The Bad News: there is still a long way before housing prices hits bottom
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/barry-ritholtz-housing-bottom-nowhere-sight-181259409.html
29users liked this comment
Post.Haste • 9 hours ago
In 2006 I posted that housing would take 10 years to bottom = 2016. Everyone said that was nuts. What do you think now?
Andy Shin • Los Angeles, California •
U r very conservative... I think for our generation Housing is done... I would say next 10 years. Till 2022..
Last time in LA RE went down in 1990 till 1996. In bad areas only by 2001 price came back. This time it's different. Unless deficit will be solved, than yes housing will pick up. But now americans do not make enough money to pay - prices are too high and interest is too low. The only way of future - prices will go further down. System wont allow babyboomers to cash out..
5th Horseman • Phoenix, Arizona • 9 hours ago
I met with a major builder yesterday and he said there is a 12 year oversupply of houses right now. Also the number of people who can buy is down, the cost of permits is way up, and the number of boomers retiring and trying to sell their homes is way up..
Runaway Trane • San Francisco, California • 9 hours ago
I saw the median sales price of a home in my neighborhood climb nearly $250K in just a few years. All the crazy bidding wars that ended up driving comparatives up because homes were selling for 100K sometimes 200K over asking. I saw kids in their early 30s buying homes for $900K, $1M or more. I asked myself how these kids are affording these homes given the number of sales. I estimated that you would need a combined household income of around $350K to afford these homes with a standard mortgage and there just aren't that many jobs that pay that much to 30 year-olds. I said to my friends, "you watch, there's a record number of foreclosures coming because there's no way all of these people are making that kind of money." Sure enough....
top hat • Schenectady, New York • 9 hours ago
I think you're still nuts but that doesn't make you wrong..
Danny T • Richardson, Texas • 8 hours ago
The bottom will be way past that in places like Michigan, where as I live in north Texas and my house last appraisal was still 15% or about $35,000 more than I paid 6 years ago. So I guess I am sayinig that a lot depends on how diverse the economic conditions are in the market you are talking about as to when this "bottom" is reached.
RG • Bakersfield, California • 8 hours ago
Wake up people , this country has never been in trouble like this , before there was at least jobs to rely on and you could always if needed get a factory job and make a living at it, but since most work has been exported to foreigners ,where are we going to get growth from. I think we start to see riots like in Greece fairly soon as citizens get more desperate, and it looks like all politicians are afraid to do what is needed for fear they will be ridiculed and tossed out of office for doing the hard but necessary things, Hope I Am Wrong.
etinarcadiaego • 5 hours ago
It's not 2016 yet..
Headlley • Troutdale, Oregon • 4 hours ago
2016 is a pretty good guess I'd say. I'm going to put my money on within the next couple of years after a bank or two like BoA goes under and have to sell off all those houses at crazy low prices to pay the bills. Then it snowballs from there...
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Rupert Murdoch - the Enemy of Democracy and Decency
When this hideous man finally dies, who will lament over his passing? No one. He will have left a karmic legacy of meanness and pandering that will take many many ages of suffering in Dante's Inferno to atone for.
May the decent people of the world soon be rid of the demagogues, bullies, and deceivers like Murdoch and Limbaugh that currently dominate the public's airwaves.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Steve Jobs' Forgotten Children
Steve Jobs had a pattern of denying his progeny, now we see how he neglected the 100's of thousands of children who made his Ipods and Igadgets.
Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-10-07/news/30253365_1_foxconn-factory-iphones-short-documentary#ixzz1kyTUIQmL
A Touching Short Film About Foxconn's Teenage Workers And What They Want Out Of Life
Gus Lubin
October 07, 2011
6,265
10
There are 180 million Chinese migrant workers who were born in the eighties and nineties. A few hundred thousand of them work at the Foxconn factory in Shenzhen making iPhones and other electronics.
Dreamwork China is a touching short documentary about these workers and what they want out of life (via Shanghaiist).
One young man says: "I want to make a little more money, to work well at the Foxconn factory, and when I have more money I'll go back home. I don't have big dreams."
Another: "I graduated in 2007 from Zhongnan Finance University, then I came here in April 2009. Now I work on the iPhones, I do the testing."
Check out the footage (two minutes in) of hundreds of college-age Chinese walking to the factory, for some reason many of them wearing identical jackets.
Dreamwork China from Cineresie on Vimeo.
Featured ArticlesIf You Break The Rules On Google+, You Can Lose All Google ServicesThe Truth About Apple's Stock7 Tips To Help You Wake Up And Get Out Of Bed Fast
More:Meet The 'Seal Team 6', The Bad-Asses Who Killed Osama Bin Laden
Here's Why Bank Of America's Stock Is Collapsing Again
Over 100,000 XXX Domain Names Are Going Live Tomorrow At 11 ESTHow To Hack Facebook In 51 Seconds
Guess Which Country Has Debt Of Nearly 1000% Of GDP...
How To Download Tons Of Free eBooks Online For Any eReader DeviceThe Water Cooler10 commentskilroy on Oct 7, 4:25 AM said:
Sad. Face it America (and the West). Your beloved iPhones, iPads, etc. are priced attractively enough for you to buy at the expense of iSlaves. We are no better than consumers that benefited from the labor of African slaves in the pre Civil War South. The only difference is where the slaves are forced to labor against their will.
These are Steve Jobs' Forgotten on Oct 7, 5:04 AM said:
and illegitimate children. Funny how techie "progressives" conveniently forget about them.
Libervative on Oct 7, 5:32 AM said:
This is your kids in 10 years under the Gop. Funny how Rupert Murdoch's zombie hordes conveniently forget about that.
Tom Greene on Oct 7, 6:13 AM said:
Jobs true legacy will someday be recognized. As with Sam Walton, what they really acomplished is not what is highlighted in their biography. Sam taught the world that you can run the world's largest company with realtively few full time employees. Part timers cost next to nothing. Jobs showed the world that you can make a chinese company (Apple) look and feel like it is American and create zombie like, mindless drone consumers with no concept that their latest trinket was made with child labor while polluting on a scale not imagined on US soil. And the best part? They became billionaires with these tactics all the while idolized by the typically dumb as dirt american consumer. You just have to love it.....
Kevin72 on Oct 7, 6:03 PM said:
Apple currently has on the order of $90 BILLION in cash. It's inexcusable that the people who make their phones should have to suffer so much. Pay them more and let them work less.
Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-10-07/news/30253365_1_foxconn-factory-iphones-short-documentary#ixzz1kyTUIQmL
A Touching Short Film About Foxconn's Teenage Workers And What They Want Out Of Life
Gus Lubin
October 07, 2011
6,265
10
There are 180 million Chinese migrant workers who were born in the eighties and nineties. A few hundred thousand of them work at the Foxconn factory in Shenzhen making iPhones and other electronics.
Dreamwork China is a touching short documentary about these workers and what they want out of life (via Shanghaiist).
One young man says: "I want to make a little more money, to work well at the Foxconn factory, and when I have more money I'll go back home. I don't have big dreams."
Another: "I graduated in 2007 from Zhongnan Finance University, then I came here in April 2009. Now I work on the iPhones, I do the testing."
Check out the footage (two minutes in) of hundreds of college-age Chinese walking to the factory, for some reason many of them wearing identical jackets.
Dreamwork China from Cineresie on Vimeo.
Featured ArticlesIf You Break The Rules On Google+, You Can Lose All Google ServicesThe Truth About Apple's Stock7 Tips To Help You Wake Up And Get Out Of Bed Fast
More:Meet The 'Seal Team 6', The Bad-Asses Who Killed Osama Bin Laden
Here's Why Bank Of America's Stock Is Collapsing Again
Over 100,000 XXX Domain Names Are Going Live Tomorrow At 11 ESTHow To Hack Facebook In 51 Seconds
Guess Which Country Has Debt Of Nearly 1000% Of GDP...
How To Download Tons Of Free eBooks Online For Any eReader DeviceThe Water Cooler10 commentskilroy on Oct 7, 4:25 AM said:
Sad. Face it America (and the West). Your beloved iPhones, iPads, etc. are priced attractively enough for you to buy at the expense of iSlaves. We are no better than consumers that benefited from the labor of African slaves in the pre Civil War South. The only difference is where the slaves are forced to labor against their will.
These are Steve Jobs' Forgotten on Oct 7, 5:04 AM said:
and illegitimate children. Funny how techie "progressives" conveniently forget about them.
Libervative on Oct 7, 5:32 AM said:
This is your kids in 10 years under the Gop. Funny how Rupert Murdoch's zombie hordes conveniently forget about that.
Tom Greene on Oct 7, 6:13 AM said:
Jobs true legacy will someday be recognized. As with Sam Walton, what they really acomplished is not what is highlighted in their biography. Sam taught the world that you can run the world's largest company with realtively few full time employees. Part timers cost next to nothing. Jobs showed the world that you can make a chinese company (Apple) look and feel like it is American and create zombie like, mindless drone consumers with no concept that their latest trinket was made with child labor while polluting on a scale not imagined on US soil. And the best part? They became billionaires with these tactics all the while idolized by the typically dumb as dirt american consumer. You just have to love it.....
Kevin72 on Oct 7, 6:03 PM said:
Apple currently has on the order of $90 BILLION in cash. It's inexcusable that the people who make their phones should have to suffer so much. Pay them more and let them work less.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Republican Nihilists Determined to Learn Nothing from their Mistakes
Thus has it ever been: Wealth is Virtue, Poverty is a Crime
If our ideology crashed our economy, we can always blame the poor, and double down on a failed ideology of tax breaks for the wealthy.
Who are th real 'job creators'? The rich or the poor? The rich who use their surplus for wall street speculation or the poor who actually spend every spare cent on living essentials thus creating economic demand which is the heart of the economy, of which 70% is due to consumer demand.
---------------------------------------
Martin SteinPortland, Oregon
Martin Stein is Trusted.Trusted Commenters enjoy the privilege of commenting on articles and blog posts without moderation.
..
Obama must explain in plain language to the population exactly why we cannot survive another Republican administration..
.
I think that the policies that Republicans champion border on evil They are based on greed, division,caste,conflict, the equation of monetary wealth with moral worth, demonetization, misinformation, and the perpetuation of the mythology of the uber rich as some kind of inherently superior of masters who as supplicants we need to be dependent upon for out survival. They want to punish the poor, the sick and the vulnerable as collateral damage in the economic societal law of the jungle they envision society to be,as a drain on our resources. They are also race baiters who want to frame blacks and other ethnic groups as being a drain on society and its resources.
It is not only the economic policies that need to be rejected, but also the philosophical belief systems that form the foundation from which these policies are created. He needs to unmask and explain the Orwellian mind games that the GOP has played to get millions of Americans to enter into a political sadomasochistic relationship with them making them vulnerable to misleading propaganda and vote for policies that make them poorer.
2102 is a much about our philosophy of who we as a society are as the policies we pursue because the former is the foundation of the latter. The GOP has gotten millions to accept a nihilistic belief system based upon economic myths, race and class division.
Jan. 22, 2012 at 9:07 p.m.Recommended132
Share this on FacebookShare this on Twitter..
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Germany vs USA Economy
FOXNEWSRTRAITORS posts the following on Yahoo Daily Ticker:
Germany has 56% of GDP consumer spending, US has 70%
Germany has 21% of GDP manufacturing, US has 13%,
Germany spends 11% of GDP on health care with everyone covered, US spends 17% with 50 million uncovered..
Germany is not perfect, and they may get taken down by southern Europe, but the US won't have a healthy economy until we are much closer to Germany's numbers.
Germany has 56% of GDP consumer spending, US has 70%
Germany has 21% of GDP manufacturing, US has 13%,
Germany spends 11% of GDP on health care with everyone covered, US spends 17% with 50 million uncovered..
Germany is not perfect, and they may get taken down by southern Europe, but the US won't have a healthy economy until we are much closer to Germany's numbers.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
There are only Two Kinds of Republicans ...
millionaires and fools ...
There are two kinds of Republicans: Rich Republicans and Stupid Republicans: The Rich Republicans keep the Stupid Republicans Stupid. And Stupid Republicans keep Rich Republicans Rich.
[–]mk31 29 points 5 hours ago
Sounds like a good argument in favor of a multi-party system.
[–]huggableplum 9 points 5 hours ago
It won't switch though. From the bull-moose party, to the green party, to the dixiecrats, third parties and any others will always be squashed
[–]Ravek 23 points 4 hours ago
Because of the prevalence of winner-takes-all in US elections. If a party that could get 2% of votes can't get 2% of influence, then small parties have no reason to exist.
exactamundo!!!
END THE TWO PARTY DUOPOLY
WITH RANKED CHOICE VOTING
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/capitalism-crisis-either-dems-gop-solution-174655678.html;_ylt=ApJa.9y91zupC28e7ehQxJGiuYdG;_ylu=X3oDMTQzb3ZkdXFsBG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIEp1bWJvdHJvbiBMaXRlBHBrZwMwMjI3OWVlZC05ZThiLTNmMzAtOTNjYi1iMjQ5ZjMzYTA1ZmQEcG9zAzEEc2VjA2p1bWJvdHJvbgR2ZXIDNDcwYzAzNjAtNDEzNC0xMWUxLWJiMTctYzE5ZTM0NzBkOWVi;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3
smald4lib • Lester Thurow's The Future of Capitalism, written mid-1990s:
"History teaches us that the survival-of-the-fittest versions of capitalism do not work. The free market economies that existed in the 1920s imploded during the Great Depression and had to be reconstructed by government....It is well to remember that the social welfare state was not implemented by wild-eyed leftists. Its midwives were almost always enlightened aristocratic conservatives (Bismarck, Churchill, Roosevelt) who adopted social welfare policies to save, not destroy capitalism by protecting the working class...If one asked what must governments do in capitalistic socieities to make conditions better, the socialist answer was to own and run business firms. That answer proved to be incorrect. The right answer is to force a high level of private and public investment."
Reddit:
The most amazing con in history has to be the one perpetuated by the modern Republican Party. These politicians have actually convinced the poor that ultra-wealthy corporations and business magnates have their best interests at heart. (self.politics)
submitted 8 hours ago* by moralnihilist
They've defunded and degraded public services to their near-failure point, only to turn around and use their ineptitude at running a government as proof of their "government doesn't work" ideology. The reason the U.S. government is corrupt and inefficient is precisely because those politicians have ruined it, on purpose. Government is only "the problem" because they've made it the problem.
In what other profession can you utterly bankrupt and ruin your company, and then turn around and use your incompetence as a reason to keep you on the payroll?
2046 comments
top 200 commentsshow 500
[–]10BV01 305 points 5 hours ago*
The biggest problem is the willful ignorance epidemic.
Its more than that, the right has done its best to slander being educated! A friend of a friend replied to one of my facebook posts with this:
"'Think for yourself' wow that's the same battle cry used by everyone who has ever been brainwashed by a professor. "
[–]boo_baup 7 points 3 hours ago*
The right has jumped on the train of slandering education, but I don't think they can be accredited as the architects of that stance. The US has always been skeptical of formal institutions, especially those that embrace some kind of perceived pretention. The Reagan era christian conservative coalition was a genius marketing decision, but it wasn't an entirely new direction for American discourse. However, I do think that we are beginning to see the influence of this socio-political alliance erode.
permalink
parent
[–]oneshoe 87 points 2 hours ago*
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Stephen Hawking
[–]GMonsoon 16 points 2 hours ago
Good one. I'm a bit shocked that there are still people who believe that there is a trustworthy political party in power. What is it going to take for them to see: off-camera they are all buddies. They are in agreement. They do the same things because they work for the same parties, and those parties aren't the Republicans or the Democrats and they aren't you or me. Why do these people think that when Obama got into office he perpetuated and worsened everything Bush did? Obama was just the Bush Expansion Pack. Geeze - the evidence is right there. What is it going to take for people to LOOK at it?
[–]errandum 5 points 1 hour ago
There is very little someone can do in the current american system. Individuals hold way too much power, and unlike Republicans that seem to mindlessly follow the leader, democrats are a lot more divided and it's way harder to get anything through any of the houses (especially because the republicans actually want Obama to look bad and noneffective).
Obama had nice ideas. But too many democrats blocked him while they had the chance to pass anything, and then they lost one of the houses and now they can't pass anything at all without a lot of concessions.
Not saying that Obama did a good job, just that it wasn't entirely it's fault. Or actually, it mostly wasn't.
From what I gather in this side of the pond, the President's title is currently a very empty one. He can veto things, but he can't pass anything worth mentioning without a shitload of concessions to individuals (and by attachment, the corporations they represent).
The system is clearly flawed. But what solution do you propose?
[–]Donpablo 13 points 3 hours ago
Na, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority
[–]doody 447 points 6 hours ago
In what other profession can you utterly bankrupt and ruin your company, and then turn around and use your incompetence as a reason to keep you on the payroll?
Banking, apparently.
[–]nizo505 122 points 4 hours ago
Actually for added irony the boobs running the bank get massive bonuses for running it into the ground.
[–]redstapler3 6 points 2 hours ago
Spot on. If I could count the number of times I have heard some of my more conservative friends say, "Why should we punish the rich just because they have figured out how to succeed?" My eye starts to twitch every time I hear this. They honestly believe that they will get a statistical fair shake at success and, if that were to somehow ever happen, don't want to be hindered in any way. It is like they want to protect the super rich just in case they were to ever become super rich themselves. (The vanishing upper middle-class does not equal rich, b-t-dubs.)
[–]h_von_trash 15 points 3 hours ago
it's the difference between politics based on reasoning and politics based on feeling. this worked relatively well for the fascists of the early 20th century. why not the republicans of the early 21st? reminds me of weber's idea of gesinnungspolitik...
[–]EthyleneGlycol 18 points 4 hours ago
"You don't have a job because Obama over regulating your company meant they had to move to China."
[–]m0deth 34 points 4 hours ago
Lol, Our jobs have been given to China for one reason only, to bolster corporate profit margins, and claim 'growth' that actually isn't there.
Regulation wasn't the first thing they blamed it on....it's just the latest in a long string of excuses we've heard for 30 years and going, since Nixon went to China and opened up enemy shores to our jobs.
And if you think the govt. of China isn't our ideological and economic enemy....you are a moron, or part of the problem.
There are two kinds of Republicans: Rich Republicans and Stupid Republicans: The Rich Republicans keep the Stupid Republicans Stupid. And Stupid Republicans keep Rich Republicans Rich.
[–]mk31 29 points 5 hours ago
Sounds like a good argument in favor of a multi-party system.
[–]huggableplum 9 points 5 hours ago
It won't switch though. From the bull-moose party, to the green party, to the dixiecrats, third parties and any others will always be squashed
[–]Ravek 23 points 4 hours ago
Because of the prevalence of winner-takes-all in US elections. If a party that could get 2% of votes can't get 2% of influence, then small parties have no reason to exist.
exactamundo!!!
END THE TWO PARTY DUOPOLY
WITH RANKED CHOICE VOTING
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/capitalism-crisis-either-dems-gop-solution-174655678.html;_ylt=ApJa.9y91zupC28e7ehQxJGiuYdG;_ylu=X3oDMTQzb3ZkdXFsBG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIEp1bWJvdHJvbiBMaXRlBHBrZwMwMjI3OWVlZC05ZThiLTNmMzAtOTNjYi1iMjQ5ZjMzYTA1ZmQEcG9zAzEEc2VjA2p1bWJvdHJvbgR2ZXIDNDcwYzAzNjAtNDEzNC0xMWUxLWJiMTctYzE5ZTM0NzBkOWVi;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3
smald4lib • Lester Thurow's The Future of Capitalism, written mid-1990s:
"History teaches us that the survival-of-the-fittest versions of capitalism do not work. The free market economies that existed in the 1920s imploded during the Great Depression and had to be reconstructed by government....It is well to remember that the social welfare state was not implemented by wild-eyed leftists. Its midwives were almost always enlightened aristocratic conservatives (Bismarck, Churchill, Roosevelt) who adopted social welfare policies to save, not destroy capitalism by protecting the working class...If one asked what must governments do in capitalistic socieities to make conditions better, the socialist answer was to own and run business firms. That answer proved to be incorrect. The right answer is to force a high level of private and public investment."
Reddit:
The most amazing con in history has to be the one perpetuated by the modern Republican Party. These politicians have actually convinced the poor that ultra-wealthy corporations and business magnates have their best interests at heart. (self.politics)
submitted 8 hours ago* by moralnihilist
They've defunded and degraded public services to their near-failure point, only to turn around and use their ineptitude at running a government as proof of their "government doesn't work" ideology. The reason the U.S. government is corrupt and inefficient is precisely because those politicians have ruined it, on purpose. Government is only "the problem" because they've made it the problem.
In what other profession can you utterly bankrupt and ruin your company, and then turn around and use your incompetence as a reason to keep you on the payroll?
2046 comments
top 200 commentsshow 500
[–]10BV01 305 points 5 hours ago*
The biggest problem is the willful ignorance epidemic.
Its more than that, the right has done its best to slander being educated! A friend of a friend replied to one of my facebook posts with this:
"'Think for yourself' wow that's the same battle cry used by everyone who has ever been brainwashed by a professor. "
[–]boo_baup 7 points 3 hours ago*
The right has jumped on the train of slandering education, but I don't think they can be accredited as the architects of that stance. The US has always been skeptical of formal institutions, especially those that embrace some kind of perceived pretention. The Reagan era christian conservative coalition was a genius marketing decision, but it wasn't an entirely new direction for American discourse. However, I do think that we are beginning to see the influence of this socio-political alliance erode.
permalink
parent
[–]oneshoe 87 points 2 hours ago*
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Stephen Hawking
[–]GMonsoon 16 points 2 hours ago
Good one. I'm a bit shocked that there are still people who believe that there is a trustworthy political party in power. What is it going to take for them to see: off-camera they are all buddies. They are in agreement. They do the same things because they work for the same parties, and those parties aren't the Republicans or the Democrats and they aren't you or me. Why do these people think that when Obama got into office he perpetuated and worsened everything Bush did? Obama was just the Bush Expansion Pack. Geeze - the evidence is right there. What is it going to take for people to LOOK at it?
[–]errandum 5 points 1 hour ago
There is very little someone can do in the current american system. Individuals hold way too much power, and unlike Republicans that seem to mindlessly follow the leader, democrats are a lot more divided and it's way harder to get anything through any of the houses (especially because the republicans actually want Obama to look bad and noneffective).
Obama had nice ideas. But too many democrats blocked him while they had the chance to pass anything, and then they lost one of the houses and now they can't pass anything at all without a lot of concessions.
Not saying that Obama did a good job, just that it wasn't entirely it's fault. Or actually, it mostly wasn't.
From what I gather in this side of the pond, the President's title is currently a very empty one. He can veto things, but he can't pass anything worth mentioning without a shitload of concessions to individuals (and by attachment, the corporations they represent).
The system is clearly flawed. But what solution do you propose?
[–]Donpablo 13 points 3 hours ago
Na, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority
[–]doody 447 points 6 hours ago
In what other profession can you utterly bankrupt and ruin your company, and then turn around and use your incompetence as a reason to keep you on the payroll?
Banking, apparently.
[–]nizo505 122 points 4 hours ago
Actually for added irony the boobs running the bank get massive bonuses for running it into the ground.
[–]redstapler3 6 points 2 hours ago
Spot on. If I could count the number of times I have heard some of my more conservative friends say, "Why should we punish the rich just because they have figured out how to succeed?" My eye starts to twitch every time I hear this. They honestly believe that they will get a statistical fair shake at success and, if that were to somehow ever happen, don't want to be hindered in any way. It is like they want to protect the super rich just in case they were to ever become super rich themselves. (The vanishing upper middle-class does not equal rich, b-t-dubs.)
[–]h_von_trash 15 points 3 hours ago
it's the difference between politics based on reasoning and politics based on feeling. this worked relatively well for the fascists of the early 20th century. why not the republicans of the early 21st? reminds me of weber's idea of gesinnungspolitik...
[–]EthyleneGlycol 18 points 4 hours ago
"You don't have a job because Obama over regulating your company meant they had to move to China."
[–]m0deth 34 points 4 hours ago
Lol, Our jobs have been given to China for one reason only, to bolster corporate profit margins, and claim 'growth' that actually isn't there.
Regulation wasn't the first thing they blamed it on....it's just the latest in a long string of excuses we've heard for 30 years and going, since Nixon went to China and opened up enemy shores to our jobs.
And if you think the govt. of China isn't our ideological and economic enemy....you are a moron, or part of the problem.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Clear Channel and Bain Capital - Tyranny of the Airwaves - 1932 style Demagoguery Rules
Aartemio 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand You are all operating out of the premise that Clear Channel and Cumuluis are about doing good and profitable business ---- sorry, but NOT the case!
They have a clear political agenda, an agenda that includes heavily subsidizing loosers like Beck and cutting out the public's access to progressive media.
Just look around the nation. This market switch is not unique, it is a trend, a slippery dunk to the far right, a la Europe 1932.
Just as Fox is a video propaganda machine, these radio chains are the radio version.
If you want to understand their decisions, that is the place to start.
As for me and my house (as they said in the Bible) we shall follow the Good News to be found wherever progressive media can be yet gleened in the Bay Area and abandon KGO and its 5th columnist Ronn Owens (don't even get me started about their prime time weekend spot) and change my dial away from 960 as well if these changes go thru.
IF they move the current 960 line up to 910 to gain range and strength, then there me and mine shall be as well.
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 2 Likes F .
Aartemio 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand PS... Thank you Bill Clinton for deregulating the media and allowing such clear economic and public service disasters as this. How many strations does Clear Channel control? Has anyone noticed any positive benefit from the re-emergence of monopolies in this or ANY industry?
It ain't just the Republicans my friends! :-(
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 0 Like
F .
Rangerz 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Well, let's add this up capitalistically: Hartmann and Miller with millions in advertising, book/CD/ticket sales, top radio awards versus Beck, who cost Fox millions and couldn't even get 500 people to show up for free to see him. Yes, in liberal SF....seems like Clearchannel learned their lessons in profitability from some book written circa 2004 about mortgage investing. Worse for them, if they keep playing games, unhappy listeners will just move to the Internet to hear the hosts they want. So much for the advertising money!
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 0 Like
F .
PO'd former listener 1 comment collapsed
Collapse Expand Clear Channel doesn't care if this station loses listeners. It does not care if this station loses money. All it cares about is destroying the most popular (the only?) progressive radio station that we have here in the Bay Area. I mean, come on, Glen Beck taking Stephanie Miller's time slot? It's a joke, but an horrible one.
It's unbelievable to me that this could happen in the most liberal area of the country. Then again, it's all about the money, which Clear Channel has plenty of.
I'm still really pissed off about them running KKSF off the air, but this is much worse. Green 960 with ALL of the radio hosts helped me keep my sanity in a world of right wing hate mongering and nonsense. And for this to happen in a hugely important election year is just appalling.
I hope to God that someone starts up another progressive radio station to replace this one. My God, this is the fricken' Bay Area!!! San Francisco!! Yes, we can move to the Internet to listen to progressive radio hosts, but why the hell should we have to? We have a right to have our voices heard to. I am so angry. What's next?
And we can fill this blog with thousands of comments and it won't matter, as it didn't when they took away KKSF. I just wish that there was a way for progressives to buy up a local radio station (like one of those old rock stations that seem to be EVERYWHERE) and make it into a progressive station and make it listener owned so it can't be sold out when Clear Channel comes in and throws a bunch of money at the station owners.
Anyone out there have the knowledge and experience to do this? We need an "Occupy the Airwaves" movement!!!
A Like Reply 5 days ago 0 Like
F .
They have a clear political agenda, an agenda that includes heavily subsidizing loosers like Beck and cutting out the public's access to progressive media.
Just look around the nation. This market switch is not unique, it is a trend, a slippery dunk to the far right, a la Europe 1932.
Just as Fox is a video propaganda machine, these radio chains are the radio version.
If you want to understand their decisions, that is the place to start.
As for me and my house (as they said in the Bible) we shall follow the Good News to be found wherever progressive media can be yet gleened in the Bay Area and abandon KGO and its 5th columnist Ronn Owens (don't even get me started about their prime time weekend spot) and change my dial away from 960 as well if these changes go thru.
IF they move the current 960 line up to 910 to gain range and strength, then there me and mine shall be as well.
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 2 Likes F .
Aartemio 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand PS... Thank you Bill Clinton for deregulating the media and allowing such clear economic and public service disasters as this. How many strations does Clear Channel control? Has anyone noticed any positive benefit from the re-emergence of monopolies in this or ANY industry?
It ain't just the Republicans my friends! :-(
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 0 Like
F .
Rangerz 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Well, let's add this up capitalistically: Hartmann and Miller with millions in advertising, book/CD/ticket sales, top radio awards versus Beck, who cost Fox millions and couldn't even get 500 people to show up for free to see him. Yes, in liberal SF....seems like Clearchannel learned their lessons in profitability from some book written circa 2004 about mortgage investing. Worse for them, if they keep playing games, unhappy listeners will just move to the Internet to hear the hosts they want. So much for the advertising money!
A Like Reply 2 weeks ago 0 Like
F .
PO'd former listener 1 comment collapsed
Collapse Expand Clear Channel doesn't care if this station loses listeners. It does not care if this station loses money. All it cares about is destroying the most popular (the only?) progressive radio station that we have here in the Bay Area. I mean, come on, Glen Beck taking Stephanie Miller's time slot? It's a joke, but an horrible one.
It's unbelievable to me that this could happen in the most liberal area of the country. Then again, it's all about the money, which Clear Channel has plenty of.
I'm still really pissed off about them running KKSF off the air, but this is much worse. Green 960 with ALL of the radio hosts helped me keep my sanity in a world of right wing hate mongering and nonsense. And for this to happen in a hugely important election year is just appalling.
I hope to God that someone starts up another progressive radio station to replace this one. My God, this is the fricken' Bay Area!!! San Francisco!! Yes, we can move to the Internet to listen to progressive radio hosts, but why the hell should we have to? We have a right to have our voices heard to. I am so angry. What's next?
And we can fill this blog with thousands of comments and it won't matter, as it didn't when they took away KKSF. I just wish that there was a way for progressives to buy up a local radio station (like one of those old rock stations that seem to be EVERYWHERE) and make it into a progressive station and make it listener owned so it can't be sold out when Clear Channel comes in and throws a bunch of money at the station owners.
Anyone out there have the knowledge and experience to do this? We need an "Occupy the Airwaves" movement!!!
A Like Reply 5 days ago 0 Like
F .
Clear Channel's Tyranny of the Public Airwaves in San Francisco, killing Green960
Clear Channel exercises its freedom of speech by denying the public any alternative to the right wing hate speech that dominates AM talk radio.
Evidently Clear Channel is part of the Republican political strategy for the 2012 election, trying their best to suppress the liberal vote in California.
Stephanie Miller's show had turned into a nonstop ad for her stupidly named 'sexy liberal' comedy roadshow, and Thom Hartmann was obsessively compulsively tilting quixotically at one conservatard after another in his twisted quest for Socratic dialog with the certifiably insane, yet to replace these stalwarts with of all people the psychotic demagogue Glenn Beck??? It is truly an insult to the entire Bay Area that must warm the cockles of Rupert Murdoch's cold dead heart.
--------------------------
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8974
Clear Channel, our public airwaves and public interest obligations
Emmy award-winning former Los Angeles TV news producer Sue Wilson (an occasional guest contributor on media issues at The BRAD BLOG over the years), whose documentary film Broadcast Blues focuses on, among other things, the dangers of Clear Channel's dominance in the radio market following the passage of the Telecommunications Act, noted yet another change by the company over the weekend. In Sacramento, the state capitol in very progressive California, where there has been no progressive AM talk stations on the public airwaves for years, more Rightwing radio was quietly added to the airwaves.
She charges, on a Facebook page linked from her FCC watchdog website, OurPublicAirwaves.com, that last Wednesday, the company "pulled a fast one on its listeners in Sacramento" by replacing an FM rock station with simulcast programming from talk station KFBK, the station which launched, and still carries, Rightwing talker Rush Limbaugh.
Wilson writes that the move "means that hard right-wing talk will fill another 50,000 watts of OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES in the Sacramento region, ranging from Lake Tahoe to Santa Rosa. It means our region now gets four stations promoting pro-corporate 'conservative' hate speech, but zero stations promoting any opposing ideas."
She says this means that "Limbaugh can tell millions that Occupy Wall Street protestors are 'Pure, genuine parasites,' and 'smug, stupid idiots' whose parents will need to 'housebreak 'em all over again'" while Sean Hannity "defends UC Davis cops use of pepper spray [and] can tell millions that Occupy protesters are 'Lunatics Of The Left Wing'", while at the same time on KFBK's sister station KSTE Rightwinger Michael Savage "calls occupiers 'vermin'".
"[There is n]obody there to counter this propaganda," she charges. "'Conservative' talk radio supporters will tell us that this is all about free speech, and if we don't like it, we should just change the channel."
"They are right," Wilson says, "it is about free speech. OUR free speech. Where is OUR opportunity to get an alternative message out to our community on OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES?"
She goes on to say that no matter the politics, stations are granted FCC licenses for use of the public airwaves in exchange only for serving in the public interest.
"How is a hard right corporate power grab serving YOUR public interest?," she rhetorically asks. "Answer: It is not."
Politics aside?
In 2008, Bain Capital LLC, a Boston-based private equity firm founded in 1984 by current Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, purchased the Clear Channel conglomerate in a leveraged buyout.
Clear Channel's removal of progressive talk from San Francisco's airwaves at the beginning of a Presidential election year when Romney is seen by many to be the GOP's likely nominee is bound to raise eyebrows and renew progressive concerns about media consolidation under the 1996 Telecom Act.
Collins, however, doesn't see a conspiracy behind the shakeup in San Francisco. "I just don't think the decisions were about politics," he says. "But, it's very easy to see that there's an industry bias against Liberals and a basic industry presumption that Liberals can't be successful in talk radio."
"The real failure of this was to promote progressive talk in the same manner as conservative talk is promoted," he says.
Indeed, it's not just the corporate radio industry that seems disinclined toward supporting and promoting progressive programming. In 2006, Collins released a memo from ABC Radio Networks instructing affiliates who carried programs syndicated by Air America (the progressive radio network which declared bankruptcy the same year) to black out all ads from some 90 major corporate sponsors, including Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Visa, Exxon Mobil, Cingular, McDonald's, and even the U.S. Postal service and the U.S. Navy. All of them, the memo reads, "do not wish to air on any Air America affiliates
Evidently Clear Channel is part of the Republican political strategy for the 2012 election, trying their best to suppress the liberal vote in California.
Stephanie Miller's show had turned into a nonstop ad for her stupidly named 'sexy liberal' comedy roadshow, and Thom Hartmann was obsessively compulsively tilting quixotically at one conservatard after another in his twisted quest for Socratic dialog with the certifiably insane, yet to replace these stalwarts with of all people the psychotic demagogue Glenn Beck??? It is truly an insult to the entire Bay Area that must warm the cockles of Rupert Murdoch's cold dead heart.
--------------------------
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8974
Clear Channel, our public airwaves and public interest obligations
Emmy award-winning former Los Angeles TV news producer Sue Wilson (an occasional guest contributor on media issues at The BRAD BLOG over the years), whose documentary film Broadcast Blues focuses on, among other things, the dangers of Clear Channel's dominance in the radio market following the passage of the Telecommunications Act, noted yet another change by the company over the weekend. In Sacramento, the state capitol in very progressive California, where there has been no progressive AM talk stations on the public airwaves for years, more Rightwing radio was quietly added to the airwaves.
She charges, on a Facebook page linked from her FCC watchdog website, OurPublicAirwaves.com, that last Wednesday, the company "pulled a fast one on its listeners in Sacramento" by replacing an FM rock station with simulcast programming from talk station KFBK, the station which launched, and still carries, Rightwing talker Rush Limbaugh.
Wilson writes that the move "means that hard right-wing talk will fill another 50,000 watts of OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES in the Sacramento region, ranging from Lake Tahoe to Santa Rosa. It means our region now gets four stations promoting pro-corporate 'conservative' hate speech, but zero stations promoting any opposing ideas."
She says this means that "Limbaugh can tell millions that Occupy Wall Street protestors are 'Pure, genuine parasites,' and 'smug, stupid idiots' whose parents will need to 'housebreak 'em all over again'" while Sean Hannity "defends UC Davis cops use of pepper spray [and] can tell millions that Occupy protesters are 'Lunatics Of The Left Wing'", while at the same time on KFBK's sister station KSTE Rightwinger Michael Savage "calls occupiers 'vermin'".
"[There is n]obody there to counter this propaganda," she charges. "'Conservative' talk radio supporters will tell us that this is all about free speech, and if we don't like it, we should just change the channel."
"They are right," Wilson says, "it is about free speech. OUR free speech. Where is OUR opportunity to get an alternative message out to our community on OUR PUBLIC AIRWAVES?"
She goes on to say that no matter the politics, stations are granted FCC licenses for use of the public airwaves in exchange only for serving in the public interest.
"How is a hard right corporate power grab serving YOUR public interest?," she rhetorically asks. "Answer: It is not."
Politics aside?
In 2008, Bain Capital LLC, a Boston-based private equity firm founded in 1984 by current Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, purchased the Clear Channel conglomerate in a leveraged buyout.
Clear Channel's removal of progressive talk from San Francisco's airwaves at the beginning of a Presidential election year when Romney is seen by many to be the GOP's likely nominee is bound to raise eyebrows and renew progressive concerns about media consolidation under the 1996 Telecom Act.
Collins, however, doesn't see a conspiracy behind the shakeup in San Francisco. "I just don't think the decisions were about politics," he says. "But, it's very easy to see that there's an industry bias against Liberals and a basic industry presumption that Liberals can't be successful in talk radio."
"The real failure of this was to promote progressive talk in the same manner as conservative talk is promoted," he says.
Indeed, it's not just the corporate radio industry that seems disinclined toward supporting and promoting progressive programming. In 2006, Collins released a memo from ABC Radio Networks instructing affiliates who carried programs syndicated by Air America (the progressive radio network which declared bankruptcy the same year) to black out all ads from some 90 major corporate sponsors, including Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Visa, Exxon Mobil, Cingular, McDonald's, and even the U.S. Postal service and the U.S. Navy. All of them, the memo reads, "do not wish to air on any Air America affiliates
Sunday, January 1, 2012
Microsoft - Defective by Design
is there anyone who thinks the new Microsft Office tool 'ribbon' menu was designed in response to user's requests, or was tested to ensure productivity was not impaired?
hahhahhahhahahah
every product microsoft ships is defective by design, what is the first thing you have to do to a new windows pc? you have to spend hours fixing it by installing numerous antivirus and firewall tools.
where is the class action lawsuit to reimburse all microsoft customers for lost time and productivity as victims of their defective products?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_(computing)
https://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=+microsoft+tool+ribbon+sucks&pbx=1&oq=+microsoft+tool+ribbon+sucks&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=372466l377552l3l378410l12l8l1l0l0l1l312l1778l0.2.5.1l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=890a274ff6b690bf&biw=1093&bih=485
the sooner we all move to open office and gimp the better
--------------------------
Incorrect assertions by MicrosoftAccording to MS help on removing the ribbon, "The Ribbon ...is part of the Microsoft Office Fluent user interface, is designed to help you quickly find the commands that you need to complete a task. Commands are organized in logical groups that are collected together under tabs. Each tab relates to a type of activity, such as writing or laying out a page. To reduce screen clutter, some tabs are shown only when they are needed. When the Ribbon is minimized, you see only the tabs."
I think that many of us may disagree with sections of this paragraph from Microsoft.
Commands are not organized into logical groups, they are merely plastered across the screen in a logic defying manner that only serves to look pretty and make conventional functions hard to find. Finding commands is not quick because the density of icons is spread out across the screen instead of gathered into a close area, so the eye must search back and forth across the screen until a poorly designed icon that is not well related to previous menu choices may be found. It is like reading the this paragraph.
The function choices are not even the same as the 2003 menu choices, so previous users have to hunt through multiple mouse menus to find what is not shown in the new Ribbon.
Tabs may relate to types of activities that do not seem to be carefully related.
The ribbon hogs screen space in an abhorent manner making the document window seem completely irrelevant. Taking of valuable screen space is especially noticeable on short screen laptops.
When I minimize the Ribbon, I'd like it to disappear completely.
Microsoft refers to it's software as "Professional." The Ribbon does not seem to meet the standards for 'professional' since it does not maintain continuity for those professionals who use it.
Is Microsoft's feedback loop completely broken? If sales are their only parameter, then they certainly are not doing themselves and their users any favors.70.89.209.81 (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Any Usability Studies Cited by Microsoft?it would be nice to see a reference to any studies Microsoft has released to support its claim of productivity enhancement, given users' self reported impairment of productivity by 20-35%. Allowing for the bald faced facetiousness of the productivity argument, there should be discussion about other strategies justifying this massive antagonizing of their customer base, i.e. is it yet another of Microaoft's many lock-in strategies? Ensuring lock-in of new users to Office vs Open Office, by training new users in a non standard non portable unique and crippling interface. It would also seem to be potential grounds for a class action lawsuit if in fact productivity is reduced as much as the 20-35% report. if so, Microsoft should have foreseen this and conducted sufficient usability studies to defend any such legal action on behalf of its long suffering abusive relationship victims aka 'customers'. — Preceding unsigned comment 11:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
In my to-do list there's a desire to write a summary of the story of the MS Ribbon. Once you learn that the Office most used command is Paste and that users in focus groups were asking MS for new features that already existed in Office (that obviously they didn't found), it starts to explain many things about the redesign. Office 2007 was certainly designed based both on collected usage statistics and goal-based design. The designers issued a series of blog posts discussing the design process, they should be added as a reference to the article. Diego (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
-----------------------------------------
Roy Leban, Founder of Puzzazz - we're building the future of puzzles for electronic media. kwds={visionary, entrepreneur, UX, photographer, pizza maker, writer, blogger} 5 comments collapsed Collapse Expand How is it possible that Microsoft hasn't figured out the Ribbon sucks? Have they ever watched people using it? (Really just watched, not run a flawed usability test that is doomed to give invalid results before they even start it.)
A good rule: First, build something that works better. Then, make it pretty. Doing it the other way around is a recipe for disaster.
A Like Reply 9 months ago 10 Likes F .
Mahadev 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Ribbon is really the best feature on the Office suite! It is so easy to use.. cannot wait for Win8.
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 2 Likes F .
Yasir Alam 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand It takes some getting used to, I'll give you that, but on the whole I like the Ribbon interface. It's an interesting evolution from drop down menus. The context sensitive tabs really let you get at more features at a glance than any other way of doing things. I don't know if Windows Explorer has enough functions to require such an interface, but it was a godsend for office products.
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 1 Like F .
Steve, big fan and power user of computers and the internet, occasionally a bit of a nerd, fairly knowledgeable tech-head. it's not just computers as it's other subjects I like to keep up with and give my opinions/reviews... 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Oh dear! I absolutely hate the stupid stupid ribbon idea in the new versions of MS Office that claims to be better - trust me, it really isn't. I have an older version with real menu system. Now I read they want to introduce this daft idea into the new version of Windows? (before even letting the paint dry properly on Windows 7, when is this expected to be forced on an unwilling public?)
How much does this stink of some sort of desperation that a) it's being started already, and b) cynically leaking design ideas - I suppose the chatter is worth it. Listen up Microsoft: if it ain't broken then don't meddle with it. (read: don't fuck with it) there are many other places in the operating system where there are plenty of means to improve, appearance isnt one of them.
This might only be a pre-alpha series of leaked shots, but I really hope they don't place this in with out other options like regular menus for people who don't have or want touch screen (your possible saving grace in this argument) but aren't blind enough to need big stupid buttons to click...
Stunts like this will drive more people to Linux. ~S
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 0 Like
F .
Cow 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Microsoft built the ribbon interface almost purely on user test group ideas. People were complaining that too many options were buried under all these ridiculous menus they had to dig through. Besides, keyboard shortcuts (which are still the same) are faster than either.
A Like Reply 7 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 0 Like
F .
Vanno Davis 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand wow i cant wait for windows 9 to see how they move up from this
A Like Reply 9 months ago 0 Like
F .
Thedlinktv 3 comments collapsed Collapse Expand I really like teh fact that Microsoft is really keeping all info about Windows 8 closed, it just builds up excitment. I personally think Ribbon is a great addition to Windows 8, I use it on Office 2010. Also adding Xbox and Windows Phone UI to Windows 8 would really slap Apple across the face. Plus a Windows Store, for apps? Microsoft is definetely stepping up to the plate. Who knows what could be next, maybe better software like Windows Live Essentials, or change of the taskbar. Let's take our place back Microsoft!
A Like Reply 9 months ago 6 Likes F .
Olisaebuka Maduka 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Agreed
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Thedlinktv 1 Like F .
Steve, big fan and power user of computers and the internet, occasionally a bit of a nerd, fairly knowledgeable tech-head. it's not just computers as it's other subjects I like to keep up with and give my opinions/reviews... 1 comment collapsed
Collapse Expand You know the problem here? (not a major problem, just a minor annoyance) is that we have to get yet another online ID, and personally I prefer to keep my laptop separate and only log in to services when I need them not have it built into the operating system...
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Thedlinktv 0 Like
F .
Sure 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Yeah! More MicroSatan and Winblows.
hahhahhahhahahah
every product microsoft ships is defective by design, what is the first thing you have to do to a new windows pc? you have to spend hours fixing it by installing numerous antivirus and firewall tools.
where is the class action lawsuit to reimburse all microsoft customers for lost time and productivity as victims of their defective products?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_(computing)
https://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=+microsoft+tool+ribbon+sucks&pbx=1&oq=+microsoft+tool+ribbon+sucks&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=372466l377552l3l378410l12l8l1l0l0l1l312l1778l0.2.5.1l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=890a274ff6b690bf&biw=1093&bih=485
the sooner we all move to open office and gimp the better
--------------------------
Incorrect assertions by MicrosoftAccording to MS help on removing the ribbon, "The Ribbon ...is part of the Microsoft Office Fluent user interface, is designed to help you quickly find the commands that you need to complete a task. Commands are organized in logical groups that are collected together under tabs. Each tab relates to a type of activity, such as writing or laying out a page. To reduce screen clutter, some tabs are shown only when they are needed. When the Ribbon is minimized, you see only the tabs."
I think that many of us may disagree with sections of this paragraph from Microsoft.
Commands are not organized into logical groups, they are merely plastered across the screen in a logic defying manner that only serves to look pretty and make conventional functions hard to find. Finding commands is not quick because the density of icons is spread out across the screen instead of gathered into a close area, so the eye must search back and forth across the screen until a poorly designed icon that is not well related to previous menu choices may be found. It is like reading the this paragraph.
The function choices are not even the same as the 2003 menu choices, so previous users have to hunt through multiple mouse menus to find what is not shown in the new Ribbon.
Tabs may relate to types of activities that do not seem to be carefully related.
The ribbon hogs screen space in an abhorent manner making the document window seem completely irrelevant. Taking of valuable screen space is especially noticeable on short screen laptops.
When I minimize the Ribbon, I'd like it to disappear completely.
Microsoft refers to it's software as "Professional." The Ribbon does not seem to meet the standards for 'professional' since it does not maintain continuity for those professionals who use it.
Is Microsoft's feedback loop completely broken? If sales are their only parameter, then they certainly are not doing themselves and their users any favors.70.89.209.81 (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Any Usability Studies Cited by Microsoft?it would be nice to see a reference to any studies Microsoft has released to support its claim of productivity enhancement, given users' self reported impairment of productivity by 20-35%. Allowing for the bald faced facetiousness of the productivity argument, there should be discussion about other strategies justifying this massive antagonizing of their customer base, i.e. is it yet another of Microaoft's many lock-in strategies? Ensuring lock-in of new users to Office vs Open Office, by training new users in a non standard non portable unique and crippling interface. It would also seem to be potential grounds for a class action lawsuit if in fact productivity is reduced as much as the 20-35% report. if so, Microsoft should have foreseen this and conducted sufficient usability studies to defend any such legal action on behalf of its long suffering abusive relationship victims aka 'customers'. — Preceding unsigned comment 11:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
In my to-do list there's a desire to write a summary of the story of the MS Ribbon. Once you learn that the Office most used command is Paste and that users in focus groups were asking MS for new features that already existed in Office (that obviously they didn't found), it starts to explain many things about the redesign. Office 2007 was certainly designed based both on collected usage statistics and goal-based design. The designers issued a series of blog posts discussing the design process, they should be added as a reference to the article. Diego (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
-----------------------------------------
Roy Leban, Founder of Puzzazz - we're building the future of puzzles for electronic media. kwds={visionary, entrepreneur, UX, photographer, pizza maker, writer, blogger} 5 comments collapsed Collapse Expand How is it possible that Microsoft hasn't figured out the Ribbon sucks? Have they ever watched people using it? (Really just watched, not run a flawed usability test that is doomed to give invalid results before they even start it.)
A good rule: First, build something that works better. Then, make it pretty. Doing it the other way around is a recipe for disaster.
A Like Reply 9 months ago 10 Likes F .
Mahadev 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Ribbon is really the best feature on the Office suite! It is so easy to use.. cannot wait for Win8.
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 2 Likes F .
Yasir Alam 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand It takes some getting used to, I'll give you that, but on the whole I like the Ribbon interface. It's an interesting evolution from drop down menus. The context sensitive tabs really let you get at more features at a glance than any other way of doing things. I don't know if Windows Explorer has enough functions to require such an interface, but it was a godsend for office products.
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 1 Like F .
Steve, big fan and power user of computers and the internet, occasionally a bit of a nerd, fairly knowledgeable tech-head. it's not just computers as it's other subjects I like to keep up with and give my opinions/reviews... 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Oh dear! I absolutely hate the stupid stupid ribbon idea in the new versions of MS Office that claims to be better - trust me, it really isn't. I have an older version with real menu system. Now I read they want to introduce this daft idea into the new version of Windows? (before even letting the paint dry properly on Windows 7, when is this expected to be forced on an unwilling public?)
How much does this stink of some sort of desperation that a) it's being started already, and b) cynically leaking design ideas - I suppose the chatter is worth it. Listen up Microsoft: if it ain't broken then don't meddle with it. (read: don't fuck with it) there are many other places in the operating system where there are plenty of means to improve, appearance isnt one of them.
This might only be a pre-alpha series of leaked shots, but I really hope they don't place this in with out other options like regular menus for people who don't have or want touch screen (your possible saving grace in this argument) but aren't blind enough to need big stupid buttons to click...
Stunts like this will drive more people to Linux. ~S
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 0 Like
F .
Cow 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Microsoft built the ribbon interface almost purely on user test group ideas. People were complaining that too many options were buried under all these ridiculous menus they had to dig through. Besides, keyboard shortcuts (which are still the same) are faster than either.
A Like Reply 7 months ago in reply to Roy Leban 0 Like
F .
Vanno Davis 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand wow i cant wait for windows 9 to see how they move up from this
A Like Reply 9 months ago 0 Like
F .
Thedlinktv 3 comments collapsed Collapse Expand I really like teh fact that Microsoft is really keeping all info about Windows 8 closed, it just builds up excitment. I personally think Ribbon is a great addition to Windows 8, I use it on Office 2010. Also adding Xbox and Windows Phone UI to Windows 8 would really slap Apple across the face. Plus a Windows Store, for apps? Microsoft is definetely stepping up to the plate. Who knows what could be next, maybe better software like Windows Live Essentials, or change of the taskbar. Let's take our place back Microsoft!
A Like Reply 9 months ago 6 Likes F .
Olisaebuka Maduka 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Agreed
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Thedlinktv 1 Like F .
Steve, big fan and power user of computers and the internet, occasionally a bit of a nerd, fairly knowledgeable tech-head. it's not just computers as it's other subjects I like to keep up with and give my opinions/reviews... 1 comment collapsed
Collapse Expand You know the problem here? (not a major problem, just a minor annoyance) is that we have to get yet another online ID, and personally I prefer to keep my laptop separate and only log in to services when I need them not have it built into the operating system...
A Like Reply 9 months ago in reply to Thedlinktv 0 Like
F .
Sure 1 comment collapsed Collapse Expand Yeah! More MicroSatan and Winblows.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)