5 reasons why I won't be using Windows 8

[Swatopluk]

One possibility is to design the tests in a way that a calculator is of no use or only to add up the final results. That forces the students to think or do transformations by hand because the calculator can only do numbers and not deal with terms and results like 3a + 1.4b.

Maybe that's the reason why we had so many polynomial divisions to solve

[Bluenose]

My grandmother who passed away about 20 years ago used to be able to add up long columns of figures in her head way faster than you could even enter them into a calculator.  She had worked for many years as a bookkeeper for a number of businesses and her ability was simply amazing.  I have no idea how she did it, but she never got the total wrong so far as I am aware.  Mind boggling.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I disagree on one count, which is that I am quite slow at doing basic arithmetic. I'm accurate at it, and I can rearrange fairly complex algebra in my head quickly and efficiently, but give me addition or especially subtraction and division*?  I bog down and need to work it out on paper. I used to get frustrated to tears at the timed 'speed sheets' that we were given in elementary school, because although I'd have very few errors, my results would be sub-par relative to my general math skills.  I may be a little bit of a numerical dyslexic... I used to routinely confuse and transpose 4's and 5's. I'm also a perfectionist, and tend to double-check results to ensure I've got the correct answer.

_{*multiplication seems come come easiest to me}

I'm a proponent of calculators when students reach a level at which they are being tested on higher math skills (and have proven their ability to do simple arithmetic), simply to allow the time and mental effort to be applied to the non-arithmetic skills.  

Side note: I hated first-year calculus because our professor gave ridiculously long final exams.  I had little issue with the 2-hour midterms, but on the final, we were given a 3-hour slot to complete what for me was a 4-hour exam. I would tend to finish 75% of the exam, say, and get 73% as a final mark. NOT a fair assessment of my skills, IMHO.  So, while speed is important, it's also important to keep in perspective what the overall objective is.  From the professor's perspective, perhaps only students that could work both quickly and accurately deserved top grades, but this was never explicitly communicated.

But.  You admit that you do have the basic math skills, albeit a wee bit slower than average?  Then you qualify by my rule-- I never said how fast, and I do think timed tests, especially for difficult or higher maths, is wrong-- the student should be able to proceed at whatever pace works for him or her.  As you correctly pointed out, a timed test failed miserably to adequately test your skills.  And I sympathize too-- I was never fast at doing the higher stuff, I had to work through it each and every time. 

As for basic arithmetic?  I was supposed to have memorized that in the 4th grade.  Unfortunately, the school I attended was a "dump stat" school, wherein the kids were not pushed in any way at all; you could get the material or not, didn't matter to the school-- you passed regardless. 

So I struggled for the remainder of my schooling career with multiplication/division.  I eventually memorized it myself, but never did get it to become as automatic as breathing-- I had to use a "system" to remember the values.  I still use the same system even now:  to multiply multiple-digit numbers in my head, I routinely add  and/or subtract minor values to bring the two working numbers to something I already know the answer to, such as ending in zero or 5.  Then I either add back in the subtracted bits (after multiplying those separately from the usual memorized tables) or subtract, as required to get back to the original number(s).

This method also works for 3 and 4 digit multiplicands, and I used to do this sort of stuff in my head while tending that convenience store.   Yeah, it was exceedingly boring work, so I wanted something to distract me.

I would also add up the total in my head, and do the taxes too-- if my internal total did not match the paper-tape?  I knew I'd made a mistake somewhere, and I could check the tape.  Most of the time, I was in agreement.  Occasionally, I'd either have keyed in the wrong price, or added wrong.

But at first, I was not that fast-- it took months of daily practice.

Something I never got to do, back in school.

I suspect that with practice, you too Aggie could become quite quick at the basic maths as eventually it becomes sort of automatic, not requiring any real conscious effort.

But if you don't keep up with the skill?  It goes away... today, I don't do arithmetic like I did back in the 80's.  It takes some small effort on my part, and more often than not, I double-check myself with...

.... yeah, I realize the irony, here ...

.... the calculator built into my cell phone...

.... I blame it on being older than 50.

[pieces o nine]

Attitude plays an important role as well. When I found geometry my math ability blossomed because it was a kind of thinking that came naturally to me. I liked it and enjoyed the challenge of tackling next steps. But the more abstract the math becomes, it's like a window shade pulls down in my mind and I could not *be* less interested. I will cheat and use a proportion wheel to scale images rather than that cross-multiplication/cross-division equation because I freeze and have to 'practice' on simple conversions (like 50% and 200%) to make sure I am working it properly! Similar experiences in other academic subjects, but with their inherent emphasis on reading and verbal (always my strength) I didn't notice at the time how much my personal interest level affected my learning --and retention -- curve.

I can switch easily between inches and picas from doing print graphics, and use a 1 pica = 1 foot scale in personal drawings because picas divide so nicely by 12 without getting clunky. I can do this with as little thought as breathing -- mostly because it was my idea and I like  it! Ask me to convert imperial to metric: I need time and am never quite sure of the results. I also have to give some thought to time zone conversions and gas mileage. I've never applied myself to those and they don't come easily. Still, I understand the equations and can work them out, which is more than many 'kids today' were taught/or learned to do.

[Griffin NoName]

Just followed your link Bob.

Windows 8 sounds a) useless b) ulltra irritating c) almost impossible to use

I find all touch screen interfaces*** hard to use, and the complex swiping beyond me. I am obviously not alone in this so what are we all supposed to do?

And in particular why hide IE10 tabs, and why do away with white on red corner crosses to close applications (so what if they don't degrade performance, I hate having stuff around that I have finished with).

<sigh>

***even with a stylus

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Exactly!  Why mess with the long-standing and well proven interface?

Hiding stuff is why I dumped Firefox for Android-- they "helpfully" hid all the standard controls underneath a secret* swipe gesture.

As I said in my OP, I do not plan on going to Win8 anytime soon-- I'm already happy with Android's ICS anyway.   



________________
* secret to me, at least-- I'd already dumped it when I read about how to get them back, if for only a second

[Griffin NoName]

It all seems to be in order that 3 year olds can manage apps. We get old so much younger nowadays.

My grandmother who passed away about 20 years ago used to be able to add up long columns of figures in her head way faster than you could even enter them into a calculator.

My father-in-law, long since gone, could do "Purchase Tax" in his head, which I vaguely remember being 3/22 of price. Or some such ridiculous value. Of course, he could have been making it up, and fixing it at the till afterwards - he ran his own shop. I used to love helping out, except when I had to climb the ladders to get stuff off the top shelves (old-fashioned shop stuffed to the gills, with many shelf levels going up skywards) which worried me a bit as it was 1960's with very short skirts. (no idea why I didn't wear trousers when helping out).

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

When real state is at a premium (like in a smart phone) hiding things does make sense provided that bringing them back is easy, but if you have more real state, like a laptop, or worse, a desktop, hiding stuff doesn't make sense.

Not to say that the opposite is desirable, like the 200+ toolbars that everybody wants to install in regular browsers, but why hide something that you will be using constantly?

Where are pragmatic and selective at these interface design meetings?

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Where are pragmatic and selective at these interface design meetings?

Hiding in the closet, of course.



I blame Apple myself:  they had to seem "innovative", "new" and "fresh"... else why bother to upgrade/buy-the-latest-one?

So they felt like they deliberately had to change things up with each new version--even if there was no real need to do so.

But I maintain that form must follow function, or else you are a slave to fashion.   The hammer has not changed in any functional way since it was invented thousands of years ago the first time some enterprising human first attached a stone to a stick with sinew or vines.  You still have a lever (stick/handle) attached to some sort of weight that you swing to hit stuff, multiplying the leverage inherent in your forearm by ... alot (over simply holding the weight directly in your hand).

Just as a baseball, when hit by a bat, will travel much-much farther than a handball hit directly by a hand-- again, the club (baseball bat) has not functionally changed since it was invented either.

Form follows function.

Anytime the "designers" forget that lesson?  The human becomes a slave to fashion/design.  _{(why I do not do Apple)}

[Griffin NoName]

Luckily square wheels were never fashionable.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Luckily square wheels were never fashionable.

Indeed.  The TV show Mythbusters, actually built 4 square wheels to see how it'd work...

... episode here (may not play in the UK, though... sorry)

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/square-wheels.htm

If you cannot get the video to work, they did mount 4 square wheels they had carefully hand-crafted out of plate-steel, then they bolted on rubber treads from 4 oversized tires.  They drove it on both pavement, in dirt and on deliberately bumpy roads. 

They discovered that the 4 corners did not give any additional traction or "bite" in soft ground-- just the opposite, in fact (good round, dirt tires had superior traction for example).

[Griffin NoName]

I found out how to do stuff in W8 which were not as hidden as i thought. start menu just left click bottom left screen, or right click for some other function so can get at control panel. http://www.techradar.com/news/software/operating-systems/10-best-hidden-features-in-windows-8-1117304

swiping credit /debit card across card reader with no pin needed to pay in "cash" sounds like a great improveement until I started thinking about how easy to steal the card. Burglars can have a merry time, swipe, swipe, swipe.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Indeed.  I will never own one of those RFID cards that you merely wave at the reader-- an illicit reader sitting next to you on the bus, or in the plane, or on the escalator or even in an elevator?  And *poof* you are paying for his trip to Tahiti....

[Aggie]

It all seems to be in order that 3 year olds can manage apps. We get old so much younger nowadays.

This is the most profound reason to make such a system, no? Hook 'em at 3, keep 'em for life.