Bullets 'n' Babes

Markgway wrote:You know it's actually OK to get off the fucking fence once in a while, Brad.

I wish you'd sit on it occasionally . You've having a big rant over what boils done to someone being spat on. Meh!

Markgway wrote:P.S. This is meant to be facetious right?

Well it's not that shocking is it? Some artists take a mouthful of water/booze/whatever and spit or projectile spray it into the crowd at their gigs - big fucking deal! I wouldn't position myself in the firing line for something like that and obviously neither would you, but far worse things go on towards the stage at many rock concerts these days.

But still, a guy regularly going out to gigs, taking photgraphs hoping to gain the experience to become a freelance professional - where putting oneself in the front row "firing line" is going to be an occupational hazard - is surely a case of someone actually going out there and having "a life" (albeit maybe not a very rational one) rather than someone who just posts overly judgemental comments online from the comfort of their own home and who maybe has never been to a gig or music festival in their lifetime (and music festivals seem like far skankier places than artiste-spitting gigs imo).

Shingster wrote:Well it's not that shocking is it? Some artists take a mouthful of water/booze/whatever and spit or projectile spray it into the crowd at their gigs - big fucking deal!

It's the principle of the thing dammit. You wouldn't let someone do that to you in the street so why on earth would you pay for "the privilage"?

I wouldn't position myself in the firing line for something like that and obviously neither would you, but far worse things go on towards the stage at many rock concerts these days.

That's like saying it's OK for a rock star to punch you in the face because at some concerts you could get stabbed and shit!

But still, a guy regularly going out to gigs, taking photgraphs hoping to gain the experience to become a freelance professional - where putting oneself in the front row "firing line" is going to be an occupational hazard

I get the photographer thing - that's not the problem. He's perfectly happy to be spat upon - THAT'S the problem. I've never understood the fan mentality where normal rights and wrongs cease to exist. I don't care who it is. Did you read about the dude John Terry hit with his car? OK, so a ton of security would get in your way at a concert - but at least get pissed off about it.

surely a case of someone actually going out there and having "a life" (albeit maybe not a very rational one) rather than someone who just posts overly judgemental comments online from the comfort of their own home and who maybe has never been to a gig or music festival in their lifetime (and music festivals seem like far skankier places than artiste-spitting gigs imo).

I don't recall saying Romero should "get a life". The stalking thing was a joke. If he wants to document concerts that's fine. Seriously, go for it, Romero!! But I won't change my opinion about the spitting thing. It's not acceptable. Period. And if you think that's being judgemental... that's up to you.

I agree with Mark. Thank gawd I have anoher appointment with my psychologist next week.

I've been involved in 2 'spitting-incidents' in my life. Both ended with my fists flying into the guy's face.

1 was a maroccan dude in the swimmingpool, who spat in my face (and I smacked him), and 1 was when someone spat a friend of mine in the face while I stood next to him, and I released a flurry of punches onto that guy's face.

Actually, I now remember there was another incident once, where a shitty small kid of about 13-14 years old spat at me during some football in the neighbourhood, and I immediately sweeped the little bastard and knocked him on his ass. I was about twice his age and size btw(!) Little idiot. I should have spiked him on a fence.

You know these acts aren't just standing there onstage gobbing into people's faces, it's just going to be a rather trite and clichéd "outrageous" act, a fleeting moment in an otherwise long musical gig (which is what the fans are really there for). If you both think a singer/musician taking a mouthful of tea or booze and spitting it out into the crowd is the same sort of context as being spat on by a little shit whose parents haven't given them the back of their hand enough times, or a guy squaring up to you in the street/at a bar/in public and aggressively spitting a freshly hacked up phlegm special right into your face then there's no point continuing this discussion.

It's also worth pointing out that someone taking a mouthful of a drink and spitting it back out again straight away would involve no more emission of "bodily fluids" than taking a swig from a bottle or glass - and how many people here have never taken a sip from someone else's drink or swigged from an open bottle in a fridge after friends and famly have done the same?

Markgway wrote:But I won't change my opinion about the spitting thing. It's not acceptable. Period. And if you think that's being judgemental... that's up to you.

Your opinion on spitting isn't judgemental, you calling him a tool for not being bothered by the spitting is.

Too much to read, so just to Romero

Damn, every now and then I actually like that guy.

I'm starting to think we could be friends.

Yi-Long wrote:I agree with Mark. Thank gawd I have anoher appointment with my psychologist next week.

I've been involved in 2 'spitting-incidents' in my life. Both ended with my fists flying into the guy's face.

1 was a maroccan dude in the swimmingpool, who spat in my face (and I smacked him), and 1 was when someone spat a friend of mine in the face while I stood next to him, and I released a flurry of punches onto that guy's face.

Actually, I now remember there was another incident once, where a shitty small kid of about 13-14 years old spat at me during some football in the neighbourhood, and I immediately sweeped the little bastard and knocked him on his ass. I was about twice his age and size btw(!) Little idiot. I should have spiked him on a fence.

Shingster wrote:You know these acts aren't just standing there onstage gobbing into people's faces, it's just going to be a rather trite and clichéd "outrageous" act, a fleeting moment in an otherwise long musical gig (which is what the fans are really there for).

I don't know if that makes it better or worse.

If you both think a singer/musician taking a mouthful of tea or booze and spitting it out into the crowd is the same sort of context as being spat on by a little shit whose parents haven't given them the back of their hand enough times, or a guy squaring up to you in the street/at a bar/in public and aggressively spitting a freshly hacked up phlegm special right into your face then there's no point continuing this discussion.

I do... and I suppose there isn't.

It's also worth pointing out that someone taking a mouthful of a drink and spitting it back out again straight away would involve no more emission of "bodily fluids" than taking a swig from a bottle or glass - and how many people here have never taken a sip from someone else's drink or swigged from an open bottle in a fridge after friends and famly have done the same?

I've yet to proceed to spit said sip into their faces as a thank you.

Your opinion on spitting isn't judgemental, you calling him a tool for not being bothered by the spitting is.

I can live with that. Sometimes one needs to sit in judgement.

I have created a Monster

Markgway wrote:I'm starting to think we could be friends.

Hmmmm.... not sure. Grim and me are pretty 'exclusive', and he's got a mean jealous streak, so you wouldn't wanna mess with that...

I understand. You can only have one friend at a time. Grim and I were friends but his violent jealousy got too much when he flipped out after I used a smiley in a response to Brad.

Yi-Long wrote:

Markgway wrote:I'm starting to think we could be friends.

Hmmmm.... not sure. Grim and me are pretty 'exclusive', and he's got a mean jealous streak, so you wouldn't wanna mess with that...

Markgway wrote:I understand. You can only have one friend at a time. Grim and I were friends but his violent jealousy got too much when he flipped out after I used a smiley in a response to Brad.

Yeah, he told me. You cheating bastard! The poor guy was devastated when I took him in.

Yi-Long wrote:Yeah, he told me. You cheating bastard! The poor guy was devastated when I took him in.

Just wait until he creeps into your room at night to watch you sleep... I've heard some scary stories, man.

I've been trialling the Windows 8 Consumer Preview (Beta):

Metro UI (you see this first, it's one click to the Desktop UI):



My "Classic" Desktop:



Split-Screen Metro + Desktop feature (that's the Metro Messaging app on the left):



How I use Windows 8:

Driving the new Metro UI with a keyboard/mouse is a bit on the clunky side (it's going to be excellent in tablets). Metro apps on laptops are rather pointless, the three Mail/Calendar/People apps are totally dumbed down compared with any Desktop e-mail app (especially Outlook) BUT the Metro Start Screen allows for a quick glance of E-Mail/Social feeds etc.. and the Live Tile aspect is rather neat. I tend to have a look from time to time and then click back on to the Desktop (which IS the same user interface as featured in Windows 7, making all the negative feedback rather pointless).

If you've used Windows Phone you'll know how Live Tiles work.

I completely forgot about this thread. Windows 8 looks pretty fancy, Brad. I like it!

My very clean desktop:

I forgot about it too. All the XP desktops attest to that. I too like to get rid of pretty much all the icons. There are much better places to stick stuff than the Desktop and I like looking at a clean wallpaper.

I'll post my Windows 7 desktop when I put that hard disk back in my laptop (to ensure no corruption can occur, I installed Windows 8 on an entirely different hard disk). Due to the fact I've not got all my software/files on this hard disk I won't be using Windows 8 permanently but will miss Metro a bit.

Most Windows 8 reviews are polarising because it's clear tablets and touch are the driving force behind Windows 8's Metro and not keyboard/mice (used on 90%+ laptops/desktops). Still the Desktop is still very much there and supported.

You cannot default Windows 8 to go straight to the Desktop UI though and the Start Menu is completely gone in place of a Start Screen. You can see even the Start button has been removed, when you move the mouse to the bottom left corner a Live preview appears of the Metro UI. Click this and it appears. It's basically the same but without an actual button.

p.s - Are there any Ubuntu users here?

What the hell's wrong with the start button? I get that they want to optimise it for tablet users (which just makes me want to weep), but I'd hardly think the start button changes nmuch for those users in the first place!

Anyway, here's my current desktop:

Shingster wrote:What the hell's wrong with the start button? I get that they want to optimise it for tablet users (which just makes me want to weep), but I'd hardly think the start button changes much for those users in the first place!

Nothing is wrong with the start button, it's still there. Microsoft call it "zero pixels", I call it "move your mouse over and a thumbnail appears". I still think a physical button should be there regardless, purely because it's what people expect and it's not as if we use the entire length of the taskbar to pin apps.

Do you mean "Start Menu"? It's largely ignored nowadays, it's the dumping ground for apps. Everyone either uses the Desktop or Taskbar (or both).

The Desktop isn't optimized for tablets. That works best with keyboards/mouse as it ever has. The Metro Start Screen is but the point the people complaining are missing is it's exactly one click to never have to see Metro again (except when logging in or unlocking). I suspect many will moan but like the ribbon will grow to like it (except those who like the ribbon will hate it forever).

I disliked it at first but after using it for a few hours I rather liked it and now miss it on Windows 7. Like I said, the Start Menu is largely redundant nowadays. I found snapping the Messenger App to the left for Facebook Chat genuinely useful. Most Metro Apps I ended up ignoring because due to their "tablet simplicity" they are pointless next to Desktop apps (compare any Desktop E-Mail app, especially Outlook with Metro Mail) but that's okay, we'll just ignore them, like we do Outlook Express, Windows Mail and Windows Movie Maker.

Outside of snapping, Metro apps have no ability to be used side by side. This is ideal for tablets (see Android/iPad) but not Desktops/Laptops where Desktop mode offers the usual benefits of showing various windows open side by side. Which is another reason why metro apps on Desktops/Laptops are pretty redundant. That's not to say the Start Screen is though.

On tablets I see Metro being excellent and possibly offering the simplicity of iPad (I'm an Android man but Android tablets aren't simple in the way iPad is) but configurability of Android. On laptops/desktops, I see myself using the Desktop 99% of the time, with the odd click to Metro for opening apps I don't wish to pin to the taskbar (or cannot be pinned, in the case of Metro apps) or to Search. I like the full-screen search too, it's always felt cramped stuck in the Start Menu. I tend to click Start then press F3 to open a proper Search window. The revamped Task Manager is significantly better. I've always thought for such a crucial part of Windows, it's currently looks far to technical.

Under the hood Windows 8 IS Windows 7 (the file structure is identical too) but with the Start Menu replaced for a more complex Start Screen + new WinRT based Metro Apps system (which if you wish, you can almost completely ignore).

I've used and liked (including ME and Vista) every desktop version of Windows ever released since Windows 3.1. I'll be getting Windows 8 when I upgrade my 5 year old laptop in the autumn.

Shingster wrote:Anyway, here's my current desktop: http://i1250.photobucket.com/albums/hh5 ... esktop.jpg

It's clean. I like it. You've not got much pinned to the task bar. Is that all you use?

I tried out Ubuntu 11.10 last night, using Linux's clever "Live CD" feature (the entire OS runs from CD and loads into memory, nothing gets installed). It reminded me so much of Mac OS X (same dock bar, options top right, app menus and system settings layout), which isn't surprising that too is based on Linux. It's okay I guess but it's colour layout seemed to be restricted to something like 256 colours (it looked like something from the 1990s) and it's app selection is poor.

Open Office is NO Microsoft Office and Thunderbird is certainly no Outlook. I'd only seriously consider Mac OS X in place of Windows (if only Apple didn't charge so much for a Macbook!) because I must have Microsoft Office 2010, Firefox (which Linux does have) and Spotify (Spotify for Linux is lacking in major features). Until Linux has these three apps, I cannot seriously consider it.

Anyway, my Windows 7 Desktop (and main installation):



My old Desktop from 2010 can be seen here:

https://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/ ... &start=416

It's changed very little in the 2 years since I lasted uploaded a capture (still the same Win7 Home Premium) and I largely use the same apps on a daily basis too.

bradavon wrote:It's clean. I like it. You've not got much pinned to the task bar. Is that all you use?

It's all I use regularly, everything else I use less frequently goes into the start menu, hence my attachment to it!

You're confusing "All Programs" with the "Start Menu".

All Programs is still there, you press the Windows key (or click it), right click and choose All Programs. The list (full-screen) is then presented to you. Annoyingly cannot right click any more to edit shortcuts (I'm hoping this is a Beta flaw), so have to faf navigating to the folder structure through Explorer (once you've found where the Start Menu lives) but it's a minor annoyance.

How often do you alter the Start Menu contents? Most people never do, it's a dumping ground.

On Windows 9x to Windows 7 I categorise the Start Menu. I delete all the crap and only have 7 subfolders, such as Internet and Games. On Windows 8 I've done this a bit but find it quicker to just press the Windows key and then type what I am after (e.g - def brings up Defrag) and I then press Enter. You can do this on Vista/Win7 too but the cramped search box is rather cramped.

Get yourself upgraded to Outlook 2010 it's much better.

How you come to that conclusion when you know nothing about my START menu structure is truly baffling brad! Like I said, I use program shortcuts in the start menu, I also have program shortcuts in the All Programs menu but they are the programs I use rarely.

Shingster wrote:How you come to that conclusion when you know nothing about my START menu structure is truly baffling brad!

Well you don't use the Start Menu how 99% of people do then, few store programs in the Start Menu itself. As you can see from my screenshot above I happen to also but it's mostly the same apps. It's largely a pointless addition since Windows 7 added the ability to pin to the Taskbar and thus has been removed completely in Windows 8.

It's usually left empty for the "recently opened" programs to appear as and when you open them. So to complain I'm being truly baffling is nonsense. All Programs is where the majority of people access programs from, not stored on the Desktop or Taskbar.

Besides this is largely semantics, your point Windows 8 is going the wrong way in this respect, is wrong because All Programs is still there and the Taksbar is still there too. The Start Menu itself has run it's course and for 99% of people (clearly not you), it's just a dumping ground. It serves no value any more. People have just grown to expect it and that's not a good reason to keep something.

Look, I never revealed anything about my start menu structure other than I store program shortcuts there, you then foolishly - and in typical bradavon style might I add - decided that I actually meant I stored those shortcuts in the All Programs part of the start menu. I don't care if you think this is the case for most people, we weren't talking about most people, we were talking about me.

Also I never said anything substantial about windows 8 at all, just asked what was wrong with the windows 7 start menu whilst bemoaning your feedback that windows 8 is being optimised for tablet readers, but if you have clear conclusive proof that 99% of all people using Windows 7 clearly use it much differently to me (as you claim) then please feel free to post it here. Otherwise I'm just going to go on believing that once again you're making wild, baseless assumptions based on your own very limited experiences (something I like to call "brad mode").