What about those "we have lots of money, but need somewhere to put it. Send us your bank account number" ones? They're my favorite. I've had two people come and ask me if they're legitimate. Some things should be obviously crooked!
Jesus! What ever happened to civics education in this country. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is an executive agency. Nothing to do with congress. Prosecutorial initiatives come from the executive branch (save some exceptions.) Go to a history or government class. They're more fun than you think.
Bravo. Sensible people looking at the meanings of everyday words are few and far between in the whole OS/free software/etc. world. If there was less fussing about words and more writing of software, everyone would benefit. (Except for the few stray firebrands who thrive on publicity.)
Not at all. Books in libraries are available with an openly specified protocol, in a public place, for anyone to access. They even provide photocopiers. If I go and photocopy the latest John Grisham novel and put it in my library, you bet I'm risking trouble.
For the sharing thing, it's more complicated than that. The problem is that sharing just sucks. Particularly on the part of Win98. It's all voodoo.
The TV card kinda works now. There are drivers, but they're nowhere as good at the BT848 for Linux.
I'm sorry, but W2k just doesn't work as a client. I can't tell you how many times I've been using the Explorer (for web or files) hard and it just fails. Stops working, craps out, locks the whole interface, just breaks. It sucks. It sucks all over the place. The problems aren't predictable (like they are on the Mac -- I can deal with problems that I know how to avoid.) On Linux, I know when it'll break. On Windows it could be fine one minute, and go straight to hell a minute later.
You know, that's what I find amazing. It just _doesn't_ work! I installed Windows 2000 on a PC to see what all of the fuss was about. The install wasn't hard at all, but as I got my TV card to work, installed drivers and software, I was struck by the fact that it actually doesn't work. It kinda works sometimes, but most of the time, it's just really broken.
A friend of mine with a Win98 laptop wanted me to set up a shared folder for him. It was a nightmare. We had to plunge into ridiculous windows domains, and all sorts of fuss. What made it worse was that when he mapped the folder as a drive, it didn't work in DOS.
It just doesn't work. And when you lean on it really hard, it gives up and goes home.
I think that's outrageously stupid, as well. It's even stupider, actually.
I'm not saying that it wasn't a capable system, but I am saying that everything about it frustrated me. Every single aspect of the system. I find that to be a very impressive feat.
Right, but I suspect that the processor has a lot more in common with the big chunk of rock (other than temperature -- Mt. McKinley is quite cold) than it does with a dead imperialist/jingoist figurehead.
That's like advocating equal rights on Martin Luther's birthday. Sure Martin Luther King was named after him, but still...
Re:Straight from the article...
on
Intel's Big Chip
·
· Score: 2
I find that journalism like the above is often the most effective way of communicating a point.
"An example: My Workbench (finder, ) runs in a medium-resolution (800x600), 24-bit mode in order to make the icons the right size and the text readable. My paint program is set to run in the highest 24-bit resolution my piss-poor gfx card can handle (1280x960). My C IDE is set to run in 1600x1200, 256 colors.
"
This may be a little abrasive, but that's just stupid. I can think of few worse GUI choices than having the resolution different for different applications. I used the Amiga (500 and 1200), and thought that it was the most poorly thought-out, user-confounding GUI ever. It was all sorts of tricks and ideas bundled together to work quickly, but in the weirdest, least productive fashion I have ever seen.
> Any sized icons.
And that was just outrageously stupid.
I don't know about y'all, but I could never bring myself to take seriously a computer whose screen image jittered so violently that using any GUI app was risky to mental health.
And it made it worse when our CS teacher (touted to be one of the top Amiga minds in the country) told us that it wasn't a big deal. Particularly when I could pull out my PowerBook and do twice as much, twice as happily, and without putting up with ridiculous shortcomings in the interest of being "more advanced."
> I don't have to mention the GUI do I. Apple's is
> terribly slow and most of it is in fact useless.
That's just from outer space. It can get bogged down, sometimes, but it remains extremely peppy and always responsive on my G4 400.
> OS X costs $129.00
And it's a bargain for that.
> OS X hides many admin tools deep in the GUI
Care to name one? The applications are in/Applications. The admin tools are in/Applications/Utilities. If that's deep, you need to stick to MS Bob.
> Apple should have built OS X off of Linux if they were smart
Or, they could have stuck with the system that the OS was developed on, the development environment that everything is targeted for, and the environment that they retain complete control of (and doesn't come with thousands of screaming teenagers.)
Exactamundo. I haven't had a one-screen system (save my PowerBook) for many years now. My NeXT had three monitors (central screen, palette/file browser screen, terminal screen.) My G4 has two (primary, large screen and secondary, palette, old Apple monitor screen.) It's just not the same. With two screens, I can relegate things to the other screen and just know that they're there for me when I need them. One large screen has nothing goin' on two. Even if I did get that great big one you're talking about, I'd probably still put another video card in my Mac to hold all of the annoying things that clutter up the primary monitor.
I've done some fairly high-end prepress, and have run into my share of color matching issues.
While what you say is correct, as an on-screen artist, I sure as heck need faithful color on my screen. And that's why I'll put effort onto screen-based color matching.
That's the dumbest thing I've heard all day. The named resolutions have the same problem that you point out, except that they obscure _all_ potentially useful information, instead of leaving some behind to allow people who are sensible to get on with life while the only-gratified-by-picking-apart-the-minutae-of-oth ers get off.
"Useful to some folks, perhaps, but not to the average user. Thus the commercial."
The real point isn't that it was useful to some folks, it is that it was _necessary_ to almost _all_ PC users. As another poster pointed out that you needed to fuss with DIP switches and jumpers to get your modem to work, when you plugged in your Mac and it just plain worked. To the original poster: you needed all those dead trees to know how to use your PC. You needed 15-odd pages to know how to use your Mac. That was the point of the ad.
If the PC makers decided to try and make their products seem easier by throwing away the manual, foo on them. Not on Apple.
Or...they could keep doing what they're doing, be successful, and have all of the people be jealous that the coolest OS out there doesn't run on their ugly beige hardware.
Okay, that was a bit of flamebait. But still, Apple has a good thing going now. They piss some people off, but they are being pretty darned successful compared to the other major box manufacturers. I honestly don't think a new Dell product could get the cover of Time.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey man, Special Unit 2 changed my life! The Andy Warhol-like villian redefined my ideas of evil. We need more shows like Special Unit 2!
I hear that Family Guy is getting cancelled every season or so.
The difference is that the other shows suck =)
Right. Not as good as The Simpsons, either. =)
Pure acrylic mink, eh? Pretty good.
What about those "we have lots of money, but need somewhere to put it. Send us your bank account number" ones? They're my favorite. I've had two people come and ask me if they're legitimate. Some things should be obviously crooked!
Jesus! What ever happened to civics education in this country. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is an executive agency. Nothing to do with congress. Prosecutorial initiatives come from the executive branch (save some exceptions.) Go to a history or government class. They're more fun than you think.
SpamTruth(tm) TruthTranslation (sm):
"See 24 year-old, flabby woman fingered by 65 year-ol flabby man."
"And there are plenty of us who will accept nothing less."
Bravo. So why are you buying an iMac?
Bravo. Sensible people looking at the meanings of everyday words are few and far between in the whole OS/free software/etc. world. If there was less fussing about words and more writing of software, everyone would benefit. (Except for the few stray firebrands who thrive on publicity.)
This time of the morning? What time zone are you in?
Not at all. Books in libraries are available with an openly specified protocol, in a public place, for anyone to access. They even provide photocopiers. If I go and photocopy the latest John Grisham novel and put it in my library, you bet I'm risking trouble.
For the sharing thing, it's more complicated than that. The problem is that sharing just sucks. Particularly on the part of Win98. It's all voodoo.
The TV card kinda works now. There are drivers, but they're nowhere as good at the BT848 for Linux.
I'm sorry, but W2k just doesn't work as a client. I can't tell you how many times I've been using the Explorer (for web or files) hard and it just fails. Stops working, craps out, locks the whole interface, just breaks. It sucks. It sucks all over the place. The problems aren't predictable (like they are on the Mac -- I can deal with problems that I know how to avoid.) On Linux, I know when it'll break. On Windows it could be fine one minute, and go straight to hell a minute later.
You know, that's what I find amazing. It just _doesn't_ work! I installed Windows 2000 on a PC to see what all of the fuss was about. The install wasn't hard at all, but as I got my TV card to work, installed drivers and software, I was struck by the fact that it actually doesn't work. It kinda works sometimes, but most of the time, it's just really broken.
A friend of mine with a Win98 laptop wanted me to set up a shared folder for him. It was a nightmare. We had to plunge into ridiculous windows domains, and all sorts of fuss. What made it worse was that when he mapped the folder as a drive, it didn't work in DOS.
It just doesn't work. And when you lean on it really hard, it gives up and goes home.
I think that's outrageously stupid, as well. It's even stupider, actually.
I'm not saying that it wasn't a capable system, but I am saying that everything about it frustrated me. Every single aspect of the system. I find that to be a very impressive feat.
Right, but I suspect that the processor has a lot more in common with the big chunk of rock (other than temperature -- Mt. McKinley is quite cold) than it does with a dead imperialist/jingoist figurehead.
That's like advocating equal rights on Martin Luther's birthday. Sure Martin Luther King was named after him, but still...
I find that journalism like the above is often the most effective way of communicating a point.
Surely it's named after Mt. McKinley, the highest mountain in North America.
"An example: My Workbench (finder, ) runs in a medium-resolution (800x600), 24-bit mode in order to make the icons the right size and the text readable. My paint program is set to run in the highest 24-bit resolution my piss-poor gfx card can handle (1280x960). My C IDE is set to run in 1600x1200, 256 colors.
"
This may be a little abrasive, but that's just stupid. I can think of few worse GUI choices than having the resolution different for different applications. I used the Amiga (500 and 1200), and thought that it was the most poorly thought-out, user-confounding GUI ever. It was all sorts of tricks and ideas bundled together to work quickly, but in the weirdest, least productive fashion I have ever seen.
> Any sized icons.
And that was just outrageously stupid.
I don't know about y'all, but I could never bring myself to take seriously a computer whose screen image jittered so violently that using any GUI app was risky to mental health.
And it made it worse when our CS teacher (touted to be one of the top Amiga minds in the country) told us that it wasn't a big deal. Particularly when I could pull out my PowerBook and do twice as much, twice as happily, and without putting up with ridiculous shortcomings in the interest of being "more advanced."
Umm, have you ever used it?
/Applications. The admin tools are in /Applications/Utilities. If that's deep, you need to stick to MS Bob.
> I don't have to mention the GUI do I. Apple's is
> terribly slow and most of it is in fact useless.
That's just from outer space. It can get bogged down, sometimes, but it remains extremely peppy and always responsive on my G4 400.
> OS X costs $129.00
And it's a bargain for that.
> OS X hides many admin tools deep in the GUI
Care to name one? The applications are in
> Apple should have built OS X off of Linux if they were smart
Or, they could have stuck with the system that the OS was developed on, the development environment that everything is targeted for, and the environment that they retain complete control of (and doesn't come with thousands of screaming teenagers.)
Or you could be completely wrong. How can you say "no home user"? I know plenty. (Myself included)
And those god-awful desktop scrolling systems are a complete nightmare. I physically wretch when I have to even think about using them.
Multiple desktops are hardly a solution for multiple, real desktops.
You're just wrong. Sorry.
Exactamundo. I haven't had a one-screen system (save my PowerBook) for many years now. My NeXT had three monitors (central screen, palette/file browser screen, terminal screen.) My G4 has two (primary, large screen and secondary, palette, old Apple monitor screen.) It's just not the same. With two screens, I can relegate things to the other screen and just know that they're there for me when I need them. One large screen has nothing goin' on two. Even if I did get that great big one you're talking about, I'd probably still put another video card in my Mac to hold all of the annoying things that clutter up the primary monitor.
I've done some fairly high-end prepress, and have run into my share of color matching issues.
While what you say is correct, as an on-screen artist, I sure as heck need faithful color on my screen. And that's why I'll put effort onto screen-based color matching.
That's the dumbest thing I've heard all day. The named resolutions have the same problem that you point out, except that they obscure _all_ potentially useful information, instead of leaving some behind to allow people who are sensible to get on with life while the only-gratified-by-picking-apart-the-minutae-of-oth ers get off.
"Useful to some folks, perhaps, but not to the average user. Thus the commercial."
The real point isn't that it was useful to some folks, it is that it was _necessary_ to almost _all_ PC users. As another poster pointed out that you needed to fuss with DIP switches and jumpers to get your modem to work, when you plugged in your Mac and it just plain worked. To the original poster: you needed all those dead trees to know how to use your PC. You needed 15-odd pages to know how to use your Mac. That was the point of the ad.
If the PC makers decided to try and make their products seem easier by throwing away the manual, foo on them. Not on Apple.
Or...they could keep doing what they're doing, be successful, and have all of the people be jealous that the coolest OS out there doesn't run on their ugly beige hardware.
Okay, that was a bit of flamebait. But still, Apple has a good thing going now. They piss some people off, but they are being pretty darned successful compared to the other major box manufacturers. I honestly don't think a new Dell product could get the cover of Time.