Why the hell is everyone dicking around with Command line crap when what everyone wants is a good voice recognition OS? Sorry, Linux pissed me off when I spent 2 days trying to configure a multilink dialup account to share internet with my network when all it took was a few simple mouse clicks to do it in Wink2k Server.
I just thought of a great anti-linux campagin "Command line interface it not the future, Voice Recognition is.
- Thread starter Ultimar
- Start date
First of all, KDE(and quite possibly Gnome) includes an extremely simply dial up setup utility, if you can't bother reading docs, or even checking through the menus, don't bitch at others.
Besides, did you actually ask someone before getting PO'ed and deciding Linux sucks?
Secondly, CLI is extremely useful for administrative tasks, say when administering a server, the lack of a decent CLI is one of the reasons I shun Windows on servers, and also one of the biggest reasons I don't want more to do with it than I have to as a workstation as well.
You've obviously missed the point of having a good useful CLI completely.
Besides, did you actually ask someone before getting PO'ed and deciding Linux sucks?
Secondly, CLI is extremely useful for administrative tasks, say when administering a server, the lack of a decent CLI is one of the reasons I shun Windows on servers, and also one of the biggest reasons I don't want more to do with it than I have to as a workstation as well.
You've obviously missed the point of having a good useful CLI completely.
Because I can type just as fast as I speak, it takes less time to get used to a new keyboard than it does to train the current voice recognition software, you never know what errant things will happen when downloading pr0n, and I have been sick for the past 2-3 days and my throat has been killing me.
aircooled
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 15,965
- 1
- 0
True voice recognition is very processor intensive and CPU's will need to be in the 5+ghz range before it becomes a viable alternative, by then the software should be ready for prime-time also. Regardless, I still don't see voice recognition replaceing the keyboard/mouse.
That's the beauty of computers, you can make them do stuff without saying a word.
Do I really wan't my computer to hear me calling it a g@dd@^n piece of s41t!!!! ;-)
That's the beauty of computers, you can make them do stuff without saying a word.
Do I really wan't my computer to hear me calling it a g@dd@^n piece of s41t!!!! ;-)
Hmmmm. That would be a novel concept. Talk to the box I'm on instead of using telnet to administer our servers.
Wonder if such an arrangement would also be downloadable from a mirror? And like, would it save my company thou$ands of dollar$ in the process the same as a linux distro does?
Imagine 300 tech support personal in one big room which horrible accoustics to begin with trying to walk someone through reinstalling wizbang 2003 and at the same time seeing some crazy stuff happen on their own machine. "Crap! My machine rebooted AGAIN! Call back in like 5 minutes!"
Or you and your fellow admins are busy patching your respective servers, and one machine hears the password from the guy sitting next to you instead of your own password for the third time locking out the domain administrator account and you all are screwed for the 3 hours it takes to unfreeze the account.
You know, voice recognition always sounds cool. And maybe it is for dictating a letter and such.
But for programming , data analysis, system administration, web surfing, etc. I think it would be a complete PITA. And it would suck in at work. The guy in the next cube is annoying enough on the phone, it would drive me nuts to listen to him talking to his computer all day.
Besides, a good CLI is far more powerful & efficient then any GUI.
n0cmonkey: I 'hear' you. Yes, a bunch of admins talking in voice recognition sw could turn out to be quite a cluster indeed.
I was making a somewhat lame attempt at being sarcastic. The more I work with Linux and the CLI, the more I fully appreciate its power as a server and true ease of administration.
I was making a somewhat lame attempt at being sarcastic. The more I work with Linux and the CLI, the more I fully appreciate its power as a server and true ease of administration.
Voice recognition has its applications, but the environments in which you find servers and real workstations are not ideal for such voice recognition. In the workstation environment, it would be very annoying (this has been stated already in this thread). In a server room, the background noise would be a problem, as well as the issue of the servers trying to determine whether you're talking to them, or to the servers in the rack next to them.
Aside from the processor power problem (we'll put that aside for a moment), just imagine how much network bandwidth would be required for remote administration of servers via voice recognition. I doubt this would be acceptable on the networks of today that are many times near the peak of their bandwidth with non-administrative traffic. Even terminal services over my uncrowded 100mbit/sec ethernet LAN is laggy (I've not tried it over dialup); however, SSH or Telnet is usable over dialup, and it's as fast over a 100mbit/sec LAN as it would be if you were right there on the machine.
Aside from the processor power problem (we'll put that aside for a moment), just imagine how much network bandwidth would be required for remote administration of servers via voice recognition. I doubt this would be acceptable on the networks of today that are many times near the peak of their bandwidth with non-administrative traffic. Even terminal services over my uncrowded 100mbit/sec ethernet LAN is laggy (I've not tried it over dialup); however, SSH or Telnet is usable over dialup, and it's as fast over a 100mbit/sec LAN as it would be if you were right there on the machine.
Why is it that end users think that they are the driving force behind technology? "I don't think Linux is a viable desktop operate, therefore, it should not exist!" Besides, you watch too much Star-Trek. Who's to say that Microsoft will even exist by the time computers are driven by voice? PC's which use voice as the input device are not right around the corner.
Yeah, I can just see it now, "don't use Linux because maybe, just maybe, computers will be run by voice commands rather than CLI! So if you want your system to be compatible 15 years from now, switch now!"
I have to agree with the switchers, parts of Windows don't make sense, like the registry.
Yea, the Windows registry doesn't make sense - which is one of the reasons that I'm slowly but surely trying to wean myself off of the need for Windows applications so I can use Linux exclusively.
Everything has it's uses. CLI is a blessing when it comes to using a computer remotely. Even if the server if half-dead you can usually still SSH into the machine, "do your thing", and bring it back to life. I keep a LOT of CLI stuff on my Linux machine for remote use (Mutt makes it easy to check mail remotely). GUI's are also very good as well in their places (and are no less powerful than a CLI. hate to burst your bubble guys but you can't be a fanatic on either side. sometimes a GUI is the best thing to use). When I'm transferring files from an FTP site and want to get a very specific set (that isn't related in a way so as to be covered by wildcards) then it's much easier to hold down Ctrl and click each file that I want than it is to sit there typing every filename. On the flip side though if I want to delete a specific set of files that WILL be covered by a wildcard (say I want do download every file in a directory that my newsreader said was a duplicate, which it does by adding a _1 ... _n everytime it encounters an existing file). It's much, much easier to type "rm -rf *_?.*" than it is to manually select each file to delete. You just have to learn when to use each method.
And as to voice recognition: realize the power of open source. Linux will likely have a GOOD voice recognition system before MS.
And as to voice recognition: realize the power of open source. Linux will likely have a GOOD voice recognition system before MS.
I decided to play with voice commands today since I was bored and some people responded to the thread. Luckily, Apple includes some basic voice commands in its OS. I think its pretty neat. Not only will my AIM client talk to me, I can have my computer tell me bad knock knock jokes!
The true power of voice-enabled computers does NOT lie in desktop computers. In fact, effective utilization of voice recognition and natural language processing technology requires a paradigm shift in thinking about the way we use computers.
Go to Mark Weiser's Ubiquitous Computing Page and you'll start to get an idea of what the future of computing will be like. Desktops are (thankfully) on the way out the door, and have already been replaced to a large extent with laptops and a small number of workstations and servers. This trend will continue.
Voice recognition and natural language processing is an integral part of ubiquitous computing because it enables human-computer interaction in a much more human-centric, task-oriented manner. The keyboard and mouse force humans to work in the computer domain; future computers should be designed to work in the human domain.
Go to Mark Weiser's Ubiquitous Computing Page and you'll start to get an idea of what the future of computing will be like. Desktops are (thankfully) on the way out the door, and have already been replaced to a large extent with laptops and a small number of workstations and servers. This trend will continue.
Voice recognition and natural language processing is an integral part of ubiquitous computing because it enables human-computer interaction in a much more human-centric, task-oriented manner. The keyboard and mouse force humans to work in the computer domain; future computers should be designed to work in the human domain.
I agree with most of what you said. However, you're still wrong about desktops going the way of the dodo anytime soon; unless, of course, laptops drop in price to be comparable with desktops, and laptops' bottlenecks (especially the hard drive, but fortunately video cards, processors, and ram don't seem to be much of a problem any more) get alleviated to at least the point where they are on current desktops.
They've been saying the desktop is dead for at least 5 or 6 years now. It ain't gonna happen. The average person doesn't want to use computers on the level that most of these futurists are prediciting. What most of us fail to see is that for the average Joe the computer is already what it needs to be. They're fast enough, they've got all the software necessary, and they just don't need changing. The desktop is not only alive and well, but it's exactly what most people need out of a computer. Sure us in all of our geeky glory will still push the technology ahead but I don't see alot of this new stuff being adopted by non-technophiles. The average computer I see in service is about a 400mhz. Just about everybody has one, but the only programs they open are Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, and Microsoft Word. They never do anything outside of those 3 apps (some of figured out how to use Napster and Winamp). These people aren't going to get rid of their desktops and go wireless or mobile when their current setup does want they want it to virtually flawlessly. Everybody I've seen who gets a cell phone with internet capabilities uses that feature ONE time to show a few people that their phone can go on the internet. After they get over that ooh-ahh feature it's never cranked up again. The desktop is a progression of the big server/dumb terminal setup we used 30-some years ago: it's not going away anytime soon.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter