|
Ever seen the early COM days circa 94, I always thought the pronounciation was gew-id.
|
|
|
|
|
How ironic that something supposed to represent uniqueness, has mutliple pronounciations. 
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
|
|
|
|
|
Too true. Globally unique, in fact.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
we'll need a new identifier if we are to conquer space.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe ... a galactically unique ID
|
|
|
|
|
Individuality is fine as long as everyone is the same.
Failure is not an option; it's the default selection.
|
|
|
|
|
You can not have uniqueness without variety, just as you can't have a shadow without light.
|
|
|
|
|
If you start quoting from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance[^], then I'm going to have to knock you down and ride over you with my Harley.
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm talking to other technical people, I usually say goo-id. Though if I'm talking to non-tech folk, I usually try to spell out my acronyms (gee yoo eye dee) so they can look it up later if they need to. If they are really non-tech, I won't even bother with acronyms, I would just say globally unique identifier.
Be The Noise
|
|
|
|
|
When all else fails theirs always:
Gee-Ewe-Eye-Dee . . . works every time.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
'Strange beast'.
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
Gwid like squid. Where there are multiple acceptable pronunciations of a word I will always choose the one with the fewest syllables--it only makes sense. Sequel instead of S-Q-L, gwid instead of goo-id, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I will always choose the one with the fewest syllables
I agree. Why do more than is necessary?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Squirrel -- two syllables.
Jason Hooper wrote: Sequel
Sequel to what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 is correct.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
ryanb31 wrote: What is the proper pronunciation for GUID?
Don't know, but I pronounce it: gooey-dee
Heaven help me if I ever meet Dee.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: ever meet Dee.
That could be a stickee stituation. (Spelling mistakes on perpoise).
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard it both ways.
I used to pronounce it gwid like squid, but I changed to pronounce it like goo-id.
Mostly I follow what everyone else around me is pronouncing it to avoid confusion.
But I think I'll start pronouncing it like gweed as in 'weed' just for fun.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Remember that it's important to select the pronunciation that will most confuse end users, so that we can have a good nark about how stoopid they are, later.
Try the mandarin pronunciation -- "gwayed". It'll help to further confuse users if you say that options are gwayed out.
Dutch would be worse (nothing unexpected there), with "gauwed" (with your lips pursed and your tongue far forward -- full instructions here[^])
Or you could go rapper -- "Hey mutha, I's hakkin' da Gooey-D!"
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I say G-U-I-D 
I love go-o-o-o-ld!
|
|
|
|
|
Inside COM, Rogerson, Microsoft Press ISBN 1-57231-349-8, top of page 112:
Pronounced goo-id to rhyme with druid. Not sure what the geoduck stuff is about though?!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not claiming that HTML 5 isn't viable or that it won't meet with a great deal of success. In my opinion, people who develop in HTML 5 are going to earn their salaries much like they earn them while writing HTML 4 applications. I just don't think HTML 5 is going to be all that. HTML 5 isn't going to jump the boundaries currently enjoyed by HTML 4.
If you'd like to read a really bad analysis see this Nonsense.[^]
His basic argument is that Apple won big by betting against the web and by providing a superior user experience - the same user experience which will be available by using HTML 5, which means, ultimately, that non-HTML5 technology is doomed. If you'd like to really understand his argument I'd suggest sniffing glue for the rest of the afternoon.
I'd like to offer some reasons as to why his analysis fails:
1: Apple has complete control of the experience now whereas the HTML 5 standards are still eight years off and they are controlled by a committee that doesn't control the browsers or the hardware. Of course a closed system has a huge advantage here.
2: In the next 8 years the user expectations are going to leap-frog past anything the HTML 5 standard will be designed to cover. Do the HTML 5 standards handle hologram displays? What happens when the iPad 8 comes out with a hologram display or Microsoft comes out with an embedded Kinect motion reader in their MicroPad 10?
3: The author's analysis is based on what developers hope will happen (write once, deploy once, read anywhere) and not upon what the users hope will happen. Users don't care about the underlying technology, they just want what works and delivers all the latest goodies.
4: The author makes a big deal over the cost to get into the Apple eco-system. He says:“Most of all what Apple did was they charged $400 to $1,000 for the hardware that was necessary to get a differentiated user experience on data that 100% of their customers could get for free off a desktop device,” I sure would like to know where all of these 'free' desktop devices are located. Turns out, it costs to buy into the HTML 5 experience as well.
Look, I understand the desire for HTML 5 to succeed because the dream of writing something once and having it work everywhere is totally awesome. However, millions of users are willing to pay a great deal of money to get something awesome and cutting edge. This has been what has defined success in computers since the 80's which means authors like Roger McNammee are going to have to come up with something more compelling than predictions based on a developer's wish list.
modified 8-May-12 9:16am.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: 2: In the next 8 years the user expectations are going to leap-frog past anything the HTML 5 standard will be designed to cover. Do the HTML 5 standards handle hologram displays? What happens when the iPad 8 comes out with a hologram display or Microsoft comes out with an embedded Kinect motion reader in their MicroPad 10?
We should be having HTML 18 by that time.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
