Maybe I'm confused, but many of these posts give far too much power to the HR department. In my experience, the only thing HR does is all the paperwork AFTER department managers have reviewed resumes and picked out potential applicants. HR doesn't do ANYTHING dealing with vetting resumes (other than maybe making sure they are in the appropriate format?) and they don't make any decisions whatsoever about who gets an interview or not.
Err...who in their right mind puts a SSN on an job application?!?!
Somebody trying to get a job in a field that requires a SSN? Maybe I'm in the wrong field, but I've had to supply my SSN at every job I've held in the past 20 years...something to do with illegal immigration and that sort of thing?
Not to dig up an old argument, but that article you linked is ridiculous. I hadn't seen it before. To be brief, nothing in that the iPhone ads is not doable with good 3G connections, and I've duplicated the same things myself. That remains the main strength of Apple ads--they are one of the few tech ads out there that actually show the product being used as the work in real life (sure, with optimization and lots of use threads and rehearsal, but still, the device is fully capable of doing what is shown). Other products can't actually show you how well they work, because they'd have to work well to start with, and most don't work well at all--thus, they just don't show it being used and instead show Beyonce or some other celebrity pretending to use the device. Sorry, had to vent--again, the linked story you posted really peeves me.
"Worst" is a superlative of "bad". That would suggest that having your finger pushed in ink and smudged on paper is somehow really awful, which I'm not buying.
Complexity doesn't necessarily mean likely to fail.
Having more moving parts (mechanical) or complex code may not mean likely to fail, but definitely increases the likelihood of failure, if that makes sense. Moving from less likely to more likely doesn't mean likely.
While we are at it, we should ban mug shots! Those give away vital private information, such as what your face looks like! But in all seriousness, until the average Joe has a way to a) steal your DNA from a data bank, b) read the data in your DNA, and c) exploit it, there is nothing to see here.
Installation time is a good indication of system complexity. The more complex the install, the more likely something is to not work correctly. At least that's been my experience with every install from Win95-WinXP. Mouse clicks is interesting. I think the last OSX install I did was three mouse clicks. More importantly, they were at the beginning, so you are free to go off and do other things and not baby sit "next" buttons.
Unless something has changed from XP to Win7, this line has me scratching my head:
Boot up time was also measured from the moment the machine was turned on, and the timer was stopped as soon as the desktop was reached.
Anyone who has ever used WinXP knows that you can't really do anything until all the services and task bar things have loaded. You still have several seconds (20-30 on my machine) once the desktop appears before you can actually do anything.
Ok, let's discuss then. If you don't like the EULA, then don't use the product. The "A" in EULA stands for "agreement". If you don't agree, don't use it. I get the whole nerdy discussion site, but THIS particular kind of story gets far too much attention relative to the seriousness of the issue.
If you don't like it, don't use it? Bitching and moaning about it on this site isn't going to change anything, unless somebody can link me to a story where slashdot contributions actually made a difference?
It's standard practice that when companies release a new version, they tell you how much better it is than the previous version. Just as how with Apple, for years PPC was great, but as soon as they switched to Intel, it was "Buy me, I'm Intel".
The parallel is off because you are equating normal marketing practices of companies to get you to THINK the next product is better when it is just new, but in Apple's case, it was indeed better.
Who gives a fuck whether you needed to upgrade or not?
I answered with "So" because it is really a stupid thing to judge the value of a computer on. If you need to upgrade your video card every 6-months, then the video-game industry thanks you. Otherwise, like my post said, a 9-year old Radeon AGP stock video card works great.
Then again, maybe its a given that there is a huge advantage that a large chunk of games are released on the PC vs the Mac making the video card upgrade option useless for most Mac users.
I can play every current PC game on my iMac booted up in XP, and my iMac is going on two years old.
I've yet to be impressed by the Mac. On my friends Macbook pro (core duo (!c2d) 2.0ghz 2gb ram), you cant even play two Youtube HD streams simultaneously and he paid like 2300 bucks for it in 2006. I'm not even kidding... the audio stutters like hell on HD (no its not buffering, its stuttering).
If the price of a PC that has specs at least X and can upgrade the video card is $1500, and a Mac is $2500, then the Mac is $1000 more expensive
You are bemoaning the lack Apple products at some arbitrary price-point, not the fact that Macs are more expensive. When a Mac with specs of at least X is $2500, and a Dell with the pretty much the same specs is $3200, then the Mac is not $1000 more expensive.
Yes, Apple has some holes, but for MOST users, the iMac line at $1200 and up suits most needs at similar price points from the competition for the same stuff. I guess the only thing missing would be a stand-alone tower without a monitor, so people with monitors could jump into a Mac for a couple hundred less, but not be hampered by the small form factor of the mini.
The article clearly states that there will be TWO editions: Windows 7 Home Premium, and Windows 7 Professional. This mirrors XP's Home and Pro editions.
The "other four" editions are for specifically targeted markets, like the Starter edition for low-end 3rd world machines, and the Home Basic edition probably destined for netbooks and the like.
So what you are saying is that there really are six editions, even though you only want to acknowledge two?
the only difference now is that a user doesn't HAVE TO PAY the high price for ultimate if they dont want the features.
the can decide to upgrade later, pop in the dvd, upgrade IN PLACE and even try it out for 30 days without paying for the upgrade.
then they can simply go to MS's website, use the anytime upgrade program and pay for their upgrade.
no mess, no fuss, no screwing around.
I guess you and I have vastly different opinions about the meaning of "no mess, no fuss, no screwing around". What you've described is NOTHING BUT fuss, mess and screwing around. First the user has to compare feature sets to see what they want, versus what they are willing to pay, then they go to some site to unlock the 30-day trial, then if they like that, they dig up an additional serial number, pay more money, put that number in, sit through (probably hours) of "upgrades" and countless reboots... All of this they could have avoided if Win7 just came with one option, like OSX does. You put the DVD in and you hit Ok a couple times and then you have an OS in about 20 minutes--the same OS that everybody else gets, all for $129.
There's a simple concept that complexity adds costs, and as a technology trainer, Microsoft consistently gives me real-world examples to demonstrate this problem.
The cheapest Mac in which you can do something as simple as upgrade the video card is $2,499.
So? Most people will never upgrade a video card. I have a G4 tower with an upgradeable video card (albeit limited to AGP), and I've never had the need to in NINE years. I think it's time to move beyond the teenage mentality of "a computer is only as awesome as the frames-per-second rate in Doom!"
You still need hardware to run Windows7. Just because you can get some no-name brand for cheaper doesn't make Windows7 is cheaper than OSX. So in reality, did Windows7 Ultimate only cost $399?
Hypothetical: $1200 Macbook comes with Leopard. I buy Snow-leopard for $130 next year. I paid $400 Windows7 and put it on my $700 Dell. $1330 vs. $1100. Is $230 really that much money to convince somebody to use a Microsoft product, just because of the perception that Apple hardware lock-in is expensive? The price gap disappears with more computers, as you are not required to purchase multiple licenses of OSX to run on multiple machines, like you most likely will with Win7.
It's right in line with the mentality of MS fans. Lots of little features to compare/contrast and vague little options (carrots) to dangle. It's so much fun being an MS consumer, look at all the control I have, unlike the lack of options I get with OSX! Microsoft understands ME and what I want in a computer!
Slashdot Mirror
You mean you aren't already drunk before you get there? Ur doin' it wrong.
You can always get drunk...most contracts aren't enforceable if one party is incapacitated.
Maybe I'm confused, but many of these posts give far too much power to the HR department. In my experience, the only thing HR does is all the paperwork AFTER department managers have reviewed resumes and picked out potential applicants. HR doesn't do ANYTHING dealing with vetting resumes (other than maybe making sure they are in the appropriate format?) and they don't make any decisions whatsoever about who gets an interview or not.
Err...who in their right mind puts a SSN on an job application?!?!
Somebody trying to get a job in a field that requires a SSN? Maybe I'm in the wrong field, but I've had to supply my SSN at every job I've held in the past 20 years...something to do with illegal immigration and that sort of thing?
A legitimate copy of Photoshop CS4 stopped functioning after we clobbered a nagging registration screen by replacing a DLL with a hacked version.
Draconian, really? Hack something and it stops functioning? Seriously?
Not to dig up an old argument, but that article you linked is ridiculous. I hadn't seen it before. To be brief, nothing in that the iPhone ads is not doable with good 3G connections, and I've duplicated the same things myself. That remains the main strength of Apple ads--they are one of the few tech ads out there that actually show the product being used as the work in real life (sure, with optimization and lots of use threads and rehearsal, but still, the device is fully capable of doing what is shown). Other products can't actually show you how well they work, because they'd have to work well to start with, and most don't work well at all--thus, they just don't show it being used and instead show Beyonce or some other celebrity pretending to use the device. Sorry, had to vent--again, the linked story you posted really peeves me.
Leave it up to a math nerd to not understand grammar.
I'm suggesting that Microsoft has a long-standing history that makes me very cynical that Windows7 will be any different.
The first time was the worst
"Worst" is a superlative of "bad". That would suggest that having your finger pushed in ink and smudged on paper is somehow really awful, which I'm not buying.
Complexity doesn't necessarily mean likely to fail.
Having more moving parts (mechanical) or complex code may not mean likely to fail, but definitely increases the likelihood of failure, if that makes sense. Moving from less likely to more likely doesn't mean likely.
While we are at it, we should ban mug shots! Those give away vital private information, such as what your face looks like! But in all seriousness, until the average Joe has a way to a) steal your DNA from a data bank, b) read the data in your DNA, and c) exploit it, there is nothing to see here.
...so that drivers can tattle on assholes who think the rules don't apply to them
Fixed that one for you.
Installation time is a good indication of system complexity. The more complex the install, the more likely something is to not work correctly. At least that's been my experience with every install from Win95-WinXP. Mouse clicks is interesting. I think the last OSX install I did was three mouse clicks. More importantly, they were at the beginning, so you are free to go off and do other things and not baby sit "next" buttons.
Boot up time was also measured from the moment the machine was turned on, and the timer was stopped as soon as the desktop was reached.
Anyone who has ever used WinXP knows that you can't really do anything until all the services and task bar things have loaded. You still have several seconds (20-30 on my machine) once the desktop appears before you can actually do anything.
Ok, let's discuss then. If you don't like the EULA, then don't use the product. The "A" in EULA stands for "agreement". If you don't agree, don't use it. I get the whole nerdy discussion site, but THIS particular kind of story gets far too much attention relative to the seriousness of the issue.
If you don't like it, don't use it? Bitching and moaning about it on this site isn't going to change anything, unless somebody can link me to a story where slashdot contributions actually made a difference?
It's standard practice that when companies release a new version, they tell you how much better it is than the previous version. Just as how with Apple, for years PPC was great, but as soon as they switched to Intel, it was "Buy me, I'm Intel".
The parallel is off because you are equating normal marketing practices of companies to get you to THINK the next product is better when it is just new, but in Apple's case, it was indeed better.
Who gives a fuck whether you needed to upgrade or not?
I answered with "So" because it is really a stupid thing to judge the value of a computer on. If you need to upgrade your video card every 6-months, then the video-game industry thanks you. Otherwise, like my post said, a 9-year old Radeon AGP stock video card works great.
Then again, maybe its a given that there is a huge advantage that a large chunk of games are released on the PC vs the Mac making the video card upgrade option useless for most Mac users.
I can play every current PC game on my iMac booted up in XP, and my iMac is going on two years old.
I've yet to be impressed by the Mac. On my friends Macbook pro (core duo (!c2d) 2.0ghz 2gb ram), you cant even play two Youtube HD streams simultaneously and he paid like 2300 bucks for it in 2006. I'm not even kidding... the audio stutters like hell on HD (no its not buffering, its stuttering).
Riiiiight.
If the price of a PC that has specs at least X and can upgrade the video card is $1500, and a Mac is $2500, then the Mac is $1000 more expensive
You are bemoaning the lack Apple products at some arbitrary price-point, not the fact that Macs are more expensive. When a Mac with specs of at least X is $2500, and a Dell with the pretty much the same specs is $3200, then the Mac is not $1000 more expensive.
Yes, Apple has some holes, but for MOST users, the iMac line at $1200 and up suits most needs at similar price points from the competition for the same stuff. I guess the only thing missing would be a stand-alone tower without a monitor, so people with monitors could jump into a Mac for a couple hundred less, but not be hampered by the small form factor of the mini.
Hooray for sensationalist idiot posters :P
The article clearly states that there will be TWO editions: Windows 7 Home Premium, and Windows 7 Professional. This mirrors XP's Home and Pro editions.
The "other four" editions are for specifically targeted markets, like the Starter edition for low-end 3rd world machines, and the Home Basic edition probably destined for netbooks and the like.
So what you are saying is that there really are six editions, even though you only want to acknowledge two?
the only difference now is that a user doesn't HAVE TO PAY the high price for ultimate if they dont want the features. the can decide to upgrade later, pop in the dvd, upgrade IN PLACE and even try it out for 30 days without paying for the upgrade. then they can simply go to MS's website, use the anytime upgrade program and pay for their upgrade. no mess, no fuss, no screwing around.
I guess you and I have vastly different opinions about the meaning of "no mess, no fuss, no screwing around". What you've described is NOTHING BUT fuss, mess and screwing around. First the user has to compare feature sets to see what they want, versus what they are willing to pay, then they go to some site to unlock the 30-day trial, then if they like that, they dig up an additional serial number, pay more money, put that number in, sit through (probably hours) of "upgrades" and countless reboots... All of this they could have avoided if Win7 just came with one option, like OSX does. You put the DVD in and you hit Ok a couple times and then you have an OS in about 20 minutes--the same OS that everybody else gets, all for $129.
There's a simple concept that complexity adds costs, and as a technology trainer, Microsoft consistently gives me real-world examples to demonstrate this problem.
The cheapest Mac in which you can do something as simple as upgrade the video card is $2,499.
So? Most people will never upgrade a video card. I have a G4 tower with an upgradeable video card (albeit limited to AGP), and I've never had the need to in NINE years. I think it's time to move beyond the teenage mentality of "a computer is only as awesome as the frames-per-second rate in Doom!"
You still need hardware to run Windows7. Just because you can get some no-name brand for cheaper doesn't make Windows7 is cheaper than OSX. So in reality, did Windows7 Ultimate only cost $399?
Hypothetical: $1200 Macbook comes with Leopard. I buy Snow-leopard for $130 next year. I paid $400 Windows7 and put it on my $700 Dell. $1330 vs. $1100. Is $230 really that much money to convince somebody to use a Microsoft product, just because of the perception that Apple hardware lock-in is expensive? The price gap disappears with more computers, as you are not required to purchase multiple licenses of OSX to run on multiple machines, like you most likely will with Win7.
It's right in line with the mentality of MS fans. Lots of little features to compare/contrast and vague little options (carrots) to dangle. It's so much fun being an MS consumer, look at all the control I have, unlike the lack of options I get with OSX! Microsoft understands ME and what I want in a computer!