Scobleizer: Mozilla gives the passionates one with Ubiquity
Zee from WeDoCreative
· 1 year ago
Absolute zero non-passionates as you call them will use the tool but the surge in passion is likely to go through the roof which should guarantee another couple of hears of the passionates convincing the non-passionates that Firefox is the best browser out there...which, if you look after it, it is.
Michael Moncur
· 1 year ago
Color me underwhelmed.
I think you'd call me passionate - I've submitted bugs for Firefox, I've written plug-ins for it, and my particular installation is quite customized. Heck, I've even written books about it. But I don't (yet) see a use for Ubiquity.
Why? Because it doesn't solve any problems I need solved.
For example, the first two examples they give in the instructions are searching Wikipedia and searching Google for a selection. The latter is already built into Firefox and requires nothing but a right click, and the former is easily solved with a search keyword. I've taken it a step further and have Quicksilver set up so I can click shift-control-W to pop up a Wikipedia search box, even if I'm not currently in a browser.
I'm sure there are people out there who use Activewords for exactly the same thing and wonder why they'd need a browser command line.
I realize it has potential far beyond that, but the thing about us passionate users is that we don't use something for its own sake. We use it because it makes our life better, or more efficient. Eventually I'll have a problem that Ubiquity is the perfect solution for, but for now it's just yet another unnecessary command line with a confusing muddle of beta-quality features attached.
Ubiquity looks a lot like a browser-specific version of Quicksilver, which is intriguing, but I'm hoping the real Quicksilver will continue to evolve so I don't need a tool like Ubiquity that is tied to a particular browser.
Amir Gharaat
· 1 year ago
This is a nice implementation of Mac OS "services" (formerly NeXTstep services) for Web 2.0. The OS in this case is Firefox. It's a step towards "the semantic web". This iteration requires the user to initiate and hint at the semantics, memorize commands, and install each service into their browser. It's a good sandbox for inventors to prototype and get some user feedback on semantic concepts. Over time these will be automated. I create a calendar invite in Google Calendar, when I type "sushi near Apple HQ" in the Location field, I get a Yelp or OpenTable popup sorted by rating, pick one, and send. My recipients email reader will use semantics to show a map, ratings, etc when they hover over the restaurant name.
Brett Nordquist
· 1 year ago
I installed it and have been playing around with Ubiquity for an hour. I agree it's for the passionate users and I'll probably use it often. I'm impressed so far but not for what it does today but what it will do down the road. My friends who run IE won't get it.
Christian
· 1 year ago
So it's exactly like having yubnub.org in your browser then? (and yubnub is awesome) Only it seems a bit harder to create custom commands. Nice idea though, and am sure it will catch on amongst the 'passionates' once the bugs and quirks are ironed out.
I do think this kind of this - Command Line interfaces for the web - is the first step towards Web OS. But who knows what a GUI would look like?
Allan
· 1 year ago
Just one question...
How many passionates were there 3 years ago, 2 years ago...
I think the language between machines and humans will eventually converge in a middle ground between natural and syntaxy. Ubiquity seems like a very flexible, open and accessible awesome first step.
Vinodh Nandakumar
· 1 year ago
UbiQ blows my mind away. Have been playing around with it all day. Just hoping that they imprve usability in the coming versions.
Tweeting from UbiQ is a breeze, I'm guessing this is going to increase load on Twitter APIs like crazy!
Dario Salvelli
· 1 year ago
I think that it's amazing. Is this the future of browsing?
Scott
· 1 year ago
I can't think of any reason that I would have used IE8 for anyway other than making sure my CSS and JS works for it and figuring out what hacks I would need to do to make it work. Anyway, Ubiquity is awesome. I can see a lot of potential for it and am already imagining a dozen commands that I could add to it. It has a lot of features that could make web development and testing easier. I'm looking forward to working with it and developing for it.
Dawn
· 1 year ago
Somebody else download it on my computer, show me how it works and maybe I'll get passionate. I just don't like having to figure things out. I once let a clock radio I purchased sit in the box for three months until my husband came back from sea and could set it for me.
Now that my husband has passed away, my clocks on the microwave and the stove just blink, my clock in the car is an hour off, and I can't use the our digital camera because I don't know how to charge it or get pictures from it into the computer.
I'm not stupid. I was Valedictorian of my high school and have an MBA which I received with honors. I use all kinds of software and have even designed a few applications by telling developers what I want done. I'm just not a task person. I don't like reading manuals, directions, etc. for gadgety things. I won't do it.
I think that's the key to understanding nonpassionates. The truth is we ARE passionate, we just need more help to get there. OR, better yet, make it so intuitive that we don't have to read a manual to figure it out.
Michael
· 1 year ago
Dawn, I'm confused. Can you explain more what you mean by not being a 'task person'? After all, I also find it daunting to read massive manuals on new gadgets and things - I remember it took me ages to work my minidisc player years ago - but if I want to drive a car, I'll take lessons, if you see what I mean?
I don't think everything can be intuitive - some very important things are complicated, like nuclear power plants. I think that it's about being happy to try new things and invest time, rather than just waiting for it to hit the mainstream. It's like my parents - they're scared of operating the video because they don't like figuring out how it works, but if they want to record something, they'll do it reluctantly, and they'll do it better next time. But they're not passionate about it - they'll say "aahhhh, that's handy" when it works, but I don't think they're passionate. So I'd agree with Scoble's divide.
Dawn
· 1 year ago
Michael, I really don't know how to explain it. I'm just not gadget inclined. If something comes with a lot of buttons, I don't want it.
Funny that you mentioned nuclear power plants. My husband was a Navy Nuke (reactor operator) for 8 years and he wound up working for Intel. But I was better at using software than he was. He was great at hardware, which I don't even like to mess with.
It's something to do with the brain's wiring I think, but I'm no expert, so I'm not sure I can explain it. I do read lots of nonfiction books (business) but I don't do manuals. I can force my brain to go there when I have to, like somebody is paying me to do so, but I won't on my own time. Even if I want to record something. :)
Maybe the key is in your car example where you said you'd take lessons. So would I. I wouldn't read a book to learn how to drive. I don't want to read instructions to learn how to use Ubiquity. Like I said in my previous post, show me how it works.
You know, I never thought of it this way, but maybe that's why I like Robert and read this blog, even though I'm not a techie. Robert shows me stuff. I want to see it used and hear about how it's being used and then maybe use it myself if I think it's useful or fun. I don't want to read an instruction book about it.
Dawn
· 1 year ago
btw, this conversation has made me decide something. When my site launches, I want TWO instructional videos. One for the passionates and another for the nonpassionates. :)
wavey davie
· 1 year ago
I love what Ubiquity does, even though I haven't downloaded it. I tried earlier when I found some time but found out I needed FF3. So out went FF2 and now I'm downloading Ubiquity. Sounds like I'm a non-passionate doesn't it? I like to think I'm a passionate but with OCD and a bad memory problem it just never seems to work out :-(
Alan Le
· 1 year ago
I think IE8's Activities feature empowers web developer to empower their sites for their users. Mozilla Ubiquity let the end-users empower themselves. I prefer the later.
@Dawn, I don't think you're "passionate" if you need someone to download, install and show it for you. Passion comes with the initiative and desire to try it yourself. Scoble is right; Ubiquity is not for what he refers to as "non-passionate" people.
Dawn
· 1 year ago
Alan: Maybe you're right, but then again, I'm passionate about ripe tomatoes but I don't grow them myself. And I've known lots of couples who were friends before they became passionate about each other.
Seems to me that to expect passion on the frontend limits products more than they might otherwise need to be. I think Activewords has it right. That's something I'm actually using because of their babysteps approach. They didn't expect me to be passionate immediately. It worked.
I don't like the word "non-passionate" anyway. I'm a very passionate person. It's misleading and would likely offend people outside the tech world. Seems to me that to imply somebody isn't passionate, just because they don't like the kinds of things I like, is a bias seeking an -ism label.
Why can't we just say geek and nongeek. "Geek" is no longer an offensive term, right? Or is it?
David Geller
· 1 year ago
Ubiquity looks impressive. I like your mention of ActiveWords too. Conceivably, ActiveWords would let you build Ubquity-like experiences across all our apps - not just FF, but IE, Outlook, etc. You're right too about suggesting MSFT buy them. It makes so much sense for ActiveWords to be a built-in component of Windows that everyone can use. Imagine all the useful things that could be built if everyone had it at their disposal.
dccrowley
· 1 year ago
I am taking every chance I get to show Ubiquity to anyone who cares to see it. That is for me a litmus test that it's amazingly useful.
Pete Weldon
· 1 year ago
OK, Buzz is "Mr. Outside" for ActiveWords but I am compelled to speak here.
First, ActiveWords is truly ubiquitous, not “Ubiquity for Firefox.” ActiveWords provides system wide functionality that acts on text entry (and stylus/fingertip entry on Tablet/UMPC now, and hopefully voice in the future).
Second, many have tried to set up fixed word – action “languages” but almost no users have made the investment to adopt them. ActiveWords offers each user the opportunity to define their own word – action relationships using their vocabulary and innate ability to name things. For those needing a fixed structure, ActiveWords can be locked down to fix these relationships for sets of users.
Third, how do these user defined word – action relationships fit together? The preferred answer is based on the personal semantic preferences of each user. ActiveWords allows the user to use the same ActiveWord for multiple actions and multiple ActiveWords for the same action. Over time, the user self organizes these semantic relationships.
Fourth, ActiveWords is extensible. It includes agent technology allowing third parties to create actions and suggested semantics (ActiveWords) to trigger events. Creating an ActiveWord agent that interfaces with Google APIs can duplicate everything demonstrated with “Ubiquity for Firefox,” and it can do so independent of a Firefox context (in any context or no context at all). For example, the actions of sending an email to Bob and inserting a Google map of a particular address can be triggered by one or more ActiveWords whenever the user thinks of it, not just when they are composing a new message in gmail.
Fifth, what if I use multiple computers and grow accustomed to word – action functionality? The ActiveWords personal data store is readily transferable between Windows computers and will someday be “in the cloud,” ready whenever you are on whatever computing device you happen to be using at the moment.
We continue to hope that projects such as “Ubiquity for Firefox” will spread the power and gospel of the word – action interface, ActiveWords. The productivity implications are important. The less time you are “computing” the more opportunity you have to create something of value.
So I tried it, and I think it will be very useful. I'm a passionate, but I'm an average geek looking for the useful, rather than the uber geek who will adopt anything. I can see how this might really produce material that's useful for the person who receives it rather than just fun for the person who creates it.
Troy Malone
· 1 year ago
This is like looking at the first model-A. Something big is happening here. At first blush, it is not that impressive or a big event, but I do see this in the next few years becoming a major thing. Someone will come along and connect the dots with regard to the interface and make it into something that people will use.
It reminds me of the mouse. At first, the mouse was a weird device that only a few people used. "how could you not use the keyboard for everything?" was the word of the day...here we go again. I am excited...
Terri Barrons
· 1 year ago
The simple fact is that Ubiquity merely brings a stripped down version of the functionality of applications like Launchy or Find and Run Robot to the browser.
There is nothing new about a command-line launcher. They've been around for years. And 90% of what Ubiquity is promising can be accomplished with tools that are already available.
Ubiquity users are Early Adopters? Hardly. More like just catching on.
BTW: Acting like an ill-informed snob is not the same thing as being passionate. (Besides, we have Penn Gillette anytime we want to listen to that sort of nonsense.)
Smare Johannson
· 1 year ago
> Why hasn’t Microsoft purchased ActiveWords?
Come one, I appreciate that you feel the constant need to support your Activewords buddy but you can answer that one to yourself as you worked for Microsoft:
Activewords has not a single useful patent, it has not a single unique idea and there are and were dozens of programs which do/did the same before and are even free or open-source. Microsoft could do such thing in a snap if they really want to. There would be no value in a acquisition.
2. Autohotkey (Open Source and kind of geeky but very powerful scripting for the tekkies)
3. Direct Accelerator (Smart .NET user interface but a memory hog)
4. Ghost Typer XML ...
5. Launchy for the program launcher part
And so on.
--
Ubiquity looks fancy in the video but I doubt that users will find the right trigger words to do what they want to do. You need to know exactly what you 'can' type but I will certainly check it out at v0.9 :-)
Smare from Sweden
Arjun Singh
· 1 year ago
I started to hear the buzz about ubiquity earlier today on twitter. Ok, so I read some of the blog posts and web pages about it. It sounded really interesting. Then I thought to myself, how powerful my iphone is, and how easy it generally is to use. And I put my ubiquity research on hold and went on with my busy, passionate life. Ubiquity might have a lot of uses for me, and I am probably shooting myself in the foot for not trying it, but dont want to spend the time. Maybe thats human nature, maybe thats just waiting to see if it comes back on to my radar again.
Marcus
· 1 year ago
FYI: the new feature in IE8 formally known as "Activities" has been renamed to "Accelerators."
I'm re-posting from that train wreck over at Mashable. That's my last comment over there for a while. My comments on the video will go to your pay gig website shortly.
So... [snip]
Somewhere along the way, you became and are now a meta-reference (like it or not). [theme song to Fame plays softly in the background]
The passionate vs. non-passionate thing just made lose my patience with all of this when is was sucked into a Ubiquity discussion.
My take on it was that it was "Ubiquity is like Greasemonkey and Quicksilver and Enso all put into a blender with a shot of Mozilla protein powder. Slick!" [1]
I know a lot of very passionate users that don't use Firefox. Yes. Shocking. They use Safari. They use IE. Opera! Yet, they still manage to run circles around most of what you appear to classify as "non-passionates".
People that are mono-thinker-platform tend to be asses when they are viewed by the larger community. We all know one. Heck, we might be one in certain areas. It's a bit like snobbery but uniquely finicky and frankly... (p)assionate.
-Jay
[1] I too am prone to assery.
Michael
· 1 year ago
Hi Dawn - actually, that makes a lot of sense, thank you - good examples :) I think it could be 'interest-based' - I like food, but wouldn't want to read a gardening manual (can't I just put the seeds in the ground?). Similarly, I'd rather watch the news on TV than read it in a newspaper. But - if I bought a new PC game, I'd happily read the manual - and it actually puts me off buying when a game doesn't come with one (yes, thank you The Witcher team. Enormous RPG, manual in .pdf. Well done, you've spoiled it all).
So I don't think 'passionate / nonpassionate' is a suitable term either. And I don't think it's geek / nongeek either (I still think geek has offensive connotations here in the UK) because that also still implies technology, and I think we're looking at something wider.
sarahlane22
· 1 year ago
I love firefox I would never use anything else!
Yoshi
· 1 year ago
Microsoft could make Activewords by themselve if they want but they do not want to destroy the utility market. And Activewords look very Windows 95.
Yoshio
Brent
· 1 year ago
Please do not encourage Microsoft to buy Active Words. That will be the end of innovation for Active Words. Do you really want a VistaActiveWords? Really? No, really????!!!!!
Thomas
· 1 year ago
Thanks for the Ubiquity tip. I am a passionate and will look into it!
HansVB [MSFT]
· 1 year ago
Office also faced the challenge of giving access to too many commands through one UI. They developed the ribbon. This is just another way to try to overcome the same challenge. I prefer an idea like accelerators in IE8 more but I can understand that some people will prefer a keyboard driven command center. There have always been those who like to click and those who prefered typing.
Blake
· 1 year ago
I don't understand how this is much different from something like Quicksilver or Butler.
erich13
· 1 year ago
ActiveWords is a built-in in Mac OS X, using Cmd-spacebar to initiate.
erich13
· 1 year ago
Also, a browser addon called Hyperwords adds this hypertexting feature of ActiveWords to web pages, and Hyperwords is authoring a Windows version also.
Thomas Beek
· 1 year ago
The mail functionality did not work. I use Firefox 3.x on a Mac OS X (Leopard). I type in "mail this to amy" and it does not find her in my contacts, or anyone else for that matter. Also, since installing Ubiquity I am no longer logged-in to my Google Bookmarks. Arg!
I REALLY rely on my Google Bookmarks, so bye-bye Ubiquity until this bug is fixed.
Andy Freeman
· 1 year ago
Yawn. Emacs did this years ago.
No, emacs doesn't handle images all that well, but given all the other things that it does (browsing was just a minor add-in) ....
Ari Herzog
· 1 year ago
I'm curious why you suggest Ubiquity and products like it currently out and those in development to launch in the future aren't intended for "non-passionate internet users."
The popular opinion looking at the future of the internet (or whatever we're going to call it in 10+ years) is that everything without a digital signature today will be connected by then. So, someone won't be given the choice of a red pill or a blue pill but be asked to choose to live within the world or live in a bubble.
Rather than suggesting this product is for a segment of society, wouldn't you be better regarded (and the product receive greater support) if everyone embraced it and not a passionate few?
All Comments
I think you'd call me passionate - I've submitted bugs for Firefox, I've written plug-ins for it, and my particular installation is quite customized. Heck, I've even written books about it. But I don't (yet) see a use for Ubiquity.
Why? Because it doesn't solve any problems I need solved.
For example, the first two examples they give in the instructions are searching Wikipedia and searching Google for a selection. The latter is already built into Firefox and requires nothing but a right click, and the former is easily solved with a search keyword. I've taken it a step further and have Quicksilver set up so I can click shift-control-W to pop up a Wikipedia search box, even if I'm not currently in a browser.
I'm sure there are people out there who use Activewords for exactly the same thing and wonder why they'd need a browser command line.
I realize it has potential far beyond that, but the thing about us passionate users is that we don't use something for its own sake. We use it because it makes our life better, or more efficient. Eventually I'll have a problem that Ubiquity is the perfect solution for, but for now it's just yet another unnecessary command line with a confusing muddle of beta-quality features attached.
Ubiquity looks a lot like a browser-specific version of Quicksilver, which is intriguing, but I'm hoping the real Quicksilver will continue to evolve so I don't need a tool like Ubiquity that is tied to a particular browser.
I do think this kind of this - Command Line interfaces for the web - is the first step towards Web OS. But who knows what a GUI would look like?
How many passionates were there 3 years ago, 2 years ago...
I think the language between machines and humans will eventually converge in a middle ground between natural and syntaxy. Ubiquity seems like a very flexible, open and accessible awesome first step.
Tweeting from UbiQ is a breeze, I'm guessing this is going to increase load on Twitter APIs like crazy!
Now that my husband has passed away, my clocks on the microwave and the stove just blink, my clock in the car is an hour off, and I can't use the our digital camera because I don't know how to charge it or get pictures from it into the computer.
I'm not stupid. I was Valedictorian of my high school and have an MBA which I received with honors. I use all kinds of software and have even designed a few applications by telling developers what I want done. I'm just not a task person. I don't like reading manuals, directions, etc. for gadgety things. I won't do it.
I think that's the key to understanding nonpassionates. The truth is we ARE passionate, we just need more help to get there. OR, better yet, make it so intuitive that we don't have to read a manual to figure it out.
I don't think everything can be intuitive - some very important things are complicated, like nuclear power plants. I think that it's about being happy to try new things and invest time, rather than just waiting for it to hit the mainstream. It's like my parents - they're scared of operating the video because they don't like figuring out how it works, but if they want to record something, they'll do it reluctantly, and they'll do it better next time. But they're not passionate about it - they'll say "aahhhh, that's handy" when it works, but I don't think they're passionate. So I'd agree with Scoble's divide.
Funny that you mentioned nuclear power plants. My husband was a Navy Nuke (reactor operator) for 8 years and he wound up working for Intel. But I was better at using software than he was. He was great at hardware, which I don't even like to mess with.
It's something to do with the brain's wiring I think, but I'm no expert, so I'm not sure I can explain it. I do read lots of nonfiction books (business) but I don't do manuals. I can force my brain to go there when I have to, like somebody is paying me to do so, but I won't on my own time. Even if I want to record something. :)
Maybe the key is in your car example where you said you'd take lessons. So would I. I wouldn't read a book to learn how to drive. I don't want to read instructions to learn how to use Ubiquity. Like I said in my previous post, show me how it works.
You know, I never thought of it this way, but maybe that's why I like Robert and read this blog, even though I'm not a techie. Robert shows me stuff. I want to see it used and hear about how it's being used and then maybe use it myself if I think it's useful or fun. I don't want to read an instruction book about it.
@Dawn, I don't think you're "passionate" if you need someone to download, install and show it for you. Passion comes with the initiative and desire to try it yourself. Scoble is right; Ubiquity is not for what he refers to as "non-passionate" people.
Seems to me that to expect passion on the frontend limits products more than they might otherwise need to be. I think Activewords has it right. That's something I'm actually using because of their babysteps approach. They didn't expect me to be passionate immediately. It worked.
I don't like the word "non-passionate" anyway. I'm a very passionate person. It's misleading and would likely offend people outside the tech world. Seems to me that to imply somebody isn't passionate, just because they don't like the kinds of things I like, is a bias seeking an -ism label.
Why can't we just say geek and nongeek. "Geek" is no longer an offensive term, right? Or is it?
First, ActiveWords is truly ubiquitous, not “Ubiquity for Firefox.” ActiveWords provides system wide functionality that acts on text entry (and stylus/fingertip entry on Tablet/UMPC now, and hopefully voice in the future).
Second, many have tried to set up fixed word – action “languages” but almost no users have made the investment to adopt them. ActiveWords offers each user the opportunity to define their own word – action relationships using their vocabulary and innate ability to name things. For those needing a fixed structure, ActiveWords can be locked down to fix these relationships for sets of users.
Third, how do these user defined word – action relationships fit together? The preferred answer is based on the personal semantic preferences of each user. ActiveWords allows the user to use the same ActiveWord for multiple actions and multiple ActiveWords for the same action. Over time, the user self organizes these semantic relationships.
Fourth, ActiveWords is extensible. It includes agent technology allowing third parties to create actions and suggested semantics (ActiveWords) to trigger events. Creating an ActiveWord agent that interfaces with Google APIs can duplicate everything demonstrated with “Ubiquity for Firefox,” and it can do so independent of a Firefox context (in any context or no context at all). For example, the actions of sending an email to Bob and inserting a Google map of a particular address can be triggered by one or more ActiveWords whenever the user thinks of it, not just when they are composing a new message in gmail.
Fifth, what if I use multiple computers and grow accustomed to word – action functionality? The ActiveWords personal data store is readily transferable between Windows computers and will someday be “in the cloud,” ready whenever you are on whatever computing device you happen to be using at the moment.
We continue to hope that projects such as “Ubiquity for Firefox” will spread the power and gospel of the word – action interface, ActiveWords. The productivity implications are important. The less time you are “computing” the more opportunity you have to create something of value.
Pete Weldon
ActiveWord Systems, Inc.
www.activewords.com
It reminds me of the mouse. At first, the mouse was a weird device that only a few people used. "how could you not use the keyboard for everything?" was the word of the day...here we go again. I am excited...
There is nothing new about a command-line launcher. They've been around for years. And 90% of what Ubiquity is promising can be accomplished with tools that are already available.
Ubiquity users are Early Adopters? Hardly. More like just catching on.
BTW: Acting like an ill-informed snob is not the same thing as being passionate. (Besides, we have Penn Gillette anytime we want to listen to that sort of nonsense.)
Come one, I appreciate that you feel the constant need to support your Activewords buddy but you can answer that one to yourself as you worked for Microsoft:
Activewords has not a single useful patent, it has not a single unique idea and there are and were dozens of programs which do/did the same before and are even free or open-source. Microsoft could do such thing in a snap if they really want to. There would be no value in a acquisition.
Examples?
1. PhraseExpress (My favourite. The video demo is a must: http://www.phraseexpress.com/demo.htm )
2. Autohotkey (Open Source and kind of geeky but very powerful scripting for the tekkies)
3. Direct Accelerator (Smart .NET user interface but a memory hog)
4. Ghost Typer XML ...
5. Launchy for the program launcher part
And so on.
--
Ubiquity looks fancy in the video but I doubt that users will find the right trigger words to do what they want to do. You need to know exactly what you 'can' type but I will certainly check it out at v0.9 :-)
Smare from Sweden
Here's the new add-on site: http://www.ieaddons.com/en/accelerators/
I'm re-posting from that train wreck over at Mashable. That's my last comment over there for a while. My comments on the video will go to your pay gig website shortly.
So... [snip]
Somewhere along the way, you became and are now a meta-reference (like it or not). [theme song to Fame plays softly in the background]
The passionate vs. non-passionate thing just made lose my patience with all of this when is was sucked into a Ubiquity discussion.
My take on it was that it was "Ubiquity is like Greasemonkey and Quicksilver and Enso all put into a blender with a shot of Mozilla protein powder. Slick!" [1]
http://twitter.com/qthrul/sta tuses/900109207
I know a lot of very passionate users that don't use Firefox. Yes. Shocking. They use Safari. They use IE. Opera! Yet, they still manage to run circles around most of what you appear to classify as "non-passionates".
People that are mono-thinker-platform tend to be asses when they are viewed by the larger community. We all know one. Heck, we might be one in certain areas. It's a bit like snobbery but uniquely finicky and frankly... (p)assionate.
-Jay
[1] I too am prone to assery.
So I don't think 'passionate / nonpassionate' is a suitable term either. And I don't think it's geek / nongeek either (I still think geek has offensive connotations here in the UK) because that also still implies technology, and I think we're looking at something wider.
Yoshio
This is just another way to try to overcome the same challenge.
I prefer an idea like accelerators in IE8 more but I can understand that some people will prefer a keyboard driven command center.
There have always been those who like to click and those who prefered typing.
I REALLY rely on my Google Bookmarks, so bye-bye Ubiquity until this bug is fixed.
No, emacs doesn't handle images all that well, but given all the other things that it does (browsing was just a minor add-in) ....
The popular opinion looking at the future of the internet (or whatever we're going to call it in 10+ years) is that everything without a digital signature today will be connected by then. So, someone won't be given the choice of a red pill or a blue pill but be asked to choose to live within the world or live in a bubble.
Rather than suggesting this product is for a segment of society, wouldn't you be better regarded (and the product receive greater support) if everyone embraced it and not a passionate few?