More Microsoft aggravations

Okay, I just have to rant and rail about Microsoft again. I've been trying to send a document via e-mail, which requires navigating to its location to load it. Once again, Windows XP slows down to an agonizing crawl. And why? Because it insists on doing so much stupidity in the background -- unnecessary operations that Microsoft feels would be "kewl." Nevermind that it sacrifices performance greatly.

The same thing often happens when you attempt to right-click on a file or a folder. In principle, there's no reason why the right-click menu should not pop up right away; however, XP uses this opportunity to say "Oooh! Oooh! There's a whole bunch of other kewl stuff I can do at this point! Let's squeeze that in!"

To some extent, this depends on the various software options and handlers that have been added to the system. This is one reason why a fresh XP installation will perform better than a three-year-old one. It's ultimately no excuse, though; calling up a right-click menu is such a simple operation that it shouldn't require massive amounts of computing time. The same holds true for calling up Windows Explorer. Microsoft simply made a whole bunch of foolish design calls in their efforts to make things look nifty.

And it's bloody aggravating.

Apprentice candidate Jessie

Earlier, I raved about the talented Ms. Kendra Todd. Well, I've been watching the first season of The Apprentice on a set of badly beaten-up library DVDs. I remember feeling that Jessie Connors had a lot to offer. After watching the early episodes again, I find that I still feel that way.

Jessie was a bit green, and she wasn't as well seasoned as Kendra. She was highly accomplished though, and a very impressive individual indeed. I don't know much about her, but she seems like the kind of person that I would choose to hire for my sales force (if I had one, that is).

Oh, and executive assistant Robin was quite delightful as well. I was sorry to hear that she was dismissed from the Trump organization. According to one alleged insider's report that I read though, she wasn't dismissed by Trump; rather, this was the doing of some new manager gal. Take that for what it's worth.

I'd love to see her return to the show... and I'd love to see her get more lines.

Engineering revisited

Earlier, I talked about this mighty fine piece of engineering design work. Way cool. That's what happens when people understand engineering design principles.

Not everybody does, though. Not everybody understands the principles of sound engineering. Consider the following encounter I once had.

I was telling somebody about this interesting diode-based device that I had received. Like a curious layperson, he said, "Can I see it?" I replied, "No, I'd rather not. It's a static-sensitive device; that's why it's enclosed in an anti-static bag. I'd rather wait until I have it under controlled conditions before opening it up."

He shot back, "That's nonsense! You can handle electronic devices all the time, and they're not going to get fried from a little static electricity. Not unless you have nanometer-sized transistors in their."

"It's not that simple," I replied. "It's not just a matter of device size. You also have to consider the type of device and the materials used. For example, CMOS devices are notoriously static-sensitive, whereas TTL devices are not."

He said, "You know what? I know people who handle blood samples with a lot of ceremony and ritual, whereas others don't. We just don't need to be that complicated."

"And how is that relevant?" I asked. "Blood and circuits are two different things. Let's say that those people are indeed overly cautious. How does this prove that static electricity is not a problem when handling circuits?"

"Look, our company has built hundreds of computers. We've never had a problem with static electricity."

"So what?" I said. "That's like saying that you've driven thousands of miles without a seatbelt, and so seatbelts are unnecessary. All it takes is one accident. Every competent technician knows that certain electronic devices are very much static sensitive."

"Well, you and I are both wearing cotton clothing. We're not going to generate static electricity -- not unless we were wearing synthetics."

"That's not true," I said. "Sure, synthetics might increase the amount of static generated -- but that doesn't mean that we won't build up any static charge right now."

"You're just being fearful," he said. "You need to develop some courage."

"You're being reckless," I said. What I really wanted to say, however, was "You're an idiot."

A fine piece of engineering

I've had the pleasure of seeing how this device operates. I'm not allowed to divulge any sensitive details; however, I can say that it is a mighty fine piece of engineering. Talk about an incredibly elegant design solution.

This device was required to scan a variety of visual targets. This presented multiple challenges, due to the differing geometries and optical characteristics of the objects in question. To make matters worse, there was also the problem of mounting some of these targets cheaply, in a manner that preserved them well. It was a thorny set of challenges, and they all had to dovetail together neatly.

Well, they did. To cut a long story short, the device, its accessory hardware and the mounting scheme all had to work together with great simplicity -- and they did. The choice of materials was just perfect. Just about the only thing that would make it better would be to manufacture some of these parts using certain rapid prototyping techniques, but that would not be cost-effective.

What a fine piece of design work.

Lazy writing in e-mails and on the 'net

Okay, I know that this blog has been a bit negative lately. Perhaps it's a sign of the stress that I've been under, and for that, I apologize.

Right now though, I just have to complain about all the sloppy writing that I see all over the 'net. It seems like so many people that I encounter are practically illiterate, if their message board posts are any indication. Ugh.

Now, I realize that some people have genuine difficulties with language. Sometimes, this is through no fault of their own, and I'd like to be tolerant of those people. With many others though, it seems like they just have no discipline... no sense of order. This is especially true of people who post incoherent ramblings in their singles site profiles and online resumes. In this case, I don't think that a lack of personal language skills is a valid excuse; after all, why not have a friend proofread your work? At least get some input, for pity's sake.

As an aside... on one singles site, I opined that people should attempt to provide polished, eye-catching profiles. One fella chewed me out, saying, "We're not applying for jobs here! It's up to you people to find the good in our profiles!" (Actually, what he said was more incoherent annd mighty difficult to decipher. I suspect that he got angry because he felt outraged at the notion of putting more work into his profile.)

I remember one guy on an e-mail distribution list. His signature said, "Don't complaint to me about spelling or grammar. What, do you think I have time to proofread my e-mails?" Notice the egotistical attitude there? He didn't feel that he shoud put any effort into proofreading his messages, but he felt perfectly justified in making others work harder to decipher his ramblings. Ugh.

Some people just revel in laziness and mediocrity, I guess. In the real world though, "good enough" just isn't. (And in most of these situations, their writings aren't even close to "good enough.")