txt temp02.txt. When there are 70 or 80. I move them to a folder and merge them into my forums.txt file where previous ones have been stored. I am not interested in the file name in many cases like this.

     

    If I have powerpoint documents (and I do) I might keep them to base future presentations on, how does storing them in a text file help me with regards to layout and formatting? Word (or excel or rtf or html or jpeg or any other format) will all contain more than just the text i.e. layout, colouring, formatting, metadata such as keywords, author, date, page count etc. - losing these can make the content next to useless i.e. the format / colours / layout and metadata provide context!

    Indexing takes virtually no time and is done in the background as I am using the computer - I am not having to allocate time or effort or even thought to this task. It runs with little to zero cpu / memory usage and doesn't prevent me working in any way shape or form. If I am using the computer I would certainly rather an indexing service used a fraction of a percent of my cpu rather than myself having to waste time exporting my files to .txt and then manually appending them to a central file. If I delete a file I certainly don't want to find it in the central text document and remove the traces myself either.

    I also find it useful to keep my various source files as separate files so other tools (such as the compiler itself or IDE) can use them, why would I merge all thefiles into one just so I can search them and then have to find the actual source file myself anyway? Visual studio can search multiple files no problem as can WDS.

    I really can't understand why you are insistant that the best way for me to use my computer to do my work is for me to scrap everything that works and use your tool that suits your way of working.

     

     

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Send your Dad up here. The 1/2 day course and he'll leave you in his dust. Computer video, music, pics and lots more.

    Dad thinks it's stupid that he would have to travel from Europe to Canada to learn a software program, while learning to use the Google Desktop Search took him about 3 minutes to figure out without any training or documentation.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Very few newbies can just sit down and figure out software these days. Just too many options hiding the real important parts

    GDS actually lacks any "options": you have a text field and a "search" button.  Explains how my dad got going with it in 3 minutes.


  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    My videos on the net are secure. My family album pics are secure (many copies with family) The Desktop Search is secure. (you got one don't you?)
    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times.

    Ok, listen - closely. Maybe you will learn. In modern computing, "security" consists of several aspects, among them being

    • data integrity
    • data availability
    • access control/limitation
    • etc. 

    You, Swamp, keep talking about only about data availability all the time. This has nothing to do with real security in the sense of keeping data safe. All you're doing is spread your stuff to many people so that you can get a backup copy in case you lose your data. You say that everybody is too worried about security (your example was school marks and personnel data). You also say that real security is achieved by sharing. As a consequence you say that if schools shared all their marks, students' and personnel data that would mean real security! Are you kidding?

    Please stop talking about the fact that sharing means "Security" when it does not. Sharing violates "access control/limitation" and maybe even "data integrity". Your "search" has nothing to do with security, as it kills "data integrity" (Word -> flat file, eMail -> flat file) and "access control/limitation" (anybody can access your txt files).

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    @spenk said:

    I can't believe I finally got dragged into this thread but while I'm here I may as well offer my opinions; firstly your application isn't going to benefit from a skin, a skin can alter the appearance of a gui but not completely and utterly change an application from a "weird command line but in an inputbox kind of interface" into a real windows interface.

    A skin shouldn't be too hard. The app runs as a background job right now. Just feed it the 3 main prompt data bits. I could do it. But I like the program already. Can't you tell.

    Can you read? How can you answer "A skin won't help" with "Oh, skinning is easy!". Your application sucks by design. It won't suck less if it looks different! 

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've answered QUITE a few questions. My turn.

    No, you have not answered any questions and it is not your turn at all. You haven't answered to most important questions, either because you don't know the answers or you know that answering these important questions would show that you have no point to make. 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Has anybody got mpeg video and tried the software?

    Prompt #2 "gf" (for get files. It started out as part of a directory function and changed later, thus the poor name)
    that should lead you through the auto catalog of the mpg files.

    once you have the output file created from the step above. Start the program again. and at Prompt #1 give it the file from above mpg.txt etc
    at prompt #2 enter 'rand' to pick a random file
    at prompt #2 enter 'randa' to pick a random start point
    at prompt #2 enter 'tt8' to play 8 seconds of random video
    at prompt #2 enter 'ww' to start the screen saver random play and sit back.

     

    You do realise that in Windows Media Player, this amounts to clicking on the "random" button and clicking "play", right?



  • And it begins snowballing.  Most are posting quicker than I can read them.  Good thing I don't have to work today. 



  • This still continues?

    This guy is still talking back? Im totally blown away with the presistent stupidity. Ipod and Vista are Defective by Design. This is worse.

    An analogy.

    Swampy's "desktop search" is like trying to invent and manufacture a wheel using a single not very handy rock and dry branches in 1990s. It may be cleverly made(Clearly not the case here!) and even roll a few meters but it's utterly void of any practical uses other than educating the maker and even that limited use is made void when the maker fails to learn from the mistake and refuses to go get something with real wheels for every day use.

    It's either a very bad case of "NIH" develped into "Not Invented By Me" or a troll.



  • @death said:

    Ipod and Vista are Defective by Design.
     

    How in the world does that relate to anything? Do you just sprinkle these kinds of general opinions into your posts?

    Your post actually reeks of SpectateSwamp. Random capitalization, and that trademark rant that is only slightly related to the topic.

    @death said:

    Im totally blown away with the presistent stupidity

    Me too.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @death said:
    Ipod and Vista are Defective by Design.
     

    How in the world does that relate to anything? Do you just sprinkle these kinds of general opinions into your posts?

    Not my words mind you, just a quote. Your personallity is so sharp that you must cut yourself often. English is not my native language and I havent gotten my speller installed here yet. Whats your excuse for being an all out prick?

     



  • Hey, you pick on the guy for being stupid, and in the same sentence you provide an example. What can I say?

    The words are yours, considering you did not actually quote anyone in the post. With someone else, I might be able to brush it off as "maybe he forgot to quote someone". But these are the kinds of things of opinions you have posted before. 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    This one search program eliminates the need for learning many computer apps. Learn this forget about the rest. Is a nitche that needed filling.
     

    export SARCASM=1 

     OK, I think I will forget about the rest while I learn to use your grep pseudo-implementation. 

     export SARCASM=0



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Your plain text method loses all attachments, appointments, contacts and tasks. Sorry, but you lose. Using plain text to store email archives is ridiculous and retarded. No surprise you use that method I suppose.

    Uhh... only if you're sending raw binary streams and not using base64 like most people. I'll bet you couldn't find one email that isn't entirely preservable as plain text in your archive.



  •  @aythun said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:
    Your plain text method loses all attachments, appointments, contacts and tasks. Sorry, but you lose. Using plain text to store email archives is ridiculous and retarded. No surprise you use that method I suppose.
    Uhh... only if you're sending raw binary streams and not using base64 like most people. I'll bet you couldn't find one email that isn't entirely preservable as plain text in your archive.

    Do you think SpectateSwamp is doing it that way?  I think he's copy-pasting emails into a text document.



  •  @aythun said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:
    Your plain text method loses all attachments, appointments, contacts and tasks. Sorry, but you lose. Using plain text to store email archives is ridiculous and retarded. No surprise you use that method I suppose.
    Uhh... only if you're sending raw binary streams and not using base64 like most people. I'll bet you couldn't find one email that isn't entirely preservable as plain text in your archive.

    Try reading the whole thread. SpectateSwamp is advocating just saving the emails. Not the attachments.  He clearly says throughout this thread that storing it as text will allow you to only use his 'search'. He says this will allow you to throw away all your other applications. This obviously ridiculous.

    The issue is not whether you COULD store your email in text files. It is whether what he is saying would make any sense to do.

    I thought the rest of us were feeding the troll, but you really want him to keep going don't you?

     



  • @death said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @death said:
    Ipod and Vista are Defective by Design.
     

    ...

    Not my words mind you, just a quote.

     

    O RLY? 

    :D

    No hard feelings.  I just thought that was too funny. 





  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times. The receiving department had goods delivered and there was no PO# to match it to. Their screens only showed opened po's this one had yet to be issued. I created a routine to allow them to see just these type po's. I never told purchasing and neither did receiving.
     

    That doesn't make any sense. If a PO has not been issued, than there is no way it could be received. Try at least sticking to some level of truth in these ridiculous stories, ok?

     

     

    While I'm sure that anything SS ever did in this field was just as much of a WTF as SSDS is, the general situation actually could come about in a couple of ways:

     

    1. Vendor delivered something without getting a PO number.  Vendor's fault.
    2. Someone impersonated the purchasing department and gave the vendor a fake PO number, vendor thought it was legit and delivered.  Impersonator's fault.  Vendor may or may not be at fault to some extent, depending.


  • @Lingerance said:

    @djork said:

     

    O RLY? 

    :D

    No hard feelings.  I just thought that was too funny. 

    (big-ass link)

     

    Of course, and I agree with the sentiment.  I just thought that saying something is a "quote" and having it turn out to, in fact, be the first utterance of the phrase recorded by Google was hilarious.



  • @emurphy said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times. The receiving department had goods delivered and there was no PO# to match it to. Their screens only showed opened po's this one had yet to be issued. I created a routine to allow them to see just these type po's. I never told purchasing and neither did receiving.
     

    That doesn't make any sense. If a PO has not been issued, than there is no way it could be received. Try at least sticking to some level of truth in these ridiculous stories, ok?

     

     

    While I'm sure that anything SS ever did in this field was just as much of a WTF as SSDS is, the general situation actually could come about in a couple of ways:

     

    1. Vendor delivered something without getting a PO number.  Vendor's fault.
    2. Someone impersonated the purchasing department and gave the vendor a fake PO number, vendor thought it was legit and delivered.  Impersonator's fault.  Vendor may or may not be at fault to some extent, depending.

     

    And how would that explain him using a 'search' to expose the POs?

    I realize it is possible to get a delivery without a PO. But what he says is not truth and not possible.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Send your Dad up here. The 1/2 day course and he'll leave you in his dust. Computer video, music, pics and lots more.

    Very few newbies can just sit down and figure out software these days. Just too many options hiding the real important parts.

    So let me get this straight, it takes a 1/2 day to learn the software you wrote "for the masses"?

    I have never gone to a class to learn how to use a piece of software.  Not even back in 1987 when I wrote my first BASIC program.  But now, this one-size-fits-all, solves-all-problems software takes 4 hours to learn. 

    Catch the contradiction yet?  Software that is easy for the masses isn't easy if it takes you 4 hours to teach them to use it.



  • @taylonr said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Send your Dad up here. The 1/2 day course and he'll leave you in his dust. Computer video, music, pics and lots more.

    Very few newbies can just sit down and figure out software these days. Just too many options hiding the real important parts.

    So let me get this straight, it takes a 1/2 day to learn the software you wrote "for the masses"?

    I have never gone to a class to learn how to use a piece of software.  Not even back in 1987 when I wrote my first BASIC program.  But now, this one-size-fits-all, solves-all-problems software takes 4 hours to learn. 

    Catch the contradiction yet?  Software that is easy for the masses isn't easy if it takes you 4 hours to teach them to use it.

     

    Not only that, but it requires a trip to Canada. And it requires you to meet this moron in person. 



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

     @aythun said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:
    Your plain text method loses all attachments, appointments, contacts and tasks. Sorry, but you lose. Using plain text to store email archives is ridiculous and retarded. No surprise you use that method I suppose.

    Uhh... only if you're sending raw binary streams and not using base64 like most people. I'll bet you couldn't find one email that isn't entirely preservable as plain text in your archive.

    Try reading the whole thread. SpectateSwamp is advocating just saving the emails. Not the attachments.  He clearly says throughout this thread that storing it as text will allow you to only use his 'search'. He says this will allow you to throw away all your other applications. This obviously ridiculous.

    The issue is not whether you COULD store your email in text files. It is whether what he is saying would make any sense to do.

    I thought the rest of us were feeding the troll, but you really want him to keep going don't you?

     

    I have read the whole thread and will continue to do so, but what you said is false: Storing emails as plain text does not lose any information and it isn't ridiculous. I'm not trying to defend anyone, but I'm just saying your emails probably are already in plain text.

    Besides, this is free entertainment. Just because I don't tag my posts "correctly" doesn't mean anything.



  •  @aythun said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

     @aythun said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:
    Your plain text method loses all attachments, appointments, contacts and tasks. Sorry, but you lose. Using plain text to store email archives is ridiculous and retarded. No surprise you use that method I suppose.
    Uhh... only if you're sending raw binary streams and not using base64 like most people. I'll bet you couldn't find one email that isn't entirely preservable as plain text in your archive.

    Try reading the whole thread. SpectateSwamp is advocating just saving the emails. Not the attachments.  He clearly says throughout this thread that storing it as text will allow you to only use his 'search'. He says this will allow you to throw away all your other applications. This obviously ridiculous.

    The issue is not whether you COULD store your email in text files. It is whether what he is saying would make any sense to do.

    I thought the rest of us were feeding the troll, but you really want him to keep going don't you?

     

    I have read the whole thread and will continue to do so, but what you said is false: Storing emails as plain text does not lose any information and it isn't ridiculous. I'm not trying to defend anyone, but I'm just saying your emails probably are already in plain text.

    Besides, this is free entertainment. Just because I don't tag my posts "correctly" doesn't mean anything.

    Taking something out of context and calling it false sure is easy, isnt it?

    In the context of the thread, and what I quoted, what I said is true.  Pointing out how base64 works doesn't change that. Thanks for explaining that to me and everyone though. I am sure we are all enlightened now.

    And AFAIK no one said anything about how you tag your posts.

     



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @emurphy said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times. The receiving department had goods delivered and there was no PO# to match it to. Their screens only showed opened po's this one had yet to be issued. I created a routine to allow them to see just these type po's. I never told purchasing and neither did receiving.
     

    That doesn't make any sense. If a PO has not been issued, than there is no way it could be received. Try at least sticking to some level of truth in these ridiculous stories, ok?

     

     

    While I'm sure that anything SS ever did in this field was just as much of a WTF as SSDS is, the general situation actually could come about in a couple of ways:

     

    1. Vendor delivered something without getting a PO number.  Vendor's fault.
    2. Someone impersonated the purchasing department and gave the vendor a fake PO number, vendor thought it was legit and delivered.  Impersonator's fault.  Vendor may or may not be at fault to some extent, depending.

     

    And how would that explain him using a 'search' to expose the POs?

    I realize it is possible to get a delivery without a PO. But what he says is not truth and not possible.

     

     

    This wasn't one of his retarded misuses of "search".  (It was one of his retarded misuses of "security".)

     

    Some companies might be interested in gaps in the PO-numbers-issued sequence (one of my clients had me write a report that among other things identifies gaps in their invoice-numbers-issued), but at this point we're getting into serious guesswork.

     



  • @emurphy said:

    This wasn't one of his retarded misuses of "search".  (It was one of his retarded misuses of "security".)

     

    Some companies might be interested in gaps in the PO-numbers-issued sequence (one of my clients had me write a report that among other things identifies gaps in their invoice-numbers-issued), but at this point we're getting into serious guesswork.

     

    He says he created a routine to allow the receiving dept to see unissued POs. If a PO has not been issued, it has not gone to the vendor (and therefore cannot be delivered and charged to that PO). Otherwise it would be an open PO.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    All my emails are my data in plain text files. Your emails are OutLooks, ThunderBirds and Mail Client's property more than they are yours.
     

    You do realize that Thunderbird stores all your emails in PLAIN TEXT files? Go ahead, give it a whirl. Install T-Bird, send yourself a message, then go open the Inbox file in Notepad, or even SSDS.

    It's perfectly portable to pretty much any system on the planet because T-Bird uses the unix mbox format (which is PLAIN TEXT) for its mail store. 


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @MarcB said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    All my emails are my data in plain text files. Your emails are OutLooks, ThunderBirds and Mail Client's property more than they are yours.
     

    You do realize that Thunderbird stores all your emails in PLAIN TEXT files?

    Ah, but TB's disadvantage over SSDS, is that TB's method doesn't involve manually concatenating those text files into one huge useless text file.</orange>


  •  @PJH said:

    @MarcB said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    All my emails are my data in plain text files. Your emails are OutLooks, ThunderBirds and Mail Client's property more than they are yours.
     

    You do realize that Thunderbird stores all your emails in PLAIN TEXT files?

    Ah, but TB's disadvantage over SSDS, is that TB's method doesn't involve manually concatenating those text files into one huge useless text file.</orange>

    Nor does it meet the SSDS requirement of taking all of your attachments and converting them to text and appending them to that huge useless text file.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @PJH said:
    @MarcB said:
    @SpectateSwamp said:
    All my emails are my data in plain text files. Your emails are OutLooks, ThunderBirds and Mail Client's property more than they are yours.

    You do realize that Thunderbird stores all your emails in PLAIN TEXT files?

    Ah, but TB's disadvantage over SSDS, is that TB's method doesn't involve manually concatenating those text files into one huge useless text file.</orange>

    Nor does it meet the SSDS requirement of taking all of your attachments and converting them to text and appending them to that huge useless text file.

    .. or playing the resultant mess as a random movie.


  • @PJH said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Nor does it meet the SSDS requirement of taking all of your attachments and converting them to text and appending them to that huge useless text file.

    .. or playing the resultant mess as a random movie.

    ...touche.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    He says he created a routine to allow the receiving dept to see unissued POs. If a PO has not been issued, it has not gone to the vendor (and therefore cannot be delivered and charged to that PO). Otherwise it would be an open PO.

     

     

    I was going to say something about PO numbers issued off the books, but you're right, any sane accounting system wouldn't let them put the receipt on the books in that situation.  Meh, I'ma concede this one.

     

     


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @emurphy said:

    This wasn't one of his retarded misuses of "search".  (It was one of his retarded misuses of "security".)

    Some companies might be interested in gaps in the PO-numbers-issued sequence (one of my clients had me write a report that among other things identifies gaps in their invoice-numbers-issued), but at this point we're getting into serious guesswork.

     

    He says he created a routine to allow the receiving dept to see unissued POs. If a PO has not been issued, it has not gone to the vendor (and therefore cannot be delivered and charged to that PO). Otherwise it would be an open PO.

     

    Actually, I've seen systems where the PO may have been created, but not everyone can see them due to the PO lifecycle.  I think the term was 'released' such that it went from the purchaser's sole domain into the wide company.  So the number itself existed in the system, and if the purchasing agent made the buy over the phone and forgot to subsequently release the PO, a situation as above could happen.  There are many cases where a verbal PO will suffice (especially if you're dealing with a well known customer).

    Not that any of this justifies anything that SS did.



  •  @boomzilla said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @emurphy said:

    This wasn't one of his retarded misuses of "search".  (It was one of his retarded misuses of "security".)

    Some companies might be interested in gaps in the PO-numbers-issued sequence (one of my clients had me write a report that among other things identifies gaps in their invoice-numbers-issued), but at this point we're getting into serious guesswork.

     

    He says he created a routine to allow the receiving dept to see unissued POs. If a PO has not been issued, it has not gone to the vendor (and therefore cannot be delivered and charged to that PO). Otherwise it would be an open PO.

     

    Actually, I've seen systems where the PO may have been created, but not everyone can see them due to the PO lifecycle.  I think the term was 'released' such that it went from the purchaser's sole domain into the wide company.  So the number itself existed in the system, and if the purchasing agent made the buy over the phone and forgot to subsequently release the PO, a situation as above could happen.  There are many cases where a verbal PO will suffice (especially if you're dealing with a well known customer).

    Not that any of this justifies anything that SS did.

    When the buyer then verbally issued the PO, the PO would be considered 'issued' not 'unissued'.
    Trying to interact with this PO from the receiving dept would be incredibly stupid. The correct workflow in this situation would be to notify purchasing dept of the discrepency. Not have some moron write a different query for the DB that ignored 'Open' status in the PO.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    When the buyer then verbally issued the PO, the PO would be considered 'issued' not 'unissued'.
    Trying to interact with this PO from the receiving dept would be incredibly stupid. The correct workflow in this situation would be to notify purchasing dept of the discrepency. Not have some moron write a different query for the DB that ignored 'Open' status in the PO.

     

    It wouldn't be considered issued by computer.  Having dealt with this sort of situation before, I suspect that what really happened was the the receiving department could see in the system who they buyer was and call them and bitch them out about not doing their job.  It's undoubtedly better for everyone involved than to be constantly refusing shipments and having them sent back to the vendor.

    To be fair, and this may be the only useful thing SS has ever done, he only said that they were able to see them, not that they were allowed to do anything with them in the system:

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times. The receiving department had goods delivered and there was no PO# to match it to. Their screens only showed opened po's this one had yet to be issued. I created a routine to allow them to see just these type po's. I never told purchasing and neither did receiving.

     

    In fact, there was probably a giant text file on their machines where these PO numbers were written, if subsequent behavior is anything to go by.  I imagine the key sequence was something like: "hq" + "/" + "x32"

    Clearly the receiving department was way ahead of the purchasing department when they used their computers.



  • @boomzilla said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    When the buyer then verbally issued the PO, the PO would be considered 'issued' not 'unissued'.
    Trying to interact with this PO from the receiving dept would be incredibly stupid. The correct workflow in this situation would be to notify purchasing dept of the discrepency. Not have some moron write a different query for the DB that ignored 'Open' status in the PO.

     

    It wouldn't be considered issued by computer.  Having dealt with this sort of situation before, I suspect that what really happened was the the receiving department could see in the system who they buyer was and call them and bitch them out about not doing their job.  It's undoubtedly better for everyone involved than to be constantly refusing shipments and having them sent back to the vendor.

    To be fair, and this may be the only useful thing SS has ever done, he only said that they were able to see them, not that they were allowed to do anything with them in the system:

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    I've seen the other side to data security. LOTS of times. The receiving department had goods delivered and there was no PO# to match it to. Their screens only showed opened po's this one had yet to be issued. I created a routine to allow them to see just these type po's. I never told purchasing and neither did receiving.

     

    In fact, there was probably a giant text file on their machines where these PO numbers were written, if subsequent behavior is anything to go by.  I imagine the key sequence was something like: "hq" + "/" + "x32"

    Clearly the receiving department was way ahead of the purchasing department when they used their computers.

     

    Still none of that makes any sense. If the PO was not issued, 'seeing it' would provide nothing.

    I elect you to be newest SSDS developer. Sorry. Thats what happens.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Still none of that makes any sense. If the PO was not issued, 'seeing it' would provide nothing.

    I elect you to be newest SSDS developer. Sorry. Thats what happens.

     

    Errr, just because you've clearly never dealt with this sort of situation, I think you're going to end up self-electing.  Either that, or IHBT, which is probably the same thing.

    If the guys in receiving can see the PO number, they'll take the box and put it in the corner until it can be properly dealt with (i.e., the purchaser issues the PO, and they can process it).  If they can't see the PO number, they refuse the shipment, the vendor becomes upset because you've returned the order, the buyer has to deal with the consequences, and so do the receiving clerks.  Costs go up, vendor relationships go down, everyone loses. 

    Clearly, SS would never be articulate enough to make this point understood, but having seen similar situations, I can definitely see the benefit.



  •  @boomzilla said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Still none of that makes any sense. If the PO was not issued, 'seeing it' would provide nothing.

    I elect you to be newest SSDS developer. Sorry. Thats what happens.

     

    Errr, just because you've clearly never dealt with this sort of situation, I think you're going to end up self-electing.  Either that, or IHBT, which is probably the same thing.

    If the guys in receiving can see the PO number, they'll take the box and put it in the corner until it can be properly dealt with (i.e., the purchaser issues the PO, and they can process it).  If they can't see the PO number, they refuse the shipment, the vendor becomes upset because you've returned the order, the buyer has to deal with the consequences, and so do the receiving clerks.  Costs go up, vendor relationships go down, everyone loses. 

    Clearly, SS would never be articulate enough to make this point understood, but having seen similar situations, I can definitely see the benefit.

    To the contrary, I have seen this problem too, but again, a receiving department should not have access to POs that are not open. I know of no system that would willfully allow this. Most places that have this problem do not have this happen at a rate that would have a major impact. If this is a common occurence, other issues should be examined. This is a stupid fix to a simple problem.

    Also, it would be prudent for the receiving dept to contact the purchasing dept with the question instead of simply refusing the shipment. Any shipment that came in should be marked with the PO number anyway. A simple call or email for why PO xxxx has arrived, but is not an open PO would resolve this.

    I maintain, no good would come from something like giving receiving more access.



  • Video demonstration of random random video. Comming SOON

    @boomzilla said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @emurphy said:

    This wasn't one of his retarded misuses of "search".  (It was one of his retarded misuses of "security".)

    Some companies might be interested in gaps in the PO-numbers-issued sequence (one of my clients had me write a report that among other things identifies gaps in their invoice-numbers-issued), but at this point we're getting into serious guesswork.

     

    He says he created a routine to allow the receiving dept to see unissued POs. If a PO has not been issued, it has not gone to the vendor (and therefore cannot be delivered and charged to that PO). Otherwise it would be an open PO.

     

    Actually, I've seen systems where the PO may have been created, but not everyone can see them due to the PO lifecycle.  I think the term was 'released' such that it went from the purchaser's sole domain into the wide company.  So the number itself existed in the system, and if the purchasing agent made the buy over the phone and forgot to subsequently release the PO, a situation as above could happen.  There are many cases where a verbal PO will suffice (especially if you're dealing with a well known customer).

    Not that any of this justifies anything that SS did.

    That's exactly what happened. Maybe 2 or 3 times a month at the Pulp and Papermill. Security wasn't the receiving departments friend. I was.

    There is quite a bit to read here.  So I'll think them over this evening. I don't have time to answer them all. I'll demo my random video. I'm sure you'll love it more than me. LATER



  • @djork said:

    @Lingerance said:

    @djork said:

     

    O RLY? 

    :D

    No hard feelings.  I just thought that was too funny. 

    (big-ass link)

     

    Of course, and I agree with the sentiment.  I just thought that saying something is a "quote" and having it turn out to, in fact, be the first utterance of the phrase recorded by Google was hilarious.

     

    Another link.

    "Defective by Design" is a quote, its used both for Vista and Ipod.If I missed something, sorry for my blatant abuse of the english language. Still, its a restatement of someone elses opinion that I do happen to share.

    Its totally irelelvant to the point I was trying to make tho, witch was that this Desktop Search is solving a long solved solved problem in a WTF way.

    PS: Is it just me or does  MPS act more and more like somebody with PMS?



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    I'll demo my random video. I'm sure you'll love it more than me. LATER

    LMAO! Ever thought about starting a career as a comedian?



  • Attn: SpectateSwamp -- LISTEN UP!

     Your product from what you've shown us only serves you and a small select few, it is not for those who want to get anything done. In order for anyone to understand your application, they have to come to you for special training, this is not what users want. users want to download a search application, install it, and INSTANTLY type in a search box their keyword(s). You are ignoring the fact that [b]nobody wants to compile a search index for your program just so that they can use your program.[/b] (you claim your application does NOT use a search index, however that big text file is indeed a search index). 

     You claim again and again a speed of 20,000,000 cpm or something like that - You haven't told us the specifications of the said machine, You have failed to give us benchmarks of different sized text files (i.e. how long the search takes for the whole file) You have stated random arbitrary numbers, i.e. "it'd take 15 seconds to search through linux source code" when a poster DISPLAYED how long it takes to search line by line the said source (a numeric something like 10 minutes)

     You have showed unwillingness to adapt the program for the communities, you have failed to take people's comments into consideration stating your program is good as it is, even when the groups you're punting to are screaming that your program needs improvements. [b]Nobody wants to use a program by a developer/programmer who is smug and won't listen[/b] Developers must be willing to make the program to the quality that the clientel wants. Not what the developer wants. Your clientel are the communities you're developing it for in this case.

    In my honest opinion, you have soleley made your program open source as so that whenever someone complains, you simply say "go reprogram it yourself, it's not fun to me" [b]If you have no intent to maintain your program actively [u]yourself[/u], stop pushing it to people.[/b] We're not going to maintain it for you despite the fact most of this community are programmers and/or developers, we're busy with other things. It's your project. your resposibility, if there's something wrong with it, it's your problem to fix. if you're unable to fix it, hire someone who can (obviously for a pricetag), if you can't find anyone to do it, [b]Let the project die[/b]

    As countless people have said, and I wish to point it out again [b]Sharing is not security[/b] Spreading your data around multiple points is called "redundancy", Security is where you protect your data from unauthorized access, preventing attackers from reaching your confidential data, encrypting your data with a high security algorythim, etc. But in any case, [b]Sharing is not security[/b] it is in fact quite the oposite in alot of cases. Here's a scenario: Someone gets your email password because you saved it in a text file, they are able to send email as you, they damage your reputation by impersonating

    Sure, your project may have been a "fun thing" for you to do, but seriously, you're pushing it worse than most salesmen. And when a salesman pushes a product too much, people are less likely to reconsider turning it down and to come back.

     One last point:
    [b]If you can't stand to program for today's world, don't program at all[/b] - we don't want 1970's code, we want code for 2008+ 

     

    To everyone else: Apologies if my post is irratating. 

     Radioactive tag because like radiation, you can't stay around this sort of stuff too long.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @DigitalXeron said:

    Your product from what you've shown us only serves you
    I think you would have been better off stopping there.



  • Swamp, you said before you had registered with SourceForge but so far I've been unable to find any reference to you or your desktop search there. Not that I was interested in joining the project, I'd just like to monitor the project for further troll-feeding.



  • @PJH said:

    @DigitalXeron said:

    Your product from what you've shown us only serves you
    I think you would have been better off stopping there.

     

     Because he (SS) is going to ignore everything you said anyway.



  • New Clue in Video now posted.


    The most recent video from today is now uploaded.

    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=2719618133911231085

     

    01-22-2008 07:17 am

    elgate
         Good Attitude.

         I've videoed lots for 5 years with my Mini DVD Camcorder.
         Hardly use my camera once, I got my camcorder. But I should.

         Coding. By who's standards. My first program was on punch cards
         in 1970. Been programming since then on all types of projects.
         There is one more powerful program, I'd like to show any programmer.

    01-22-2008 7:26 AM
    taylonr
         It's not that bad. Your skills are still useful in some circles.
         But the rest of the masses don't need all the computer knowledge burden.
         Video is a very powerful tool. And this simple player makes it more fun to watch.
         I'll video demo it asap. You'll only need to know this ONE more app. I sometimes
         fail to remember that even techies don't care for change.

    01-22-2008 7:29 AM
    tdittmar
         John Doe won't have to remember anything I'm going to do short short videos of everything
         No visit to Spectate Swamp Shack required.

         Gee-Hawing maybe a bit. I picked on digital picture forum biggies. Saying video puts thing
         in perspective. Take pictures if you like but Video is DYNAMITE. Politicians and insiders
         don't like it when I video open political Forums.

         Apples and oranges. Not likely when comparing camera and camcorder. More like apples and
         golden apples. With a camcorder you got slow motion, sound, action, movement, changing
         perspectives, random and freeze frame. 
        
         I'm not looking at yesterday's questions. This forum was way way more clueless than I could
         have imagined. But that's OK. I'm in the right spot.


    01-22-2008 7:35 AM
    tdittmar
         I think your are getting it. Camcorder Powerful. Computers Simple. Me go video. Not Worry.

         Don't be worry.

    01-22-2008 7:37 AM
    boomzilla
         Backup philosophy. Is keep it as simple as possible. This Search helps me keep on top of lots of data.

         Real men don't use backups. That gets you on my favorites list. That Torvalds must be OK.
     
    01-22-2008 7:41 AM
    spenk
         confusing backups with cript.. Cript came about because I needed search and replace option to change
         my 5000+ family album cataloged pictures. And to correct the poor spelling and typo's in my notes.
         Doing encryption was just a simple add on to that. I really don't use it at all.

    01-22-2008 8:27 AM
    Renan_S2
         cryptic command line. No doubt. But not that much to pick up 6 or 8 main commands. With clear
         understanding of what is going on in the background. Because I'll check the code. Can't any of you
         even get a glimmer of what's going on in the program. It's called SEARCH. Like get a Clue.

         their job consists of playing random video files. Your job should consist of some video. It's going
         to take over. This app will help make it enjoyable. You'll see.

    01-22-2008 8:58 AM
    djork
         learn arbitrary and meaningless commands. Just a very few. To gain control over your data that Google
         will never have. Random. Slow motion. Complete data ownership. No snitching or data mining with SSDS
         Google like Yahoo and MicroSoft have limits on the size of text file they will index. Do you know you
         are getting all your data with these Internet Search engines pretending to be Desktop Search. That's
         like comparing apples and bad apples.
        
         They get results with context. They get index jibberish. Not the real data.

         Not good at video or providing extracts like this one either.

    01-22-2008 9:31 AM
    spenk


    The upload of the video played me out. Two complete unplugs of the modem. A great number 20 to 30 points where
    using the email send receive was the only thing that kept the connection alive. Thank whoever that google transfer
    doesn't give up on their end.

    I'll continue from here later.
    Enjoy getting clued in.

    Once I get my new modem. You'll get clued in once a day.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

     

     tdittmar
         John Doe won't have to remember anything I'm going to do short short videos of everything
         No visit to Spectate Swamp Shack required.

    Oh! I see! That makes things so much better! Instead of just typing the word I'm looking for into a text box, like I'd do with any proper search tool, with your "search" I'll first have to watch some crappy video explaining how to do things (don't matter I can't see a bloody thing because it' just another stupid videoed-in display), then type a whole bunch of commands so I can MAYBE find a search result? I mean, think about it. Are you honestly tring to tell me that your way of searching is actually EASIER and QUICKER than typing the word I'm looking for and pressing ENTER? And I want a "Yes" or a "No". And if your answer should be "Yes", I want one (1) good reason why you think so.

    @SpectateSwamp said:


         Apples and oranges. Not likely when comparing camera and camcorder. More like apples and
         golden apples. With a camcorder you got slow motion, sound, action, movement, changing
         perspectives, random and freeze frame. 
        

    Sorry if my question is a bit "direct": ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING? Camera is for taking FOTOS - still frame fotos, maybe with great lighting, perfectly arranged if you want. Camcorders are for VIDEO. You know there is a difference, right? You cannot say that camcorders are like enhanced cameras taken to the next step! They work differently, have different purposes, different technical aspects and so on.

    Also from the audience's perspective there is a huge difference between foto and video. So it is NOT like comparing apples and golden apples, it's like apples and oranges. Your analogy would fit if you compared old tape camcorders to new digital camcorders. But comparing Cameras and Camcorders is like comparing photo album and television - completely different.

    And you can't say that video is "mightier" than photography. There are many things you can do with a photo camera which you can not do with a video camera. 

    @SpectateSwamp said:

     

    I'm not looking at yesterday's questions. This forum was way way more clueless than I could have imagined. But that's OK. I'm in the right spot.

    Maybe you should look at yesterday's questions. It would occur to you that you're the clueless one here. It's not that we're asking the wrong questions. It's just that you don't have the answers.

    One thing before I go back to work: Didn't we tell you to use some proper screen recording software and stop doing that "video in my screen" thing? You can't see anything in the video! And where is the part where you give us a real sample of how fast your "search" is? That is: search time charts comparing different keywords and different file sizes and so on?

    Your search doesn't work - it only searches at a speed of 1 byte per second! Prove otherwise!


     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

     

         Coding. By who's standards. My first program was on punch cards
         in 1970. Been programming since then on all types of projects.
         There is one more powerful program, I'd like to show any programmer.

    Thereby proving how much more you SHOULD know about coding than you do.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    But the rest of the masses don't need all the computer knowledge burden.

    The rest of the masses don't need all the SSDS knowledge burden.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Politicians and insiders don't like it when I video open political Forums.

    What does this have to do with ANYTHING.  I swear, you're like an ADD kid, but retarded to boot.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    I think your are getting it. Camcorder Powerful. Computers Simple. Me go video. Not Worry.

    Cave man confused!

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Your job should consist of some video

    Your job should consist of getting a clue.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    No snitching or data mining with SSDS

    Oh but there is.  It's just that you have to do it all yourself.

    @SpectateSwamp said:


    The upload of the video played me out. Two complete unplugs of the modem. A great number 20 to 30 points where
    using the email send receive was the only thing that kept the connection alive. Thank whoever that google transfer
    doesn't give up on their end.

    More gibberish.  If you're going to post on a technical forum with educated people, learn to talk like one.

    PS the new "select and quote" function owns!!!



  • "John Doe won't have to remember anything I'm going to do short short videos of everything":  This is still stupid.  Your program requires typing stuff into about 20 text boxes, one at a time.  Windows Media Player's shuffle feature requires two button clicks, "turn shuffle on" and "play".  Go actually try Windows Media Player for your vaunted half-a-day!  Make a video of yourself doing it!

     

    Your "skip to the next one after X seconds" is actually a decent idea (countless programs have done the same with still images for a long time), but vastly outweighed by your terrible interface.  And before you repeat your "the code is open, rewrite it" rant, perhaps you (willfully) overlooked that someone already rewrote this feature from scratch in a single line of Unix plumbing.  Why should anyone build on top of your aptly-named swamp of a terrible program, when building a brand-new good program would be a thousand times easier?

     

    "Search ... consists of playing random video files":  Not always.  Sometimes - as proven by your own e-mail address searches, no less! - it consists of finding one or more specific things.  Go actually try Google Desktop Search for your vaunted half-a-day!  Make a video of yourself doing it!

     

    "Google ... has limits on the size of text file they will index":  This is actually true, sort of; if a text file is larger than about 75K, then it'll only index that first 75K or so.  Of course, if you do what the common man does, and actually keep your data in separate files, then this will almost never be a problem.

     



  • Oh, I knew there was something else I meant to write.

     

    "Security":  Like the "skip to next video after X seconds" thing, there's a valid idea in here that (unfortunately) blinds him to the stupidity of everything else he's attached to that idea.  In this case, the valid idea is "security against data loss", while the thing that he's been blinded to is "security against data theft".  (Further details have already been discussed - and completely misunderstood by him - ad nauseum, so I won't repeat them here.)

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:



    The most recent video from today is now uploaded.

    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=2719618133911231085

     

     

     

    After reading this whole thread, that video is without doubt one of the finest things I've ever seen in my life. You've made an application that can, after entering arbitrary commands on 10 successive screens, show you 8-second chunks of video randomly selected from political debates and hunting trips.

     

    The psychology of this whole thing is fascinating... I'm not even convinced Swampy IS a troll, not in the traditional sense. I think he's just a slightly (completely?) mad person who we're all shouting at... and that makes me feel a little mean.  :-(


Log in to reply