|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Some of you are lunatic enough to live where this is common.
What we consider to be the lunatic part of it are the technical requirements stated by the authorities when you put up a new house here. It is stated by "U value": Walls shall have a maximum heat loss of 0.18 watt per square meter per kelvin temperature difference. With -15C outdoors, +20C indoors (35K delta), the maximum permitted heat loss is 35*0.18 = 6.3 watt per square meter of outer wall. Through the ground floor, it is even stricter: At most 0.1 W/K * square meter. For the ceiling, the maximum U-value is 0.13.
These requirements demand top quality insulation of at least 30 cm (12 inches) in the walls, and 40-50 cm under your ground floor. You can in theory make 2-layer windows satisfying the requirements, but in practice, they are three layer, with insulating gas between the layers.
Also, the majority of households use heat pumps nowadays, delivering three to four times as much heat per watt compared to a plain electric heater. Heated floors is becoming more and more common, allowing room temperature to be lowered by at least 3-4 C (or 5-7 F) for the same level of comfort (at least if you don't wear shoes indoors). We have strict requirements for the efficiency of wood stoves. Recovering the heat in ventilation systems is not required, but fairly common - the used air blown out of the house is cold.
So, we have ways of handling the cold. This morning was -15C at my place: Clear sky, dry, snow is light and crispy (we had a snowfall of 61 cm, 24 inches, last weekend). Actually, we love the cold so much that we sometimes catch it!
|
|
|
|
|
An excellent argument to confirm my original subject line!
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "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 |
|
|
|
|
|
Well, my ancestors many generations ago came from Scandinavia. Which may be why my recent ancestors (18th century and onwards) settled in Georgia. 
Yet, I spent a winter in Chicago and a winter in southeastern Idaho (courtesy of the US Navy) and loved it. Days and nights of -40F in Idaho were not uncommon, and I would stand out in the snow drifts for up to an hour waiting on a bus to take me and my Navy buddies 60 miles out in the desert (as teenagers - I was 19) to play with live nuclear reactors.
I adapted to the cold quite well.
|
|
|
|
|
I grew up in the inland - far from any ocean or lake. Well, there was a river down in the bottom of the valley, but it didn't bother us much; most of its surface was frozen most of the winter. Air was dry, we had very little wind. At school, we were allowed to stay in the corridors during the breaks if temperature was below -20C (-4F), but we didn't want to - we wanted to run outside.
When starting my studies, I moved to a costal town with a lot of wind. Temperature downtown rarely goes below -5C (23F), yet I was freezing like a dog most of the time. Most of the winter was milder, sometimes below freezing, sometimes above, turning the snow into (wet) ice impossible to handle either as a pedestrian or as a car driver. Rain at a couple degrees below freezing (it certainly happens!) feels far, far colder than dry snow at -20C! Especially when the wind is howling through the streets.
I still live in the same town, but have moved a few kilometers away from the fjord, higher up in the landscape. It is somewhat drier, and colder, here than downtown - currently at -15C (downtown temperature is reported to be -8C). If I were to move somewhere else, it would be further inland, to a cooler, drier place, such as Røros reported to have -23C right now, or Folldal at -29C. I know that I would freeze a lot less going to the grocery store there than I would if by taking a trip downtown in this town, even if the temperature is 21 centigrade lower in Folldal.
Wind and humidity is what counts. I got the impression that Chicago has got a fair share of both, but I never lived there, so I may be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
... a while ago, and it gets worse and worse. 
Open web site, click yes for cookies, start browsing, click yes for privacy, go on browsing, click no for downloading specific-app-instead-of-mobile-browsing, go on browsing, click no to register-to-our-outstanding-newsletter, go on browsing, down wipe the add taking middle of the screen, .... EVERY.SINGLE.TIME.
Checking out a cake recipe on a tablet, or anything else actually, has become the worst user experience ever. This is plain sick.  
|
|
|
|
|
That's because we only want to visit free websites, where ads have to pay for the costs of maintaining a server. Those ads require cookies, and apparently you can't view any text without having a tracking-cookie.
Cake recipe: buy a cakemix, follow instructions on the back 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of it is GDPR related panic, I suspect.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Imagine if starting your automobile required this kind of interaction.
Turn key...
"Please select the []Agree checkbox to indicate that you are licensed to operate this vehicle."
*click*
"Please indicate that you are not inebriated by breathing into the appropriate tube."
*breathe*
Please assure the authorities that you have not been recently arrested for vehicular homicide in any of the adjacent states by choosing the []un-arrested checkbox.
*click*
Please absolve the car manufacturer of any responsibility should you happen to operate the vehicle in an unsafe manner, by clicking the []agree checkbox.
*click*
Confirm your understanding that gasoline powered vehicles do include internal combustion and do produce pollutants which you will not hold the gas manufacturer responsible for by clicking the [] do not hold responsible checkbox.
*click*
ad nauseum...
|
|
|
|
|
You mean yours doesn't? 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
well:
already got the 'not wearing your seat belt' ding-dongs,
oh and the 'forgot to close your boot/trunk,'
and the 'computer thinks the car is sick'
...[more coming soon]
(and that last one can cost many $ to make it go away - even when they tell you it's just the 'time to change your oil' warning.)
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Check out this screen shot from the Visual Studio 2019 Preview which displays the new Project selection screen. It's so flat and terrible. First look is really confusing because everything just blends together.
https://i.stack.imgur.com/mWqK6.png[^]
|
|
|
|
|
What annoys me most about these "UWP look'n'feel" dialogs is the huge waste of screen real estate.
Look at the amount of white on the left hand side!
I can only assume that the layout designers all have three or four 55" 8K monitors, and want to fill them ...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: What annoys me most about these "UWP look'n'feel" dialogs is the huge waste of screen real estate.
Agree 100%. I don't understand the waste of space.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently they think they are being stylish.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
I've been making this comparison since Windows 8.x introduced the "metro" UI: Now that we have video hardware that can show millions of colors and can do billions of operations per second, today's UIs (were it not for resolution) wouldn't look any different on CGA video cards. And having a choice of 4 colors would still be overkill.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Now that we have video hardware that can show millions of colors and can do billions of operations per second, today's UIs (were it not for resolution) wouldn't look any different on CGA video cards.
It's absolute lunacy!!
It seems like it is based on nothing else except "being different from the old".
|
|
|
|
|
It'll come around again; it's just a matter of time. Then whoever re-introduces the concept of colors in a UI will be described as a visionary and a pioneer.
My personal preference - Windows XP in Windows Classic mode looked great and was absolutely functional. It took me a long time to get used to Windows Aero, but ultimately I think that was the highest point in terms of Windows UI design. Then it all went downhill in order to "simplify everything" for the sake of tablets and touch.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Then whoever re-introduces the concept of colors in a UI will be described as a visionary and a pioneer.
Nailed it!!
|
|
|
|
|
... designed by flat, uncreative, colouress minds who can't imagine an inventive, creative, and colourful future.
The words "don't upgrade" are becoming more and more prevalent. I've no way of knowing if there is one (twitter is blocked on my network), but there ought to be a hashtag for it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: designed by flat, uncreative, colouress minds who can't imagine an inventive, creative, and colourful future.
Agree 100%
again, it seems to be the new way simply because it is "different from the old way" with no sound reasoning behind it. Maybe we should all go back to black and white TVs too?? 
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: Maybe we should all go back to black and white TVs too??
Color-TV's add to the experience.
The new and modern UI's are not evolving, but devolving. Where the common controls 3.0 were a radiant beacon of design (albeit "ugly"), the new UI is lacking in every aspect. One of the great advantages was the recognizability; which is gone. The idea of keeping the UI consistent is out of the Window. With it, reduced learning-expenses went out the window too.
The old UI was great in terms of discoverability; you look and instantly identify the control as a user, and how it behaves. Nowadays you hover over each part of the screen to FIND the damn controls (sometimes clicking a label to verify!).
The old UI was designed for accessability; nowadays a UI is designed for a specific resolution, and hardly scales. Set your desktop to a high-contrast scheme with an increased DPI, and watch most modern UI's fail.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The old UI was great in terms of discoverability; you look and instantly identify the control as a user, and how it behaves. Nowadays you hover over each part of the screen to FIND the damn controls (sometimes clicking a label to verify!).
So true. This is the one that really gets me too. It's just so much wasted time and effort.
The Search capability in Visual Studio 2013 and beyond is really terrible. Every time I try to change the ignore case and whole word options I can never even tell what is selected or not.
See https://i.stack.imgur.com/zO5xn.png[^]
And that very light box has recently been added...before it was just shaded differences.
The whole new metro thing is terrible.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The idea of keeping the UI consistent is out of the Window
I think in this regard the updates to Skype are a huge sin on the part of Microsoft - menu choices open to windows where it's anyone's as to whether the cross, to close the window, will be at the top left or top right of the window.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
ms have taken "idiot proofing" to the next level.
1. the less choices they give the less mistakes can happen.
2. big is good, bigger means it's more important.
3. idiots always click the most colorful things first, and after that anything that's red.... take that away and they will click everything equal amounts.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: idiots always click the most colorful things first,
That's a good point. I guess with this new UI MS doesn't want anybody clicking anything.
Who can even tell what is an active item any more??
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
