From the 22nd amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."
Seriously, who the hell calls the tech support line to inform Dell that their house just burned down? Does this joker think Dell is going to create a service call or something? Try calling your insurance company and contacting a lawer, fool!
Easy with the "everyone" comments. I live in England, and lived in Germany. I've seen Canadian health care first hand. The US health care system is better than all three of these systems combined.
There is a problem with your scenario. You ask how many men would actually vote for a woman, and how many whites would vote for a black...The problem is narrow-minded people that think this way are all Repulicans, so they won't vote for any of them anyway. And I'm saying this as a Republican myself..pretty sad...
Ok, peeve of mine, being from Texas myself... Did you go to, and graduate from an Ivy-league college? Even with a C average, Bush's college block on his resume trumps the living shit out of my degree, cum laude, from the University of Oregon.
More people in this country are inarticulate than not, so I would tend to believe there are other issues behind the dislike of Bush (such as screwed up foreign policy, perhaps?)
I hate the push for corn-fuel and nationalized health care system, but love the push for broadband EVERYWHERE!
Jimmy Carter was a huge corn-fuel advocate and all he did was bring us the worst energy crisis in U.S. History. I live in England, so don't get me started on the "benefits" of nationalized health care.
To be fair, I was aware of breaches in FairPlay (thus the fast succession of upgrades to iTunes). My orginal contention holds true, that iTunes purchased songs are NOT ABUNDANT, as the overwhelming number of tunes available through any bittorrent client are not from the iTunes market place. AAC tunes exist outside of the world of DRM'd iTunes downloads, so your Pirate Bay link is irrelevant. There are less than 180 AAC files on Pirate Bay and many of those aren't even available on iTunes. Hell, even Fergie has more mp3's on Pirate Bay than all AAC files combined.
Very few bittorrent songs come from iTunes, because the DRM does what it is supposed to do; make it inconvenient enough so that we can't easily spread iTunes songs all over the Internet. Just because a song is in AAC format doesn't automatically mean it is an iTunes song stripped of FairPlay. I'm not sure, but I believe the iTunes store sold songs before the advent of FairPlay. I'm not citing anything there, because I can't find anything, but I do recall the early days of my 1st generation iPod and never having to authorize songs on machines. I do remember them being AAC files, however.
I'll help your argument out though...Programs exist that stripped the FairPlay (old versions) and then let you save the file as any format you like, so it is possible that some.mp3 files out there were originally iTunes songs. But then again, why go through all the hassle, when enough people have uploaded illegal copies of the same tunes, straight from a cd or another online music service?
Well I'm running about 10 apps right now on my MacBook with just one core with no problems at all. I believe there are about 10 or so things running on my wife's side too. In short, I never worry about performance lag on this machine. The difference is I have the minimum 1Ghz of ram. 512mb is still really a smashing blow to your credibility. Try upgrading to realistic figures.
I love when math nerds argue about English. You have all failed to take into consideration the colloquial phrase "last source" or "final source". The last source is where you go for the final say on something. The last source is the ultimate authority on something, colloquially speaking. So therefore, Apple is the second best "final source" on being cool and second only to Rolling Stone Magazine, obviously. You guys should stick to |grep 10101010 etc/host/ blah blah blah;-)
Well you are investing in a company you believe in. Isn't that the whole reason we have shareholders? Companies borrow money from people who believe in them? You have done nothing wrong, friend.
Very insightful post. Basically you have explained the whole Mac vs. PC debate from a philosophical angle. You also point out why I have always been an Apple faithful. Unlike some companies, Apple has been fairly steadfast with their organizational goals: make premium products for people who aren't cheap asses. The only exception is when non-Apple type people ran the company into the ground, by trying to turn an insanely-great corporate culture into Wal-Mart (or in Gil Amelios case, Coca-Cola). That Scully fellow really didn't get it either.
Pure bunk. I run OS X.4 on a 6 year old G4 with 768mb ram. I assure you that this machine is much slower than a 2 year old mini, yet it runs OS X just fine. If your Mac mini is truly 2 years old, you must have bought it the 2nd week it was made available (dubious). That would mean you have a 1.2 or a 1.5GHz G4 chip in it which is much better than my old ass G4 upgraded to 800MHz. Your problem is you are running 256mb of ram (dubious). Thus, you have no credibility.
So because you don't like Apple's business model, you are gonna call bullshit on the guy who posted? That makes a lot of sense. At least when you buy a Mac, you know you can use any version of the OS from the past 5 years or the next 5 years. The combo of Microsoft consumer OSes and Johnny-come-lately Hardware companies, you have to buy a new machine every few years to run the latest version, so you really aren't saving any money. Whoopty doo, I get a prebundled handcuffed version of a Microsoft OS when I buy a mchine. With a Mac, at least I have the option to run OS X.1-.4 (not to mention OS9), on a 7 year-old G4. I most likely won't be able to run X.5 on my G4, but Jesus, I've had a workhorse computer for 7 years, that has never broken down or lost data. What should I expect from a computer that predates iPods and OSX and WinXP? If I could only have gotten 1/5th of the usability out of my 2 and 3 year old pcs...
(MS couldn't even write their own pinball game for Windows, for crying out loud! They bought it from Maxis!)
Or how about a much more high profile game like Halo? Microsoft bought out Bungie and made Halo the flagship Xbox game. It was also a preemptive strike against MacOS, given that Bungie was a Mac-centric company that made their games for Macs and PCs simultaneously, and in a few cases, Mac only.
As a long time Mac user, I've lived through OS6-9,and the transition to X, seen the switch to PowerPC chips and now with my 2 new Macs, the switch to Intel chips. Every transition was smooth. The PowerPC, OS X, and Intel transitions, in hindsight, were amazing technical feats. Microsoft has never taken any such leap.
Please cite your claim that FairPlay has been cracked and illicit copies are ABUNDANT. It may be true, but please give citations. As for burning and re-ripping....duh. What's your point?
Please follow the conversation at hand. Someone claimed that software, hardware, etc. is more expensive for the mac, to which I responded: software costs the same, regardless of the platform and add-on hardware such as ram, monitors, video cards, mice, printers, cost the same for Macs or PCs. I didn't say Apple was cheaper, I said software and hardware is not more expensive for a Mac, like 10 year old arguments would make you think.
Care to share model numbers? Frankly, your numbers are bogus. There is no PC that has similar specs that is 2 19" LCDs-worth cheaper than an iMac that already has either a 17", 20" or 24" monitor.
Oh yeah, and I forgot to mention that all the current crop of games run fine on an an iMac with the video card uprgrade, so your argument is not valid. It isn't the greatest video card on the market, but all the demos I've ran of current games run full screen in mostly max video options much higer than my minimum expectation of 30fps.
As for being stuck with whatever Apple chooses to sell me? Well, I have a choice NOT to buy a Mac, you know? The day Apple's offerings suck so greatly as to convince me that a Vista machine would be better is the day I no longer have a Mac in my house. Funny I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Apple did liscence OS to other companies, such as UMAX, Power Computing, and Motorola. I had a Motorola StarMax and my roommate at the time had a Power Computing Mac. The only advantage was they were both about $300 cheaper than an equivalent Apple branded Mac, and they both broke down a lot.
That's the price of cheap. The same price that has never given me a solid, reliable PC (although I believe MS operating systems have MUCH more to do with that than the actually hardware bits.)
97/3 market share. In 10 years from now, when it is more like 70/30, people might start being a little more critical of the underdog. Right now, however, it is such an unfair fight that most people don't care if Appple locks in their customers.
I feel strongly enough that I will only buy a machine that has OS X on it. If that means my choices are one of the 5 Apple Macintosh models available, then I guess I buy one of those 5, eh? If I wanted a build-it-myself box, I would be resigned to the fact that I'd have to run some crappy Microsoft OS on it.
Yeah, because Microsoft Office costs more for the Mac, as do flat screen displays, mice, keyboards, hard drives, ram chips and video cards. Oh wait, no they don't. Your argument is at least 10 years on the stale side.
Slashdot Mirror
From the 22nd amendment of the U.S. Constitution: "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."
Seriously, who the hell calls the tech support line to inform Dell that their house just burned down? Does this joker think Dell is going to create a service call or something? Try calling your insurance company and contacting a lawer, fool!
Easy with the "everyone" comments. I live in England, and lived in Germany. I've seen Canadian health care first hand. The US health care system is better than all three of these systems combined.
There is a problem with your scenario. You ask how many men would actually vote for a woman, and how many whites would vote for a black...The problem is narrow-minded people that think this way are all Repulicans, so they won't vote for any of them anyway. And I'm saying this as a Republican myself..pretty sad...
More people in this country are inarticulate than not, so I would tend to believe there are other issues behind the dislike of Bush (such as screwed up foreign policy, perhaps?)
But they aren't allowed to run Bill Clinton again, the only guy that fits that bill.
Jimmy Carter was a huge corn-fuel advocate and all he did was bring us the worst energy crisis in U.S. History. I live in England, so don't get me started on the "benefits" of nationalized health care.
Very few bittorrent songs come from iTunes, because the DRM does what it is supposed to do; make it inconvenient enough so that we can't easily spread iTunes songs all over the Internet. Just because a song is in AAC format doesn't automatically mean it is an iTunes song stripped of FairPlay. I'm not sure, but I believe the iTunes store sold songs before the advent of FairPlay. I'm not citing anything there, because I can't find anything, but I do recall the early days of my 1st generation iPod and never having to authorize songs on machines. I do remember them being AAC files, however.
I'll help your argument out though...Programs exist that stripped the FairPlay (old versions) and then let you save the file as any format you like, so it is possible that some .mp3 files out there were originally iTunes songs. But then again, why go through all the hassle, when enough people have uploaded illegal copies of the same tunes, straight from a cd or another online music service?
Well I'm running about 10 apps right now on my MacBook with just one core with no problems at all. I believe there are about 10 or so things running on my wife's side too. In short, I never worry about performance lag on this machine. The difference is I have the minimum 1Ghz of ram. 512mb is still really a smashing blow to your credibility. Try upgrading to realistic figures.
I love when math nerds argue about English. You have all failed to take into consideration the colloquial phrase "last source" or "final source". The last source is where you go for the final say on something. The last source is the ultimate authority on something, colloquially speaking. So therefore, Apple is the second best "final source" on being cool and second only to Rolling Stone Magazine, obviously. You guys should stick to |grep 10101010 etc/host/ blah blah blah ;-)
Well you are investing in a company you believe in. Isn't that the whole reason we have shareholders? Companies borrow money from people who believe in them? You have done nothing wrong, friend.
Very insightful post. Basically you have explained the whole Mac vs. PC debate from a philosophical angle. You also point out why I have always been an Apple faithful. Unlike some companies, Apple has been fairly steadfast with their organizational goals: make premium products for people who aren't cheap asses. The only exception is when non-Apple type people ran the company into the ground, by trying to turn an insanely-great corporate culture into Wal-Mart (or in Gil Amelios case, Coca-Cola). That Scully fellow really didn't get it either.
Pure bunk. I run OS X.4 on a 6 year old G4 with 768mb ram. I assure you that this machine is much slower than a 2 year old mini, yet it runs OS X just fine. If your Mac mini is truly 2 years old, you must have bought it the 2nd week it was made available (dubious). That would mean you have a 1.2 or a 1.5GHz G4 chip in it which is much better than my old ass G4 upgraded to 800MHz. Your problem is you are running 256mb of ram (dubious). Thus, you have no credibility.
So because you don't like Apple's business model, you are gonna call bullshit on the guy who posted? That makes a lot of sense. At least when you buy a Mac, you know you can use any version of the OS from the past 5 years or the next 5 years. The combo of Microsoft consumer OSes and Johnny-come-lately Hardware companies, you have to buy a new machine every few years to run the latest version, so you really aren't saving any money. Whoopty doo, I get a prebundled handcuffed version of a Microsoft OS when I buy a mchine. With a Mac, at least I have the option to run OS X.1-.4 (not to mention OS9), on a 7 year-old G4. I most likely won't be able to run X.5 on my G4, but Jesus, I've had a workhorse computer for 7 years, that has never broken down or lost data. What should I expect from a computer that predates iPods and OSX and WinXP? If I could only have gotten 1/5th of the usability out of my 2 and 3 year old pcs...
As a long time Mac user, I've lived through OS6-9,and the transition to X, seen the switch to PowerPC chips and now with my 2 new Macs, the switch to Intel chips. Every transition was smooth. The PowerPC, OS X, and Intel transitions, in hindsight, were amazing technical feats. Microsoft has never taken any such leap.
Please cite your claim that FairPlay has been cracked and illicit copies are ABUNDANT. It may be true, but please give citations. As for burning and re-ripping....duh. What's your point?
Please follow the conversation at hand. Someone claimed that software, hardware, etc. is more expensive for the mac, to which I responded: software costs the same, regardless of the platform and add-on hardware such as ram, monitors, video cards, mice, printers, cost the same for Macs or PCs. I didn't say Apple was cheaper, I said software and hardware is not more expensive for a Mac, like 10 year old arguments would make you think.
Care to share model numbers? Frankly, your numbers are bogus. There is no PC that has similar specs that is 2 19" LCDs-worth cheaper than an iMac that already has either a 17", 20" or 24" monitor.
Because I had to do an Access project for my Masters degree?
It really is a pain to have to wait 20 seconds for the reboot. Actually the real pain is the 30 second wait for XP to shutdown.
As for being stuck with whatever Apple chooses to sell me? Well, I have a choice NOT to buy a Mac, you know? The day Apple's offerings suck so greatly as to convince me that a Vista machine would be better is the day I no longer have a Mac in my house. Funny I don't see that happening anytime soon.
That's the price of cheap. The same price that has never given me a solid, reliable PC (although I believe MS operating systems have MUCH more to do with that than the actually hardware bits.)
I feel strongly enough that I will only buy a machine that has OS X on it. If that means my choices are one of the 5 Apple Macintosh models available, then I guess I buy one of those 5, eh? If I wanted a build-it-myself box, I would be resigned to the fact that I'd have to run some crappy Microsoft OS on it.
Yeah, because Microsoft Office costs more for the Mac, as do flat screen displays, mice, keyboards, hard drives, ram chips and video cards. Oh wait, no they don't. Your argument is at least 10 years on the stale side.