Re: No sound...?

Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@xxxxxx> wrote:

Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]

Unless an author tells us what it can do, why would we want to use
it in the first place? It's feature list is definitely important -
along with reliability, but reliability shouldn't be a 'feature'.

The feature list is irrelevant, since what is required is an explanation
of what the end user can do with the software. Feature lists are lies
in my experience.

So, how do you tell a prospective user of your software what it can do
for them then?

Read my manual for the sectsty LaTeX package for an idea of my approach.
"texdoc sectsty" at the Terminal should do the job (assuming you have
MacTeX installed) - it does here.

I do have MacTeX installed, but I get a 'command not found' message for
texdoc.

That'll be down to paths not being set right, at a guess.

Things like 'fixes some OS issues', or 'edits photos' (for example)
aren't too helpful, although they do tell us what type of software it
is, it doesn't say why *I* need it, or whether it'll fulfill my
requirements. A feature list, if accurate, is necessary for an end user
to decide whether software will be useful or not.

I claim not - read my sectsty manual to see how I approach the matter.

I tried, but it doesn't seem to be there on my system.

I bet it is. It's:

/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/doc/latex/sectsty/sectsty.pdf

here (aside from the other place I keep it - but that's because it's my
package and I've got it stashed on HD elsewhere for me rather than
relying on CTAN keeping my reference copy of the data).

I'll try and
reinstall it.

I'm betting that you've got paths not set right.

You read an Apple feature list, it all sounds groovy - until you find
that you can't actually access the promised features without spending
vast amounts more money on extra software, hardware, training, manuals,
and so on.

I can't say I've come across anything like that myself. I have *chosen*
to buy extra software from Apple, because it has features that I would
like to have available to me.

I've read Apple feature lists and been happy at the thought of being
able to access whatever - and been very annoyed to find that in fact,
the software provided does not permit me to access the claimed features.

The reasons are many and varied - very often, the advertised feature is
only available if you buy more software or hardware, for example, or pay
for a training course, or something.

I have no idea what they could be? There are some features that cost to
use for sure, such as photo books in iPhoto, or buying music from the
iTunes store, and some features will need the inclusion of other
software, such as iLife apps to integrate media with the iWork apps. But
as far as I can see, that's quite clear and obvious before you buy
anything.

Bollocks it is. Apple sells Macs described as `Airport ready'. That is
a deliberate lie to con people into thinking that the Mac they are
buying is set up with Airport hardware so that it just works when you
get the thing.

In reality, what it really means is that the MAc is ready to have the
hardware added - but Apple does not make this clear: the advertising
just says `Airport ready'.

Or you could just buy something else, like MS Office, that has most
components included, for 4x the price of Apple's software! Or what about
Adobe's Creativity Suite at £1600?

<puzzled> But what for? My wife gets to install a version from work,
perfectly legally.

In any case, MS Office is an abomination - who cares that it's got all
sorts of things built in? MS Word permits me to do only what I can do
with TextEdit, but with more bother. The reasons are bad software
design and absent manuals.

MS Excel is useful, since it's *MUCH* better at producing the output my
wife needs for work than Apple's Numbers. Excel's crap at graphing, but
Numbers is much much worse.

One thing is for sure, I've never had to pay for training, or even a
book, to be able to use Apple software.

One thing's for sure: I've paid for extra books to try to learn to use
Apple software (such as MacOS X) and even that's not done the job.
Apple does not supply adequate documentation any more and it's
impossible to learn even to use the MacOS X Finder properly.

I once learnt how to use MacWrite II and MacDraw II - from the docs
supplied with the software by Apple, including an excellent multimedia
Hypercard tutorial. I still prefer to use those applications instead of
modern versions, simply because I know how to use them and cannot find
out how to use the modern versions.

Shame that MacDraw II won't run under 10.4's Classic.

I also know there are cheaper, or even
free, alternatives, but they have features missing that I want to have,
or may have far more than I'll ever need.

Like I say, feature lists don't tell me what I can do with software, so
there's no point to them as far as I'm concerned. The only way to find
out what a user can do with software is to read a user's review, or try
the software yourself.

In the end yes. However, it may tell you if it's worth even downloading
a Demo if it lists features that are of use, or interest, or
specifically *doesn't* list an item you need!

The feature list is a very rough and ready guide that I assume is
incorrect. Failure to mention something doesn't mean you can't do that
thing with the software.

There was a time when I did quite a abit of research for software,
simply because there wasn't the ability to download a Demo, I had to
rely on a combination of what the author told were its features, and
reviews in publications that told me how well they worked.

I'd never buy any software on that basis.

Once upon a time, I'd've said `read the manual' - but manuals these days
generally don't exist or if they do, they don't help.

Indeed, I agree there, manuals now are generally pretty rubbish.

They usually do not exist - not for most software.

[snip]

Hmm - does the monthly fix ever find anything to do, then?

My Repair Permissions always has a list of things it fixed,
usually the same stuff every time. However, as I do run it
manually before and after major installations,

I said `an installer' meaning `any installer'.

Indeed you did. However, a Permissions Repair in OS 10.5 takes a *long*
time (upwards of half an hour),

!!!! Takes about two minutes here - 10.4.11, 4G5.

With slower Macs, it takes longer - basically, permission repair seems
to me to take as much work on 10.1-10.4. I'm /very/ surprised that it's
so slow with 10.5. Or maybe it's a problem with the efficiency of the
hardware?

No, it's 10.5, apparently it checks a *lot* more files in the System.

I was under the impression that all files were checked in previous
versions. I don't see how it could take half an hour to check the
permissions of all OS files on a modern Mac unless the method were very
inefficient.

I can search all files (including invisisbles) on my boot volume in
about 30s using EasyFind, which people tell me is very slow.

so isn't always convenient for small
installs. And, in my experience of 10.5, not terribly necessary anymore
either.

See comments elsewhere about security.

Didn't see it.

From: Ian McCall <ian@xxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <6jcs4fF2lmtkU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

=======================================================================

Is more a security thing than anything else - in standard operation,
unless the installer maker has utterly screwed up and removed write
access, it probably makes little difference. A more common thing is
that the installer has accidentally opened write permissions in areas
that wouldn't normally have them.

Is a UNIX paranoia thing, not just OS X. Helps that I might well have
written such a dubious installer in my dim and distant past... (on
Solaris).
=======================================================================

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: No sound...?
    ... feature lists are mostly lies and exaggerations. ... Indeed, I agree there, manuals now are generally pretty rubbish. ... I said `an installer' meaning `any installer'. ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: new book: Guide to Fortran 2003 Programming (Brainerd)
    ... Cray released a version with full Fortran 2003 support about six ... but some people do seem to overlook that feature ... when making feature lists. ... Each vendor updates their f2003 features list whenever an upgrade is released but each vendor has a different list. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Why you should short-sell aapl
    ... "By far, the G1’s biggest differentiator is that it has a physical keyboard, which is revealed by sliding open the screen. ... which cost extra on the iPhone. ... It also has a higher-resolution camera than the iPhone, but like the Apple phone, it can’t shoot video. ... These include a limited ability to copy and paste text, and the ability to send photos directly to other phones without relying on email, a common phone feature called MMS, or Multimedia Messaging Service. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: iCloud - free but disappointing so far
    ... iCloud through iWeb? ... he's apparently doing is marketing some of the features of MobileMe. ... If Steve believes that this feature is important, ... significance of an 'Apple Mistake' results in Nicholas/Nashton ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Apple one stop closer to killing off all smartphone competition
    ... Apple wins patent on key smartphone feature ... Other software companies have incorporated the slide-to-unlock system, ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)