I h8 W8 on desktops/non-touch screen machines.

OMG! A vote for Jill Stein was a vote for Obama! It was a mis-calibrated touch screen. This was not nefarious.

I would expect that roughly every single person who goes to vote for Obama on that machine would complain; it's pretty hard to miss. And, even if the poll worker was being an idiot, I bet they would catch on and remove the machine after the second or third complaint.

This honestly doesn't seem like a plausible way to steal votes. People would detect the pattern if enough machines were messed with to make any difference. Honestly, I bet it's a hardware problem with that one touch screen, not a software issue.

>> ^dag:

Did you watch the whole thing?>> ^charliem:
Concept = concept...not legit. Ideas for what could be possible, but not even remotely applied in real world.
The finger print scanner on a touch screen display? So how the hell is it doing that?



Maybe @charliem forgot to tick the sarcasm box

>> ^dag:

Did you watch the whole thing?>> ^charliem:
Concept = concept...not legit. Ideas for what could be possible, but not even remotely applied in real world.
The finger print scanner on a touch screen display? So how the hell is it doing that?



I figured commenting on something that clearly violates the conservation of mass to be a bit of a time waster.

It's not all that unlikely, it's really only the last one that is a bit far-fetched, for now.

>> ^charliem:

The finger print scanner on a touch screen display? So how the hell is it doing that?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Did you watch the whole thing?>> ^charliem:

Concept = concept...not legit. Ideas for what could be possible, but not even remotely applied in real world.
The finger print scanner on a touch screen display? So how the hell is it doing that?

Concept = concept...not legit. Ideas for what could be possible, but not even remotely applied in real world.

The finger print scanner on a touch screen display? So how the hell is it doing that?

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Most of this video, to me, sounded like minor griping ("I have to move the mouse to the bottom of the screen!" or "I have to do an additional click!"). Raised a few actual issues with it, but overall, I don't mind it. When I first tried Consumer Preview, it was a mess. But since then, they've done a number of improvements. I commend MS for trying something new, it's not perfect but has potential.
I'll be buying it now, and benchmarks seem to show improvements in speed over Win 7. I just hope MS improve the usability with Service Packs and updates (rather than solely security and bug fixes). It is new, it isn't perfect, it will need updates.

They are critiquing an interface. Number of mouse clicks and mouse travel are pretty good ways of determining userbility. Its not really a minor gripe when you do it 100s of times a day, or an unnecessary layer simply confuses. Yes they are looking for problems with Windows8, yes thats their job. They also pointed out a few positive things, hell they even went as far to say that fullscreen start menu is a more intelligent use of screen estate. I'd certainly say its very aesthetically pleasing, but it does seem to have come at a cost. Oh, and apparently its good for touch screens which most PC users won't give 2 shits about.


I also find it commendable that MS should try new things, but it was criticism of Vista that resulted in Windows7. From what I've seen of Windows8...well it seems to me they have their priorities wrong. I'm sure it'll improve over time...then they'll call it Windows9 and ship it

Just bought this -- on sale at $2.60, it seemed cheap enough to take a chance. My first impression is that the touch screen controls are even more awful than I thought they'd be, and make an already hard game pretty much impossible. Boo-urns.

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

>> ^MonkeySpank:

Obviously, you missed the entire point. You're statement is like saying "The Web? Haven't you heard of cable TV?"
>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
>> ^MonkeySpank:
Kids today are going to remember the iPad as this old useless archaic tool that had extremely limited featured, yet sold for a lot of money - the same way I remember my first pong videogame.

Useless? You've heard of apps, right?



No, I've not missed the point, a portable tablet computer with thousands of apps is not "useless". It's good for watching videos, surfing the web, playing games, reading, email, playing music... those may not be valuable things, or useful to you, but it's just plain inaccurate to call it useless. and you're not comparing like with like. Cable TV and the Web have nothing to do with each other. A better analogy would be to compare the iPad to a web browser - a browser is only as useful as the sites you view with it, and an iPad's usefulness depends on its programs (just like any computer).

Obviously, you missed the entire point. You're statement is like saying "The Web? Haven't you heard of cable TV?"

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

>> ^MonkeySpank:
Kids today are going to remember the iPad as this old useless archaic tool that had extremely limited featured, yet sold for a lot of money - the same way I remember my first pong videogame.

Useless? You've heard of apps, right?

>> ^MonkeySpank:

Kids today are going to remember the iPad as this old useless archaic tool that had extremely limited featured, yet sold for a lot of money - the same way I remember my first pong videogame.


I can't agree more.



-Sent by my iBrain, errors are unintentional and possibly hallucinations.
-Tachyon Messaging App, Copyright 2035.
-Get Emoticons for your face FREE!

>> ^MonkeySpank:

Kids today are going to remember the iPad as this old useless archaic tool that had extremely limited featured, yet sold for a lot of money - the same way I remember my first pong videogame.


Useless? You've heard of apps, right?