May 22, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/22/2013)
Sean Lange (5/22/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/21/2013)
Grant has a Surface RT. However Sean said "For the Touch I do not have the newer version of the OS. I have the older and much less expensive version."I am curious if I'm forgetting some older MS product.
No it is my brain that is the issue. 😉 I was referring to the Surface.
Whew, thought it was me.
RT or Pro?
I've only got the RT. I'd love to pick up a Pro, but I'm officially cut off from buying new toys by Mrs. Scary.
I had a hard time finding a good teleprompter app for the droid. I'll have to start looking for the WP or the Surface. But I can see why that would stop you. And the password thing. I've gone through three different password apps this year.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
May 22, 2013 at 4:09 pm
Grant Fritchey (5/22/2013)
GilaMonster (5/22/2013)
Oh look... "I don't think that's right... " again. Anyone got a baseball bat? Or a punching bag?Will an Arkansas tire thumper work?
No idea what one of those is, but I like the idea.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
May 22, 2013 at 4:20 pm
GilaMonster (5/22/2013)
Grant Fritchey (5/22/2013)
GilaMonster (5/22/2013)
Oh look... "I don't think that's right... " again. Anyone got a baseball bat? Or a punching bag?Will an Arkansas tire thumper work?
No idea what one of those is, but I like the idea.
I believe, when you find them in the middle of the road, it's an Armadillo.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
May 22, 2013 at 4:42 pm
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
Lynn Pettis (5/22/2013)
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
Lynn Pettis (5/22/2013)
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (5/22/2013)
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/21/2013)
L' Eomot Inversé (5/21/2013)
In response to Patrick, it would have better phrased something like "There is a lot of discussion of this on the web. Have you not seen anything that indicates what the problems are?" which seems very much less like a snide remark.,,, after typing in this very thread ...
Now can someone tell me what all the fuss is about? Please? I just don't understand what the difficulties are, in fact I suspect they were unreal problems dreamt up by bone-headed old dinosaurs who have forgotten how to adapt to new things.
Seriously?
The difference being that his dinosaurs comment came across as a generic reference and was not directed specificially at anyone in this thread. Whereas your comment was specifically directed at him and made about him.
What you're saying is that I was perfectly welcome to avoid mentioning my disapproval of the product so as to avoid his wide sweeping and exaggerated characterization of anybody who deems to have a complaint, right?
I didn't read Tom's post that way you did, but I did read your post the same way Brandie did.
There is nothing wrong with you expressing your disapproval of the product, but put it that way and don't personally attack someone else while doing it.
I found that I disagreed with his post, and felt it took no consideration of what I and others have complainted about. I suggested a reason for it, ie., he doesn't browse the web much. Its up to him to convince me that I'm mistaken, IF HE FEELS THE NEED.
I DID bring up his characterization of me and others as being "bone-headed old dinosaurs" as an illustration of how selectively you guys are in your characterisation of posts.
Pulling this quote out:
Now can someone tell me what all the fuss is about? Please? I just don't understand what the difficulties are, in fact I suspect they were unreal problems dreamt up by bone-headed old dinosaurs who have forgotten how to adapt to new things.
I read this as a simple generalization and not something directed at you personally, unlike your post which was obviously directed at Tom.
I did indeed address Tom directly. I offered my theory that he has not read the complaints about 8. And its been a fairly common news item. Obviously the other characterization was that he dismissed all of us 8 detracters as bone headed dinosaurs, but I felt free to leave that out until Brandy started with the "attack" meme. I then referenced it as an example of dueling standards.
The fun part of all this is that I can't seem to find the original post in which Tom was supposed to have made this comment, nor do I see any any posts from which this comment may have been deleted.
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic604325-61-3970.aspx#bm1453093
Well, then you will be interested to hear that I haven't heard all the complaints about Windows 8 either. Unfortunately, none of your posts ever really enlightened me on the supposed problems. Plus, I tend to ignore the hype choosing instead to make my own decisions on whether or not a product is good or bad as I too feel that all we usually hear are the very vocal minority. Most people who like a product tend not to get vocal about it.
One thing I learned in a Marketing class many years ago. If someone has a good experience with a product or company they tell 3 people. On the other hand, if you have had a bad experience with a product or company you tell 11 people. You are much more likely to hear about bad experiences than good.
May 22, 2013 at 4:54 pm
Lynn Pettis (5/22/2013)
One thing I learned in a Marketing class many years ago. If someone has a good experience with a product or company they tell 3 people. On the other hand, if you have had a bad experience with a product or company you tell 11 people. You are much more likely to hear about bad experiences than good.
That's probably why there was no so much noice about new version of iOS - iOS6.
Well, actually there was, mainly about its Maps.
And guess what - they turned out to be really s..ty. To such extend that Apple themselves recommended to use Google Maps instead.
So, may be that "vocal minority" is not that wrong after all...
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
May 22, 2013 at 6:30 pm
I'd still like to address Brandy Tarvin's "attack labelling". First, lets drill down on the actual objectionable phrase, I used, and Brandy Tarvin's characterization of it.
The phrase in question ("Not a big web user eh? Its not like people haven't been discussing this to death.") comes across as harsh and belittling. The word choices make it sound as if you're questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology. It is very confrontational and insulting, which is why I called you out in an earlier post about being harsh
First, Brandy the "attack labeller" calls this harsh and belittling, and labels this an "attack". Now you could use for instance "attack", if its like non labelling "attack and counterattack" like a good natured ribbing about point and counterpoint in debate for instance, but this doesn't seem to be what Brandy is doing here. She is upping the offense level and this is what I'm particularily interested in. She is subjectively telling you guys here that I'm "questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology", all from the phrase indicating that he's paid scant attention to all the noise going on about 8. I absolutely do believe Tom's paid scant attention, either that, or he holds so much contempt for it that he believes folks like me are, well, you know the rest, and frankly I thought a snippy "don't browse the web much" would thankfully skip that little embarrasing characterization he used. Brandy Tarvin's characterization of my "belittling" of Tom and "questioning Toms intelligence and ability to use technology" in my opinion is just a deliberate attempt at inaccurately escalating and inventing offense in a fundamentally dishonest manner, but as long as I can voice my dissatisfaction to what I view as an extraordinary poor and inaccurate characterisation on her part, then I'm certainly not going to demand her poorly conceived postings stop as long as I can post the occasional rebuttal to them :hehe:
May 22, 2013 at 7:11 pm
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
I'd still like to address Brandy Tarvin's "attack labelling". First, lets drill down on the actual objectionable phrase, I used, and Brandy Tarvin's characterization of it.The phrase in question ("Not a big web user eh? Its not like people haven't been discussing this to death.") comes across as harsh and belittling. The word choices make it sound as if you're questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology. It is very confrontational and insulting, which is why I called you out in an earlier post about being harsh
First, Brandy the "attack labeller" calls this harsh and belittling, and labels this an "attack". Now you could use for instance "attack", if its like non labelling "attack and counterattack" like a good natured ribbing about point and counterpoint in debate for instance, but this doesn't seem to be what Brandy is doing here. She is upping the offense level and this is what I'm particularily interested in. She is subjectively telling you guys here that I'm "questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology", all from the phrase indicating that he's paid scant attention to all the noise going on about 8. I absolutely do believe Tom's paid scant attention, either that, or he holds so much contempt for it that he believes folks like me are, well, you know the rest, and frankly I thought a snippy "don't browse the web much" would thankfully skip that little embarrasing characterization he used. Brandy Tarvin's characterization of my "belittling" of Tom and "questioning Toms intelligence and ability to use technology" in my opinion is just a deliberate attempt at inaccurately escalating and inventing offense in a fundamentally dishonest manner, but as long as I can voice my dissatisfaction to what I view as an extraordinary poor and inaccurate characterisation on her part, then I'm certainly not going to demand her poorly conceived postings stop as long as I can post the occasional rebuttal to them :hehe:
I don't think Brandie was "upping the offense level." I think she was being frank and honest about how the comment appeared to her. I agree with her interpretaion. "Snippy" can easily come across as "confrontational and insulting" or questioning someone's intelligence. I'm sure part of the original offense on both sides comes from regional differences in English. I don't believe Brandie was trying to tell the rest of us anything, she was trying to communicate to you how she saw your post and why Tom may have taken offense. At the very least you came off as dismissive of a specific person. At worst you seemed like you were looking for a fight. An impression not dispelled by this subsequent post.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
May 22, 2013 at 8:03 pm
Stefan Krzywicki (5/22/2013)
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
I'd still like to address Brandy Tarvin's "attack labelling". First, lets drill down on the actual objectionable phrase, I used, and Brandy Tarvin's characterization of it.The phrase in question ("Not a big web user eh? Its not like people haven't been discussing this to death.") comes across as harsh and belittling. The word choices make it sound as if you're questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology. It is very confrontational and insulting, which is why I called you out in an earlier post about being harsh
First, Brandy the "attack labeller" calls this harsh and belittling, and labels this an "attack". Now you could use for instance "attack", if its like non labelling "attack and counterattack" like a good natured ribbing about point and counterpoint in debate for instance, but this doesn't seem to be what Brandy is doing here. She is upping the offense level and this is what I'm particularily interested in. She is subjectively telling you guys here that I'm "questioning Tom's intelligence and ability to use technology", all from the phrase indicating that he's paid scant attention to all the noise going on about 8. I absolutely do believe Tom's paid scant attention, either that, or he holds so much contempt for it that he believes folks like me are, well, you know the rest, and frankly I thought a snippy "don't browse the web much" would thankfully skip that little embarrasing characterization he used. Brandy Tarvin's characterization of my "belittling" of Tom and "questioning Toms intelligence and ability to use technology" in my opinion is just a deliberate attempt at inaccurately escalating and inventing offense in a fundamentally dishonest manner, but as long as I can voice my dissatisfaction to what I view as an extraordinary poor and inaccurate characterisation on her part, then I'm certainly not going to demand her poorly conceived postings stop as long as I can post the occasional rebuttal to them :hehe:
I don't think Brandie was "upping the offense level." I think she was being frank and honest about how the comment appeared to her. I agree with her interpretaion. "Snippy" can easily come across as "confrontational and insulting" or questioning someone's intelligence. I'm sure part of the original offense on both sides comes from regional differences in English. I don't believe Brandie was trying to tell the rest of us anything, she was trying to communicate to you how she saw your post and why Tom may have taken offense. At the very least you came off as dismissive of a specific person. At worst you seemed like you were looking for a fight. An impression not dispelled by this subsequent post.
The worst I could imagine my phrasing could be honestly interpreted as would be a very mild expression of incredulity at Toms post. Brandy's proposed interpretation falls outside of that range of possibility and thats about as complicated as it gets.
May 22, 2013 at 10:30 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/22/2013)
Sean Lange (5/22/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/21/2013)
Grant has a Surface RT. However Sean said "For the Touch I do not have the newer version of the OS. I have the older and much less expensive version."I am curious if I'm forgetting some older MS product.
No it is my brain that is the issue. 😉 I was referring to the Surface.
Whew, thought it was me.
RT or Pro?
RT. Pro would be nice but it is way more expensive. The bonus was that my phone was free when I bought the Surface. Well I had to renew but I was due for an upgrade anyway.
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
May 22, 2013 at 10:51 pm
Sergiy (5/22/2013)
Lynn Pettis (5/22/2013)
One thing I learned in a Marketing class many years ago. If someone has a good experience with a product or company they tell 3 people. On the other hand, if you have had a bad experience with a product or company you tell 11 people. You are much more likely to hear about bad experiences than good.That's probably why there was no so much noice about new version of iOS - iOS6.
Well, actually there was, mainly about its Maps.
And guess what - they turned out to be really s..ty. To such extend that Apple themselves recommended to use Google Maps instead.
So, may be that "vocal minority" is not that wrong after all...
Never said they were wrong, just the ones you hear.
May 23, 2013 at 3:50 am
Nevermind.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
May 23, 2013 at 4:00 am
GilaMonster (5/22/2013)
Grant Fritchey (5/22/2013)
GilaMonster (5/22/2013)
Oh look... "I don't think that's right... " again. Anyone got a baseball bat? Or a punching bag?Will an Arkansas tire thumper work?
No idea what one of those is, but I like the idea.
What, Google no workie? Here you go. What's not mentioned is the hollow core filled with lead.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
May 23, 2013 at 7:18 am
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/22/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (5/22/2013)
patrickmcginnis59 10839 (5/21/2013)
L' Eomot Inversé (5/21/2013)
In response to Patrick, it would have better phrased something like "There is a lot of discussion of this on the web. Have you not seen anything that indicates what the problems are?" which seems very much less like a snide remark.,,, after typing in this very thread ...
Now can someone tell me what all the fuss is about? Please? I just don't understand what the difficulties are, in fact I suspect they were unreal problems dreamt up by bone-headed old dinosaurs who have forgotten how to adapt to new things.
Seriously?
The difference being that his dinosaurs comment came across as a generic reference and was not directed specificially at anyone in this thread. Whereas your comment was specifically directed at him and made about him.
What you're saying is that I was perfectly welcome to avoid mentioning my disapproval of the product so as to avoid his wide sweeping and exaggerated characterization of anybody who deems to have a complaint, right?
...
Missing the point.
May 23, 2013 at 7:24 am
Oh for heaven's sake, Patrick, if you're going to yell at me could you at least spell my name correctly?
May 23, 2013 at 8:01 am
Chad Crawford (5/22/2013)
For the record, I can see both sides of this discussion. I can see how both Patrick and Tom (and others) could be offended and how they could feel that their own comments were not offensive*. Would I have personally taken offense by some of the comments? Yes, I think I would have on some of them. But looking back, I can also see how the offense may not have been intended.
I'm with Chad on this. The arguments themselves could have been made with a tad more civility, e.g.:
Patrick: I think MS made a mistake by pushing Windows 8 onto desktop platforms [or something like that; I apologize, Patrick, if I'm overgeneralizing]
Tom: Really? I don't see that as an issue. I made the leap with little difficulty. I wonder whether the people having issues fall into the change-averse bucket and will eventually come around to the benefits of the interface.
Patrick: Well, that might be dismissing their complaints a little lightly; it would appear that this is causing major issues for quite a few users.
Etc., etc.
Comments about boneheaded dinosaurs, lack of Web savvy, etc. may add a bit of color but shouldn't be necessary to drive a point home (though I readily admit to occasionally adding such "color" to my posts).
I'm not sure that I would necessarily agree that Patrick's remarks were any more snide than Tom's (I do see the general vs specific argument; I'm just not convinced that that condemns one while absolving the other), but I'm more familiar with Tom's style and so perhaps give him the benefit of a few more doubts.
Lastly (if I may), I didn't see Brandie's comments as adding offense; she was defending a friend while trying to leverage a "teachable" moment by sharing how she interpreted Patrick's remarks.
This whole thing reminds of me of just how a discussion might go with my buddies at the bar: opinions colored with attempts at humorous disparagement; nobody gets truly offended because a level of mutual respect has already been established.
Doesn't play as nice here since we don't know each other from Adam; but I like to think that the offense that appears to have been taken by multiple parties was much greater than the sources intended.
Viewing 15 posts - 39,856 through 39,870 (of 66,738 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply