Exchange support is huge in business. I know of several companies that won't even consider using macs/allowing someone's personal system on a network because they can't support their mail system. Similarly at my work we always have trouble because we have mac, windows, linux and unix machines. Everyone plays nice with our calender system but windows, hopefully now we'll be able to just find one that works with windows and the Macs will just work. At least that is the hope.
As I said in an earlier post the finder and other speed improvements are worth $29 to us too. We have folders that take a couple minutes to open up because they have a huge number of files. Any time savings would help. At any rate it is about a fifth of the price of a normal version upgrade so I'm happy if I only get a fifth (or more) of a normal upgrade worth of features.
And speaking of developer APIs, with an Apple upgrade you get a new version (usually) of there IDE, where as the IDE from MS was (up until recently) a several hundred dollar side purchase.
Finder improvements might be worth it for my work. We have apps that generate tens of thousands of files in each directory, currently finder will hang for a couple minutes each time you change folders. It is fine if you go from the command line, so it is finder specific. Supposedly finder is completely rewritten (now cocoa instead of carbon based), and faster so hopefully this gets rid of that problem.
Let's find some other way of bringing the people of different nations together that doesn't rely on division.
What you mean something like the UN?
Seriously though in that sense the problem is that nations exist not that they compete. Once you have the concept of "this is our land, and these are the people that belong here" you are going to have competition. After all if you are poor and your neighbor rich you might get invaded or they just might dominate regional politics to the point were you don't have much of a choice.
reward the winners with a show to find 20 women willing to bear their children.
Or 20 men I presume. That would be "unnatural selection". I guess humans have somewhat come to that point anyways what with life saving techniques that let people with diseases that otherwise would kill them before they had children survive long enough to have children themselves. But, your suggestion would have serious consequences. After all in nature it isn't the fastest Gazelle that lives to see another day but all the ones that are faster than the slowest.
By selecting for the freaks in one area you'd make it less likely that the freakishly gifted in other areas would survive. To "solve" this you'd probably have to result to eugenics. I can just imagine a Department of Breeding officer saying "we need you to breed, oh you too, nope you can't breed we already have enough like you".
I think they would have to define a man as someone that is XY and a woman as someone that is XX, anything else doesn't qualify or gets removed based on medical grounds. After all people with medical conditions that require them to take drugs to stay healthy aren't allowed to compete because they are "doping" so why not someone that has a medical condition that makes them not normal as far as their genetics go. Sure athletes tend to be genetically odd a bit anyways, but I think there is a difference from having an unusually quick fast twitch response and having an extra chromosome.
Also I think you have to define it genetically otherwise people that have a sex change could compete as the sex they want to.
They don't care. I think the logic is thus: "There is some of our IP on TPB that we didn't authorize. Therefore they are an infringing site and should be blocked." TPB pretty much tells the industry to go screw themselves every time they ask them to take something down so the industry has decided to have the ISPs take it down for them.
I saw this device on a Discovery show called Future Weapons about 2-3 years ago, not really news. But yeah the idea is that you throw it over a wall or into a window. Sure they'll know you were at the other side of the wall but it is still better than sticking your head through the window to take a look. Also you can move from the wall once you've deployed the unit. Destroying it still lets you know someone is on the otherside with less risk to yourself, and if you get lucky and no one is around you can drive the thing around and get an idea of whats in other rooms. Also I've seen versions that were equipped with a handgun. I think it is a bigger version of the idea at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTabSf1Dxx8 which is a clip from another Future Weapons episode This one you don't throw through a window but it can climb stairs, move along river beds, and carry heavier weapons (sniper rifle, machine gun, rocket launcher, incendiary devices for anti-mine ops etc).
Now now, lets not get rid of stereotypes: they make it easier it unnecessary to talk to the person to find out how they think. People of the previous generation actually listened to Rick Astley because they liked the music, they aren't sure if they should be using OS/2 or Win 3.0 for there application, they can't program their VCR, they didn't save for retirement because they were promised a pension and are now biter and broke. Does that about cover it?
Depends on the company I guess. I work at a research lab, we use mostly Macs, we have --, so something like Intel-Einstein-4. The labs buy the computers with their budget and if they were to leave for another institute could take them with them so this makes sense for us. Similarly depending on company structure it might work. For example if computers are "owned" by departments then there isn't a reason not to use the department in the name. What if the department name changes? Well it then gives you an idea of how old the system is and perhaps pushes you to go ahead with that asset refresh you've been putting off for the last few years:-)
I'd love to have a Kindle or a Sony reader but they don't sell the content in Amazon's case the device outside the US, in Sony's case the books outside of US, Canada and UK. Boo. The next comparable digital ink ereader I've saw is in the ±1000US price range. There are others that are about the same price but use LCD screens.
No they don't promise to refund, the OEM license says: "However you may compensate end users for Software or Hardware returned to you under the License Terms." (http://www.microsoft.com/oem/sblicense/default.mspx) . Note the may. Also, OEM licensing involves buying the licenses in bulk for a large discount. In that sense the OEM is a reseller because they are using multiple customers' purchases to qualify for the bulk discounts.
They aren't just buying a copy of Windows off the shelf and installing it on the system for you. They are saying: "we will sell 20k computers this month so we'll buy 20k licenses and hand them out as we move computers". The OEM licenses are special in my understanding in that they are not transferable. In the mean time the OEM owns the licenses or at least the rights to a license. Similarly a store with 20k boxed copies of Windows that has a fire "owns" them as far as inventory/insurance goes.
First: the dude has to contact MS, if the retailer doesn't refund then they are supposed to work it out with MS directly. Not sure what MS does in that case, I'm guessing they have policies with the OEM and it becomes more of a "you honor the refund policy or we jack your license cost/stop selling to you".
Second: he probably will be upset when he gets the refund. The amount the suit is for (1000K ~ $140US) I was able to find a license of Vista Premium retail. OEM version would be more like $20-30 I'd expect: especially for a large customer like Lenovo. It kind of reminds me back in the day asking to remove a floppy drive from a computer as I already had a CD writer and secondary CD player in the system. The vendor offered a $5 discount for the system without the floppy. I said to hell with it I probably can get $5 worth of use out of the sucker (this was 98). The combination of the fact that the vendor gets stuff really cheaply and the hassle factor of doing custom systems means that you don't get much when you go non-standard.
Exactly. Is a "I think I can get away with it" really worth it, if the punishment for getting caught is years in jail, flogging or a death penalty? There are people I don't like, but besides moral reasons, I won't kill them because even though I think I can get away with it I value my freedom more than being rid of them.
The US government just wants to make sure that they can get propaganda through. Does the government really care if Chinese kids can read about the latest Linsay Lohan scandal? Nope, but they do care to make sure every chinese iranian etc. thinks of the US as great without having to include Satan in the title.
Also you don't hear any talk of banning violent criminals from having kitchen knives even though they could use them to offend again. It is a amazing how easy it is to come up for a reason to ban someones internet activities because it is so easy (so they think) to enforce. Oh, someone illegally downloaded a movie, ban them from sites about movies, someone is known as a repeat traffic violator, don't let them near the traffic sites they might use it to find the speed traps. I can see this being part of a probationary period, but by definition once you've served your time you should be free again IMHO. If the public doesn't like it then they should work to have the punishment term extended, not enforce permanent punishments on someone that has already served the required time.
I don't know both Cyberdyne Systems and Omni Consumer Products were US companies.
Weapon systems aren't all bad they make for good movies. If weapons never evolved Rambo would be lobbing spears against knife welding bad guys, no were near as many bangs and explosions. All we need are really cool weapon systems that never get used in combat say the F22 its perfect. Also I have nothing against weapons that prevent bad guys from hurting good guys, as always it isn't the weapons themselves that are bad but those that use them for evil purposes.
Detention puts more work on teachers so they try to avoid it. After all they have to monitor the kids, and explain it to the couch why Johny can't make practice/game that night.
True. I'd think that Britney Spears or other huge artists would actually be harder to work with. More demands for their time, easier for them to get a contract elsewhere whenever they are free, much bigger venues and branding efforts. They also have to work on "manufacturing" more of the music and picking the look of the band more than you'd have to for a group like Slayer. One is more of a creation of the music label while the other for the most part comes with a relatively small number of fans, with the look that their fans like and don't really much care to change to sell 5M albums versus 500k.
I think at some level society needs big stars not just a bunch of good bands that some people know. Part of culture is a shared music tradition. By definition if thousands of bands are being listened too and no one is a big star then music doesn't make it into culture as much (as in if you quote lyrics from a song few people will know what your talking about). Not saying other bands shouldn't exist, just that their is a huge need for very popular music and as a bonus it is very profitable.
Myself I'm into black death metal which is somewhat hard to find (you can't find it in Walmart, at least were I live;)), usually more expensive (25 for a new album versus ~15 or so for pop music). That said though, I can go to a 3 music festival for $50 including camping and hear 20 good bands. There is something to be said for being part of a subculture where everyone assumes you are poor and gives you good deals:)
I think that is the way that the music industry is going, most poeople will end up purchasing the music online and most of the money will be spent on concerts. For example last year the music industry made record profits even though the record sales were down. People are just spending the money on concerts instead of the albums.
Kids DO complete a person because in the end, that's really what we're here for, not to be narcissistic and selfish.
No kids complete you. First: so your saying you had kids to complete you? How is that not selfish. Second: what do we owe unborn children? Nothing. The only living people you can say for sure would be affected by the decision is the couple having the kid. Why shouldn't we consider the choice of the living instead of assuming what the kid would want (to exist presumably, which is not a given).
We are responsible for being good citizens while alive being considerate, charitable etc. That doesn't mean we have to define our family life by social norms.
Why are you a dirty old man if you like to have sex with attractive young women (of marrying age)? If I'm 80 and can still get a hot 25 year old to have sex with me that doesn't make me a pervert it makes me lucky.
I love arguments like this article though. Women have been getting more attractive because attractive women currently have more children than unattractive women. Men still look as ugly as cavemen because they currently aren't selected for their looks. This is such bogus science. Say it with me "events today cannot be used to explain things that happened yesterday". The next generation of women might be more attractive (to this generation) than the last one, that doesn't mean it was that way back in caveman days.
As for women going for richer guys and having more kids: perhaps. But it also might be a self fulfilling prophecy. Kids cost money so people with more money can afford to have more kids. It might not be that the women chooses to have kids with a rich guy, but that the rich family can afford to have a second or third kid where as a poor family has to settle for one. Additionally you'd expect it to be more correlated with the man's income versus the woman's, after all if the woman is having more kids she has less time to work so her originally higher income goes away, where as the guy keeps producing even while shes busy popping the kids out.
Slashdot Mirror
Exchange support is huge in business. I know of several companies that won't even consider using macs/allowing someone's personal system on a network because they can't support their mail system. Similarly at my work we always have trouble because we have mac, windows, linux and unix machines. Everyone plays nice with our calender system but windows, hopefully now we'll be able to just find one that works with windows and the Macs will just work. At least that is the hope.
As I said in an earlier post the finder and other speed improvements are worth $29 to us too. We have folders that take a couple minutes to open up because they have a huge number of files. Any time savings would help. At any rate it is about a fifth of the price of a normal version upgrade so I'm happy if I only get a fifth (or more) of a normal upgrade worth of features.
And speaking of developer APIs, with an Apple upgrade you get a new version (usually) of there IDE, where as the IDE from MS was (up until recently) a several hundred dollar side purchase.
Finder improvements might be worth it for my work. We have apps that generate tens of thousands of files in each directory, currently finder will hang for a couple minutes each time you change folders. It is fine if you go from the command line, so it is finder specific. Supposedly finder is completely rewritten (now cocoa instead of carbon based), and faster so hopefully this gets rid of that problem.
Let's find some other way of bringing the people of different nations together that doesn't rely on division.
What you mean something like the UN?
Seriously though in that sense the problem is that nations exist not that they compete. Once you have the concept of "this is our land, and these are the people that belong here" you are going to have competition. After all if you are poor and your neighbor rich you might get invaded or they just might dominate regional politics to the point were you don't have much of a choice.
reward the winners with a show to find 20 women willing to bear their children.
Or 20 men I presume. That would be "unnatural selection". I guess humans have somewhat come to that point anyways what with life saving techniques that let people with diseases that otherwise would kill them before they had children survive long enough to have children themselves. But, your suggestion would have serious consequences. After all in nature it isn't the fastest Gazelle that lives to see another day but all the ones that are faster than the slowest.
By selecting for the freaks in one area you'd make it less likely that the freakishly gifted in other areas would survive. To "solve" this you'd probably have to result to eugenics. I can just imagine a Department of Breeding officer saying "we need you to breed, oh you too, nope you can't breed we already have enough like you".
Also I think you have to define it genetically otherwise people that have a sex change could compete as the sex they want to.
They don't care. I think the logic is thus: "There is some of our IP on TPB that we didn't authorize. Therefore they are an infringing site and should be blocked." TPB pretty much tells the industry to go screw themselves every time they ask them to take something down so the industry has decided to have the ISPs take it down for them.
I saw this device on a Discovery show called Future Weapons about 2-3 years ago, not really news. But yeah the idea is that you throw it over a wall or into a window. Sure they'll know you were at the other side of the wall but it is still better than sticking your head through the window to take a look. Also you can move from the wall once you've deployed the unit. Destroying it still lets you know someone is on the otherside with less risk to yourself, and if you get lucky and no one is around you can drive the thing around and get an idea of whats in other rooms. Also I've seen versions that were equipped with a handgun. I think it is a bigger version of the idea at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTabSf1Dxx8 which is a clip from another Future Weapons episode This one you don't throw through a window but it can climb stairs, move along river beds, and carry heavier weapons (sniper rifle, machine gun, rocket launcher, incendiary devices for anti-mine ops etc).
Now now, lets not get rid of stereotypes: they make it easier it unnecessary to talk to the person to find out how they think. People of the previous generation actually listened to Rick Astley because they liked the music, they aren't sure if they should be using OS/2 or Win 3.0 for there application, they can't program their VCR, they didn't save for retirement because they were promised a pension and are now biter and broke. Does that about cover it?
Depends on the company I guess. I work at a research lab, we use mostly Macs, we have --, so something like Intel-Einstein-4. The labs buy the computers with their budget and if they were to leave for another institute could take them with them so this makes sense for us. Similarly depending on company structure it might work. For example if computers are "owned" by departments then there isn't a reason not to use the department in the name. What if the department name changes? Well it then gives you an idea of how old the system is and perhaps pushes you to go ahead with that asset refresh you've been putting off for the last few years :-)
I you are rich enough and have access to the right things you can frame someone for murder. What will they come up with next.
I'd love to have a Kindle or a Sony reader but they don't sell the content in Amazon's case the device outside the US, in Sony's case the books outside of US, Canada and UK. Boo. The next comparable digital ink ereader I've saw is in the ±1000US price range. There are others that are about the same price but use LCD screens.
They aren't just buying a copy of Windows off the shelf and installing it on the system for you. They are saying: "we will sell 20k computers this month so we'll buy 20k licenses and hand them out as we move computers". The OEM licenses are special in my understanding in that they are not transferable. In the mean time the OEM owns the licenses or at least the rights to a license. Similarly a store with 20k boxed copies of Windows that has a fire "owns" them as far as inventory/insurance goes.
Second: he probably will be upset when he gets the refund. The amount the suit is for (1000K ~ $140US) I was able to find a license of Vista Premium retail. OEM version would be more like $20-30 I'd expect: especially for a large customer like Lenovo. It kind of reminds me back in the day asking to remove a floppy drive from a computer as I already had a CD writer and secondary CD player in the system. The vendor offered a $5 discount for the system without the floppy. I said to hell with it I probably can get $5 worth of use out of the sucker (this was 98). The combination of the fact that the vendor gets stuff really cheaply and the hassle factor of doing custom systems means that you don't get much when you go non-standard.
Exactly. Is a "I think I can get away with it" really worth it, if the punishment for getting caught is years in jail, flogging or a death penalty? There are people I don't like, but besides moral reasons, I won't kill them because even though I think I can get away with it I value my freedom more than being rid of them.
The US government just wants to make sure that they can get propaganda through. Does the government really care if Chinese kids can read about the latest Linsay Lohan scandal? Nope, but they do care to make sure every chinese iranian etc. thinks of the US as great without having to include Satan in the title.
Also you don't hear any talk of banning violent criminals from having kitchen knives even though they could use them to offend again. It is a amazing how easy it is to come up for a reason to ban someones internet activities because it is so easy (so they think) to enforce. Oh, someone illegally downloaded a movie, ban them from sites about movies, someone is known as a repeat traffic violator, don't let them near the traffic sites they might use it to find the speed traps. I can see this being part of a probationary period, but by definition once you've served your time you should be free again IMHO. If the public doesn't like it then they should work to have the punishment term extended, not enforce permanent punishments on someone that has already served the required time.
Weapon systems aren't all bad they make for good movies. If weapons never evolved Rambo would be lobbing spears against knife welding bad guys, no were near as many bangs and explosions. All we need are really cool weapon systems that never get used in combat say the F22 its perfect. Also I have nothing against weapons that prevent bad guys from hurting good guys, as always it isn't the weapons themselves that are bad but those that use them for evil purposes.
Detention puts more work on teachers so they try to avoid it. After all they have to monitor the kids, and explain it to the couch why Johny can't make practice/game that night.
True. I'd think that Britney Spears or other huge artists would actually be harder to work with. More demands for their time, easier for them to get a contract elsewhere whenever they are free, much bigger venues and branding efforts. They also have to work on "manufacturing" more of the music and picking the look of the band more than you'd have to for a group like Slayer. One is more of a creation of the music label while the other for the most part comes with a relatively small number of fans, with the look that their fans like and don't really much care to change to sell 5M albums versus 500k.
Myself I'm into black death metal which is somewhat hard to find (you can't find it in Walmart, at least were I live ;)), usually more expensive (25 for a new album versus ~15 or so for pop music). That said though, I can go to a 3 music festival for $50 including camping and hear 20 good bands. There is something to be said for being part of a subculture where everyone assumes you are poor and gives you good deals :)
I think that is the way that the music industry is going, most poeople will end up purchasing the music online and most of the money will be spent on concerts. For example last year the music industry made record profits even though the record sales were down. People are just spending the money on concerts instead of the albums.
a death knight, a warlock and a therapist are in a bar ...
me to be the first to say: "laaayyser".
Kids DO complete a person because in the end, that's really what we're here for, not to be narcissistic and selfish.
No kids complete you. First: so your saying you had kids to complete you? How is that not selfish. Second: what do we owe unborn children? Nothing. The only living people you can say for sure would be affected by the decision is the couple having the kid. Why shouldn't we consider the choice of the living instead of assuming what the kid would want (to exist presumably, which is not a given).
We are responsible for being good citizens while alive being considerate, charitable etc. That doesn't mean we have to define our family life by social norms.
I love arguments like this article though. Women have been getting more attractive because attractive women currently have more children than unattractive women. Men still look as ugly as cavemen because they currently aren't selected for their looks. This is such bogus science. Say it with me "events today cannot be used to explain things that happened yesterday". The next generation of women might be more attractive (to this generation) than the last one, that doesn't mean it was that way back in caveman days.
As for women going for richer guys and having more kids: perhaps. But it also might be a self fulfilling prophecy. Kids cost money so people with more money can afford to have more kids. It might not be that the women chooses to have kids with a rich guy, but that the rich family can afford to have a second or third kid where as a poor family has to settle for one. Additionally you'd expect it to be more correlated with the man's income versus the woman's, after all if the woman is having more kids she has less time to work so her originally higher income goes away, where as the guy keeps producing even while shes busy popping the kids out.