Curious readers might appreciate another "monstrosity" for it's time, the SS Great Eastern, which was built nearly 100 years before the SS United States:
Replace language with an actually sensible one, and press any key to continue!
If nothing else, that is a truly sadistic trivia question. I wonder if there are any other words in the English language whose plural form is spelled the same, but pronounced differently.
I think all the others that do this are loanwords from French? We keep the silent s at the end in the singular, and make it audible in the plural - faux pas, corps, précis, etc.
There are a bunch of other heteronyms, but I can't think of others that differ specifically in the plural
If you want to take the weirdness a step further, just look at the plural for "woman". When you write "women" you only change the second vowel, but when you pronounce that same word you only change the first.
It is a french word and it is inherently plural, sort of like pants, by my best guess, having only looked it up just now, singuler chassis would be a case.
So chassis, the thing full of parts, case, same thing but without the parts?
Based on the etymology, I suspect the singular of chassis is case. Nobody uses it like that. But you would perhaps use chassis when it is full of parts or as an item that could be full of parts and case when empty or the parts don't matter.
Surprisingly enough, despite nobody using it like this, it works well, except for cars, where the singular form would be frame(car case just does not work), which does not share the same root and as such is a bit disappointing.
And what is also disapointing, despite the word already being plural(a french spelling of latin pluralization rules for case, use the latin soft c for case and add an i to pluralize, under french rules "is", the s is silent), When there are several chassis, we use the english pluralization rules and add an s. And because there is already an s we just add an s sound.
In a civil society, I expect swift justice and a fair trial more so than individual violence dispensers, but logistics being what they are...we're stuck with individual violence dispensers.
My wife and I both agree that we miss DVD menus. They felt like artistic expressions made with pride (in some cases). New movies would come out and break the mold and deliver a new flashy menu experience. I looked forward to popping in a new DVD and hoping, pleading to the universe, please...give me a great DVD menu! Mini-games, Easter eggs, and the like...
Pages with personality like that are not just examples of how bad UX can be, they are examples of how UX can be used as an artistic form of self-expression.
Even commercial design was interesting and eye-catching back then.
Print designers were adapting to the web and there was a tremendous amount of technique, experience and hard work in that first batch.
Then the dictatorship of the sameness started, and we somehow ended in a world where everything kinda looks the same but is slightly different in slightly broken ways. Creativity be damned, but also other things like performance, accessibility and user-centricity are now secondary to following fashions.
A lot of smaller organizations really struggle to collaborate with their software teams. Collaboration is hard, in general, but especially so if the organization isn't fluent and competent in software product development. Before you go diving into the psychology of your sad and despondent software team, look around them. Are the people working with them capable of supporting and engaging with these engineers?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Eastern