Why not just not click on the ads instead of going through all the ad-blocking run-around "tips" offered in this (and every Flash article) thread? Screw all those ad-ons..I'll just not click the ad.
As with everything in life, you have to find the happy medium. Flash has legitimate purposes (repid e-learning development and delivery, for example) that far outweigh the risks of clicking on a rogue advert. Do I want to disable Flash to feel "safe" and prevent unpleasantries, such as flashing/blinking/buy-me ads at the cost of not being able to conduct the mandatory training module I have to complete for work?
is there a real difference between flash and silverlight?
One is controlled by a company with a long-standing and well-deserved reputation as the graphics industry leader and the other one makes second-rate office software.
...then they better get their Flash stuff together. More-and-more rapid e-learning solutions (the vast majority, I'd say) are delivered via Flash technologies. Sure, Flash gets a bad rap for the stupid blinky ads, but don't overlook the value of Flash as an Interactive Multimedia training solution. Software simulations, boring page-turning HR training, customer-service "role"-based training...mostly all done with some sort of Flash based rapid e-learning tool, such as Articulate or Captivate. Anytime a customer comes to us for deliverable e-learning, our first question is "can your run Flash, because if you can't, it's gonna cost you a lot more".
Because companies are big, stupid clumsy beasts that like to follow "processes". Fighting your boss, who is bound by corporate policies and process, will do nothing except put your boss in an awkward position, which in turn will make him reward you with a mediocre evaluation.
if there is anything in there about the company owning the rights to your work while employed there, then you don't have much recourse because they can just file it without your permission anyway as "something our team developed."
even needs to be written? It seems pretty much inferred to me, by the very definition of having a job.
"Other duties as assigned". Check closely--I bet that's in there. You are free to quit, but it wouldn't be illegal for them to fire you for not cleaning a toilet.
How is the quoted portion "not true"? Yes, his job is to develop for a company, and yes, his personal feelings are irrelevant. Your subsequent post address neither of those truths. Getting himself fired is akin to "your feelings on whether patents are broken or not" being irrelevant. And no, companies don't care if a fired or former employee's name is on the patent, because companies don't care about names.
If you worked for me and your project was done for the company, then you refused to follow the companies plans, then I'd severely discipline you. I'd actually probably just suggest you go work somewhere else. If it's that important to you, you probably aren't working in the right place in the first place.
I get tired of these sort of tactics. Fortunately, there's competition now here in Austin, so I'll be switching to AT&T with NO DVR rental fee and no cable modem rental. (But then again, their high speed internet is $10 / month more than Time Warner, but Time Warner charges $10 / month for the modem...just on principle alone I'll pay AT&T more.)
The usability argument died out thirteen years ago, when it became quite evident with Win95, that even with 13 years to copy the original Macintosh, Microsoft was never going to be able to produce an elegant user interface. 13 years after that (current day), it still holds true.
You aren't doing yourself any favor by trying to infer that I'm an idiot. Paranoia has nothing to do with the reality of MOST municipalities in America (seems my 2 posts garnering 5 scores would support the notion) are not focusing on public safety. Your points are valid, albeit the exception. I have NO problems at all with the approach your local authorities take. I have lived all over the US and MOST municipalities in the US are down-right criminal when it comes to revenue generation.
Lots of grammarians go of in a huff about things that aren't really incorrect to start with. Take judgment for example. It is also acceptable to spell it judgement. The summary itself makes the same error, complaining about misspelt, when that is a correct variant of misspelled in the English language. Mispelled would have been a more appropriate example, since it is used incorrectly more frequently, and unlike misspelt, is actually misspelled.
Misspelt is correct (British English). Then again, I'm biased, being an American having lived in the UK, I have lots of acceptable spelling variations.
If you are sweating $200 and claim that you aren't poor, then you must just be cheap. That's about as succinct as I can be, and was the entire point of my first post. I mean, I could point you to the myriad of studies showing better ROI, operating costs, productivity on the OS X side, but that would probably escalate into a he-said he-said war. I'll go with my studies (god knows I paid enough for school) and let you do the research.
Look at the price of iPod's, iPhone's, Mac Books, and their other products. They are selling them at an incredible profit.
As opposed to similar spec'd Zunes that sell for $10-$20 less than iPods. I guess that takes Microsoft out of the "incredible" profit zone and drops them into just the "great" profit zone?
I think you mistake brand-loyalty with faboyism. Brand-loyalty is earned, whereas fanboyism is an irrational/out-of-proportion affinity for something. If I've had great success with a particular company for a period of two decades, I feel safe in sticking with that company, even for twice the price and half the supposed "value" (value being a completely subjective, hence worthless, argument). BMW comes immediately to mind for me. It doesn't have to be just BMW or Apple Macintoshes, for example. It can be Fords, McDonalds, Dells, Microsofts, whatever. The difference being, some companies force a brand image upon us via marketing, and others deserve a brand-image through years of excellence.
Belittling Apple and diminishing their role simply as "fashion accessory company" discredits the rest of your otherwise decent post. It's a tired meme with no teeth. Old-ass, uncool guys like me have a couple iPods and iPhones and a few macs around the house. We are not fashion-savvy, nor do we care.
First: you miss my point entirely. I'd pay $500 more in THEORY to get a Mac with OSX, but in reality, I only have to pay $200 more (based on your figures). If you want to argue that $200 will ruin you financially, then you have nothing to apologize for being poor, other than the fact you are dropping nearly $1k on something that you can't afford
Second: Everyone knows that extra warranty coverage is always a waste of money. What you described is covered in my homeowners insurance anyway.
Third: $400 is less than the $500 theoretical dollars I said I'd spend for a computer with OSX over a computer with Vista. No, $400 does not make me sweat, unless I was paying $400 for something obscenely inferior to the cheaper product, which I'm not.
I'm not the one claiming everyone going the same speed is safer. I'm just claiming that setting up 50 cops to catch 50 people going 5 mph over the speed limit is a revenue generator and not a public safety issue. Case in point, why don't the cops patrol the frontage road you described, since that is obviously more dangerous (pedestrians, stop lights, intersections, cars turning off, and onto the road,etc)? It's easier for them to sit up on the main road and nab their revenue there.
Slashdot Mirror
Because NOBODY ever uses the word "pedantic" on slashdot to try to sound more smarturer.
Why not just not click on the ads instead of going through all the ad-blocking run-around "tips" offered in this (and every Flash article) thread? Screw all those ad-ons..I'll just not click the ad.
As with everything in life, you have to find the happy medium. Flash has legitimate purposes (repid e-learning development and delivery, for example) that far outweigh the risks of clicking on a rogue advert. Do I want to disable Flash to feel "safe" and prevent unpleasantries, such as flashing/blinking/buy-me ads at the cost of not being able to conduct the mandatory training module I have to complete for work?
is there a real difference between flash and silverlight?
One is controlled by a company with a long-standing and well-deserved reputation as the graphics industry leader and the other one makes second-rate office software.
...then they better get their Flash stuff together. More-and-more rapid e-learning solutions (the vast majority, I'd say) are delivered via Flash technologies. Sure, Flash gets a bad rap for the stupid blinky ads, but don't overlook the value of Flash as an Interactive Multimedia training solution. Software simulations, boring page-turning HR training, customer-service "role"-based training...mostly all done with some sort of Flash based rapid e-learning tool, such as Articulate or Captivate. Anytime a customer comes to us for deliverable e-learning, our first question is "can your run Flash, because if you can't, it's gonna cost you a lot more".
Evolving stance? Is that the PC version of flip flopping.
This is slashdot, so it's the Linux version of flip-flopping.
Because companies are big, stupid clumsy beasts that like to follow "processes". Fighting your boss, who is bound by corporate policies and process, will do nothing except put your boss in an awkward position, which in turn will make him reward you with a mediocre evaluation.
if there is anything in there about the company owning the rights to your work while employed there, then you don't have much recourse because they can just file it without your permission anyway as "something our team developed."
even needs to be written? It seems pretty much inferred to me, by the very definition of having a job.
I work in the UK, where we have much stronger employment protection laws.
You also go to work a 9 am, take a two hour tea-time in the middle and leave at 3 pm to head to the pub. I so want to move back!
"Other duties as assigned". Check closely--I bet that's in there. You are free to quit, but it wouldn't be illegal for them to fire you for not cleaning a toilet.
How is the quoted portion "not true"? Yes, his job is to develop for a company, and yes, his personal feelings are irrelevant. Your subsequent post address neither of those truths. Getting himself fired is akin to "your feelings on whether patents are broken or not" being irrelevant. And no, companies don't care if a fired or former employee's name is on the patent, because companies don't care about names.
If you worked for me and your project was done for the company, then you refused to follow the companies plans, then I'd severely discipline you. I'd actually probably just suggest you go work somewhere else. If it's that important to you, you probably aren't working in the right place in the first place.
I get tired of these sort of tactics. Fortunately, there's competition now here in Austin, so I'll be switching to AT&T with NO DVR rental fee and no cable modem rental. (But then again, their high speed internet is $10 / month more than Time Warner, but Time Warner charges $10 / month for the modem...just on principle alone I'll pay AT&T more.)
The usability argument died out thirteen years ago, when it became quite evident with Win95, that even with 13 years to copy the original Macintosh, Microsoft was never going to be able to produce an elegant user interface. 13 years after that (current day), it still holds true.
don't you mean .4%?
You aren't doing yourself any favor by trying to infer that I'm an idiot. Paranoia has nothing to do with the reality of MOST municipalities in America (seems my 2 posts garnering 5 scores would support the notion) are not focusing on public safety. Your points are valid, albeit the exception. I have NO problems at all with the approach your local authorities take. I have lived all over the US and MOST municipalities in the US are down-right criminal when it comes to revenue generation.
What about the elite show right before both of those...Scrubs. Or after them, Futurama...not so elite (funny, but not elite).
Lots of grammarians go of in a huff about things that aren't really incorrect to start with. Take judgment for example. It is also acceptable to spell it judgement. The summary itself makes the same error, complaining about misspelt, when that is a correct variant of misspelled in the English language. Mispelled would have been a more appropriate example, since it is used incorrectly more frequently, and unlike misspelt, is actually misspelled.
Misspelt is correct (British English). Then again, I'm biased, being an American having lived in the UK, I have lots of acceptable spelling variations.
If you are sweating $200 and claim that you aren't poor, then you must just be cheap. That's about as succinct as I can be, and was the entire point of my first post. I mean, I could point you to the myriad of studies showing better ROI, operating costs, productivity on the OS X side, but that would probably escalate into a he-said he-said war. I'll go with my studies (god knows I paid enough for school) and let you do the research.
Look at the price of iPod's, iPhone's, Mac Books, and their other products. They are selling them at an incredible profit.
As opposed to similar spec'd Zunes that sell for $10-$20 less than iPods. I guess that takes Microsoft out of the "incredible" profit zone and drops them into just the "great" profit zone?
I think you mistake brand-loyalty with faboyism. Brand-loyalty is earned, whereas fanboyism is an irrational/out-of-proportion affinity for something. If I've had great success with a particular company for a period of two decades, I feel safe in sticking with that company, even for twice the price and half the supposed "value" (value being a completely subjective, hence worthless, argument). BMW comes immediately to mind for me. It doesn't have to be just BMW or Apple Macintoshes, for example. It can be Fords, McDonalds, Dells, Microsofts, whatever. The difference being, some companies force a brand image upon us via marketing, and others deserve a brand-image through years of excellence.
Belittling Apple and diminishing their role simply as "fashion accessory company" discredits the rest of your otherwise decent post. It's a tired meme with no teeth. Old-ass, uncool guys like me have a couple iPods and iPhones and a few macs around the house. We are not fashion-savvy, nor do we care.
First: you miss my point entirely. I'd pay $500 more in THEORY to get a Mac with OSX, but in reality, I only have to pay $200 more (based on your figures). If you want to argue that $200 will ruin you financially, then you have nothing to apologize for being poor, other than the fact you are dropping nearly $1k on something that you can't afford
Second: Everyone knows that extra warranty coverage is always a waste of money. What you described is covered in my homeowners insurance anyway.
Third: $400 is less than the $500 theoretical dollars I said I'd spend for a computer with OSX over a computer with Vista. No, $400 does not make me sweat, unless I was paying $400 for something obscenely inferior to the cheaper product, which I'm not.
I'm not the one claiming everyone going the same speed is safer. I'm just claiming that setting up 50 cops to catch 50 people going 5 mph over the speed limit is a revenue generator and not a public safety issue. Case in point, why don't the cops patrol the frontage road you described, since that is obviously more dangerous (pedestrians, stop lights, intersections, cars turning off, and onto the road,etc)? It's easier for them to sit up on the main road and nab their revenue there.