What OS is the Nasdaq run on?

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

<http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
-----
Despite a system freeze and some glitches surrounding the
open, Nasdaq spokesman Joe Christinat maintains that â€œ100
percent of our confirmations were completed by 1:50 p.m. on
Friday,â€ which raises questions as to why some of those
receipts were significantly delayed â€” potentially signaling
further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
...
Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
Nasdaqâ€™s computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
underway.
-----

What OS is the Nasdaq run on?

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Hadron · External Since: Nov 28, 2009 Posts: 1017

Snit writes:

> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
> -----
> Despite a system freeze and some glitches surrounding the
> open, Nasdaq spokesman Joe Christinat maintains that "100
> percent of our confirmations were completed by 1:50 p.m. on
> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
> receipts were significantly delayed — potentially signaling
> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
> ...
> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
> underway.
> -----
>
> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?

Are they not using 7s Gambas "real time transaction manager" with his
hand coded "assembler access" routines?

LOL!

Did you read 7 getting bitchsmacked in the followups from the embedded
system and real linux groups yesterday? Hilarious. He was trying to be
all sage and knowledgable and the posters there laughed at him!

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/21/12 5:03 PM, in article wc8vglf5f7.fsf DeleteThis @news.eternal-september.org,
"Hadron" wrote:

> Snit writes:
>
>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>> -----
>> Despite a system freeze and some glitches surrounding the
>> open, Nasdaq spokesman Joe Christinat maintains that â€œ100
>> percent of our confirmations were completed by 1:50 p.m. on
>> Friday,â€ which raises questions as to why some of those
>> receipts were significantly delayed â€” potentially signaling
>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>> ...
>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>> Nasdaqâ€™s computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>> underway.
>> -----
>>
>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>
> Are they not using 7s Gambas "real time transaction manager" with his
> hand coded "assembler access" routines?
>
> LOL!
>
> Did you read 7 getting bitchsmacked in the followups from the embedded
> system and real linux groups yesterday? Hilarious. He was trying to be
> all sage and knowledgable and the posters there laughed at him!

Missed it... would love links.

If you want a good laugh, read some of cc's comments about standard
deviations and inflection points. Any of his last few posts. He is more
lost there than he was with GUI stuff... and that is quite a feat!

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Foster · External Since: Nov 16, 2011 Posts: 452

On Tue, 22 May 2012 02:03:24 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> Snit writes:
>
>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>> -----
>> Despite a system freeze and some glitches surrounding the
>> open, Nasdaq spokesman Joe Christinat maintains that ¡§100
>> percent of our confirmations were completed by 1:50 p.m. on
>> Friday,¡¨ which raises questions as to why some of those
>> receipts were significantly delayed ¡X potentially signaling
>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>> ...
>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>> Nasdaq¡¦s computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>> underway.
>> -----
>>
>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>
> Are they not using 7s Gambas "real time transaction manager" with his
> hand coded "assembler access" routines?
>
> LOL!

One of the funniest threads ever in COLA.

> Did you read 7 getting bitchsmacked in the followups from the embedded
> system and real linux groups yesterday? Hilarious. He was trying to be
> all sage and knowledgable and the posters there laughed at him!

They are tearing 7 a new one.
It's actually quite entertaining to watch that fool get ROPE-A-DOPED
by the people in a serious Linux group.

But yet Chris Ahlstrom thinks he is insightful and zany.

It's just further proof of how the herd protects their own and how
when one of these idiots manages to escape and post in a legitimate
group, the people there laugh at him.

Ezekiel · External Since: Aug 06, 2011 Posts: 189

"Snit" wrote in message

> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
> -----
> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
> receipts were significantly delayed - potentially signaling
> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
> ...
> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
> underway.
> -----
>
> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?

Redhat and every other Linux vendor even says the software isn't fit for any
purpose. (CAPS are from Redhat, not me.)

<quote>
10.2 Disclaimer of Warranty. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.1 OR
BY A THIRD PARTY VENDOR DIRECTLY TO CLIENT UNDER A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THE
SERVICES, SOFTWARE AND ANY HARDWARE ARE PROVIDED BY RED HAT "AS IS" AND
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
</quote>
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/us.html

Hold on though.... the "advocates" only point out this little fact when MS
has the same legal disclaimer.

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/24/12 6:21 PM, in article jpmmqu$gpt$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
wrote:

> "Snit" wrote in message
>
>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>> -----
>> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
>> receipts were significantly delayed - potentially signaling
>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>> ...
>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>> underway.
>> -----
>>
>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>
> Redhat and every other Linux vendor even says the software isn't fit for any
> purpose. (CAPS are from Redhat, not me.)
>
> <quote>
> 10.2 Disclaimer of Warranty. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.1 OR
> BY A THIRD PARTY VENDOR DIRECTLY TO CLIENT UNDER A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THE
> SERVICES, SOFTWARE AND ANY HARDWARE ARE PROVIDED BY RED HAT "AS IS" AND
> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED
> WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A
> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> </quote>
> http://www.redhat.com/licenses/us.html
>
> Hold on though.... the "advocates" only point out this little fact when MS
> has the same legal disclaimer.

Well, MS is evil for doing so. Redhat is just being nice. Big difference.
Smile

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

GreyCloud · External Since: May 06, 2004 Posts: 922

On 5/24/2012 7:21 PM, Ezekiel wrote:
> "Snit" wrote in message
>
>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>> -----
>> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
>> receipts were significantly delayed - potentially signaling
>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>> ...
>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>> underway.
>> -----
>>
>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>
> Redhat and every other Linux vendor even says the software isn't fit for any
> purpose. (CAPS are from Redhat, not me.)
>
> <quote>
> 10.2 Disclaimer of Warranty. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.1 OR
> BY A THIRD PARTY VENDOR DIRECTLY TO CLIENT UNDER A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THE
> SERVICES, SOFTWARE AND ANY HARDWARE ARE PROVIDED BY RED HAT "AS IS" AND
> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED
> WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A
> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> </quote>
> http://www.redhat.com/licenses/us.html
>
> Hold on though.... the "advocates" only point out this little fact when MS
> has the same legal disclaimer.
>
>
>
>
I believe this kind of disclaimer is found in all operating systems that
I've ran across. It is the ol' CYA text.

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/25/12 11:24 AM, in article
eo-dnYrMlZnkUyLSnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d.RemoveThis@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud"
wrote:

> On 5/24/2012 7:21 PM, Ezekiel wrote:
>> "Snit" wrote in message
>>
>>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>>> -----
>>> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
>>> receipts were significantly delayed - potentially signaling
>>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>>> ...
>>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>>> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>>> underway.
>>> -----
>>>
>>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>>
>> Redhat and every other Linux vendor even says the software isn't fit for any
>> purpose. (CAPS are from Redhat, not me.)
>>
>> <quote>
>> 10.2 Disclaimer of Warranty. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.1 OR
>> BY A THIRD PARTY VENDOR DIRECTLY TO CLIENT UNDER A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THE
>> SERVICES, SOFTWARE AND ANY HARDWARE ARE PROVIDED BY RED HAT "AS IS" AND
>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED
>> WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A
>> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>> </quote>
>> http://www.redhat.com/licenses/us.html
>>
>> Hold on though.... the "advocates" only point out this little fact when MS
>> has the same legal disclaimer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I believe this kind of disclaimer is found in all operating systems that
> I've ran across. It is the ol' CYA text.
>
But I have seen the herd point to such a clause from MS and say this is why
it should not be used in mission critical areas.

They simply have no sense of morals.

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

GreyCloud · External Since: May 06, 2004 Posts: 922

On 5/25/2012 12:38 PM, Snit wrote:
> On 5/25/12 11:24 AM, in article
> eo-dnYrMlZnkUyLSnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d.DeleteThis@bresnan.com, "GreyCloud"
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/24/2012 7:21 PM, Ezekiel wrote:
>>> "Snit" wrote in message
>>>
>>>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033>
>>>> -----
>>>> Friday," which raises questions as to why some of those
>>>> receipts were significantly delayed - potentially signaling
>>>> further hold-up at the broker-dealer or bank level.
>>>> ...
>>>> Facebook set a record on Friday as the most traded initial
>>>> public offering in U.S. history, a surge which overloaded
>>>> Nasdaq's computer systems, leading to a momentary freeze in
>>>> pre-market trading and additional glitches once trading was
>>>> underway.
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> What OS is the Nasdaq run on?
>>>
>>> Redhat and every other Linux vendor even says the software isn't fit for any
>>> purpose. (CAPS are from Redhat, not me.)
>>>
>>> <quote>
>>> 10.2 Disclaimer of Warranty. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN SECTION 10.1 OR
>>> BY A THIRD PARTY VENDOR DIRECTLY TO CLIENT UNDER A SEPARATE AGREEMENT, THE
>>> SERVICES, SOFTWARE AND ANY HARDWARE ARE PROVIDED BY RED HAT "AS IS" AND
>>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED
>>> WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR A
>>> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>>> </quote>
>>> http://www.redhat.com/licenses/us.html
>>>
>>> Hold on though.... the "advocates" only point out this little fact when MS
>>> has the same legal disclaimer.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I believe this kind of disclaimer is found in all operating systems that
>> I've ran across. It is the ol' CYA text.
>>
> But I have seen the herd point to such a clause from MS and say this is why
> it should not be used in mission critical areas.
>
> They simply have no sense of morals.
>
>
Even IBM has such a clause. I know DEC did, and so did Sun.

GreyCloud · External Since: May 06, 2004 Posts: 922

On 5/25/2012 6:00 PM, DFS wrote:

http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?CaseStudyID=49271

Back in 2005 it looks like NASDAQ picked MS for their server.
Not sure if that changed since then.

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/25/12 7:07 PM, in article U4udnYKBufZ4p13SnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d RemoveThis @bresnan.com,
"GreyCloud" wrote:

> On 5/25/2012 6:00 PM, DFS wrote:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?CaseStudyID=49271
>
> Back in 2005 it looks like NASDAQ picked MS for their server.
> Not sure if that changed since then.
>

Thank you.

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 5:47 AM, in article u4kgavcoobrb$.vud12x4znfur$.dlg@40tude.net,
"Foster" wrote:

>>> IBM was actually part of the UI consistancy thing many years ago
>>> with their CUA (I think?) standards. Stuff like the menus File, Edit
>>> etc all came from that.
>>
>> The IBM RedBook. It was a standard but not the first.
>
> That's correct.
> IBM had an entire RedBook on interface standards.

Standards? As in basic principles to be followed (unless there is a good
reason not to)? No... cc says such things cannot exist!

Smile

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 8:14 AM, in article 1bu7yxln2a5ts$.5rkxxt6t4tkl.dlg@40tude.net,
"Foster" wrote:

>>>> Wrong. There is no single "IBM RedBook". The redbooks from IBM cover a
>>>> wide variety of knowledge
>>>>
>>>> CUA is the word. and yes, it was also published in a redbook. Like many
>>>> other topics
>>>
>>> Stop splitting words.
>>> You know what he meant.
>>
>> He meant *The* RedBook
>>
>> Which is patiently wrong
>
> THE Redbook on CUA....
>
> Stop splitting hairs.
>
> You just show what an idiot you really are.

The herd hates the idea of groups that focus on UI excellence for systems -
because they know the open source ecosystem makes that pretty much
impossible for any given system. Gnome can focus on their limited domain;
KDE on theirs, etc... but desktop Linux is not constrained to any one UI
paradigm... it is a mix and match of inconsistent "standards" that are often
poorly followed (though, I will say, things have improved with time).

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 2:10 AM, in article c7ehq6c7me.fsf.RemoveThis@news.eternal-september.org,
"Hadron" wrote:

>>> Most users use multiple applications simultaneously : mybe office/oo ,
>>> chrome, email client, music app etc etc. How horible if they all have
>>> different look and feel, totally ignore the DE schems and redefine keys
>>> so you have to consciously slip into the correct memory bank for that
>>> app for things like copy/paste, close, maximise etc etc etc etc.
>>
>> IBM was actually part of the UI consistancy thing many years ago
>> with their CUA (I think?) standards. Stuff like the menus File, Edit
>> etc all came from that.
>
> The IBM RedBook. It was a standard but not the first.
>
>> I find oddball interfaces to be a hinderence. Even my Android took
>> some getting used to and the odd application, like say Boat Browser
>> where you long press the back key to exit clearing all cache, was
>> just found by accident. This doesn't work on the other browsers.
>
> Its such a trivial thing I am amazed anyone with a brain can dispute it
> : common look and feels has numerous advantages for usage and adopoption
> on a desktop. Its ludicrous to deny this. Evene Gnome and KDE publish
> such sandards. No one can, who wants to be believed, claim that
> having different layouts and core key seuences in different apps is in
> any way helpful in any but the most extreme of cases.

Right. It is beyond obvious. And sometimes the herd lets it slip that they
understand this:

Peter KÃ¶hlmann (after saying I am wrong to speak of the problems
of inconsistency on desktop Linux):
-----
Why would a user install apps from different DEs if he does
not need to?
-----

Peter knows I (and you and Foster and standards bodies and... on and on and
on) are right. He knows that the mix and match approach seen on desktop
Linux *is* detrimental. He made that clear.

But he will run from talking about it... as will the rest of the herd.

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 9:40 AM, in article 27bol9bms5.fsf DeleteThis @news.eternal-september.org,
"Hadron" wrote:

>>> CUA is the word. and yes, it was also published in a redbook. Like many
>>> other topics
>>
>> Stop splitting words.
>> You know what he meant.
>
> Of course he did.
>
> I was in fact referring to the CUA one there from circa 92 or so. I cant
> remember and cant be arsed to google it.
>
> At least he had the grace not to claim common ui standards are not
> important as that moron cc does. Even creepy got all excited and claimed
> that "people are not stupid" and "can learn new sequences for new apps"
> despite not having thought out the answer to "err, but why?".

The idea of people not being able to figure out an inferior system where
consistency is broken is a red herring the herd loves - nobody has said
people cannot work in such an environment. The point is a better designed
environment has benefits.

I get why the herd is in denial - they know desktop Linux largely fails in
this area. I do not fully get why cc argues against this... though even he
has backed off some. I think he just wants to disagree with me for the sake
of disagreement. His whole recent BS about Excel and Numbers both screwing
up linear trend lines was just absurd (though sometimes he claimed it was
the programs, and sometimes he claimed I made some error he could never
describe). And then he went to all but bragging about how he has no idea
what an inflection point is... all the while belittling me and insisting he
is right. He is just out there... mentally broken in some bizarre way.
Almost like my stalker...

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 2:29 AM, in article jpss5l$rfs$1@dont-email.me, "Peter KÃ¶hlmann"
wrote:

>> Its such a trivial thing I am amazed anyone with a brain can dispute it
>> : common look and feels has numerous advantages for usage and adopoption
>> on a desktop. Its ludicrous to deny this. Evene Gnome and KDE publish
>> such sandards. No one can, who wants to be believed, claim that
>> having different layouts and core key seuences in different apps is in
>> any way helpful in any but the most extreme of cases.
>
> Well, there aren't these cases except for very rare oddball applications,
> which might even have a good reason to deviate from those standards.

Oh, absolutely: there are times when it is best to break the standards - if
there is a good user-based reason to do so. And using inconsistency to show
context changes and the like is important to - just blindly making
everything consistent, while it would be an improvement for desktop Linux,
is not the best way to go.

> So you are (again) beating a dead horse, because nobody actually claimed
> that having those standards is not a good thing.

Sure they did. On and on the herd has claimed I am wrong to note the value
of such standards - and cc went on about it endlessly.

....

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

JEDIDIAH · External Since: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 1610

On 2012-05-26, Torre Starnes wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 07:18:48 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> DFS writes:
>>
>>> On 5/25/2012 3:04 PM, cc wrote:
>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2012 8:25:01 PM UTC-4, Snit's codpiece wrote:
>>>>> Snit writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/21/12 5:03 PM, in article
>>>>>> wc8vglf5f7.fsf.DeleteThis@news.eternal-september.org,
>>>>>> "Hadron" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Snit writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033> ----- Despite a system
>>>>>>>> freeze and some glitches surrounding the open, Nasdaq
[deletia]
>> Most users use multiple applications simultaneously : mybe office/oo ,
>> chrome, email client, music app etc etc. How horible if they all have
>> different look and feel, totally ignore the DE schems and redefine keys
>> so you have to consciously slip into the correct memory bank for that
>> app for things like copy/paste, close, maximise etc etc etc etc.
>
> IBM was actually part of the UI consistancy thing many years ago

Every time I hear someone try to bring this up again, I just laugh.

You really have to wonder if they've actually EVER used an IBM product.

Really? Holding IBM up as an example for UI design? You're simply on crack.

[deletia]

If anything, they are the best argument for why applying rigid academic
ideas in this area is simply ridiculous.

--
In a "stable" but "inconsistent" system, the end user only |||
has to adapt once rather than needing to adapt any time a / | \
new version of the relevant shovelware is released.

Snit · External Since: Jan 09, 2009 Posts: 2956

On 5/27/12 6:11 PM, in article slrnjs5k5c.p9s.jedi.RemoveThis@nomad.mishnet, "JEDIDIAH"
wrote:

> On 2012-05-26, Torre Starnes wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2012 07:18:48 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> DFS writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/25/2012 3:04 PM, cc wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2012 8:25:01 PM UTC-4, Snit's codpiece wrote:
>>>>>> Snit writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/21/12 5:03 PM, in article
>>>>>>> wc8vglf5f7.fsf.RemoveThis@news.eternal-september.org,
>>>>>>> "Hadron" wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Snit writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.cnbc.com/id/47507033> ----- Despite a system
>>>>>>>>> freeze and some glitches surrounding the open, Nasdaq
> [deletia]
>>> Most users use multiple applications simultaneously : mybe office/oo ,
>>> chrome, email client, music app etc etc. How horible if they all have
>>> different look and feel, totally ignore the DE schems and redefine keys
>>> so you have to consciously slip into the correct memory bank for that
>>> app for things like copy/paste, close, maximise etc etc etc etc.
>>
>> IBM was actually part of the UI consistancy thing many years ago
>
> Every time I hear someone try to bring this up again, I just laugh.
>
> You really have to wonder if they've actually EVER used an IBM product.
>
> Really? Holding IBM up as an example for UI design? You're simply on crack.
>
> [deletia]
>
> If anything, they are the best argument for why applying rigid academic
> ideas in this area is simply ridiculous.

Oh, I do look forward to your examples. Please do show some.

But, I suspect, you will not.

--
ðŸ™ˆðŸ™‰ðŸ™Š

cc · External Since: Apr 17, 2007 Posts: 206

On Sunday, May 27, 2012 12:40:10 PM UTC-4, Snit's codpiece wrote:
>
> At least he had the grace not to claim common ui standards are not
> important as that moron cc does.

I suppose you have a quote for that?

--
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinearTrendLineCreation.mov> - Snit's ignorance of Excel and his hilarious attempt at statistical analysis

cc · External Since: Apr 17, 2007 Posts: 206

On Sunday, May 27, 2012 1:55:57 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> As in basic principles to be followed (unless there is a good
> reason not to)?

LOL!

--
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/LinearTrendLineCreation.mov> - Snit's ignorance of Excel and his hilarious attempt at statistical analysis