Google abandons Windows
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 7 Jun 2010 14:05 James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) said: > > > Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > > > >> real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote: > > [snip] > >>> So, Rowland suffers from some serious mental health issues, > > > > <sigh> Only just noticed this. I'm quite disappointed in you: > > You keep telling us how ill you're supposed to be. Rowland McFaker James, I keep on explaining that I suffer from depression and anxiety with a bit of PTSD and Asperger's syndrome, all of which count as `not serious mental health issues' by the official authorities who have in fact seen me in person (unlike you) and actually come up with an actual formal diagnosis. And I've told you about their opinions of me - it's not fakery to inform you of the opinions of the official experts who have officially experted me half to death with - well, never mind. > > They are *minor* mental health problems, as I keep on pointing out... > > When it suits you, Which is any time anyone gets it wrong. Should I do it more often than that? Just throw the point into a conversation at random for no reason? No? No, I thought not - so basically you're complaining here that I'm behaving sensibly. Hardly sensible of you. >but you keep saying that we make you scream or > whatever bollocks it is. I keep complaining that it is the intention of those here who abuse me to cause that outcome. I do wish you'd get your complaints against me more accurate. [snip] > god knows, your wife's a long suffering woman. OR is she a doll? My wife is a normal woman, made out of PVC sheeting in China in the conventional way. You can buy one too just like her if you want. Rowland. P.S. Actually, I'm lying. Rebecca is one of these: <http://www.realdoll.com/>. I got a win on the national lottery so I got to trade up from the cheap stuff. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org 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
From: Rowland McDonnell on 7 Jun 2010 14:05 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > David Kennedy <davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote: > > > Can I nominate this thread for the "Single Most Tedious Thread of 2010" > > Award? > > Seconded. And you're one of the people who's working on making it so, aren't you Peter? Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org 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
From: Steve Firth on 7 Jun 2010 13:48 Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote: > > > I said no such thing. It's fairly disgusting of you to make that slur. > > I had to check the From line there - I thought Rowland had jumped in. So you're now making up lies, pretending that I said them but it's me that's like Rowland? Perhaps next time you're in front of a mirror you could do a reality check.
From: Rowland McDonnell on 7 Jun 2010 14:35 James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) said: > > > [1] *I* wound him up without understanding how - he got upset because I > > suggesting that it'd be good for blind people to have better computer > > technology. No, really, he did. I cannot work out why or how or > > anything. > > You didn't actually. You suggested that developers include a dedicated > blind mode into there applications. I suggested that computing platform designers should include a dedicated blind mode in the operating system that developers could exploit for the benefit of blind users. If that's not suggesting that blind people should have better technology, I don't know what is. How can you claim otherwise and expect to be taken seriously? <shrug> > Never going to happen and if it > does, I stop using computers. What possible objection could you have to being given a UI which permitted you to get more work out of a PC with greater ease, and also permitted you easiest possible access to a greater fraction of the full features of that PC? Because that's what I'm talking about. No, I'm not trying to wind you up, I'm trying to understand something that I do not understand simply because I'm interested in the information. You also seem to have powerful objections to the thought that a computer firm would develop such a technology - why object to someone proposing the use of super high technology to make life better for blind people? I just don't understand. > I'm not interested in blindness specific > computing thanks, Yes, you've explained before how you seem to want things to be slower and more expensive and more awkward for you than ought to be necessary. I don't understand you, but if that's what you want, off you go, I shan't stand in your way. Not that it much matters: what I'm talking about doesn't actually exist at the moment, does it? > I work like the sighted as much as possible. Oi vey! I'm not saying *YOU* have to change anything *YOU* do, but don't argue that everyone else is best served by what you personally choose to do now, don't argue that they should be denied something better than that which you personally use now. Working like the sighted is stupid if you are blind and if there is a better alternative available - currently, you're stuck with a sighted persons' GUI with adaptions for the blind so it's not stupid to work that way. But why would you not use a really high quality blind mode UI if one were provided? I don't understand why you think that your interests are best served using a UI optmized for the sighted. Your eyes don't work - so surely you need something /better/: you *deserve* something better from the tech firms. That's my line - but I don't say that this proposed better thing should be compulsory, so if you want to be some old fogie stick in the mud and stick with what you know, why not? I shan't object. Rowland. (who's an old fogie stick in the mud in that sense himself in some directions, as it happens) -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org 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
From: Rowland McDonnell on 7 Jun 2010 14:52
Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > James Dore <james.dore(a)new.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Seconded. > >>>> > >>>> Too late. > >>>> > >>>> Join the queue. > >>> > >>> ". . . you are number 94 in the queue. Your call is important to us, > >>> please hold . . . . " > >>> > >>> <twiddles thumbs> > >> > >> [fx:"The Girl From Ipanema" as performed by the Mongolian Nose Flute > >> orchestra] > >> > >> Jim > > > > [fx: Cylinder flipped open. > > Soft chik-chik-chik of .44 cartridges sliding home. > > Cylinder engaged. > > Hammer pulled back. > > > > > > BOOOM. > > > > Telephone in smoking ruin] > > > > "Thankyouverymuch". > > Heh. Just punch the bloody thing, who needs a gun to destroy a phone? Poofs. Rowland. N.B. The above is humour. If you are not entertained: frankly my dear, I don't giveadamn. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org 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 |