I thought cleaning a $20 keyboard with a $7 can of compressed air was stupid. How smart then is paying more for batteries than the toy? It is not like a razor and blades, where the overpriced blades are tied to a specific razor. We have the choice to say “no” to toys that require 3 ‘C’ and 4 ‘D’ batteries – case in point, the Hot Wheels Acceledrome Race Track Set. Then there’s the Tyco RCs with proprietary battery packs that cost $45, beyond the $60–$100 one has paid for the toy! Makes other RC toys like the RadioShack Porsche 911 that requires 8 ‘AA’ and a 9V seem reasonable, except the ‘AA’s in the car last only a few days!
I think most people “just don’t get it”, or feign ignorance or play dumb as an avoidance tactic. But that would make them overly clever and deceitful. So then why are most people clever and not clean?
What about being a person of your word? Promises, contracts, estimates etc. have no sanctity for most people. They consider it perfectly acceptable to go back on their word, to suit what’s convenient for them. I consider them flakes. Or are they smart in doing what’s in their best interest?
Most people expect an apology for others’ legitimate mistakes, but don’t so much as own up to their own wrong doings, let alone apologize. What’s worse is that they meekly detract from the issue and shift the focus to their “feelings being hurt” due to the confrontation, rather than admit and apologize. Why such moral weakness?
So most people are either stupid or dishonest; and don’t so much as think twice about their actions – perhaps because when a large proportion of people do the same thing, it becomes “normal”.
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
— Jiddu Krishnamurti
There was a time Netscape Navigator (Netscape) and Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE) were the two dominant web browsers. There were alternate sets of web pages customised to each browser’s specific features and rendering, with a script on the home page to detect the web browser being used and re–direct the user to the browser–specific set of pages.
These big two web browsers added support for features such as frames and tables at different times during their development, and even common features such as table–backgrounds rendered differently in each web browser. Then there were features such as marquees and ActiveX controls that were specific to IE on Windows.
I used to design two sets of web pages so as to display correctly in at least the Netscape and Microsoft web browsers.
I remember designing for IE initially, because ActiveX had many samples to cut and paste, and the results looked fabulous at that time. I had a single root page at my web site which displayed IE–specific content. I later realised that most of my traffic at that time was from Netscape browsers. I modified the root page using “faulty” HTML code, such that Netscape couldn’t interpret the frames and displayed the no frames version with Java applets, but IE interpreted the frames and displayed IE–specific content with ActiveX controls, table enhancements etc. Then along came the IE 4.0 beta release, at which point the bugs in my pages became apparent — IE4 failed to interpret the frames and I had to modify my “faulty” HTML code which had done the trick all along. With the modified HTML, the frames version came up in both web browsers.
That led me to create alternate web pages implementing IE–specific enhancements. Visitors then had to explicitly click on the link to the IE 3.0/4.0 enhanced page from the page that came up initially. This default page displayed properly in both web browsers since it used only Java applets that were common to both web browsers. I chose to make this web page the default, rather than the IE–enhanced page, for obvious reasons.
Further, what I keep thinking is that given my attitude, if ever I had to develop in parallel for two browsers, I would have given more attention to one browser over the other based on personal preference, to the extent of developing a lesser web page for the one I did not support. Which is true, I did ignore Netscape/Java totally until I saw which of the two sets of pages recorded more hits.
Developing for IE paid off in the form of alternate pages which were in no way less attractive than the default Netscape pages, and that had me thrilled. Visitors would be equally impressed, irrespective of their web browser. Had I adopted Netscape earlier, I would never have had the motivation to develop for IE, and thus my development would not have yielded me these results. I had two sets of great looking web pages, both developed with equal zest and passion, which is totally unexpected of me.
To some extent even today, web sites have pages which are specific to IE.
You are someone unseen, unknown
Yet you are always on my mind
You may be afar
But you are very close to my heart
I sleep with your dreams
I rise in your thoughts
Wherever I look I see you smile
I may be alone or in company
I think of you, your thought makes me lonely
Emerge from these beautiful thoughts
This wonderful and romantic night
’Cause I am lonely
Seeking your love only
Every evening your veil covers
My eyes filled with your dreams
Every night your bangles sing to me
Let there be no barriers between you and me
Emotions have stirred my heart
Whispering to me
Is it she?
Now again your thoughts have come to me
Again the flame of love is burning bright
Tell the world not to block the path of love
Say to me that you are my love
And have come to stay in my home and heart
I am incomplete without you
So come and make me complete
For you are the better half of me