Difference between revisions of "Talk:1945: Scientific Paper Graph Quality"
(add comment) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
An interesting thing to note is that you can see from this chart that even slightly before the paint/powerpoint era the quality started going down. But it could be because this graph is meant to be just like the point it is making and therefore is not 100% accurate. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.76|108.162.219.76]] 17:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC) | An interesting thing to note is that you can see from this chart that even slightly before the paint/powerpoint era the quality started going down. But it could be because this graph is meant to be just like the point it is making and therefore is not 100% accurate. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.76|108.162.219.76]] 17:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | You might find http://www.norvig.com/Gettysburg/ amusing. It is the Gettysburg Address done as a PowerPoint presentation. | ||
| + | [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.154|108.162.216.154]] 18:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC) Gene Wirchenko [email protected] | ||
Revision as of 18:55, 22 January 2018
What happened circa 2015 that marks the *end* of the PowerPoint/MSPaint era? 108.162.238.59 16:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
--> More and more journals explicitly forbade the use of powerpoint. Also, more scientists are familiar with software better suited for creating scientific graphs. Thawn (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
An interesting thing to note is that you can see from this chart that even slightly before the paint/powerpoint era the quality started going down. But it could be because this graph is meant to be just like the point it is making and therefore is not 100% accurate. 108.162.219.76 17:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
You might find http://www.norvig.com/Gettysburg/ amusing. It is the Gettysburg Address done as a PowerPoint presentation. 108.162.216.154 18:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC) Gene Wirchenko [email protected]
