January 1999
From the President:
The Alpha-Beta Hurdy-Gurdy
by Norman F. Taylor
Tell me, is there something I'm not clear on when it comes to beta releases of
products? Yes, I can hear you in the back row snickering, "Yup." But before that
snicker grows to a belly laugh, let me pass on to you a couple of things that I've seen
recently.
The first was a generic announcement from Maria Cantwell, senior vice president at
RealNetworks (http://www.real.com), a portion of which follows:
Dear RealPlayer Customer:
How much fun can you have with RealAudio and RealVideo in the next 30 days?
Why not find out? Download our new premium RealPlayer Plus G2 Beta today, risk free -
for only $29.99 - and it comes with our 30-day money-back guarantee!
The second was in the First Looks section of the January 5, 1999, issue of PC
Magazine http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag that Microsoft was selling the Beta 2 of
Office 2000 for US$19.95. There was also a warning, and I quote:
Like all early betas, Office 2000 is plagued by bugs.Worse, since it is so deeply
intertwined with the OS, test Office 2000 only if you plan to reformat your hard disk
afterward.
I was under the distinct impression that software developers made beta releases of new
products available to the public for the purpose of testing and debugging those products
prior to final release.
The user community was enlisted in this task because they are more likely than the
developers' in-house testers to find bugs. It was also acknowledged, by both sides, that
there are risks in such testing; the users are assisting the developer and, hence, there
is no charge made for beta product.
Now I will admit that I could have my head in the clouds, that charging for betas has
been a long-time and typical practice, just one of the things that I've missed. Que
sera, sera. Regardless...
Risk-free Betas?
Take a close look at the RealPlayer software. It says "risk free," right
there in black and white. If it really is risk-free, then all the bugs, real and
potential, must have been discovered and corrected.
Does it not seem odd then that it is a beta release, and not the final shipping
version? (Given the the complexity of current software and the diversity of systems that
the programs can run on, it is nearly impossible to prove that a program is free of all
bugs.) Compared to Office 2000 though, any potential problems with RealPlayer are most
likely small potatoes.
That warning about Office 2000 absolutely boggles me. Would you load a beta that could
scramble your system? Especially if you had to spend a lot of time reformatting,
reinstalling, and reconfiguring? Maybe more than once if you were really into delving deep
in the software, uncovering the parts that do the special effects for '50s sci-fi flicks?
I wouldn't: I have neither the time, nor the money, nor the masochistic inclination.
Would it be worth it if Microsoft paid me -- even a lot more than US$20? I don't think so.
I'll pass on this particular "opportunity."
So tell me, is there something I'm not clear on when it comes to beta releases?
CAD Management
2D is Better Than 3D
by Jakob Nielsen
The following commentary was reprinted from Jakob Nielsen's
Alertbox (Nov. 15 '98) found at http://www.useit.com
... because people are not frogs.
If we had been frogs with eyes sitting on the side of the head, the story might
have been different, but humans have their eyes smack in the front of their face,
looking straight out.
Compare the number of people who drive a car versus the number of helicopter pilots: 2D
navigation (on the ground) vs. 3D navigation (in the air).
Using 3D on a computer adds a range of difficulties:
?The screen and the mouse are both 2D devices, so we don't get true 3D unless we strap
on weird head-gear and buy expensive bats (flying mice).
?It is difficult to control a 3D space with the interaction techniques that are
currently in common use since they were designed for 2D manipulation (e.g., dragging,
scrolling).
?Users need to pay attention to the navigation of the 3D view, in addition to the
navigation of the underlying model: the extra controls for flying, zooming, etc. get in
the way of the user's primary task.
? Poor screen resolution makes it impossible to render remote objects in sufficient
detail to be recognizable; any text that is in the background is unreadable.
?The software needed for 3D is usually non-standard, crash-prone, and requires an extra
download (which users don't want to wait for).
Bad Use of 3D
Most abstract information spaces work poorly in 3D because they are
non-physical. If anything, they have at least a hundred dimensions, so visualizing an
information space in 3D means throwing away 97 dimensions instead of 98: hardly a big
enough improvement to justify the added interface complexity.
In particular, navigation through a hyperspace (such as a Web site) is often
very confusing in 3D, and users frequently get lost. 3D navigation looks very cool in a
demo, but that's because you are not flying through the hyperspace yourself. Thus, you
don't have to remember what's behind you or worry about what remote objects are hidden by
near-by objects. The person giving the demo knows where everything is.
The first law of demos: never try to actually use the system for anything;
simply step through a well-rehearsed script that does not touch anything that might cause
a crash.
Avoid virtual reality gimmicks (say, a virtual shopping mall) that
emulate the physical world. The goal of Web design is to be better than
reality. If you ask users to "walk around the mall," you are putting your
interface in the way of their goal. In the physical world, you need to schlep between
shops; on the Web you teleport through cyberspace directly to your destination using a
navigational topology that conforms to user needs (assuming good information architecture,
of course).
When to Use 3D
When you visualize physical objects that need to be understood in their solid
form. Examples include:
?Surgeons planning where to cut a patient: the body is 3D and the location of the tumor
has a 3D from a 2D X-ray.
?Mechanical engineers designing a widget that needs to fit into a gadget.
?Chemistry researchers trying to understand the shape of a molecule.
?Planning the layout of a trade-show booth.
Sometimes physical objects work better in 2D. A help system explaining how to replace a
harddisk in a computer chassis may be better off with a schematic drawing from
exactly the perspective that highlights the correct spot. Or use a video of a repair tech
who removes the old disk and inserts the new one. Video is 2D with respect to the images
but uses sound to enhance the understanding of events (e.g., the satisfying snap
when the disk is safely docked). Sound provides additional dimensionality without
navigational overhead because it's synched to the video.
Abstract data sets that have exactly three attributes are sometimes easier to
understand in a 3D visualization. But first attempt to simplify the problem and experiment
with 2D views ? including the comic-strip-like layout of multiple charts that Tufte loves
so much in The Visual Display of Quantitative Information.
Finally, entertainment applications and some educational interfaces can benefit
from the fun and engaging nature of
News & Announcements:
December VAUS Meeting
by Carolyn LeMarchand, Secretary
News & Announcements:
B.C.I.T.'s ATC program will be commencing in January of 1999. Mechanical Desktop will
be held on Thursday evenings @ the BBY Campus; Friday night, Saturday and Sunday @ the
Burnaby Campus. For more Info, check out their Web site at http://www.bcit.bc.ca/
Kwantlen College, AutoCAD Mastery will be commencing January 11, 1999, for more info
call John Sprung at 599-2945 or email johnsp@ kwantlen.bc.ca
Allow me to unveil the following job opportunity...
ASSISTANT INSTRUCTOR MECHANICAL TECHNOLOGY. BCIT requires an Assistant Instructor to
provide instruction to students in lab situations, assist faculty members with course
responsibility and provide technical assistance with lab setup and maintenance. This
temporary position can be part-time or full-time. Qualifications: Diploma in Mechanical
Technology or equivalent with a preference to CAD/CAM option. Relevant industrial
experience in mechanical design and manufacturing. Extensive experience with AutoCAD
Release 14 and C++ programming. Related instructional experience is a definite asset. Term
of Appointment: January 4, 1999 to March 19, 1999. Salary Range: Wanna know a cool way of
buying a computer? Link into the Dell web site: http://www.dell.ca for Canadian
customers. Bill Fane just had a brand new Pentium II 450 with a 128mg RAM & 12.7 Gig
HD plus a 17" Trinitron monitor, a modem ? all for 3 grand.
A consensus was taken as to how many were still using ACAD R12 DOS & Windows...
well, well a measly 5%.
Demo Time
Demo time featured the completion of one of these wonderful new series of tips and
tricks for AutoCAD R14 by Frank Zander. Frank also has a brand new web site: www.contractgroup.com
check it out.
Creating Intelligent Parts Libraries by Bill Fane, was an interesting demo with
a very useful support handout. Most of the info could be used in AutoCAD menus, not just
Mechanical Desktop.
Door Prize Winners
Break time was followed by the following door prize draws:
·First prize winner of the IMSI Turbo CAD 5.0 Professional software was Hank
Desteur of Corem Industries.
·Second prize winner of the IntelliCAD 98 by Visio software was Andy
Plumridge of Reid Crowther.
·Third prize winner of the Autodesk AutoCAD LT 97 software was Mike Duff
, a mechanical PEng.
·Forth prize winner of the Visio software was Frankie Chan.
In closing, Norman Taylor thanks all for attending.
The Real World:
My First Word Macro Virus
by Ralph Grabowski
A couple of day ago, I pasted some text into Word 97. Immediately, I changed my mind,
and clicked the X button on the title bar to close Word. Instead of the usual
"Do you want to save?" dialog box, the following dialog box appeared:
Clicking OK caused Word to close. (Later, I found this macro virus saved my work
using generic filenames, such as: Document1.Doc.) It was clearly time to install the
ViruScan virus-checker software, which had sat on my desk for several months.
After an installation procedure that roughly paralleled Rob's article in this issue, I
ran the virus checker but it found nothing.
It did, however, warn me that it had been 308 days since its virus signature file had
been updated. I downloaded the free update from the vendor's Web site.
Rerunning the software found the macro virus in Word's Normal.Dot template file.
I wonder where the virus came from? Email, is my guess.
The Technology Farce:
A (Not So) Humorous Look at A Serious Problem
By Robert Cheek
Some twenty-odd years ago, the pundits were expounding the virtues of computing.
Through the use of these modern technological marvels, our lives would miraculously
improve and our standard of living would know no bounds. Corporate productivity would rise
to levels higher than even Uncle Scrooge could dream of, and then some. And everyone would
have a computer at home to take over all those mundane and time-consuming chores, freeing
us up for more quality time with the family.
Sucked-in By The Dream
But does the reality live up to this dream? Ten years ago, I was totally sucked into
this vision. A little over a year ago, I began to have my doubts. And the last couple of
months have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that computers are the most time-wasting
inventions ever created. If I had to sum the situation up in a simple phrase, I would have
to say that computers are the snake oil of the 20th century. I know that it sounds harsh,
but here's my reasoning.
Snake Oil Computing
The cycle starts when a new software release occurs. At a demo, the decision is made
that this program is just what you have been looking for. Regardless of whether it's a
firs-time purchase or an upgrade to a program you are already running, your computer
cannot run it. The reasons for this vary. Maybe the CPU isn't powerful enough. Or it
doesn't have enough RAM. Worse yet, the program might require the use of a different
motherboard architecture (theVESA local bus system just won't cut it and you need to move
on to PCI).
So we move into the hardware upgrade cycle. Anyone who claims to have survived one of
these unscathed is probably lying (with the exception of a certain VAUS past-president, of
course). Hardware is a tricky thing. The money-conscious consumer might think that the
best thing to do is just tweak their existing system. This person is a glutton for
punishment who has countless hours to spend tracking down system incompatibilities:
?If the motherboard has been replaced, is the power supply capable of delivering the
required power?
?Will the RAM in the existing system fit in the new RAM slots?
?Does the operating system recognize the new system bus, or is a special software patch
needed?
?Maybe one of the expansion card drivers is out-of-date and the vendor has not written
new ones ? if ever (these are always be due "any day now").
?Or maybe two devices (any two will do) are conflicting.
The hassles of tracking down and eliminating what is not the cause of the
problems can be time consuming. Those who are persistent in their efforts will be rewarded
with either a pink slip for what the boss perceives as wasting time on the job or a spouse
who's filing for divorce. Or both.
Off-the-shelf Solution
The other alternative is to purchase a new off-the-shelf solution. The only
satisfaction obtained from this route is eventually taking it back to the store for a
refund. That will be after going through all of the painstaking tasks outlined above for a
system upgrade.
"But what about the technical support that the dealer will provide for a new
system?" you ask.
Dream on! The salesman will glibly state, "The new drivers that address this
problem will be available on the vendors Web site any day now." That's small
consolation when it's the modem or the dial-up software that's the problem.
If you are lucky enough to make it to a tech rep, you will likely hear, "You know,
this vendor has just come out with the blah-blah-blah device specifically to
address this issue. You really should consider getting it." Naturally the blah-blah-blah
device is twice the price (after paying the re-stocking fee on the original item) and has
a host of other compatibility issues that are bound to effect only you.
Starting the Software
Those who are fortunate to make it through the hardware upgrade cycle can now load the
new software. At this point the person doing the installation tends to be in a panacea,
having received an adrenaline rush of immense proportions simply because Windows 98
actually gets beyond the start-up screen. Generally, this gives be a false sense of
security, since the true ordeal is about to begin.
After firing up the new program and working with it for a while, the inevitable system
error occurs. Maybe it's just an application error (the old Windows GPF thing), or the
system locks completely. Worse yet, it might be the Windows 98 equivalent of NT's
"blue screen of death" because one VxD isn't working with another. Naturally it
doesn't happen in any other programs, just the new one. And it is impossible to duplicate.
It always happens to you but never to the dealer.
Which leads to the inevitable questions. Is it a hardware issue? Is it a software
issue? Or is it something that the software is doing to the hardware?
Regardless of the answer, the solution will generally be to head back to the hardware
upgrade cycle and start all over again. To get a clearer picture of this, go back to the
paragraph that starts with "So we move into the hardware upgrade cycle" and
start reading again.
The Agonizing Scenario
Does this scenario sound familiar?
Every time that I have purchased a new system there have been problems.
Every time that I have upgraded a system there have been problems. And no system is
ever fully functional at any given point in time.
There is always a band-aid solution for some piece of hardware or software. Compounding
the problem is that computer technology never stops evolving, and things just get more
complicated, and harder to troubleshoot.
Just look at bus systems. The IBM PC started with ISA bus, we then dabbled with EISA,
before moving to VESA local bus, followed shortly thereafter with PCI and
more recently to AGP.
For those who haven't heard yet, PCI is about to become obsolete. XPCI, coming
soon to a dealer near you.
Not only have the bus names and quality changed, but the speed of the system bus has
also improved. Currently, the move is from the 66MHz bus to the 100MHz bus. Naturally,
those of us who want to have the fastest system on the block have upgraded to this
chipset. Faster must be better, right?
And yet when push comes to shove some existing PCI cards are unable to keep up with all
of the data that's now being thrown their way. A certain soundcard that I recently
purchased fell into this category.
Snake Oil Salesmen
Back in the 1800's, travelling salesmen would con people into buying magic water (or
snake oil) that would cure all of their ills. The salesman would move on to a new town,
and those left behind would just shrug it off as a bad decision (buyer beware).
The wonder of computers is that we, as consumers, continue to buy into one scheme after
another. Instead of sticking with what is tried, tested, and true, we get caught up in the
race to have the latest and greatest. This human trait is played on by the computer
industry, an industry that continues to baffle us with new and fancier acronyms.
As one instructor at BCIT told us, "There's a fine line between leading edge and
bleeding edge." But then how many of us ever really listened to our teachers?
I am not much of a philosopher, but I once read that a true definition of hell would be
for someone to be forced to watch all of the consequences for their actions. I for one
would be immensely satisfied if this were the case for hardware and software developers.
There is only one unfortunate thing in this scenario ? they won't be able to take their
wares with them.
Defining Relationships In the Construction Industry, there are:
·clients who don't like the architect's design and therefore need to be educated,
·architects who don't care what the client wants,
·clients who appreciate the architect only at cocktail parties,
·architects who don't know the first thing about building,
·builders who don't wear bowties and therefore shouldn't design,
·engineers who prefer the word can't more than could and will,
·architects who don't care how the engineering works as long as it looks good,
·interior designers who think architects should concentrate on the outside,
·consultants who can't "fix" the design since they weren't brought in soon
enough,
·consultants who resent being brought in too early, when there's nothing to
"fix",
·builders who never read the plans unless there's something missing,
·architects who don't review the specs and plans together, and wonder why the builder
has to ask a question,
·developers who don't care about the environment,
·environmentalists who want to stop all development,
·planning boards who don't like the design, but aren't sure where the site is,
·and insurance companies who could care less as long as they receive their payments
from all of the above,
Who would have it any other way? I'd consider myself lucky if I'm a little of each.
| 