Jobs bollox

[eastender]

Just seen the intro on the Apple site - OK, nice pics and nice
products, but the nonsense about the connection with humanities and the
liberal arts making the heart sing is not one of his finer moments.

E.

[Simon Dobbs]

Post by eastender
Just seen the intro on the Apple site - OK, nice pics and nice
products, but the nonsense about the connection with humanities and the
liberal arts making the heart sing is not one of his finer moments.
E.

I disagree- that was what he was all about.

[eastender]

Post by Simon Dobbs
I disagree- that was what he was all about.

Oh I agree that some see him as an 'artist' - I see him much more as a
pretty ruthless businessperson with an outstanding eye for industrial
design. I wish Apple would stick to that rather than wheeling out silly
quotes.

This extract from a review of his biography sums it up for me:

"The designation of someone as an artist, like the designation of
someone as a genius, is elastic, and anyone can claim it for himself or
herself and for each other. There is no doubt that the products Steve
Jobs brilliantly conceived of and oversaw at Apple were elegant and
beautiful, but they were, in the end, products. Artists, typically, aim
to put something of enduring beauty into the world; consumer
electronics companies aim to sell a lot of gadgets, manufacturing
desire for this year’s model in the hope that people will discard last
year’s."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jan/12/who-was-steve-jobs/
E.

[Fred Bambrough]

Post by eastender
Artists, typically, aim
to put something of enduring beauty into the world

I hope it goes further otherwise that's a very immature viewpoint.

[zoara]

Post by eastender

Post by Simon Dobbs
I disagree- that was what he was all about.

Oh I agree that some see him as an 'artist' - I see him much more as a
pretty ruthless businessperson with an outstanding eye for industrial
design. I wish Apple would stick to that rather than wheeling out silly quotes.
"The designation of someone as an artist, like the designation of someone
as a genius, is elastic, and anyone can claim it for himself or herself
and for each other. There is no doubt that the products Steve Jobs
brilliantly conceived of and oversaw at Apple were elegant and beautiful,
but they were, in the end, products. Artists, typically, aim to put
something of enduring beauty into the world; consumer electronics
companies aim to sell a lot of gadgets, manufacturing desire for this
year’s model in the hope that people will discard last year’s."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jan/12/who-was-steve-jobs/
E.

Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

-zoara-

[eastender]

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

E.

[Flavio Matani]

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

Could get a bit Platonic, with a higher ideal world and archetypes,
going that way..

[Steve Firth]

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

I don't see that as at all cryptic. If one is interested in systems
architecture then the enduring impression of anything that Steve Jobs was
involved in is an enduring beauty. There is no physical object but what
there is is a finely crafted object that delights because of its subtlety
and beauty.

Of course if one is a prole then it's just some computer shit.

[eastender]

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

A worthy entry to Private Eye's Pseuds Corner I reckon. As I said I
don't dispute the contribution to industrial design - and I know
something about systems behaviour as my father was a leading academic
in the field. But I doubt that Apple's 'systems architecture' will be
held in reverence by liberal arts classes and humanities professors in
the future. More likely the reverence will be on MBA courses to the
business and marketing model that made a lot of people very rich.

E.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by eastender

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

The Steve was involved in most of what Apple made until he was levered
out of the firm after the original Mac was launched. The Steve ran the
Mac project.

And what was that original Mac like?

I've got a Mac 512Ke - the mouse and keyboard are anything but objects
of subtlety and beauty. The best you can say about them is that they're
workmanlike. Chunky and clunky. And while the Apple ]['s got a sturdy
and elegant case, has anyone been delighted by the subtlety and beauty
of its form?

(What's inside the Apple ]['s case? - ah, well, that's a different
matter. But that was down to Woz.)

Post by eastender
A worthy entry to Private Eye's Pseuds Corner I reckon.

And/or an OBN.

Post by eastender
As I said I
don't dispute the contribution to industrial design

[snip]

Surely The Steve's main contribution to industrial design was to bully,
cajole, coerce, and manipulate his staff into doing (mostly[1]) great
things?

The Steve had an eye for what was right - that's true. But it was
others who did the actual design work, and there's evidence that The
Steve's management style was very poor.

Rowland.

[1] Anyone remember the circular iMac mouse?

[Tim Streater]

In article

Post by Rowland McDonnell

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

The Steve was involved in most of what Apple made until he was levered
out of the firm after the original Mac was launched. The Steve ran the
Mac project.
And what was that original Mac like?
I've got a Mac 512Ke - the mouse and keyboard are anything but objects
of subtlety and beauty. The best you can say about them is that they're
workmanlike. Chunky and clunky.

That was 30 years ago, what do you expect?

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Tim Streater

Post by Rowland McDonnell

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

The Steve was involved in most of what Apple made until he was levered
out of the firm after the original Mac was launched. The Steve ran the
Mac project.
And what was that original Mac like?
I've got a Mac 512Ke - the mouse and keyboard are anything but objects
of subtlety and beauty. The best you can say about them is that they're
workmanlike. Chunky and clunky.

That was 30 years ago, what do you expect?

According to you "anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an
enduring beauty."

I'm just pointing to evidence proving that opinion to be mistaken.

I'm not sure what the relevance of it being 28 years ago might be.

The keyboard of the original Macs were clunky ugly slabs with none of
the aesthetic appeal of many IBM produced PC keyboards with which the
original Mac was contemporary.

Surely you're not trying to suggest that aesthetics in industrial design
were ignored up until more recently than 28 years ago?

<http://bbcicecream.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/1937-bugatti-typ
e-57-atlantic1.jpg>

Rowland.

[Tim Streater]

In article

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by Tim Streater

Post by Rowland McDonnell

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

The Steve was involved in most of what Apple made until he was levered
out of the firm after the original Mac was launched. The Steve ran the
Mac project.
And what was that original Mac like?
I've got a Mac 512Ke - the mouse and keyboard are anything but objects
of subtlety and beauty. The best you can say about them is that they're
workmanlike. Chunky and clunky.

That was 30 years ago, what do you expect?

According to you "anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an
enduring beauty."

Not according to me. That was according to friend Steve.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by eastender

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

The Steve was involved in most of what Apple made until he was levered
out of the firm after the original Mac was launched. The Steve ran the
Mac project.

What was the Mac project ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
And what was that original Mac like?
I've got a Mac 512Ke - the mouse and keyboard are anything but objects
of subtlety and beauty.

They were far better than most on offer at the time.
of course teh zerox sparc station of the time which also had a mouse but IIRC the mouse mat set us back over £100 alone.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The best you can say about them is that they're
workmanlike. Chunky and clunky.

compared with teh compitiotionh on prce they were pretty impressive as I remmebr them.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
And while the Apple ]['s got a sturdy
and elegant case, has anyone been delighted by the subtlety and beauty
of its form?
(What's inside the Apple ]['s case? - ah, well, that's a different
matter. But that was down to Woz.)

Post by eastender
A worthy entry to Private Eye's Pseuds Corner I reckon.

And/or an OBN.

Post by eastender
As I said I
don't dispute the contribution to industrial design

[snip]
Surely The Steve's main contribution to industrial design was to bully,
cajole, coerce, and manipulate his staff into doing (mostly[1]) great
things?
The Steve had an eye for what was right - that's true. But it was
others who did the actual design work, and there's evidence that The
Steve's management style was very poor.
Rowland.
[1] Anyone remember the circular iMac mouse?

The puck mouse horrible thing, but some seemed to like them.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Rowland McDonnell]

whisky-dave <***@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip dreadfully formatted illiterate ignorance]

If you seriously want to engage in discussion, do please post using a
proper newsreader. Learning how to write and how to think might help
too.

"What was the Mac project?" - if that's a serious question rather than
just trolling, I'm afraid I can't help you given the sign on the door of
this place.

Rowland.

[Pd]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The Steve had an eye for what was right - that's true.

There's far more to it than that, but in essence that was his greatest
talent.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But it was others who did the actual design work, and there's evidence
that The Steve's management style was very poor.

Depends how you define management. If it's "how much do your employees
like you" then it was probably poor. If it's "how much do your employees
want to do the absolute best that they can, how much do they respect
your judgement and how proud are they of what they produce" then it's
hard to argue that his management was poor.

How did Microsoft manage to become the dominant desktop operating
system? Through clever business practices, leveraging the market
perception that IBM were the ones to follow, and then using their
virtual monopoly to make it unattractive for hardware manufacturers to
recommend anything else.

How did Apple manage to produce the dominant music player, smart phone
and tablet, in markets that already had several major manufacturers?
By designing and producing gadgets that fulfilled their function
beautifully, both in looks and in the way they worked. Other people did
the nitty gritty of the design, but Steve told them *what* to design.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Pd

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The Steve had an eye for what was right - that's true.

There's far more to it than that, but in essence that was his greatest
talent.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But it was others who did the actual design work, and there's evidence
that The Steve's management style was very poor.

Depends how you define management. If it's "how much do your employees
like you" then it was probably poor. If it's "how much do your employees
want to do the absolute best that they can, how much do they respect
your judgement and how proud are they of what they produce" then it's
hard to argue that his management was poor.

But think of all the wasted talent especially in the early days when he
sacked people at the drop of a hat - and think of all those marvellously
talented people who wouldn't work for Apple because of The Steve.

He was grossly unfair, bullying, and (according to some) verging on
psychopathic. Not a nice man at all. His management style was one that
I simply wouldn't put up with for five minutes.

And think of all those wonderful ideas that The Steve strangled at
birth, and all the things The Steve's vision decided we were going to
have to abandon leaving us only with The One True Way of The Steve (At
Least For This Week) rather than what we'd have if he were capable of
respecting viewpoints other than his own.

I mention that last issue because certainly since Mac OS X 10.4, I
reckon Macs have got *less* useful for me overall. That's down to The
Steve's ideas on what old stuff to drop and what new features to give
us. The new stuff's mostly of no interest to me, and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Post by Pd
How did Microsoft manage to become the dominant desktop operating
system? Through clever business practices, leveraging the market
perception that IBM were the ones to follow, and then using their
virtual monopoly to make it unattractive for hardware manufacturers to
recommend anything else.

Not so much "clever" business practices as nigh-on illegal
anti-competitive business practices, such as offering big discounts to
OEM PC clone makers on MS-DOS if they sold /only/ MS-DOS.

There's nothing clever about that - it's just an abuse of a dominant
position intended to wipe out competition.

Post by Pd
How did Apple manage to produce the dominant music player, smart phone
and tablet, in markets that already had several major manufacturers?
By designing and producing gadgets that fulfilled their function
beautifully, both in looks and in the way they worked. Other people did
the nitty gritty of the design, but Steve told them *what* to design.

AIUI, The Steve provided direction which in many cases was initially
relatively vague, assessing each design iteration and then providing
other direction until the designers had come up with something that felt
right.

The reason the iPod took over was that the competition was mostly crap.
Most of the competition subjected the user to serious pain just to get
music onto the player and a crap UI to drive the player itself.
Generally too many features, controls of great confusion, and too little
music capacity (most of 'em).

When the iPod came out, I recall the slagging off it got from those who
liked the then current crop of portable music players. Not one of them
seemed to understand that the great mass of potential portable music
player users simply wouldn't be able to make much use of the fiddly
feature-rich gadgets they adored.

I knew someone who had a non-iPod mp3 player at the time of the iPod
launch (a gift from someone else). She never used it, because she
couldn't work out how to put music on to the thing.

It was no great stroke of genius on The Steve's part to head up a
project to come up with the iPod, nor was it a great stroke of genius to
come up with the idea of providing iTunes and the iTMS to provide an
easy way to get music on to an iPod.

Engineers did all the hard work of implementing the necessary
technology. The Steve's great contribution was his `sense of rightness'
as to what's `just right for the job'. For example, insisting on the
mechanically smallest HDD available, on the grounds that the slightly
larger (but cheaper) HDDs suitable for the job would make the resulting
music player inconveniently big. Never mind the extra cost - The Steve
understood that people are willing to pay for convenience and beauty.

Rowland.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-***@flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The new stuff's mostly of no interest to me, and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

[snip]

I meant "useless to me", not "useful".

One of these days, I'll learn how to type the words I'm thinking of.

Rlwodan.

[Pd]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The new stuff's mostly of no interest to me, and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

[snip]
I meant "useless to me", not "useful".

Are you sure? The first iteration made complete sense in terms of being
a complaint that the new stuff was no use, and the lost stuff was of
great use. Your second iteration makes no sense to me.

If Steve removed stuff that was useless to you, what's the problem?

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Pd

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The new stuff's mostly of no interest to me, and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

[snip]
I meant "useless to me", not "useful".

Are you sure?

No, just a brain fart.

Post by Pd
The first iteration made complete sense in terms of being
a complaint that the new stuff was no use, and the lost stuff was of
great use. Your second iteration makes no sense to me.

Nor me. Brain fart, honest.

Post by Pd
If Steve removed stuff that was useless to you, what's the problem?

Just call me an idiot, eh?

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by Pd

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The Steve had an eye for what was right - that's true.

There's far more to it than that, but in essence that was his greatest
talent.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But it was others who did the actual design work, and there's evidence
that The Steve's management style was very poor.

Depends how you define management. If it's "how much do your employees
like you" then it was probably poor. If it's "how much do your employees
want to do the absolute best that they can, how much do they respect
your judgement and how proud are they of what they produce" then it's
hard to argue that his management was poor.

But think of all the wasted talent especially in the early days when he
sacked people at the drop of a hat - and think of all those marvellously
talented people who wouldn't work for Apple because of The Steve.

How do you know they were that talented, you can;t be sure one of those talentyed people couldm have sunk Aple by insiting on using a windows platform because it would be cheaper and allow them to concentrate on hardware devolpoment rather than splitting the company into two areas.

Or why bother writng a new OS at all just use linux.

I think it was steve that said he wanted the expensive mouse to cost $15 dollars to make rather than the $300 or so it did cost. maybe that was a mistake, it's diffciuclt second guessing these things.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
He was grossly unfair, bullying, and (according to some) verging on
psychopathic. Not a nice man at all. His management style was one that
I simply wouldn't put up with for five minutes.

I'd like to think I wouldn;t either, I'd like to think that no one would put up with Jimmy savelle either.....

Post by Rowland McDonnell
And think of all those wonderful ideas that The Steve strangled at
birth,

which ones were those, I am curious I'm sure we've all had brillant ideas in the past.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and all the things The Steve's vision decided we were going to
have to abandon leaving us only with The One True Way of The Steve (At
Least For This Week) rather than what we'd have if he were capable of
respecting viewpoints other than his own.

Lots of companies have done that they spend a fourune on listening to the clueless and then spend even more on meeting and lunchions.
In such places it takes years just to decide on a logo ;-)

Post by Rowland McDonnell
I mention that last issue because certainly since Mac OS X 10.4, I
reckon Macs have got *less* useful for me overall.

Me too, but then I have less use for a computer in gerneal, I can do things on other devices.
I'm sure somem here used to stote their stuff in a filofax before computers, now most of thast is carried on phones.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
That's down to The
Steve's ideas on what old stuff to drop and what new features to give
us. The new stuff's mostly of no interest to me,

Maybe that's something to do with age, it's pretty simialer to music how much of what is produced now is of interst to you ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Such as what, I've pretty much removed photoshop, Word and excel from my home computers. I've added aperature pages and numbers.
The only mac app I really miss is MacDraft and macdraw II I think it was called.
Oh and a few games....

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by Pd
How did Microsoft manage to become the dominant desktop operating
system? Through clever business practices, leveraging the market
perception that IBM were the ones to follow, and then using their
virtual monopoly to make it unattractive for hardware manufacturers to
recommend anything else.

Not so much "clever" business practices as nigh-on illegal
anti-competitive business practices, such as offering big discounts to
OEM PC clone makers on MS-DOS if they sold /only/ MS-DOS.

The computer industry isn't teh only place that happenes.
Even at the Olmypics only certain companies were allowed to advertise.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
There's nothing clever about that - it's just an abuse of a dominant
position intended to wipe out competition.

Once called survival of the fitest, and Aple are trying that with smart phones.
wiping out it's competitors via legal actions.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by Pd
How did Apple manage to produce the dominant music player, smart phone
and tablet, in markets that already had several major manufacturers?
By designing and producing gadgets that fulfilled their function
beautifully, both in looks and in the way they worked. Other people did
the nitty gritty of the design, but Steve told them *what* to design.

AIUI, The Steve provided direction which in many cases was initially
relatively vague, assessing each design iteration and then providing
other direction until the designers had come up with something that felt
right.

Seems quite a good way of going about things.
Here's a nice looking csae now design the computer to fit in it, where as others were saying he's the computer now put it in a box and sell it.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The reason the iPod took over was that the competition was mostly crap.
Most of the competition subjected the user to serious pain just to get
music onto the player and a crap UI to drive the player itself.
Generally too many features, controls of great confusion, and too little
music capacity (most of 'em).

yes I never had one friends did and tehy were always complaing, but I never thpought they'd be a market for MP3 player and what with 'everyone' downloading music for free and the music indusrty lossing billions and the band being penniless, I expect the music industry to end for teh average person.
It'd bigger than ever now, and soon I'm buying my first itunes purchase of a friends band.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
When the iPod came out, I recall the slagging off it got from those who
liked the then current crop of portable music players. Not one of them
seemed to understand that the great mass of potential portable music
player users simply wouldn't be able to make much use of the fiddly
feature-rich gadgets they adored.
I knew someone who had a non-iPod mp3 player at the time of the iPod
launch (a gift from someone else). She never used it, because she
couldn't work out how to put music on to the thing.
It was no great stroke of genius on The Steve's part to head up a
project to come up with the iPod, nor was it a great stroke of genius to
come up with the idea of providing iTunes and the iTMS to provide an
easy way to get music on to an iPod.

So how come no one else thought of it, or did anything about it. ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Engineers did all the hard work of implementing the necessary
technology.

But which came first ?.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The Steve's great contribution was his `sense of rightness'
as to what's `just right for the job'. For example, insisting on the
mechanically smallest HDD available, on the grounds that the slightly
larger (but cheaper) HDDs suitable for the job would make the resulting
music player inconveniently big. Never mind the extra cost - The Steve
understood that people are willing to pay for convenience and beauty.

yes that seemd to be the key perhaps people were just fed up with 2nd rate players and having been willing to pay a massive amount (in my eyes) for a protable CD or tape player decided that for them the iPod was worth it.
As yet I've not brought one, I've been given them as presents or the original owner whated an upgrade.

And I wouldn't pay more than £100 for a phone, any phone in fact.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Rowland McDonnell]

whisky-dave <***@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave
But which came first ?.

The egg, of course.

Rowland.

[snip]

[Pd]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
It was no great stroke of genius on The Steve's part to head up a
project to come up with the iPod, nor was it a great stroke of genius to
come up with the idea of providing iTunes and the iTMS to provide an
easy way to get music on to an iPod.

So how come no one else thought of it, or did anything about it. ?

Isn't there a quote about genius being obvious after the fact?

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Pd

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
It was no great stroke of genius on The Steve's part to head up a
project to come up with the iPod, nor was it a great stroke of genius to
come up with the idea of providing iTunes and the iTMS to provide an
easy way to get music on to an iPod.

So how come no one else thought of it, or did anything about it. ?

Isn't there a quote about genius being obvious after the fact?

I'm no great fan of Thomas Edison, but he hit the nail on the head when
he said that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration - at least as
applied to technical developments.

To my mind, the basic idea of the iPod/iTunes setup was bloody obvious.
What made it great was the huge amount of work put into refining the
operation of iPod and iTunes to make it convenient for anyone to use -
mediated by The Steve's sense of rightness.

It should have been clear to anyone pre-iPod that to make an mp3 player
with widespread appeal, two big problems apparent in most pre-iPod
players needed solving:

The job of putting music onto the player gadget needed to be made
user-friendly.

The controls on the player gadget itself needed to be made
user-friendly.

But for some reason, the tech press seemed to be all in favour of
complicated feature-heavy geek toy mp3 players, almost all of which were
impossible for the man on the Clapham omnibus to use. That's the oddity
- that so many people were blind to the needs of ordinary folks. Even
when the iPod came out, the tech press slated it because of the lack of
features and the high price. They totally missed the point that the
target audience didn't want fancy features but instead wanted a gadget
that let normal people listen to music on the move.

The part of the iPod setup that I hadn't thought of before the iPod came
out was the iTunes Music Store.

No, I'm not trying to claim that I could have come up with anything like
the iPod UI or the iTunes method of putting music onto an iPod - but I
am claiming that the need for things to do those jobs with that ease was
blindingly obvious to me well before iPods came out.

Rowland.

[Rowland McDonnell]

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Such as what, I've pretty much removed photoshop, Word and excel from my
home computers. I've added aperature pages and numbers.

[snip]

Actually, I did mean `useful'.

What's gone?

By the time you get to 10.7, Classic's gone, Rosetta's gone, and even
little things like being able to use the Apple USB modem's gone (which
is handy for sending faxes - believe it or not, I've got a use for
that).

And yes, I do still have a use for some Classic applications - not to
mention several PPC apps. They provide me with the ability to do things
that I can't do using OS X native methods.

(Torquemada, for example, lets me do a complex search-and-replace job on
files that I know can be done using Unix command line tools - it's just
that I can't work out how to use the available Unix command line tools
to do so. OS X is much less user-friendly than what we had before.)

Rowland.

[Tim Hodgson]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Such as what, I've pretty much removed photoshop, Word and excel from my
home computers. I've added aperature pages and numbers.

[snip]
Actually, I did mean `useful'.
What's gone?
By the time you get to 10.7, Classic's gone, Rosetta's gone, and even
little things like being able to use the Apple USB modem's gone (which
is handy for sending faxes - believe it or not, I've got a use for
that).
And yes, I do still have a use for some Classic applications - not to
mention several PPC apps. They provide me with the ability to do things
that I can't do using OS X native methods.

Tim Bray has similar sentiments:

<http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2012/10/09/No-Takebacks>

Some of the comments are interesting too (and you can't often say that
about blog comments).

I find myself agreeing with quite a lot of what he says. Maybe it's
age...

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Tim Hodgson

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Such as what, I've pretty much removed photoshop, Word and excel from my
home computers. I've added aperature pages and numbers.

[snip]
Actually, I did mean `useful'.
What's gone?
By the time you get to 10.7, Classic's gone, Rosetta's gone, and even
little things like being able to use the Apple USB modem's gone (which
is handy for sending faxes - believe it or not, I've got a use for
that).
And yes, I do still have a use for some Classic applications - not to
mention several PPC apps. They provide me with the ability to do things
that I can't do using OS X native methods.

<http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2012/10/09/No-Takebacks>
Some of the comments are interesting too (and you can't often say that
about blog comments).
I find myself agreeing with quite a lot of what he says.

Almost all of it in my case.

Post by Tim Hodgson
Maybe it's
age...

Even in the light of:

"You know who else would be grateful? Not just geeks like me but the
other end of the teeter-totter; less-technical people who've put serious
effort into mastering the mousewheel or the chat window. What's sad is
that when product managers break stuff, these people blame themselves;
my pain is abated by anger, theirs amplified by embarrassment."

?

Nah, it's not age - it's just common sense. Would the Mac have stayed
alive to this ripe old age if Apple had been as cavalier about keeping
past abilities in the past as it is now? Of course not. People don't
like having useful abilities taken away from them. People don't like
having to learn lots of radically new ways of doing things every time
they upgrade their OS. Apple's throwing away too much good stuff on the
assumption that the users don't want or need it, and is giving us too
much pointless frippery on the assumption that users want and need that
AND APPLE IS WRONG!

I mean, what serious professional gives a shit about deep integration
with Facebook or whatever? Almost none of 'em! But what serious
professional gives a shit about not having to change his workflow every
time Apple comes up with a new OS? All of 'em!

Anyway, I do recall reading some comments in the Grauniad from some ex
BBC bigwig recently, commenting on complaints about modern telly and so
on. He admitted that some complaints had some justification - but
explained that actually it's not that they're mumbling more on the telly
these days so much as the inevitable march of age worsening the hearing
in those members of the audience complaining about mumbling.

Except that I think they're mumbling on the telly rather more than
previously and while I know that my ears can't hear high frequencies
very well any more, I also know that I can hear pretty much every word
on BBC R4 and don't seem to have any trouble following the dialogue on
(say) Blake's 7.

They bloody well are mumbling more - not just on telly, but in films too
(so how else is it that I can make out the dialogue in most older films
without any trouble but do have trouble with most modern films, eh?
Admittedly, many modern films have most work on the soundtrack put into
the 5+1 mixes and I listen in boring old stereo...)

A lot of the things that are put down to age (by those trying to defend
against complaints) aren't down to age at all - it's just a dishonest
method of putting down the complainer.

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and the stuff that The
Steve's vision has removed is to a large extent useful to me.

Such as what, I've pretty much removed photoshop, Word and excel from my
home computers. I've added aperature pages and numbers.

[snip]
Actually, I did mean `useful'.
What's gone?
By the time you get to 10.7, Classic's gone,

I've learnt to get over it, I did with my BBC.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rosetta's gone,

I preffered native.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
and even
little things like being able to use the Apple USB modem's gone (which
is handy for sending faxes - believe it or not, I've got a use for
that).

Hadn't noticed, isn't tehre any other way to send faxes.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
And yes, I do still have a use for some Classic applications - not to
mention several PPC apps. They provide me with the ability to do things
that I can't do using OS X native methods.

Perhaps that's why I still have a macplus a SE30, a LC III a LC475, 2 G3 iMacs, a G3 tower and a G4 tower.
There's lots of things I can't do with OS X, so I do them in other ways, but can;t thinbk mof anything I really need to do that I can't do.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
(Torquemada, for example, lets me do a complex search-and-replace job on
files that I know can be done using Unix command line tools - it's just
that I can't work out how to use the available Unix command line tools
to do so. OS X is much less user-friendly than what we had before.)

I thought BBedit or textwrangler could do that sort of thing.

I'm not sure what you mean by user friendly OS X, for me that;'s like the engine of a car something that I shouldn't need to fiddle with to get working.
it reminds me of PC users that tell me that they can clock-chip their processors via the bias, I've very pleased for them but don't feel envious.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[JTM]

In article

Post by whisky-dave
I'm not sure what you mean by user friendly OS X, for me
that;'s like the engine of a car something that I
shouldn't need to fiddle with to get working.

P'raps if you fiddled with your news client (User-Agent:
G2/1.0) your posts wouldn't hurt my eyes so much?

John

[whisky-dave]

Post by Tim Streater
In article

Post by whisky-dave
I'm not sure what you mean by user friendly OS X, for me
that;'s like the engine of a car something that I
shouldn't need to fiddle with to get working.

G2/1.0) your posts wouldn't hurt my eyes so much?
John

You could be right but as I'm at work using a PC running W7 using google groups is that the point you were trying to make.

[JTM]

In article

Post by whisky-dave
You could be right but as I'm at work using a PC running
W7 using google groups is that the point you were trying
to make.

That's probably it. Comiserations.

I wonder. Do GG posts look OK when you read them, (on GG) or
is it 'our' readers that don't react well with them?

John

[whisky-dave]

Post by Tim Streater
In article

Post by whisky-dave
You could be right but as I'm at work using a PC running
W7 using google groups is that the point you were trying
to make.

That's probably it. Comiserations.
I wonder. Do GG posts look OK when you read them, (on GG) or
is it 'our' readers that don't react well with them?

It seems to vary from day to day, sometimes I can be typing and the whole post disapears, or resets.

Not sure why £ signs come out so wrong, didn;t happen under XP.

Post by Tim Streater
John

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by JTM

Post by whisky-dave
I'm not sure what you mean by user friendly OS X, for me
that;'s like the engine of a car something that I
shouldn't need to fiddle with to get working.

G2/1.0) your posts wouldn't hurt my eyes so much?

There's nothing to be done about boozy Dave. I mostly just ignore him.

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by JTM

Post by whisky-dave
I'm not sure what you mean by user friendly OS X, for me
that;'s like the engine of a car something that I
shouldn't need to fiddle with to get working.

G2/1.0) your posts wouldn't hurt my eyes so much?

There's nothing to be done about boozy Dave. I mostly just ignore him.

really, so why keep emialing my home address and complain to my manager at work that I'm harassing you. ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Rowland McDonnell]

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
There's nothing to be done about boozy Dave. I mostly just ignore him.

really, so why keep emialing my home address and complain to my manager at
work that I'm harassing you. ?

<sigh>

Part of the problem is that boozy dave lives in a fantasy world.

I'm not persecuting you, dave. That's just your imagination.

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
There's nothing to be done about boozy Dave. I mostly just ignore him.

really, so why keep emialing my home address and complain to my manager at
work that I'm harassing you. ?

<sigh>
Part of the problem is that boozy dave lives in a fantasy world.

You have no ideas what world I live i9n do you, are you denying repeatadley emailing my manager at work ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
I'm not persecuting you, dave.

I never said you were.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
That's just your imagination.
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Steve Firth]

Post by eastender

If one is interested in systems architecture then the enduring >
impression of anything that Steve Jobs was involved in is an enduring >
beauty. There is no physical object but what there is is a finely >
crafted object that delights because of its subtlety and beauty.

A worthy entry to Private Eye's Pseuds Corner I reckon.

Do you like sex and travel? Because you can fuck right off.

Post by eastender
As I said I don't dispute the contribution to industrial design - and I
know something about systems behaviour as my father was a leading academic in the field.

And you fondly believe that education is hereditary?

Post by eastender
But I doubt that Apple's 'systems architecture' will be held in reverence
by liberal arts classes and humanities professors in the future.

I doubt that you have a functioning brain.

Post by eastender
More likely the reverence will be on MBA courses to the business and
marketing model that made a lot of people very rich.

That's your opinion and it was worth what I paid for it.

[eastender]

Post by Steve Firth
Do you like sex and travel? Because you can fuck right off.

Oh dear - must have touched a nerve - no sense of humour. Maybe because
you're also called Steve?

Anyway, you could have cited plenty of research on the 'sociology of
iPods', and the man-machine interface in terms of human endeavour, but
I'm not sure much of this is specific to Apple – and the company has
been better at refining ideas rather than pioneering them.

E.

[Mike Edwards]

Post by eastender

Post by Steve Firth
Do you like sex and travel? Because you can fuck right off.

Oh dear - must have touched a nerve - no sense of humour. Maybe because
you're also called Steve?
Anyway, you could have cited plenty of research on the 'sociology of
iPods', and the man-machine interface in terms of human endeavour, but
I'm not sure much of this is specific to Apple – and the company has
been better at refining ideas rather than pioneering them.

Unfortunately much of that is bollocks also. Shame people don't
understand the difference between 'innovate' and 'invention'.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by Mike Edwards

Post by eastender

Post by Steve Firth
Do you like sex and travel? Because you can fuck right off.

Oh dear - must have touched a nerve - no sense of humour. Maybe because
you're also called Steve?
Anyway, you could have cited plenty of research on the 'sociology of
iPods', and the man-machine interface in terms of human endeavour, but
I'm not sure much of this is specific to Apple â•" and the company has
been better at refining ideas rather than pioneering them.

Unfortunately much of that is bollocks also. Shame people don't
understand the difference between 'innovate' and 'invention'.

Thw words innovation and invention both have many meanings.

Invention means "A fictitious statement or story; a fabrication,
fiction, figment."

Innovation means "a novel practice, method, etc."

Which is more worthy?

A Devil's Advocate (selectively) quoting the OED.

P.S. Alternative selective quotation might result in a comparison such
as this:

Innovation means "A change made in the nature or fashion of anything."

Invention means "The original contrivance or production of a new method
or means of doing something, of an art, kind of instrument, etc.
previously unknown."

- but all invention is based on what came before. There's only a sliver
of difference between invention and innovation when considering the
words as they normally relate to technology (either things or methods).

[zoara]

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

Was it cryptic? It wasn't meant to be.

The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers. People used to be
happy with any old thrown-together plastic crap; now they have an
expectation that it looks and feels good to use. Look at MP3 players before
and after the iPod. They used to be fiddly, creaky geeky designs but now
look good and are a lot easier to use. Consumers are less likely to put up
with stuff that is baffling to use.

There's probably - in fact, very likely - to be an element of gadgets going
mainstream here. Geeks like puzzling out the exact button presses required
to change an obscure setting, but this doesn't appeal to the mainstream. So
as gadgets got more mainstream, they *had* to become easier to use (as well
as less of an eyesore; the "cool" factor can't be underestimated). But I'd
argue that this, too, is part of what Apple has done. The Macintosh wasn't
really the computer for the rest of us; it was the computer for the rest of
the geeks. The real computer for the rest of us is arguably the iPhone,
which has pushed computing *really* mainstream.

In short, Apple has - in my opinion - changed the attitude people have
towards gadgets. They're no longer for geeks, but for the cool kids too.

That will be enduring, and I think that the empowerment it gives people -
if only to post pictures of cats to their friends - is a thing of beauty.

-zoara-

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by zoara

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

Was it cryptic? It wasn't meant to be.
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers. People used to be
happy with any old thrown-together plastic crap;

I don't think that's right. Pre-iPod, mp3 players were so poorly
designed that most people simply couldn't use them. People were *NOT*
happy with them, not that I saw. A tiny minority were capable of
putting them to use, but generally people didn't like them.

Post by zoara
now they have an
expectation that it looks and feels good to use. Look at MP3 players before
and after the iPod. They used to be fiddly, creaky geeky designs but now
look good and are a lot easier to use. Consumers are less likely to put up
with stuff that is baffling to use.

If a person finds a gadget baffling, they won't use it - won't put up
with it at all.

Post by zoara
There's probably - in fact, very likely - to be an element of gadgets going
mainstream here. Geeks like puzzling out the exact button presses required
to change an obscure setting, but this doesn't appeal to the mainstream.

Hmm. Only if you define `geek' as `someone who likes bad engineering'.
Well-engineered technology is - by definition - straightforward to use.

(Although yes, some of it does required a trained expert. Cars and
aeroplanes are straightforward to use, provided you've learnt how.)

Post by zoara
So
as gadgets got more mainstream, they *had* to become easier to use

Gadgets were mainstream before the Sony Walkman. People had wireless
sets, record players, then portable transistor radios. And then
Walkmen. Gadgets, all of 'em.

And all of those gadgets were easy to use.

The problem with the designers of latter-day gadgets such as early mp3
players was that they were mostly bad engineers and failed to design kit
that was adequately straightforward to use - and so such gadgets were
never going to have a large market.

Post by zoara
(as well
as less of an eyesore; the "cool" factor can't be underestimated). But I'd
argue that this, too, is part of what Apple has done. The Macintosh wasn't
really the computer for the rest of us; it was the computer for the rest of
the geeks.

That's not what I saw, not with System 6 - 7 era Macs. The mistake is
to think that anyone could just sit down and just use a Mac without
training. Training was always required - some could get the training
using Apple-supplied material in the pre OS X days, but others needed a
person to teach them about the operating principles.

Given training, I'd say anyone with normal abilties could learn to make
good use of a Mac in those days. These days? Probably not much
different, except that Macs are a lot more confusing and less intuitive.

Post by zoara
The real computer for the rest of us is arguably the iPhone,
which has pushed computing *really* mainstream.

Most UK households have internet-connected PCs. Sounds pretty
mainstream to me. What did it was cheap PCs, internet services, and Web
browsers - that's what made computing mainstream in my opinion.

Post by zoara
In short, Apple has - in my opinion - changed the attitude people have
towards gadgets. They're no longer for geeks, but for the cool kids too.

Hmm. Geeks are generally part of the set of cool kids, aren't they?
The lazy and stupid underachievers who like to push the idea that *they*
are the cool kids never really convinced anyone when I was growing up.

My peers generally considered that those displaying real ability were
the cool kids - be that ability intellectual, practical (i.e., making
things be it a gadget or art or music), or sporting.

Post by zoara
That will be enduring, and I think that the empowerment it gives people -
if only to post pictures of cats to their friends - is a thing of beauty.

Email did that.

Rowland.

[JTM]

In article
<1krz8el.ynfjnbis4jceN%real-address-in-***@flur.bltigibbet.invalid>,
Rowland McDonnell

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Gadgets were mainstream before the Sony Walkman. People
had wireless sets, record players, then portable
transistor radios. And then Walkmen. Gadgets, all of
'em.
And all of those gadgets were easy to use.

And then came video tape recorders! Great tech for the time
but the UI left lots of people suicidal.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The problem with the designers of latter-day gadgets such
as early mp3 players was that they were mostly bad
engineers and failed to design kit that was adequately
straightforward to use - and so such gadgets were never
going to have a large market.

Often bought as presents and never used.

John

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by JTM

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Gadgets were mainstream before the Sony Walkman. People
had wireless sets, record players, then portable
transistor radios. And then Walkmen. Gadgets, all of
'em.
And all of those gadgets were easy to use.

And then came video tape recorders! Great tech for the time
but the UI left lots of people suicidal.

Hmm.... Easy enough to operate in real time. Setting up the timer for
recording when you were out - /that/ was the awkward bit.

Not great tech at all, not the programming side of things. If it had
been great tech, it would have been easy to use.

I recall visiting my parents one time (circa 1990, I suspect), long
after I'd flown the coop. They'd got a new video recorder and couldn't
figure out how to programme the thing. I confidently sat down with the
manual and you know what? I couldn't figure it out either.

So then I got cross, lay down in front of the bloody video and pushed
buttons until I'd figured it out. It wasn't actually all that
difficult, but the manual was utter shite.

Post by JTM

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The problem with the designers of latter-day gadgets such
as early mp3 players was that they were mostly bad
engineers and failed to design kit that was adequately
straightforward to use - and so such gadgets were never
going to have a large market.

Often bought as presents and never used.

I've seen that.

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
Maybe the enduring beauty is not the physical objects themselves?

Rather cryptic - do say more.

Was it cryptic? It wasn't meant to be.
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers. People used to be
happy with any old thrown-together plastic crap;

I don't think that's right. Pre-iPod, mp3 players were so poorly
designed that most people simply couldn't use them. People were *NOT*
happy with them, not that I saw. A tiny minority were capable of
putting them to use, but generally people didn't like them.

Post by zoara
now they have an
expectation that it looks and feels good to use. Look at MP3 players before
and after the iPod. They used to be fiddly, creaky geeky designs but now
look good and are a lot easier to use. Consumers are less likely to put up
with stuff that is baffling to use.

If a person finds a gadget baffling, they won't use it - won't put up
with it at all.

But it doesn't stop them buying it, they might not buyv another though.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
There's probably - in fact, very likely - to be an element of gadgets going
mainstream here. Geeks like puzzling out the exact button presses required
to change an obscure setting, but this doesn't appeal to the mainstream.

Hmm. Only if you define `geek' as `someone who likes bad engineering'.
Well-engineered technology is - by definition - straightforward to use.
(Although yes, some of it does required a trained expert. Cars and
aeroplanes are straightforward to use, provided you've learnt how.)

The product needs to do it's job well, whether or not it'll do other jobs is another question.
Does an ipod really need a gadget for getting a stone out of a horse hoof ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
So
as gadgets got more mainstream, they *had* to become easier to use

Gadgets were mainstream before the Sony Walkman. People had wireless
sets, record players, then portable transistor radios. And then
Walkmen. Gadgets, all of 'em.

Terminology has changed go to wireless world of teh 1960s I doubt you'll find any gadgets for sale.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
And all of those gadgets were easy to use.

I remmebr my dad fidlling with an old wireless to try to get teh station in tune. I remmebr trying to tune in a TV with 4 buttons adn little wheels, sometimes it needed adjusting everyday I had to get up off a my chair to do it, nowerdays I point the remote control and press a button, I think that is easier than it was years ago.
I remmeber my nan with what I'd call a gadget to get winkles or cockals out of their shell so she could eat them, I find then in jars on supermarket sheleves ready to eat. I find undoing the lid easier.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The problem with the designers of latter-day gadgets such as early mp3
players was that they were mostly bad engineers and failed to design kit
that was adequately straightforward to use - and so such gadgets were
never going to have a large market.

They hadn't corectly targeted their market, they targeted at geeks not mainstream users. RemmebEr that withoiut a computer MP3 players were pretty useless.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
(as well
as less of an eyesore; the "cool" factor can't be underestimated). But I'd
argue that this, too, is part of what Apple has done. The Macintosh wasn't
really the computer for the rest of us; it was the computer for the rest of
the geeks.

That's not what I saw, not with System 6 - 7 era Macs. The mistake is
to think that anyone could just sit down and just use a Mac without
training.

When we first brought them they came with a training kit, an audio tape with a terrible american accent telling you how to use a mouse, how many PCs/compters come with that now ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Training was always required - some could get the training
using Apple-supplied material in the pre OS X days, but others needed a
person to teach them about the operating principles.

But was that because they were difficult to use, I don't think so, it was because they were a new way of doing things the WYSIWYG gui.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Given training, I'd say anyone with normal abilties could learn to make
good use of a Mac in those days. These days? Probably not much
different, except that Macs are a lot more confusing and less intuitive.

I don;t think new users find that.

In our days we had to save a file, remmebr to give it a name, but it in the right folder, back it up. Now in ML you get prompted for anything, and you don;t have to worry about where it is.
If I want a document I had to find the floopy it was on and remmebr to take it with me, now I can just login to teh cloud and download it whereever I am.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
The real computer for the rest of us is arguably the iPhone,
which has pushed computing *really* mainstream.

Most UK households have internet-connected PCs. Sounds pretty
mainstream to me. What did it was cheap PCs, internet services, and Web
browsers - that's what made computing mainstream in my opinion.

depends whether you see that as computering. It's the differnce between writing a letter to a friends and being classed as an author.
My brother does computing (as he calls it) most evenings, what he does is play Tiger woods gold game, what I see as computing is more like writing app or using a program to do FFT or process control.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
In short, Apple has - in my opinion - changed the attitude people have
towards gadgets. They're no longer for geeks, but for the cool kids too.

Hmm. Geeks are generally part of the set of cool kids, aren't they?

Differnt set I think.
A geek can have spots, but no girlfriend, where a s a cool kid has the clothes and the gadgets but can't do originality.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The lazy and stupid underachievers who like to push the idea that *they*
are the cool kids never really convinced anyone when I was growing up.
My peers generally considered that those displaying real ability were
the cool kids - be that ability intellectual, practical (i.e., making
things be it a gadget or art or music), or sporting.

Isn;t that similar to being bad like michael jackson, or is it good like jimmy saville ;-)

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
That will be enduring, and I think that the empowerment it gives people -
if only to post pictures of cats to their friends - is a thing of beauty.

Email did that.
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Sara]

Post by whisky-dave
I remmeber my nan with what I'd call a gadget to get winkles or cockals out
of their shell so she could eat them, I find then in jars on supermarket
sheleves ready to eat. I find undoing the lid easier.

Late to the thread - sorry!

My Nan had one of those too, it was called a pin. Of course the
shellfish you get in jars tastes nothing like eating them fresh. Or so I
recall from 20-mumble years ago that I last had them.

I used to *love* winkle sandwiches.

It's one of the things I've noticed since being a vege (sorry Rowland, I
know you prefer veggie, but it just doesn't work for me) is that I've
never forgotten what things tasted/felt like in the mouth. I certainly
don't miss them, but I've not fogotten them. For some reason I find that
odd.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave
I remmeber my nan with what I'd call a gadget to get winkles or cockals out
of their shell so she could eat them, I find then in jars on supermarket
sheleves ready to eat. I find undoing the lid easier.

Late to the thread - sorry!

Better late than never....

Post by Sara
My Nan had one of those too, it was called a pin.

Did she take it with her, as I remmeber going on trips to southend and goign to stalls well they sdsold these sorts of things I rmmewbr that I only ever ate cocles, you got them on a small plate (not paper or plastic), I remmebr my nan prefered winklws but don;t remmebr whther or to the stall provided a winkle picker or she used a hat pin or whatever.

Post by Sara
Of course the
shellfish you get in jars tastes nothing like eating them fresh.

I assume so but it was so long ago, what I do know is that shop brought ones are differnt some are gritty others less so. I eat about 1 jar of cocles a year.

Post by Sara
Or so I
recall from 20-mumble years ago that I last had them.
I used to *love* winkle sandwiches.

Cocle sandwiches for me with black pepper and vinigar .

Post by Sara
It's one of the things I've noticed since being a vege (sorry Rowland, I
know you prefer veggie, but it just doesn't work for me)

I think most sensible people think like that I too have vege friends and they remmebr bacon and chicken but chose not to eat it due to theor belief(s) rather than claiming not to like it.

Post by Sara
is that I've
never forgotten what things tasted/felt like in the mouth. I certainly
don't miss them, but I've not fogotten them. For some reason I find that
odd.

I can understand it, I haven't eaten liver for years.

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

[Sara]

Post by whisky-dave
Did she take it with her, as I remmeber going on trips to southend and goign
to stalls well they sdsold these sorts of things I rmmewbr that I only ever
ate cocles, you got them on a small plate (not paper or plastic), I remmebr
my nan prefered winklws but don;t remmebr whther or to the stall provided a
winkle picker or she used a hat pin or whatever.

The stalls would usually have a wooden thingie, but they would be
selling already dead/cooked shellfish. I was talking about getting them
alive and cooking them. Although, hmmm, I don't remember ever cooking
winkles. We just used ordinary household/dress-making pins, nothing
sepcially designed for the job.

As a youngster I used to visit my Aunt's caravan at Camber Sands. We
used to go out and collect live cockles for tea, straight from the sand.
There are almost none there now. I feel a bit sad that I was part of the
generation that over-collected them, let alone how I now feel about
boiling anything alive.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Sara <***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Sara
As a youngster I used to visit my Aunt's caravan at Camber Sands. We
used to go out and collect live cockles for tea, straight from the sand.
There are almost none there now. I feel a bit sad that I was part of the
generation that over-collected them, let alone how I now feel about
boiling anything alive.

If there are still /some/ cockles left, sensible management of the area
will let them re-colonise.

There are cockle beds close to me, in the river Dee - they're quite hot
on making sure they're exploited sustainably:

<http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/news/131879.aspx?month=7&year=2011
(then again, those cockle beds are pretty much next door to a site of
special scientific interest - the Parkgate salt marsh. There's a lot of
people interested in maintaining the Dee estuary in good condition)

Rowland.

[Sara]

In article

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by Sara
As a youngster I used to visit my Aunt's caravan at Camber Sands. We
used to go out and collect live cockles for tea, straight from the sand.
There are almost none there now. I feel a bit sad that I was part of the
generation that over-collected them, let alone how I now feel about
boiling anything alive.

If there are still /some/ cockles left, sensible management of the area
will let them re-colonise.

I hope so. Popped down with Rog for a visit recently and there were a
few dotted about and more importantly, no one collecting them.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
There are cockle beds close to me, in the river Dee - they're quite hot
<http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/news/131879.aspx?month=7&year=2011
(then again, those cockle beds are pretty much next door to a site of
special scientific interest - the Parkgate salt marsh. There's a lot of
people interested in maintaining the Dee estuary in good condition)
Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave
Did she take it with her, as I remmeber going on trips to southend and goign
to stalls well they sdsold these sorts of things I rmmewbr that I only ever
ate cocles, you got them on a small plate (not paper or plastic), I remmebr
my nan prefered winklws but don;t remmebr whther or to the stall provided a
winkle picker or she used a hat pin or whatever.

The stalls would usually have a wooden thingie, but they would be
selling already dead/cooked shellfish. I was talking about getting them
alive and cooking them.

My nan did that at home.
I know wingle pickers were a type of shoe, I assume they got their name from the device used to get winkles out which I was pretty sure was a pin with a curve unless my nan made it herself.

Post by Sara
Although, hmmm, I don't remember ever cooking

I thought she soaked them or boilded them .

Post by Sara
winkles. We just used ordinary household/dress-making pins, nothing
sepcially designed for the job.
As a youngster I used to visit my Aunt's caravan at Camber Sands.

I used to go there too, the holidyab camp, that is so far the only place I've been where I had to wear wellies to play table tennis and teh only time I've been in a fire incident where there was actually a fire(in the tiolets) rather than a false alarm or practice. It was quite a weird experince as people ran down the stairs my brother and I just treated as a school fire drill no big deal.

Post by Sara
used to go out and collect live cockles for tea, straight from the sand.
There are almost none there now.

Would you do it if there were, from apollution POV that is.
I think they are stil picked in southend although I doubt I'd trust them.

Post by Sara
I feel a bit sad that I was part of the
generation that over-collected them, let alone how I now feel about
boiling anything alive.

I can think of a few people I wouldn;t mind doing that to ;-)

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

[Sara]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
There are almost none there now.

Would you do it if there were, from apollution POV that is.
I think they are stil picked in southend although I doubt I'd trust them.

No, I've been vegetarian for about 20-odd years now.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
There are almost none there now.

Would you do it if there were, from apollution POV that is.
I think they are stil picked in southend although I doubt I'd trust them.

No, I've been vegetarian for about 20-odd years now.

Well I meant hypothetically anyway hence the pollution angle, and some vegitarians do eat fish.

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

[Sara]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
There are almost none there now.

Would you do it if there were, from apollution POV that is.
I think they are stil picked in southend although I doubt I'd trust them.

No, I've been vegetarian for about 20-odd years now.

Well I meant hypothetically anyway hence the pollution angle, and some
vegitarians do eat fish.

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way, you could end up
really paranoid that way. And "vegetarians" who eat fish, aren't.
They're just people who don't eat meat.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Sara <***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Sara
I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way, you could end up
really paranoid that way.

Shellfish are famous for their susceptibility to pollution. Whatever's
in the water, they pick up.

I recall hearing on R4 recently about a Victorian typhoid outbreak
caused by siting an oyster farm next to a raw sewage outlet - quite
deliberately, to take advantage of the increased nutrients in the water.

AIUI, it's routine for harvested shellfish to be kept for a few days in
artificially cleaned water to ensure that they're well washed out.

Predatory fish from the sea are mostly contaminated with heavy metals to
such an extent that pregnant and breast feeding women are advised to
keep consumption of them down to a fairly small level, despite the fish
oil being good for you in all sorts of ways.

(the higher up the food chain, the greater the concentration of
pollutants like heavy metals in the creature's anatomy)

And don't get me started on drugs fed to farmed animals.

Oh yeah, and then there's the problem of contaminated fruit and veg.
Washing it under a tap won't remove pathogens left there from the hands
of the person who packed the veg and that's before we get started on
pesticide residue.

Modern food is horribly polluted in all sorts of ways. On the other
hand, it was worse back when my parents were young because back then,
they still soldered food cans using leaded solder. Pretty much the
entire industrialised world was suffering from levels of lead just below
the `now it's going to do something nasty' level.

And never mind the amount of smoke in the air, from domestic fireplaces,
people smoking, factories, road vehicles, you name it.

Even now, the world's coal fired power stations chuck out more
radioactivity in a year than has been released in all the nuclear power
station accidents to date.

Funny thing is, the human race seems to be coping okay.

Post by Sara
And "vegetarians" who eat fish, aren't.
They're just people who don't eat meat.

Fish are made of meat and bone (etc) just like any other animal.

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by Sara
I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way, you could end up
really paranoid that way.

Shellfish are famous for their susceptibility to pollution. Whatever's
in the water, they pick up.
I recall hearing on R4 recently about a Victorian typhoid outbreak
caused by siting an oyster farm next to a raw sewage outlet - quite
deliberately, to take advantage of the increased nutrients in the water.

don;t have to go back that far.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/6430858/Fat-Duck-food-poisoning-Heston-Blumenthal-will-face-no-action.html

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Fish are made of meat and bone (etc) just like any other animal.

Starnge that I;'ve never found bones in my cockles maybe sara has in the past.
I've never eaten muscles or snails so can;t comment on them but I don;t think they have bones but can be classed as animals.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[whisky-dave]

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
There are almost none there now.

Would you do it if there were, from apollution POV that is.
I think they are stil picked in southend although I doubt I'd trust them.

No, I've been vegetarian for about 20-odd years now.

Well I meant hypothetically anyway hence the pollution angle, and some
vegitarians do eat fish.

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way,

Me niether but I('m not picking anying raw, that includes fruit, mushrooms and stuff out of seabeds.

Post by Sara
you could end up
really paranoid that way.

True but I don;t know of any parnoid dead people only live parniod people.

Post by Sara
And "vegetarians" who eat fish, aren't.

Are you ones of those vegitarians that think it means you only eat vegitables ?
I know vegitariens that eat fruit, nuts and pulses, although I've spelt that wrong.
Some won;t eat eggs as they come from 'harmed or stressed birds'
can vegitarians wear leather, my friends won't do you ?
They don;t think anyone can be a vegitarian of you wear an animal product, such as leather not wool is OK because the animal doesn;lt get killed.


Thing is Vegetarianism the word doesn't mean only eat vegtables.

you have to go back a long way to fidn out where the word vegatarism came from.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahinsa

Buddhists have always condemned the killing of all living beings.[5][6] In most Buddhist traditions vegetarianism is not mandatory. Monks and lay persons may eat meat and fish on condition that the animal was not killed specifically for them.[7]

Post by Sara
They're just people who don't eat meat.

Or a non-Carnivore perhaps.

Meat eaters (humans) aren't classed as Carnivores though

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

[Sara]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way,

Me niether but I('m not picking anying raw, that includes fruit, mushrooms
and stuff out of seabeds.

Post by Sara
you could end up
really paranoid that way.

True but I don;t know of any parnoid dead people only live parniod people.

You also don't know any dead non-paranoid people.

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
And "vegetarians" who eat fish, aren't.

Are you ones of those vegitarians that think it means you only eat vegitables ?
I know vegitariens that eat fruit, nuts and pulses, although I've spelt that wrong.
Some won;t eat eggs as they come from 'harmed or stressed birds'

I only eat free range eggs.

Post by whisky-dave
can vegitarians wear leather, my friends won't do you ?

No.

Post by whisky-dave
They don;t think anyone can be a vegitarian of you wear an animal product,
such as leather not wool is OK because the animal doesn;lt get killed.

I don't wear leather or use leather products. I do wear wool. I am not
however a vegan.

Post by whisky-dave
Thing is Vegetarianism the word doesn't mean only eat vegtables.

It pretty much means, in very general terms, that you don't eat
something other than a plant that has to die to produce the food.

Post by whisky-dave
you have to go back a long way to fidn out where the word vegatarism came from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahinsa
Buddhists have always condemned the killing of all living beings.[5][6] In
most Buddhist traditions vegetarianism is not mandatory. Monks and lay
persons may eat meat and fish on condition that the animal was not killed
specifically for them.[7]
'

I'm not a buddhist. Actually, I'm not sure I'm an anything. Maybe a Mac
FanBoi (Gurl?) does that count?

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
They're just people who don't eat meat.

Or a non-Carnivore perhaps.
Meat eaters (humans) aren't classed as Carnivores though

Humans are classed as omnivores.

I do hope you're not going to start one of the endless "oh, you're a
vegetarian and I'm not, so I need to make you *prove* why your choices
are better than mine" arguments. I got tired of indulging those at some
point in the early 90s.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
I don't worry about pollution in food in a general way,

Me niether but I('m not picking anying raw, that includes fruit, mushrooms
and stuff out of seabeds.

Post by Sara
you could end up
really paranoid that way.

True but I don;t know of any parnoid dead people only live parniod people.

You also don't know any dead non-paranoid people.

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
And "vegetarians" who eat fish, aren't.

Are you ones of those vegitarians that think it means you only eat vegitables
?
I know vegitariens that eat fruit, nuts and pulses, although I've spelt that
wrong.
Some won;t eat eggs as they come from 'harmed or stressed birds'

I only eat free range eggs.

Post by whisky-dave
can vegitarians wear leather, my friends won't do you ?

No.

They are also very careful with makeup and anything such as hair dye and won;t use anything that is animal tested (knowinly of course)

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave
They don;t think anyone can be a vegitarian of you wear an animal product,
such as leather not wool is OK because the animal doesn;lt get killed.

I don't wear leather or use leather products. I do wear wool. I am not
however a vegan.

yes that;s quite differnt although they have vegan ways, i.e certain wines & beers use animal products and they aviod them.

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave
Thing is Vegetarianism the word doesn't mean only eat vegtables.

It pretty much means, in very general terms, that you don't eat
something other than a plant that has to die to produce the food.

It was orignally about much more than what goes in your mouth it was a belief about not doing harm to sentinet beings.

I had a macro-biotic GF for a while and veggie and vegan friends so I can see there's a range of belifs that dont; always agree.
Can a butcher be a vegitarian, I've always found that one intresting.
I think they can but prefer to leave that up to their moral standpoint.

And that is why I have friends that can say they are vegitarium but eat fish or vegitarian but will eat white meat.

I oftened a friend a terrin of rasberrys in rasberry jelly, he said he could eat it because it contained Pork fat which it did according to the ingredinets.
So he won;t eat that but, will eat responsibly sorced fish.
Being a bit of a hippie and having lived in india he has hin vegitarian views bassed of buddism rather than the christian interpretation which came 100s of years later.

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave
you have to go back a long way to fidn out where the word vegatarism came
from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahinsa
Buddhists have always condemned the killing of all living beings.[5][6] In
most Buddhist traditions vegetarianism is not mandatory. Monks and lay
persons may eat meat and fish on condition that the animal was not killed
specifically for them.[7]
'

I'm not a buddhist. Actually, I'm not sure I'm an anything. Maybe a Mac
FanBoi (Gurl?) does that count?

Not sure, can you be a mac fan gurl and use a PC ?
I think I can call myself a Mac person even though most of my work is done on a PC, and that is because I'm going to do something really nasty in my next life so I'm obvuisuoly paying for it now. :-)

or maybe I'm Jesus paying for everyone elses sins....
it's not like I have any of my own 0:-D


My veggie friends won't go to a zoo or other such place because where animals are kept for public amusment. I've question them on doing reaseach regarding endangered species.

Post by Sara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Sara
They're just people who don't eat meat.

Or a non-Carnivore perhaps.
Meat eaters (humans) aren't classed as Carnivores though

Humans are classed as omnivores.

What even vegitarian ones ?
See that's why I allow people to say to me they are vegitarians but eat fish, or white meat.

I knewn it vegitarians aren't human, I'll use that tonight on two vegitariinas I'm meeting.

Post by Sara
I do hope you're not going to start one of the endless "oh, you're a
vegetarian and I'm not,

I'm not a vegitarian, I won't eat anything that offends vegoitarians in their presence either, so like most people I make my own rules and I follow them.
Which is why I have no objection to anyone saying they are vegitarian but will eat fish, because they ARE NOT saying they ARE vegitarins FULL STOP.

Post by Sara
so I need to make you *prove* why your choices
are better than mine" arguments.

They are for me.

Post by Sara
I got tired of indulging those at some
point in the early 90s.

Later than me then who statred first in the early 80s when I complained that a vegan friend who only ate chips and beans, and drank skol lager (as he believed was one of the few that didn;t use animal products) with a creme de menth floater.
His farts in the pub were digusting and made me feel sick at times so what about his belief in doing no harm to living creatures ;-)

Post by Sara
--
Sara
cats cats cats cats cats

[Rowland McDonnell]

Sara <***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Sara
It's one of the things I've noticed since being a vege (sorry Rowland, I
know you prefer veggie, but it just doesn't work for me)

[snip]

I'll just put down in my book as irretrievably crazy.

;-)

Rowland.

[Sara]

In article

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by Sara
It's one of the things I've noticed since being a vege (sorry Rowland, I
know you prefer veggie, but it just doesn't work for me)

[snip]
I'll just put down in my book as irretrievably crazy.
;-)
Rowland.

You wouldnt be the first!

[eastender]

Post by zoara
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers.

Yes, but I was taking exception to the overblown rhetoric of:

“It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough — it’s
technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that
yields us the result that makes our heart sing and nowhere is that more
true than in these post-PC devices.”
There are important applications 'in the humanities' - mobile phones in
rural Africa for example - but a basic Nokia is more likely to be used.
E.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by zoara
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers.

"It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough — it's
technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that
yields us the result that makes our heart sing and nowhere is that more
true than in these post-PC devices."
There are important applications 'in the humanities' - mobile phones in
rural Africa for example

Yes, that's overblown rhetoric all right.

But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

Not sure what `in the humanities' has to do with it.

- but a basic Nokia is more likely to be used.

Access to information is what they need phones for in rural Africa - a
cheap Web-enabled phone does very nicely.

Rowland.

[eastender]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.
Not sure what `in the humanities' has to do with it.

Well exactly - I'm trying to give Jobs some slack. Maybe we can focus
on the 'liberal arts' – iPads are good for showing off pictures...

E.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by eastender

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.
Not sure what `in the humanities' has to do with it.

Well exactly - I'm trying to give Jobs some slack. Maybe we can focus
on the 'liberal arts' – iPads are good for showing off pictures...

<heh> First time I've heard snapshots of drunken idiots and small
children called `art'.

;-)

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by zoara
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers.

"It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough — it's
technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that
yields us the result that makes our heart sing and nowhere is that more
true than in these post-PC devices."
There are important applications 'in the humanities' - mobile phones in
rural Africa for example

Yes, that's overblown rhetoric all right.
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few £million that needs depositing.

I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's the cheapest deals about £10-£15 a month, can they really afford that and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live next door or ordering from amazon ?
I'd have thought the phones were most useful to those war tribes that go around raping and pillaging.......

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Not sure what `in the humanities' has to do with it.

- but a basic Nokia is more likely to be used.

Access to information is what they need phones for in rural Africa - a
cheap Web-enabled phone does very nicely.

What sort of informaion, where to get medical help they can't afford ?
when the next Apple product is to be released.......
Most poor areas lack runnijng water and power so not sure how they;'d charge their phones, personally I'd have throught solar power, but that's quite an investment.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[D.M. Procida]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few £million that needs depositing.
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about £10-£15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.

Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.

Daniele

[whisky-dave]

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few �million that needs depositing.
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about �10-�15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.
Daniele

Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

[zoara]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few �million that needs depositing.
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about �10-�15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.
Daniele

Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

-zoara-

[D.M. Procida]

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

I didn't want to find out.

Daniele

[whisky-dave]

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

I didn't want to find out.

Very typical.

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/us-faith-based-group-sends-solar-powered-audio-bibles-to-haiti.html

In the stream of goods that are pouring in to aid the relief effort in Haiti, one will certainly stand out--a solar powered audio Bible. Instead of food, water, or medical supplies, US faith-based group Faith Comes By Hearing has opted to send 600 audible bibles, which are currently en route to the Port-au-Prince. Each of the units can broadcast the scriptures in Haitian Creole to an audience of up to 300 people.


for those that still don;t want to find out I hear ther'e s free buckets and sand availble

Post by D.M. Procida
Daniele

[whisky-dave]

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few �million that needs depositing.
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about �10-�15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.
Daniele

Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

In the early days of our colonial expanse, those that had the same religious beliefs as 'ours' we given food and a bible, while others died.
Even mother thrasa walked past the dieing and didn;t help unless they were of the chosen religion.

[Rowland McDonnell]

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

In the early days of our colonial expanse, those that had the same
religious beliefs as 'ours' we given food and a bible, while others died.

Do you have any references to back up that claim?

I'd be interested to read them, because as any fule kno, in the early
days of British colonialism, (almost) none of the natives were
Christian. Missionaries followed the imperial expansion.

The point of the British empire was to exploit foreign nations in order
to make money. Handing out freebies to anyone was not part of the plan.

So: any links to back up your latest `interesting' claim?

Post by whisky-dave
Even mother thrasa walked past the dieing and didn;t help unless they were
of the chosen religion.

That's as wrong as the rest of your opinions.

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/5872071/Mother-Teresa.html>

"I do convert," admitted Mother Teresa, "I convert you to be a better
Hindu, a better Catholic, Muslim, Jain or Buddhist."

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

In the early days of our colonial expanse, those that had the same
religious beliefs as 'ours' we given food and a bible, while others died.

Do you have any references to back up that claim?

Not that you'd understand. Anymore than I had links to jimmy saville taking young girls into a flat in the road off from where I live.
I friend who knew more alos had no links, but he did ask me to post a track he did in 2005 but I refused as it protrayed nice Jimmy as a bit of a pedo and without links I was putting it on my youtube account.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
I'd be interested to read them, because as any fule kno, in the early
days of British colonialism, (almost) none of the natives were
Christian.

Why diod they become christain ?
Is wasnt; through threats of stavation and that preying to got will give them crops while following their beliefs was sinful.



Missionaries followed the imperial expansion.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
The point of the British empire was to exploit foreign nations in order
to make money. Handing out freebies to anyone was not part of the plan.

They weren't exactly free.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
So: any links to back up your latest `interesting' claim?

problem is this all happen many years ago so not much chance is there.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by whisky-dave
Even mother thrasa walked past the dieing and didn;t help unless they were
of the chosen religion.

That's as wrong as the rest of your opinions.
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/5872071/Mother-Teresa.html>

Well the torygraphs tribute to Jimmy saville was quite impressive too.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
"I do convert," admitted Mother Teresa, "I convert you to be a better
Hindu, a better Catholic, Muslim, Jain or Buddhist."

In her eyes yes.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

In the early days of our colonial expanse, those that had the same
religious beliefs as 'ours' we given food and a bible, while others died.

Do you have any references to back up that claim?

Not that you'd understand.

So you haven't got any links, then. Why not just admit you're making it
all up and haven't got a clue?

Post by whisky-dave
Anymore than I had links to jimmy saville
taking young girls into a flat in the road off from where I live.

Interesting logic you're using there. You seem to be saying that
because a kiddy fiddling DJ operated near you, that means the British
empire expanded into regions containing significant numbers of
Christians and provided them with food while others starved.

Can you explain how that works?

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
I'd be interested to read them, because as any fule kno, in the early
days of British colonialism, (almost) none of the natives were
Christian.

Why diod they become christain ?

I've already explained.

Post by whisky-dave
Is wasnt; through threats of stavation and that preying to got will give
them crops while following their beliefs was sinful.

Any links to back up that idea? If you can't provide links, there's no
reason to think you're doing anything but making up nonsense.

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
So: any links to back up your latest `interesting' claim?

problem is this all happen many years ago so not much chance is there.

Plenty of historical references on-line, so of course there's plenty of
opportunity for you to provide links to facts about the era in question.

It's just that because your ideas are wrong, you'll find nothing to back
up your ideas.

Don't worry: I'll drop this subthread unless boozy dave can provide any
links that back up his ideas.

[snip]

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell
[snip]

Post by whisky-dave

Post by zoara

Post by whisky-dave
Give them a bible at the same time that might help too.

What does this mean?

In the early days of our colonial expanse, those that had the same
religious beliefs as 'ours' we given food and a bible, while others died.

Do you have any references to back up that claim?

Well I did a quick search but most of my info came from where I worled years ago in an india supermarket where some of those thoer wre present in india at the time but then again I guess you can ingnore individual experinces for the mass ones.

http://futiledemocracy.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/the-curse-of-mother-theresa/
Now the chance of you actually reading this is pretty remote but give it a try I can;t claim that everything here is true but I've often wondered what happens to the money donated.

Now she wasn;t linkled to Africa or teh stancew that condoms transmitted AIDS but I assume you;'ll reject that that happened to via the catholic church.

Just becuse I can't povide a link to you taking a shit doesn't mean it's never happened.

[Rowland McDonnell]

[snip]

Post by whisky-dave
Well I did a quick search but most of my info came from where I worled
years ago in an india supermarket where some of those thoer wre present in
india at the time but then again I guess you can ingnore individual
experinces for the mass ones.
http://futiledemocracy.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/the-curse-of-mother-theres
a/
Now the chance of you actually reading this is pretty remote but give it
a try

[snip]

Another boozy dave opinion that's completely wrong.

Of course I read it. Didn't take long. I saw nothing in that article
suggesting that she refused to help those who were not Christian - which
is the claim you made which I pointed out was false.

Post by whisky-dave

Post by whisky-dave
Even mother thrasa walked past the dieing and didn;t help unless they were
of the chosen religion.

I never said she was above criticism, just that she didn't restrict her
activities to Christians, which is what you wrongly suggested.

You've failed to provide evidence to back up that false claim.

btw, that article does not strike me as very reliable, because it misses
out verifiable criticisms of serious harm Mother Teresa definitely
caused and doesn't provide proper references - just claims that it'd be
hard to check one at a time.

Well, you've done your best and that's that. Wrong again.

In defence of Mother Teresa's crazy ideas: don't forget that she was
brainwashed into her lunatic beliefs by a crazy section (convent) of a
crazy organization (the Roman church) after a childhood in a crazy part
of the world (the Balkans). And then she had her beliefs confirmed by
the adulation she received from so many during her Missionaries of
Charity working life.

It's not really her fault she ended up out to lunch on so many subjects.
I'd call her a victim of society.

Rowland.

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few £million that needs depositing.

<sigh> Boozy Dave's ignorance rears its impenetrable head again.
Telephone scams tend to be done using cheap internet telephony based in
urban call centres. btw, I've never had anyone ring me up with a
419-type offer and I don't believe you have either, have you?

Just making up nonsense to create pointless argument, as usual.

It's just a shame you're incapable of opening your mind to learning. If
you were, I'd make the effort to teach you some of the methods whereby
rural Africans make more money with the aid of mobile phones.

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by whisky-dave
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about £10-£15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.

Most of rural Africa simply doesn't have land line telephony available
at all.

Traditionally, that sort of thing was installed by governments. Back in
the colonial era, governments didn't want the natives to have access to
telephones willy-nilly.

Since then, governments in Africa have mostly operated on the `I'm all
right Jack' principle of making sure that *they* have telephones for
*their* use in the cities (and lots of whisky and flash motors and...)
and to hell with the rural poor.

Land line telephony is still a state monopoly in many countries. Even
where it isn't, it turns out to be cheaper to provide mobile phone
access than land-line access.

(no particular need to string wires everywhere to provide land-line
access: microwave links still work)

Rowland.

[whisky-dave]

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few £million that needs depositing.

<sigh> Boozy Dave's ignorance rears its impenetrable head again.

Bacck to personal insults are we, have you got loose from your trainer again.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Telephone scams tend to be done using cheap internet telephony based in
urban call centres. btw, I've never had anyone ring me up with a
419-type offer and I don't believe you have either, have you?

Don;t know what a 419 offer is .

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Just making up nonsense to create pointless argument, as usual.

No, I just want to know what those peole in afriocca that I see on TV starving and dying of thirst will do withy a modile phone.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
It's just a shame you're incapable of opening your mind to learning. If
you were, I'd make the effort to teach you some of the methods whereby
rural Africans make more money with the aid of mobile phones.

So why don;t you...
Of cause peole can make money out of them, just like they make money on food, guns and anything else of worth.

Post by Rowland McDonnell

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by whisky-dave
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about £10-£15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.

Most of rural Africa simply doesn't have land line telephony available
at all.

And most dont; have running water.

http://www.ifad.org/events/capetown/

You see argiculter is what is needs and teh infrstructure not mobile phones.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Traditionally, that sort of thing was installed by governments. Back in
the colonial era, governments didn't want the natives to have access to
telephones willy-nilly.

So, you think suplying everyome with a phone will feed them.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Since then, governments in Africa have mostly operated on the `I'm all
right Jack' principle of making sure that *they* have telephones for
*their* use in the cities (and lots of whisky and flash motors and...)
and to hell with the rural poor.

Giving teh rural poor a mobile will change nothing other than making themn a target for robbery.
get a clue from those that care what happens in africa, or just fidn out what charites want in africa, peole are dying of AIDs/HIV dying for lack of food, water and shelter some are dying from violnce from gangs and you think sending them mobile phones is the answer, who's going to then train them on data security.
Radios are probbly a better bet than mobiles.
Go to oxfam or just type into google what does africa really need, you think it's going to come up with mobile phones ?

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Land line telephony is still a state monopoly in many countries. Even
where it isn't, it turns out to be cheaper to provide mobile phone
access than land-line access.

So, how does that addre4ss africas more serious problems ?
Free phone water just text water to 8888 is that it.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
(no particular need to string wires everywhere to provide land-line
access: microwave links still work)

I boubt it's accured to you the infrstructure that's also needed such as masts and power.

Post by Rowland McDonnell
Rowland.
--
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

[Tim Hodgson]

Post by D.M. Procida

Post by whisky-dave

Post by Rowland McDonnell
But: people in rural Africa use mobile phones as essential business
tools to make money.

By phoning me telling me there's a few £million that needs depositing.
I'm confused by the phones for africfa unless they get free calls or some
special deal I really can;t see how the majority can afford it, what's
the cheapest deals about £10-£15 a month, can they really afford that
and then what use is a phone, talking to friends and family that live
next door or ordering from amazon ?

They are cheaper and easier to obtain than fixed phone lines for many
people, businesses and communities.
Though it might be impossibly expensive to run telephone lines to your
village or neighbourhood, a mobile telephone cell can be much more
affordable.

It's _huge_ in rural Africa, particularly for money transfers, amongst
many other things. See for instance

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/katine/katine-chronicles-blog/2010/jan/14/mob
ile-phones-africa>

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18358766>

<http://practicalaction.org/e-newsletter-interviews>

[zoara]

Post by eastender

Post by zoara
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers.

“It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough — it’s
technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that
yields us the result that makes our heart sing and nowhere is that more
true than in these post-PC devices.”
There are important applications 'in the humanities' - mobile phones in
rural Africa for example - but a basic Nokia is more likely to be used.
E.

Overblown, perhaps. Just seems to be saying what I said, more succinctly.
It's not enough for devices just to be technically capable; the technical
side of things has to be combined with an understanding and passion for how
people behave and of beauty of design.

And I think Apple has done that. Look at MP3 players before and after the
iPod; laptops before and after the MacBook Pro or MacBook Air; smartphones
before and after the iPhone; tablets before and after the iPad. I'm not
making some "everyone copies Apple" argument, but pointing out that there
is a strong influence in general - the design of these products (both
aesthetically and behaviourally) has improved, generally around the time
and in the direction that Apple has gone. For one, gadgets are now more
likely to be marketed by what they let you do, rather than by their
specification.

In short, Apple has encouraged the industry as a whole to place more
importance on factors *other* than simply the technology of the devices
they make. I think liberal arts and the humanities are covered here. And I
think that approach, that change in attitude, will be a long-lasting one.

-zoara-

[Rowland McDonnell]

Post by zoara

Post by zoara
The hardware itself is throwaway, but you can't deny that Apple has had a
huge influence on the design expectations of consumers.

"It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough — it's
technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that
yields us the result that makes our heart sing and nowhere is that more
true than in these post-PC devices."
There are important applications 'in the humanities' - mobile phones in
rural Africa for example - but a basic Nokia is more likely to be used.
E.

Overblown, perhaps. Just seems to be saying what I said, more succinctly.
It's not enough for devices just to be technically capable; the technical
side of things has to be combined with an understanding and passion for how
people behave and of beauty of design.

All that's really needed is basic engineering competence, which takes
into account how people behave and prefers elegant design to ugly
design.

All this `passion' stuff is just marketing bullshit if you ask me.

[snip]

Post by zoara
In short, Apple has encouraged the industry as a whole to place more
importance on factors *other* than simply the technology of the devices
they make.

I don't think there's any evidence for that idea. For some reason,
certain parts of the high-tech consumer industry lost interest in
competent engineering and gave us hellish video recorders and incredibly
awkward gadgets of other sorts.

What Apple has done is brought it home to people just how much better it
is if the technology is engineered in a properly competent fashion so
that consumer gadgets are - as good engineering ought to be - elegant
and straightforward to use.

Post by zoara
I think liberal arts and the humanities are covered here.

It's just plain ordinary engineering, nothing more.

Post by zoara
And I
think that approach, that change in attitude, will be a long-lasting one.

It's just a return to good engineering standards of one part of modern
industry that had largely abandoned good engineering standards.

Rowland.

[Basil Jet]

Post by eastender

Post by Simon Dobbs
I disagree- that was what he was all about.

Oh I agree that some see him as an 'artist' - I see him much more as a
pretty ruthless businessperson with an outstanding eye for industrial
design. I wish Apple would stick to that rather than wheeling out silly
quotes.
"The designation of someone as an artist, like the designation of
someone as a genius, is elastic, and anyone can claim it for himself or
herself and for each other. There is no doubt that the products Steve
Jobs brilliantly conceived of and oversaw at Apple were elegant and
beautiful, but they were, in the end, products. Artists, typically, aim
to put something of enduring beauty into the world;

Typically? Globally, theatre actors and live musicians, whose products
are ephemeral, may well outnumber other artists.