@beginner_ said:
That is the WTF. Why don't dispaly it in center of the screen?
Because it's not a compose mail feature. It's a chat feature that post mail. And too bad for those who don't use mail as a chatting system but as a mailing system.
@beginner_ said:
That is the WTF. Why don't dispaly it in center of the screen?
Because it's not a compose mail feature. It's a chat feature that post mail. And too bad for those who don't use mail as a chatting system but as a mailing system.
@Aeolun said:
I don't really care. I just couldn't help the feeling that you must be incredibly set in your ways if you can't deal with Gmail changing their compose interface. You don't have to deal with all that useless clutter when composing an email anymore.
There is two problems with your reasonment.
The first one is, a lot of people don't use email enough to want to learn a new UI for their use. In the same way, I don't try new kind of high tech meat-cutting technology because my old knife do the job and I don't use them enough to want something more efficiant.
The second one is, some people do use this "useless clutter". I can understand making this UI for people who want it, but why break what work to
Anyway, I had to switch to thunderbird to have again an interface I like. Which mean I will certainly ditch gmail now that it have nothing I really want on it. It's almost the only consequence of this move, bitching on google is pretty much useless anyway.
@TDWTF123 said:
Then again, the EU itself currently has a law saying it's not permitted for insurance companies to discriminate based on gender, but age is just fine. It's a very screwed-up area of law.
Well, it's perfectly the kind of semi-aberration you get from lazy law processing.
At first, the law was to forbid insurance to run differents price depending on genetic test. In other word, even if you have gene that raise your cancer chance by 15%, insurances are not supposed to make you pay 15% more or forbid you from applying. It make sense with some conception of health insurances, and it do help the unlucky one get an insurance. You cannot change your genetic problems, and everyone deserve to be able to get treatment at a reasonable price, which is the spirit of the law.
Now, being a male is a huge risk factor for car insurance. Being male is kind of a genetic risk you cannot do anything against, and a lot of men were complaining that they paid more than women. So, EU expanded the aforementioned stuff to gender. Which is make a lot less sense, since men get into more car accident not because they are men but because men are taught to be less risk-averse. You cannot wish your cancer risk away, but you can drive sensibly. But since it's a popular move, let's do it !
@blakeyrat said:
But on the other hand, iteration is good and I hate people who are afraid of change.So here's the deal: A UI made by Google probably sucks. But Google changing the UI around is a GOOD thing because it at least means they're trying to make it better.
That they do change is not bad per see, I agree. But imposing the change to every user is, especialy when it's very far from being a straight improvement. Different people, different need, so different UI ? Clearly it cannot happen in Google HQ And if people think it's a direct improvement, I would point out that it's clearly the messenging UI adapted to email send, so it's quite different in conception. At a minimum, it's like saying an helicopter is an improvement on an avion. For rescuing people in moutain, sure. For going from London to New York, less so.
(thunderbird have nothing specially good and I actually believe old gmail to be better. It's mainly that it have no deal-breaking flaw, lack no feature I use and don't crash. Still, I can accept to be hopeless
My brain farted and substitued plane and avion. Which is the word for plane in my native language. The idea is that I can see people who find the layout better for both the old one and the new one.
And if gmail is loathesome to get an interface that I find useable, they will lose a customer (well, a product being sold since I don't pay for gmail and fully expect them to sell a reasonable amount of information to advertisement).If theyfucked up the interface but other important feature were not provided by anyone else, I would stay on it, but keep trace of that as a reason to look for other mail service.
And yet I am sure that google will refuse to do google car with manual transmission. Come on, google, get your act together !
Blakeyrat is now able to admit that some people have differents needs and loke differents interface.
Next time, maybe even he will admit he have no fucking idea whether people prefer CLI or graphic interface, for the simple reason that almost every user just never got in touch with the non mainstream options.
Now, I believe that the "stagnation" is a big bullshit. People aren't that slow to change their interface when you propose them something that is easier to use. For example, it's not like a lot of people don't use tab in browser because they are not accustomated to them. Most people tried tab navigation, a good portion of thoses loved it, and it have stuck.
@morbiuswilters said:
They're actually reptiles that are distinct from lizards (and distinct from any currently-living known reptiles). I was just being a pedantic dickweed.
You have likely eaten reptile of the same family several time in your life. They are called bird, and usually chicken nugget are allegedly created from birds.
The majority don't use a CLI because they never have a CLI on hand, and don't feel the need to try it out. When they do, there is quite an high % of conversion. By the way, the "innovation" of gmail we talk of are about as novel as a CLI. Would you accept if windows suddenly switched to CLI interface because it's new ? Cause that's about what's happening. Something work, and it's replaced by something which is different, not exactly innovating, not exactly easier to use, but different. I don't want to use that, like you don't want to use CLI.
It's like the majority of american and european don't have an opinion on automatic vs manual transmission because they never have used the other one. They aren't interested in switching either, because it work and the switch don't seem to have much additional functionality (in both sense : I believe automatic don't consume more fuel than manual and don't break more often, so switching to manual seem useless, and manual is not hard at all to use once you know how, so switching to automatic seem useless)
@morbiuswilters said:
I guess this is probably the result of what passes for the dumbed-down, keep-the-proles-ignorant public education system in Europe nowadays. "If someone disagrees with you and expresses an opinion that has not been approved by the Central Council for Acceptable Ideas, then they are trolling you and you can dismiss them."
I love your cluelessness about Europa. It's almost as cute as thoses frenchs who believe America is entirely made of ignorant redneck with automatic weapon who ride safari in Mexico to get scalps.
Where, in fact, some prefer non automatic weapons.
@boh said:
Only in the UK AFAIK. In the rest of Europe, the role of the court is only to decide whether an action was in accordance with written law or not, not to make up new laws (that's what the parliament is for), or disregard laws if they feel like it. But they do interpret the law though, so I guess the difference is not all that great.
In France (can you know guess from where country I am from), like half the law are cancelled because they are against the constitution or the EU treaty or the human right or shit like that. IIRC it's the same in any european country. So, yes, they don't strictly do new law (do the US court do that ?), but yes they could have cancelled the law if it was against Google's right.
Since Google is not an human, I wouldn't bet it's considered as having unviolable right.
@morbiuswilters said:
I have no idea how the EU court works, but in the US a court could decide the law was unreasonable and infringed on Google's rights, and effectively kill (or neuter) the law.
In Europe it's the case too, but nobody believe that this is an infringement of their right. And indeed, the law opportunistically hit the one they can hit, to solve a problem a lot of people in Europa find is problematic. of course, that still don't mean that the way to solve it is really good, if only because the time before someone could hope to be forgetted about is not something objective. I kinda think reminding someone of how he swindled 150.000 euros from his last job need to stick longer than reminding someone that he was drunk in public, some think the opposite, and I can guess that Morbuswilter believe this should never be forgotten and people just had to not do it in the first place.
(I chose two example who have prevented people from getting a job, since it's what the law is mostly about, people being unable to find a job after their sentences was finished)
For the publicity of justice decision : in France at least, I remember you cannot get easily the judicial decision that someone have had. You can get an abridged version if you can justify why you want it, like for bodyguards.
Don't see why. I routinely have 300-400 tabs with all the usefuls stuff, 100 seem downright conservative. On topic, Firefox 20.0 and 656 MB used.
And even if it were true, Apple would still not be the only alternative.
Given the average age of the nazi today, molestation on them would be choking.
The majority don't use a CLI because they never have a CLI on hand, and don't feel the need to try it out. When they do, there is quite an high % of conversion. By the way, the "innovation" of gmail we talk of are about as novel as a CLI. Would you accept if windows suddenly switched to CLI interface because it's new ? Cause that's about what's happening. Something work, and it's replaced by something which is different, not exactly innovating, not exactly easier to use, but different. I don't want to use that, like you don't want to use CLI.
It's like the majority of american and european don't have an opinion on automatic vs manual transmission because they never have used the other one. They aren't interested in switching either, because it work and the switch don't seem to have much additional functionality (in both sense : I believe automatic don't consume more fuel than manual and don't break more often, so switching to manual seem useless, and manual is not hard at all to use once you know how, so switching to automatic seem useless)
Blakeyrat is now able to admit that some people have differents needs and loke differents interface.
Next time, maybe even he will admit he have no fucking idea whether people prefer CLI or graphic interface, for the simple reason that almost every user just never got in touch with the non mainstream options.
Now, I believe that the "stagnation" is a big bullshit. People aren't that slow to change their interface when you propose them something that is easier to use. For example, it's not like a lot of people don't use tab in browser because they are not accustomated to them. Most people tried tab navigation, a good portion of thoses loved it, and it have stuck.
As a firm, you can have quite a bit of information about potential customer with this. Not that any self-respecting corporation would try to know who pay their bill in due time and who desesperately need some money here and now.
And yet I am sure that google will refuse to do google car with manual transmission. Come on, google, get your act together !
It may be driver-related, which would make the version of the OS pretty moot - if anything it may work even more slowly.