Re: New interview with Woz

["mdj" <mdj.mdj@gmail.com>]

Michael J. Mahon wrote:

> Of course, it isn't Unix...

Throwing Cygwin on there gives me enough Unix functionality to satisfy
me most of the time (essentially the ability to write shell scripts)

> > Both these things are fixable, and I quite happily use XP in my day job
> > without any issues whatsoever.
> >
> > That said, a lot of the complaints that get bandied about are
> > legitimate.
>
> My biggest complaint about PC systems is the commercial software that
> presumes to reconfigure your system as if it were the only piece of
> software on earth.  This is the evil dark side of failed attempts to
> be "easy to use".  Automatic updating has turned many otherwise well-
> behaved "passive" products into "active" monsters--even Java.

Yes, this is a problem. I'd call it poor design rather than an attempt
at ease of use though. It's like many software developers are stuck in
the old single user mentality of the early 90's. Still today most
Windows software isn't multi user aware.

Supposedly Vista will finally bring about the multi-user world, where
software will have to behave within a lesser privelleged environment.
>From what I've heard, acceptance testing has shown most people are
uncomfortable with the extra steps necessary (like entering a password
to give an installer administrator priveleges)

> Terrible examples are camera-supporting software and big, commercial
> anti-virus packages.  They are so invasive that installation should
> be called "infection".  ;-)

Yes. Fortunately for me most of these devices support good old
fashioned TWAIN and 'just work' when plugged into a Linux box.

> I would almost always choose a "pull" model for updates over a "push"
> model, though I know that regular citizens aren't savvy enough to
> "pull".

Well, it shouldn't really matter. If companies didn't take advantage of
the ability to 'push' any old rubbish onto machines the problem would
be lessened.

Matt