Y2HH

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 08:32 AM) Locke is awesome An 80 minute film about a building contract/cement pour supervisor driving on the M-6 in his car to a hospital while dealing with three life-altering crises at the same time on his car phone. Tom Hardy makes this film work...and his imaginary deadbeat father in the backseat. Such a simple, yet elegant film...100% dialogue-based, not a single bit of action. And yet compelling. Reminded me of Stephen Spielberg's very first film DUEL in its utter simplicity. Wow does this sound boring.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:31 AM) I know a few people. They won’t come right out and say it in so many words, but they sure don’t have any motivation to stop receiving that check from the government and actually go out and look for a job to support themselves. They are perfectly content letting other people support them. I know of someone even worse than this. He makes about 98,000$ a year, and has a kid with the girl he lives with. They're not married because she's on welfare. So, on top of his 98k a year, they receive full welfare benefits for her and the child, which basically equates to free food for them (among other free services). If he was to marry her, she'd lose those benefits. And there are a LOT of people that do this...by the way.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) Truman and Ford were both pretty bad. Carter was not prepared for the job and GW Bush bankrupted us. Just like to point out that we were bankrupt before GW Bush was ever president. Clinton balancing the budget is NOT the same as paying down debt (which he paid down zero of). And while the trillions number grew under Bush and Obama, we were into the trillions well before them, as by 1989 we were already approaching 3 trillion, and by 1999 it was approaching 6.

QUOTE (MEANS @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 07:41 AM) maybe some of us don't want "GOD" in our country Too bad for "some of us" no matter what side they're on in this battle -- religious or not...I don't want EITHER side telling me what I have to believe.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 30, 2014 -> 11:21 AM) It's fine that you have that opinion, I just believe that it's absolutely wrong. You're opinion doesn't matter since you believe Google has had good UI design prior to Android L, so...as the Rock would say, it doesn't matter what you think.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 10:39 PM) http://www.boxoffice.com/latest-news/2014-...opening-weekend Looks like the "China strategy" with Transformers 4 is already paying off nicely. Will end up around $95 million, setting the record in China for Opening Day ($38 million) and opening weekend, and probably beating the US/North America total, which is expected to be in the low 90's. Avatar's all-time is in sight, but I would expect the negative word of mouth to prevent that from happening. On the other hand, there's no way this picture's going to make it to $1 billion. UPDATE: U.S. total now predicted to be $102 million, so Chinese box office will be 2nd. This is so sad...when crapfest rehash movies like this open huge and a relatively original SciFi project like Edge of Tomorrow bombs in comparison. People deserve exactly what we end up with because we keep paying to watch crap unoriginal sequels instead of going to see an actual good movie, instead. Well, that doesn't apply to me, but it applies to most.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 29, 2014 -> 03:06 PM) You do realize that Google apps on iOS also used Holo design right...? This was especially evident before iOS 7. Maps was updated first on iOS because Apple Maps replaced the old Maps app, Google gave it priority. Android got the updated version a few months later and it looked more or less the same. You're literally bashing something that you liked on iOS. This highlights exactly what I've been saying... Google maps on iOS (original release) was better than what was present on Android, but don't take that for me saying I love it...I don't, it's still just ok design. I'd prefer apple maps UI with googles data set if I had a choice. People don't use Google maps on iOS because of its design, as it's often slow, clunky, and busy (yes, even today), they use it for its accuracy and extremely populated data set. Which goes back to my point from the start...even Googles updated "holo" designs aren't great, they're simply better than the absolute crap that preceded it. So, I again say, I welcome the changes coming in android l. I don't really understand why you can't just accept that, as far as I'm concerned -- and in my opinion -- up until now, googles UI design is meh.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 09:07 PM) The framework you're speaking of, ART, has been available since Android 4.4, which was released more than half a year ago. And that has almost nothing to do with UI. It has a lot more to do with UX. I think you're just throwing around the word "terrible" out there for no apparent reason. I'm not sure how the Gmail UI is terrible or how Holo UI is terrible. Just because Google thinks they can improve their interface doesn't mean they thought it was terrible. I also think you've never actually used Android if you think Android 1.0 and Android 4.4 are similar performance-wise. Most of what you said pretty much confirms that you haven't had a ton of experience using Android (understandable, since you're an Apple user). To be more clear, in this conversation when I talk about "framework", I mean the basic design language and parameters in how applications and UI's are built, for example, in Android L, they're calling it "Material Design", so in this case I wasn't talking about ART or Dalvik, which are both runtimes. I *never* said Android 1.x to 4.x was similar *performance* wise, I said Google went through a number of revamps and project butters to make Android "run better", not to mention SOC design is much better these days which alone would make it run better. Specifically, I was talking about the framework itself, which was still largely the same in the way apps were designed, the clunky/boring square shapes, borders, the drab color schemes, etc. I'll reference that before 4.4, ALL of Google's apps on iOS were superior to their own apps on Android, INCLUDING the first release of Google Maps on iOS that made Android's look like complete crap. The whole look and feel of Android, INCLUDING the current 4.4, was and is just "blah"...was it better than 1.x and 2.x? Yes. But it was still using Windows 3.x, which while still better than DOS...it it was still lacking. The good news is, I think Google took this seriously enough to rework it's ENTIRE design philosophy in Android L, so now they can stop slapping brighter lipstick on that same old pig and move in a better direction with a better looking model. Since I'm not yet out of cliches or unrelated references to OS's and how they look, Google spent years trying to make Android 1.x-4.x look like Kate Upton by slapping makeup on some average looking girl...who would never look like Kate Upton no matter how much makeup and airbrushing they used...

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 10:35 AM) Thanks for the response. I deleted all extensions and nothing changed. I am having this problem on Chrone and I am unable to open Safari... Odd...load up activity monitor and look at the running processes -- do you see anything that stands out as "odd"? There will be a lot of processes running, but look for something obvious... A few more things to do: 1) Try running disk utility and doing a permissions repair. 2) Try uninstalling Chrome (completely uninstalling it), go download AppCleaner (http://www.freemacsoft.net/appcleaner/), and drag Chrome into AppCleaner (it will erase everything on your drive related to Chrome), then reinstall Chrome clean. Before you do that, make sure you download the Chrome installer (in case you can't launch Safari and download it after you destroy Chrome).

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 06:33 PM) One of my main beefs with iOS, and it continues to be with iOS 8 it looks like, is the launcher. Launchers on Android are often a way to customize the look of things (which I like to do sometimes), but it is also a way for me to set up specific workflows. I like having a search bar widget, a weather widget, and an agenda widget and just a few frequently used apps. Then on the next screen a few other things - a rotating Feedly headlines widget along with some of my news/sports apps. The rest? Out of sight in the app drawer. Notifications are probably my next highest priority - I think iOS 7 was a big improvement in this regard, but I honestly don't recall the details. Speaking of Apple and notifications, the notifications menu interested in Mavericks is just awesome. I'd be hardcore committed to Windows forever if they would implement that. Until then, I'm considering going MacBook Air for my upcoming computer purchase. Also thinking about Surface Pro 3 (really). I have never been a fan of widgets, not since Microsoft or Apple started using them eons ago on their desktop platforms...I was very happy Apple didn't bother bombarding a OS for smaller screens iOS with widgets. I DO, however, think Microsofts "live tile" approach is a better idea, and a good compromise between full blown widgets and useful icon launchers. The ONLY widget I find useful on Android is the search widget (Google Search), the rest of them are nothing more than glorified information poor, space wasting icons. For example, clock widgets are redundant space wasters, they take up 50% of your home screen when the time is ALREADY clearly displayed along the top bar on every phone. Weather widgets? Useless. At a glance high/low temps do nothing for me...I want to see hourly rain/temp forecasts and radar, which means using the weather widget to launch the weather program anyway. iOS 8 introduces widgets into the notification center, and I'm not sure how well that will work, either...I'd have preferred Apple went the way of Microsofts "live tile" approach with "live icons", versus widgets...

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 07:30 PM) I think I accidentally downloaded some malware/spyware or some sort of a virus on my Mac. There is unwated links, ads, all of my sites have ads placed into them. It's a huge pain in the ass. I tried deleting all my recent downloads and resetting my browser and it did nothing. I used "clamxav" and ran a sweep and nothing came up. I am not sure if this is even the right thread for this, but if someone could direct me somewhere to get this cleaned up I would really appreciate it. I am not a tech guy and this is a huge pain in the ass. I have a 2013 Macbook Air if that makes a difference to anyone. I've never really heard of anything like this -- and if ClamXAV couldn't find it, odds are it's not spyware/malware/virus. Sounds more like a trojan horse, which requires the user to be tricked into downloading a program, executing it, and then giving it admin privileges when it requests them. Nothing can prevent the damage this causes. Try installing a different browser to see if maybe it's a extension installed on the browser? If Chrome doesn't do this, but Safari does, it's probably something on Safari.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 08:55 PM) While I agree that the Holo UI needs replaced, it was far superior of pre-iOS7. It was the most up-to-date UI on the market until September 2013. And I think HTC Sense 5/6 looks great, FWIW Of course, people need to recognize that a lot of this is just opinion, but it's always been my opinion that something was missing from Android, it felt clunky even after it's repeated revamps and "project butters". As said, some of this stems from the over customization OEMs do with Android, but a lot of it comes from the framework Android is built upon, which is why a lot of Google's own applications on iOS were superior to their own Android counterparts. Of course, Google has done a lot of work on UI framework as of late, and it shows ... but I disagree with anyone that thinks their UI's were ever good, it's just an opinion, but I believe they were fair to poor designs, and I think the proof exists in that Google obviously agreed with me, hence their entire rework of the framework Android is based on. And it's not just limited to Android, their web UI's (aside from Chrome) also tend to be clunky, poorly laid out designs with what I call "option bombardment", just look at gmail on the web for reference (and again, Google KNOWS gmail's web UI is terrible). As I said before, it wasn't that Android's UI was terrible, it worked, but it was akin to using Windows 3.x ... it was better than DOS, but it still sucked. And replacing a UI just so it looks different isn't what I'm talking about, either. I don't think changing how a UI looks does anything, it's just slapping a fresh coat of lipstick on a pig (which is what Android was doing from v1.0 to 4.4), as the underlying framework was largely the same. Starting with Android L, however, the framework is changing along with the look, which is an example of GOOD UI replacement...not just change for the sake of change.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 04:03 PM) Google WAS poor at UI design. That hasn't been the case for like the last 2-3 years. Android used to look like absolute crap. There was a time when HTC Sense looked infinitely better than the stock Android skin. Then Matias Duarte came from Palm and re-designed the entire OS with 4.0. It wasn't perfect, but it was a huge improvement that rivaled iOS. I'd say that until iOS 7 came out, iOS looked outdated compared to Android 4.0+ with its skeuomorphic design since it came out in 2007 and didn't really change much until iOS 7 (6 years later). Design changes a lot in half a decade. I bet a lot of people thought Windows Vista looked nice when it came out in 07 after starring at the crayon drawing that was Windows XP. Not only did iOS get boring to look at, the design itself was old. Google does have issues centralizing its products and UI inconsistency does stem from that. However, pretty much every updated Google app followed the Holo design guidelines and put some small spins on it. After all, would you really want every app to look exactly the same? That'd be extremely boring. There was a lot of back and forth with where they should place the settings. Hamburger menu? Overflow button? I think they've finally moved over to putting settings in the hamburger menu, but now with Material design, I'm not sure what they're going to do. Google changes their mind a bit too much about UI design, but then again all you have to do is look at iOS and see what happens when you resist change for 5 years. The main issue with Android UI isn't that Google's design sucks, it's that app developers and OEMs s*** all over it by not following them. Apple will reject your app if it looks like you put it together in 5 minutes. Google doesn't care. I guess that's the problem with having a more or less open app store, but I'd rather keep it open than have Google reign supreme and watch over everything. The apps cobbled together in 5 minutes won't be downloaded and they won't be relevant. The bigger issue is that bigger developers like Twitter and Facebook don't care to follow the design guidelines. It took Facebook 3 years to put together an app that even resembled Holo design and I get a strong feeling that was because iOS 7 went with the flatter look. Should Google force these devs to follow their guidelines? Maybe they should or maybe they already do and it falls on deaf ears. Either way, I feel like Google's done a good job with design over the past 2-3 years, but since they're not enforcers of it (like Apple probably is), devs just don't bother to follow the guidelines. Not WAS, IS. And Google knows it, hence their major redesign of something that was just redesigned less than 2 years ago.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 12:51 PM) So...you're saying Google's design guidelines were bad because third parties decided to ignore them and create terrible skins? I don't think that's a fair assessment. I said they were part of the issue, but Google wasn't much better themselves. Google has always been pretty notoriously terrible at UI design.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 10:31 AM) Are you sure you're talking about Android 4.4 and not Android 2.3? Here's a comparison of what's visually different: http://www.androidbeat.com/2014/06/android...ual-comparison/ Android L does look nice. I tried out the preview yesterday. None of the Google Apps are updated yet, but the stock apps look decent. The animations a bit more fluid, which is nice. It's also using ART as the default runtime instead of Dalvik, which might be why. I did not particularly like later versions of Android despite being smoother/better than early versions. Android has always been lacking in uniformity and slickness, some of which was caused by 3rd parties such as Samsung or HTC re-skinning Android, and some of it was because Google was just all over the place on the design front, where programs often had settings in different locations, and it's overall feeling of lack of optimization. To be sure, there was nothing 'wrong' with later versions of Android, but to me, it was like using Windows. It worked, it did what it was supposed to do ... but it just wasn't very ... good, and if you wanted to make it good, it took a lot of customization and digging around. Ten years ago I would have been all over Android because of that ability to customize it into exactly what I wanted...I used to hack and tinker with everything, and it was great because it taught me the in's and out's of a device/operating system, and at that point in my life that was important to me. Even now I get the bug once in a while, but it fades quickly, and I just want whatever I'm using to work without hassle...and after a few days of making iOS or Android look unique, it gets old and I fall back to the, "Jesus, could you please just work when I try to do X, Y or Z, instead of me having to figure stuff out?" Android L, however, looks like it's approaching the uniform/optimized/fluid state I expect out of modern hardware/operating systems.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 06:20 PM) I don't know exactly what you mean by that Me either? I think Microsoft made a LOT of horrible decisions under Bamler, but purposefully trying to get people to stop using their products wasn't one of them. I believe Microsoft is in much better hands now. Aside from that, Android L *finally* looks like an OS I can take seriously, and no, I couldn't take previous versions seriously, as I personally believe they had horrendous UIs (and apparently Google agreed with me hence the change).

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) It's not difficult to distinguish between a kid that's say 8, 12 or 16. I bet I could peg a kid under 13-14 with pretty high accuracy. I'm sure most people could. Not only by how old they look but how they talk and move around. It can be ... growing up I was always mistaken for a very young kid when I wasn't. At 18, people thought I was 13, and at 21, unless I had 537 forms of picture ID, every last bar/restaurant would reject serving me alcohol because I still looked about 15.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 03:33 AM) I would really like to test drive a Windows Phone for a while to see if the shortcomings are as glaring as they might seem. I love the interface and a lot of MS is doing, but not enough to pull the trigger on a WP and gamble on years of owning one. I think Google is really targeting MS in various ways. They don't see Apple as much as a serious competitor, because Apple is less interested in market domination as much as niche domination. Google obviously doesn't want Apple to dominate its market segments, but that's more tolerable than MS, who has always been more Google-like in their desire to be in as many places as possible. Google wants to knock out Windows on desktop, in mobile, and in enterprise (which includes desktop/mobile, but also office applications, hosted services, etc.). By not supporting MS products, Google makes MS much less appealing. IMO, it doesn't make MS a worst choice in many situations (no way in hell am I abandoning MS Office), but it makes both choices have flaws instead of Google looking like an obviously inferior choice. My friend had one for a quite a while, and the interface is top notch, the issue is support. Not a lot of devices available, and not a lot of software support for those devices, and to name a major one, Google. IMO: Apple has the best design, and a lot of that comes from being vertically integrated. What they do implement they tend to implement well both in terms of hardware and software, but this can lead to feature lag (which is apparent), however, they eventually come around. Microsoft can't seem to decide if they're engineers or designers in that they're interfaces tend to be nice, but very cluttered to the point it's sometimes hard to find what you're looking for even though you already know where it is (or where it WAS until they moved it for no reason). Google are engineers first, designers ... way later. Google is usually the first to adopt and implement, but their design often lags the features, and this is apparent across most of their applications, including Gmail, which is in serious need of overhaul. Googles ability to quickly introduce features is unparalleled (it's one thing I really like about them), but their lack of focus on design is bothersome. There really is no "best choice", but at least there is choice these days. From 1993 until about 2003 there was pretty much only one choice (Microsoft), and all that resulted in was a stagnant industry.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 03:02 PM) Yeah, it wouldn't be hard, but nobody has an incentive to do it so it is hard. Apple wouldn't want it, they want you to use their services. Microsoft wouldn't want it, they want you to use their services. Google's the only company with a history of developing for other platforms since they're a software company and not a hardware company, but even they wouldn't really want that since they'd rather have you use Android. It's good for the consumer to have something like that, but it doesn't benefit the companies making it, so it probably won't happen. Except google doesn't make software for windows outside of web apps...so not entirely true.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 01:25 PM) THat being said, I want ALL devices to be be compatible with the in-car systems. I dont want a system that locks me into Android, or iOS, or WIndows Phone. I want a "dumb" system that allows me to connect my device. Mybe my wife has an iOS device, or my work phone is iOS, but my personal phone is Android. I hate saying "this", but ... this.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 12:51 PM) Windows Phones have good cameras? I don't know. I don't see them as a real option honestly. No Google services. Smaller app library. It's the same reason why I don't use Fire tablets or why I don't want that new Fire phone. No Google = no go for me. I agree ... outside of iOS and Android, I wouldn't even consider another ecosystem right now, and that includes Amazon services and Windows Mobile. Depending on the person, I recommend Apple or Google. I can't be mad Android exists, it's pushed Apple as of late, just as Apple once pushed everyone else.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 12:45 PM) MS went with it first. Then Android. Then iOS. And now Android is looking more like iOS. I love flat design BTW, so I think it's good. I agree I think it's good design...but only to a certain point. I felt I enjoyed it more when all three had their own look and feel...now that they're all converging into something very similar...meh. Honestly, I don't really see Windows Mobile as a valid choice...at least with Apple you get Google stuff, as Google doesn't support windows mobile much at all, and with Google you get the openness of having a lot of choice available. What exactly do you get with Windows Mobile aside from being stuck on Bing and IE?

Is it just me, or has it become a thing from Apple/Microsoft and now Google to all converge on the same basic design principals? Everything looks like flat, borderless tiles on every single mobile OS now. Android/iOS and Windows Mobile all seem very similar to each other now.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 10:50 AM) Who even brings young kids to a movie like that? Drives me nuts. I've said before, would love to see movie theaters designate certain screens/rooms to be 18 and over only. I've been to too many movies where some idiot(s) bring their toddlers and little kids to an R-rated movie. And they have these... https://www.google.com/maps/place/ShowPlace...4ca3f07a5a09b1f ICON Showplace is 21 and older upstairs, and regular theater downstairs for the childrens ... Muvico in Rosemont also does this. Oh, and they serve alcohol, too.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 25, 2014 -> 10:50 AM) Who even brings young kids to a movie like that? Drives me nuts. I've said before, would love to see movie theaters designate certain screens/rooms to be 18 and over only. I've been to too many movies where some idiot(s) bring their toddlers and little kids to an R-rated movie. Well, depends on the kids age -- that WAS a PG13 movie, after all.