wow, feel free to take what I write as literally as possible.
there were other stages of conversation during which they should have seen that.NET was overkill for what we needed, and they remained silent about it.
The massive requirements of the site were that there would need to be a page that takes in users' e-mail addresses and puts them into a database, along with a password - that way the registered users could be tracked and allowed into the parts of the site that were secure. This was required because the registration meant that they agreed to the terms that bound what they were viewing, as well as enabled the company to track who was reading about the fund. Other than that, it is just straight we pages that mimic a brochure. Easy stuff. Shouldn't have taken long, and it doesn't require much in terms of hardware. There are probably only a few thousand people (I would guess under 3K) in the world that would even search for this site, let alone register for the site - and they would do so over a period of a year or more. So a very low load.
The fact that it is on a kick ass bit of hardware, running the newest MS stuff, and took months to program should strike a chord to anyone that knows how to program such a thing.
As I recall reading he also car-pooled with some Navy fellows as well - but I think their contribution was largely in terms of the day to day protocol of the military and how it works, and not so much about the tech side.
LOL - yeah, exactly, they fleeced the guys here. I can't be too angry at them because that is how the business world works, just on different levels of perception.
In terms of my resume, I have worked on about 12 different high level and large scale web applications under an MS platform - many of those were prior to.NET coming out, but they were on an MS platform.
I have only built 3.NET apps, mainly because I try to avoid it - I like the ease of use, but I don't find it any easier than programming in many of the other languages. I have worked on/with about 5 in addition to the 3 I built.
In terms of distributed apps, I'm assuming you are discussing clustered load balancing, otherwise I'm gonna have a laugh. I have a pretty good level of experience with distributed apps - but probably not the type you are talking about. I'm talking about clusters like a supercomputer type stuff. MS doesn't live in that world.
As for distributed server loads - depending on what is doing the load balancing, you have a good point there - MS might make it easier now that I think about it. Note I didn't say "better" - but I do in fact think that they make it easier if you aren't using a dedicated hardware load balancing system.
In terms of web apps for the insurance/banking industry - I hope you aren't talking about web pages or online banking? If so, that can be done in anything, and sure, it is occasionally done in.NET these days I'm sure, and certainly there are a share of MS servers there even if not.NET. But in the backend software - banks talking to each other, hedge funds making trades, insurance companies calculating risk over distributed networks that span continents - I can speak with great experience - they don't use MS for anything for than what is essentially a terminal view.
Telecom is largely Java and Solaris, although the platform varies sometimes, hence why they want Java so badly. I always felt it sucked and was slow, but then over time Java got much better - it has since slowed down a bit in some of the newer versions (and then sped up again), but it all depends on what parts of it you are using.
In the end, I'm not anti-MS, and I'm not even all that pro-Other stuff. I just personally feel that for various applications there are servers and programming languages that are better served for both performance and cost issues. Like I said, I have yet to see an instance where the MS product wins out in the end for the total cost (bang for the buck). And like I said, I hadn't thought of the load balancing without the hardware handling it - my experience there is much more limited, so perhaps MS is indeed easier with their wizards and such?
People that know me, know pretty much that "he's into computers and stuff."
In fact, my current position to me is rather insulting. I have gotten rather good at some pretty cool things - genetic algorithms, neural networks, Markov martricies, Bayesian analysis, and distributed computing. The math of the El Farol problem, the heat distribution through a medium, etc. I am starting up a company that uses all of these as a means to an end of servicing investors in the financial markets. What is insulting? Well, I do all of that on my own. My job is to do IT stuff. I'm basically a glorified plumber. I go up and twist things, or install things, or bump things. I push things, pull them, and tell people that the issue is resolved. I mean no offense to the IT people, but to be the IT manager of a small network takes far less skill, knowledge, and education than it does to do any of the previous things I mentioned.
So anyway, people hear that I know about computers and they assume I'm an IT person and then they start asking me about computers. Probably like what happens with doctors, except that I had far less schooling and can't ask women to take their clothes off to solve problems.
So if someone comes up to me and asks me about some random computer issues and then I'm noticing they are tossing about buzzwords incorrectly, or saying them wrong, or is generally clueless - then I just try and quickly shut them up and point them in the general direction of the nearest Mac dealer. Hell, Mac's ad campaign is currently "Too dumb to use anything else? Try a Mac!" While this personally is offensive to me, I too like the shiny cases and pretty colors, so with that and then the idito proof approach, I think they are exactly where the clueless should be shunted at the end of the day.
I pointed out on the.NET thread that our company, prior to my arrivial here, paid waaay too much for a website recently because of a misunderstanding in terminology.
One of the owners wanted the website to have a domain name that ended in ".net" because he felt that ".com" was associated with the US, and he didn't want to be associated with them (this company is an offshore company).
That in itself is kind of funny, but then when the company he hired to do the programming was asking him what type of server he wanted it on and what language. He had no clue, but told them that he wanted the ".net" on it. They thought he wanted ".NET" and started it up.
At some point the misunderstanding was seen on their side, but they just ran with it, seeing that he was pretty clueless and then overbilled us.
Fantastic.
He isn't totally clueless, he does know a tiny little bit - but that makes it worse. He just throws around buzzwords and it is a bit embarrassing/hilarious.
His current thing is that he wants a PDA that plays MP3s, and that has a phone jack directly into it that will let him dial-up and check his e-mail, but also record conversations, but it can't be a Handspring product "because those are crap, and did you see that Palm is buying them out" as he told me. He was asking me the other day which he should try to get, "64K or 128K" in his MP3 player. I acted like he wrote "M" for megs and left it at that.
He makes my days much longer than they need to be - otherwise, I would be doing more programming and less trying to get crap done for him.
1) They are all heavily certified in all of the MS Certs. They can program well, and they do.
2) They saw that their client (the company I'm currently working at, but this was prior to me getting here) didn't have a clue, so they saw the opportunity for a project where they could do it in.NET and then refer other clients that "so and so had us do it in.NET" so then these other clients that are clueless then use us as a point of reference - even though it is technically misguided.
The programming costs are a moot point here because the bulk of the high costs there were again, they saw that the people here weren't with it in terms of technology, so they overbilled them - claiming things would take longer than they would and such. They could have done that in any programming language - so that cost isn't an issue.
What is an issue is that we had to setup a Windows Server with the newest crap on it. That cost us far more than a Linux or FreeBSD system would have.
The site we are doing is *very* basic. It could have been easily done using PHP or Perl and just flat text files. The server doesn't get much load, and it only needs to keep track of users and send out mail occasionally.
The company knew *exactly* what they were doing when they set it up this way. They were maximizing their profits off of us both now and in the future, as well as gaining a foothold with future customers as well.
In terms of hard to maintain - that is an issue with Microsoft, not with the programmers. The additions that we need to do to the site are going to be a pain in the ass simply because Microsoft doesn't make things easy for you (at least not the things that are easy on Linux/FreeBSD).
In the end, you know.NET - bully for you. You program things that you feel are good in it - again, that is fantastic, and I congratulate on it. But I assure you that in the world of telecom, finance, and insurance (which is the worlds I know well), Microsoft is worthless in terms of anything beyond a LAN. It works on the desktop, it works (well, that is a point of contention with many) as a mail server, and it gets you through on file sharing. But in terms of.NET for web apps... that is a very different thing and I would personally, in the enviroment I know, say that.NET sucks and yet will remain solely because of the MS name and the fact that it can lead to increased revenue of those charging to program in it.
We are currently going through the hassles of trying to get an MSDN subscription here in Bermuda. Microsoft is of no help. They put us in the Latin district, and therefore won't sell to us directly. Of the two numbers that they gave us, one is disconnected, and the other is all in Spanish. Perfect.
If you are writing something for a client that is demanding you use MS, then it seems pretty obvious to use their newest and greatest stuff - it is usually better than their old stuff (I much prefer XP over any of their previous OSes).
But if you are given the choice of how to implement it - in the end, doing it on Linux or FreeBSD as a server platform, and then any number of languages are available.
If it is a web app, the end user can still use IE and you can still use all of the fun DHTML, XML, and XSL translations that you could on MS (frequently faster too).
It isn't even really an arguement to say that if the client has an MS database then you have to use MS stuff - if they are using SQL server, then you can connect to it via other server types. If they are using Access, there are still other ways of getting the data out - either directly, or exporting it, or converting it. None of which are particularly hard..NET allows for a new range of Certifications that are needed to stay up to date with the MS Cert programs, which is an entire revenue stream in itself. It also is a change in technology that gets people all excited and makes them want to upgrade their systems. For the most part, from the companies that I have worked with - the ones that don't know the alternatives think that there is only MS and that is what they go with. But the ones that have very important things and/or know what they are doing, demand a Solaris/Oracle/Java system. Although many banking systems are slightly different than that, but never Microsoft.
While they might indeed be cheaper/faster/etc than previous versions of MS products - they aren't necessarily cheaper/faster/etc than the alternatives.
Java, PHP, etc all have their places and in my experience, I have yet to run into a web application or even just a web site that was done in MS that couldn't be done cheaper and better on a different platform using a different technology.
I have implemented my share of MS stuff as well, and at one point nearly worked for Microsoft themselves - so I'm not just saying this as a "boo MS" thing, but a genuine experience backed comment.
My company may be retarded, but the people they hired were actually quite good, and they also saw that they had an opportunity in our company to use.NET to show off what they could do, get us to pay for it, and win big. But they certainly knew what they were doing.
say the words "dot net" and you get to add so much to the cost of projects that it immediately makes it worth it to switch over.
that is the only reason I could see why.NET might ever catch on. I'm not saying it is a useless bit of technology, I'm just personally partial to using any number of existing technologies that do the same thing and are cheaper to implement.
my current employer is retarded when it comes to computers and they paid someone to do a very basic web project in "dot net" because there was a general misunderstanding in the difference between the domain and the programming structures.
In the end it cost them a ton and now it is costing them more to maintain. I am trying to get them to port it all over to a much lighter system (php on linux or freebsd), but they are currently not interested.
I could never possibly get addicted to anything like they do. Crazy people.
Now where is my GameBoy Advance SP? I have some Zelda to play. Sure I'm at work, but I can lock myself in a stall in the bathroom or hide under my desk.
I could stop anytime I wanted to - not like those silly foreigners that have to have a curfew imposed on them.
doesn't help me per se since I actually do want an incrased DPI. I genuinely want more on the screen and smaller instead of just more screen real estate at the same resolution each time.
you say that it leads to eye strain, but that is a very subjective thing. what seems straining to you might be quite normal to others such as myself - in fact, working at resolutions that are low drive me nuts and cause far more eye *and* mental strain.
but it does explain that with Apple it seems they must have a demand for retaining the same dpi, therefore they don't really crank the resolution. not really what I'm looking for - but obviously there are enough other people looking for it to merit the decision.
you raise an excellent point. that phrase really is the perfect name for a company.
I think the only word that might make it better is if we could add in "rape" - then I think we could pretty much just start cashing million dollar checks.
I think with my first million I'm gonna get my teeth bronzed and gold plate my house. If I had a house. or teeth.
Well, previously you would have thought that your current screen was "too big" - so perhaps 17" would be amazing. But I'm in total agreement that any of the current 17" options are just not gonna cut it in terms of battery life, weight, resolution, and cost.
The WUXGA screen just looks amazing. My current HP is slowly falling apart, and I'm hoping it can go another year - if not, then I will definitely consider a new Dell with the high res like that.
They could get around it the same way that I used to avoid reserved words in programming - use all swears. Instead of "Spam Arrest" they could just change their names to "Fuck Shitters" or "Explosive Ass Mansion" (I am fully aware that the second example only had one swear in it, and two non-swear words - but I thought it sounded like a good company name - or a new ride at Disney).
Another option would be to just flail on the keyboard and then do a quick search to see if that is anywhere on the net - if not - bingo! For instance, they could go with the name ";oasdguos " which might not be as easy to remember, but I think over time it could grow on you like a cancerous tumor (which could also be their new ad campaign).
If all else fails, we can just resort to all numbers. Their new name, from this day forward would be "Comapny 16843329" - not to be confused with 16843328 or 16843330 which make coat hangers and tampons respectively.
I should probably not say anymore since as it is, I've said too much and feel that perhaps a consulting fee is in order.
and one of the bays is just a fricken subwoofer - as if I care about that on my laptop.
in terms of batter life, it is going to be hard to get good battery life from a 17" screen - that is just a lot of power that it has to supply and I imagine paritially why the resolution still is a bit crappy on the 17" ones - to increase the resolution would have to increase the actual screen density of pixels, which would then require more power... and it is already a power hog as it is.
That site is pretty cool though, never knew it existed.
I still don't get why go up in size and then barely go up in resolution.
while you claim that 1440x900 is "nice" - I can get 1400x1050 on my 15" screen of my laptop right now. And I currently don't like it - I want one of the new laptops that can do more than that -there are plenty of laptops out there that go higher. I want to be able to fit more on my screen - not just have everything look bigger.
Why do you go up in screen size but not increase the resolution? I don't see what the point is.
Why bother having such a large screen and then having such a pants (my new favorite derogatory term) resolution?
My current laptop has a 15" screen and is at that resolution 1400somethingXwhatever.
Why not get the new Dell Inspiron 8500
that have the 15.4" and the WUXGA that runs up to fantastically high resolutions like 1920x1200, of even its younger sibling WSXGA+ that goes to a wonderful 1680x1050?
To get a bigger screen to me is absolutely pointless without an increase in resolution. Is it for the serior citizen on the go that needs a wide screen to fit more crap on it, but also needs things to be large and in charge for their agin eyes?
I love a larger screen, but this seems like a total miss to me. I have posted on here as a joke before that my ideal laptop had the dimensions of... x, y, z, etc - they were all things that an ideal desktop had. Now it seems that someone at Toshiba actually legitimately thinks this way.
That comedian always had the zaniest things to say.
And his pants!
The article doesn't mention anything about Linux having any issue with his pants. Big, billowy pants - likely what inspired MC Hammer now that I think of it.
Slashdot Mirror
wow, feel free to take what I write as literally as possible.
.NET was overkill for what we needed, and they remained silent about it.
there were other stages of conversation during which they should have seen that
The massive requirements of the site were that there would need to be a page that takes in users' e-mail addresses and puts them into a database, along with a password - that way the registered users could be tracked and allowed into the parts of the site that were secure. This was required because the registration meant that they agreed to the terms that bound what they were viewing, as well as enabled the company to track who was reading about the fund. Other than that, it is just straight we pages that mimic a brochure.
Easy stuff. Shouldn't have taken long, and it doesn't require much in terms of hardware. There are probably only a few thousand people (I would guess under 3K) in the world that would even search for this site, let alone register for the site - and they would do so over a period of a year or more.
So a very low load.
The fact that it is on a kick ass bit of hardware, running the newest MS stuff, and took months to program should strike a chord to anyone that knows how to program such a thing.
As I recall reading he also car-pooled with some Navy fellows as well - but I think their contribution was largely in terms of the day to day protocol of the military and how it works, and not so much about the tech side.
probably more like Fahrenheit 451
unless your flashbacks were actually to the year 1984 for some reason - maybe there is a Van Halen song about this that I'm not remembering.
Duh, that's not my real name. My real name is Buttfucker McSucknut. AssFace. Pffsssh, silly name.
LOL - yeah, exactly, they fleeced the guys here. I can't be too angry at them because that is how the business world works, just on different levels of perception.
.NET coming out, but they were on an MS platform.
.NET apps, mainly because I try to avoid it - I like the ease of use, but I don't find it any easier than programming in many of the other languages.
.NET these days I'm sure, and certainly there are a share of MS servers there even if not .NET.
In terms of my resume, I have worked on about 12 different high level and large scale web applications under an MS platform - many of those were prior to
I have only built 3
I have worked on/with about 5 in addition to the 3 I built.
In terms of distributed apps, I'm assuming you are discussing clustered load balancing, otherwise I'm gonna have a laugh. I have a pretty good level of experience with distributed apps - but probably not the type you are talking about. I'm talking about clusters like a supercomputer type stuff. MS doesn't live in that world.
As for distributed server loads - depending on what is doing the load balancing, you have a good point there - MS might make it easier now that I think about it.
Note I didn't say "better" - but I do in fact think that they make it easier if you aren't using a dedicated hardware load balancing system.
In terms of web apps for the insurance/banking industry - I hope you aren't talking about web pages or online banking? If so, that can be done in anything, and sure, it is occasionally done in
But in the backend software - banks talking to each other, hedge funds making trades, insurance companies calculating risk over distributed networks that span continents - I can speak with great experience - they don't use MS for anything for than what is essentially a terminal view.
Telecom is largely Java and Solaris, although the platform varies sometimes, hence why they want Java so badly. I always felt it sucked and was slow, but then over time Java got much better - it has since slowed down a bit in some of the newer versions (and then sped up again), but it all depends on what parts of it you are using.
In the end, I'm not anti-MS, and I'm not even all that pro-Other stuff.
I just personally feel that for various applications there are servers and programming languages that are better served for both performance and cost issues.
Like I said, I have yet to see an instance where the MS product wins out in the end for the total cost (bang for the buck).
And like I said, I hadn't thought of the load balancing without the hardware handling it - my experience there is much more limited, so perhaps MS is indeed easier with their wizards and such?
idito proof
brilliant. go me.
People that know me, know pretty much that "he's into computers and stuff."
In fact, my current position to me is rather insulting. I have gotten rather good at some pretty cool things - genetic algorithms, neural networks, Markov martricies, Bayesian analysis, and distributed computing. The math of the El Farol problem, the heat distribution through a medium, etc. I am starting up a company that uses all of these as a means to an end of servicing investors in the financial markets.
What is insulting? Well, I do all of that on my own. My job is to do IT stuff. I'm basically a glorified plumber. I go up and twist things, or install things, or bump things. I push things, pull them, and tell people that the issue is resolved.
I mean no offense to the IT people, but to be the IT manager of a small network takes far less skill, knowledge, and education than it does to do any of the previous things I mentioned.
So anyway, people hear that I know about computers and they assume I'm an IT person and then they start asking me about computers. Probably like what happens with doctors, except that I had far less schooling and can't ask women to take their clothes off to solve problems.
So if someone comes up to me and asks me about some random computer issues and then I'm noticing they are tossing about buzzwords incorrectly, or saying them wrong, or is generally clueless - then I just try and quickly shut them up and point them in the general direction of the nearest Mac dealer.
Hell, Mac's ad campaign is currently "Too dumb to use anything else? Try a Mac!"
While this personally is offensive to me, I too like the shiny cases and pretty colors, so with that and then the idito proof approach, I think they are exactly where the clueless should be shunted at the end of the day.
I pointed out on the .NET thread that our company, prior to my arrivial here, paid waaay too much for a website recently because of a misunderstanding in terminology.
One of the owners wanted the website to have a domain name that ended in ".net" because he felt that ".com" was associated with the US, and he didn't want to be associated with them (this company is an offshore company).
That in itself is kind of funny, but then when the company he hired to do the programming was asking him what type of server he wanted it on and what language. He had no clue, but told them that he wanted the ".net" on it.
They thought he wanted ".NET" and started it up.
At some point the misunderstanding was seen on their side, but they just ran with it, seeing that he was pretty clueless and then overbilled us.
Fantastic.
He isn't totally clueless, he does know a tiny little bit - but that makes it worse.
He just throws around buzzwords and it is a bit embarrassing/hilarious.
His current thing is that he wants a PDA that plays MP3s, and that has a phone jack directly into it that will let him dial-up and check his e-mail, but also record conversations, but it can't be a Handspring product "because those are crap, and did you see that Palm is buying them out" as he told me.
He was asking me the other day which he should try to get, "64K or 128K" in his MP3 player. I acted like he wrote "M" for megs and left it at that.
He makes my days much longer than they need to be - otherwise, I would be doing more programming and less trying to get crap done for him.
Perhaps I'm not making myself clear.
.NET and then refer other clients that "so and so had us do it in .NET" so then these other clients that are clueless then use us as a point of reference - even though it is technically misguided.
.NET - bully for you. You program things that you feel are good in it - again, that is fantastic, and I congratulate on it. .NET for web apps... that is a very different thing and I would personally, in the enviroment I know, say that .NET sucks and yet will remain solely because of the MS name and the fact that it can lead to increased revenue of those charging to program in it.
1) They are all heavily certified in all of the MS Certs. They can program well, and they do.
2) They saw that their client (the company I'm currently working at, but this was prior to me getting here) didn't have a clue, so they saw the opportunity for a project where they could do it in
The programming costs are a moot point here because the bulk of the high costs there were again, they saw that the people here weren't with it in terms of technology, so they overbilled them - claiming things would take longer than they would and such. They could have done that in any programming language - so that cost isn't an issue.
What is an issue is that we had to setup a Windows Server with the newest crap on it. That cost us far more than a Linux or FreeBSD system would have.
The site we are doing is *very* basic. It could have been easily done using PHP or Perl and just flat text files.
The server doesn't get much load, and it only needs to keep track of users and send out mail occasionally.
The company knew *exactly* what they were doing when they set it up this way. They were maximizing their profits off of us both now and in the future, as well as gaining a foothold with future customers as well.
In terms of hard to maintain - that is an issue with Microsoft, not with the programmers. The additions that we need to do to the site are going to be a pain in the ass simply because Microsoft doesn't make things easy for you (at least not the things that are easy on Linux/FreeBSD).
In the end, you know
But I assure you that in the world of telecom, finance, and insurance (which is the worlds I know well), Microsoft is worthless in terms of anything beyond a LAN. It works on the desktop, it works (well, that is a point of contention with many) as a mail server, and it gets you through on file sharing.
But in terms of
We are currently going through the hassles of trying to get an MSDN subscription here in Bermuda.
.NET allows for a new range of Certifications that are needed to stay up to date with the MS Cert programs, which is an entire revenue stream in itself.
Microsoft is of no help. They put us in the Latin district, and therefore won't sell to us directly. Of the two numbers that they gave us, one is disconnected, and the other is all in Spanish. Perfect.
If you are writing something for a client that is demanding you use MS, then it seems pretty obvious to use their newest and greatest stuff - it is usually better than their old stuff (I much prefer XP over any of their previous OSes).
But if you are given the choice of how to implement it - in the end, doing it on Linux or FreeBSD as a server platform, and then any number of languages are available.
If it is a web app, the end user can still use IE and you can still use all of the fun DHTML, XML, and XSL translations that you could on MS (frequently faster too).
It isn't even really an arguement to say that if the client has an MS database then you have to use MS stuff - if they are using SQL server, then you can connect to it via other server types.
If they are using Access, there are still other ways of getting the data out - either directly, or exporting it, or converting it.
None of which are particularly hard.
It also is a change in technology that gets people all excited and makes them want to upgrade their systems.
For the most part, from the companies that I have worked with - the ones that don't know the alternatives think that there is only MS and that is what they go with.
But the ones that have very important things and/or know what they are doing, demand a Solaris/Oracle/Java system. Although many banking systems are slightly different than that, but never Microsoft.
While they might indeed be cheaper/faster/etc than previous versions of MS products - they aren't necessarily cheaper/faster/etc than the alternatives.
.NET to show off what they could do, get us to pay for it, and win big. But they certainly knew what they were doing.
Java, PHP, etc all have their places and in my experience, I have yet to run into a web application or even just a web site that was done in MS that couldn't be done cheaper and better on a different platform using a different technology.
I have implemented my share of MS stuff as well, and at one point nearly worked for Microsoft themselves - so I'm not just saying this as a "boo MS" thing, but a genuine experience backed comment.
My company may be retarded, but the people they hired were actually quite good, and they also saw that they had an opportunity in our company to use
say the words "dot net" and you get to add so much to the cost of projects that it immediately makes it worth it to switch over.
.NET might ever catch on.
that is the only reason I could see why
I'm not saying it is a useless bit of technology, I'm just personally partial to using any number of existing technologies that do the same thing and are cheaper to implement.
my current employer is retarded when it comes to computers and they paid someone to do a very basic web project in "dot net" because there was a general misunderstanding in the difference between the domain and the programming structures.
In the end it cost them a ton and now it is costing them more to maintain. I am trying to get them to port it all over to a much lighter system (php on linux or freebsd), but they are currently not interested.
Other alternatives to medication might be uh... say, girls, or sports, or "outside" or even reading.
The only saving grace of this post is that it has to be a joke evidenced by the ending stuff.
Other than that, it should be taken out and shot.
Them foreigners sure do some crazy stuff.
I could never possibly get addicted to anything like they do. Crazy people.
Now where is my GameBoy Advance SP? I have some Zelda to play. Sure I'm at work, but I can lock myself in a stall in the bathroom or hide under my desk.
I could stop anytime I wanted to - not like those silly foreigners that have to have a curfew imposed on them.
After reading that, I can definitely walk away with one thing firm in my mind:
You must get laid incredibly often with that schpiel
ahh, well that makes sense I guess.
doesn't help me per se since I actually do want an incrased DPI. I genuinely want more on the screen and smaller instead of just more screen real estate at the same resolution each time.
you say that it leads to eye strain, but that is a very subjective thing. what seems straining to you might be quite normal to others such as myself - in fact, working at resolutions that are low drive me nuts and cause far more eye *and* mental strain.
but it does explain that with Apple it seems they must have a demand for retaining the same dpi, therefore they don't really crank the resolution.
not really what I'm looking for - but obviously there are enough other people looking for it to merit the decision.
you raise an excellent point. that phrase really is the perfect name for a company.
I think the only word that might make it better is if we could add in "rape" - then I think we could pretty much just start cashing million dollar checks.
I think with my first million I'm gonna get my teeth bronzed and gold plate my house. If I had a house. or teeth.
My apologies. All previous references to "Fuck Shitters" should be replaced with the name of "Inverted Nipple Fellatio"
Thank you
Well, previously you would have thought that your current screen was "too big" - so perhaps 17" would be amazing.
But I'm in total agreement that any of the current 17" options are just not gonna cut it in terms of battery life, weight, resolution, and cost.
The WUXGA screen just looks amazing. My current HP is slowly falling apart, and I'm hoping it can go another year - if not, then I will definitely consider a new Dell with the high res like that.
They could get around it the same way that I used to avoid reserved words in programming - use all swears.
Instead of "Spam Arrest" they could just change their names to "Fuck Shitters" or "Explosive Ass Mansion" (I am fully aware that the second example only had one swear in it, and two non-swear words - but I thought it sounded like a good company name - or a new ride at Disney).
Another option would be to just flail on the keyboard and then do a quick search to see if that is anywhere on the net - if not - bingo!
For instance, they could go with the name ";oasdguos " which might not be as easy to remember, but I think over time it could grow on you like a cancerous tumor (which could also be their new ad campaign).
If all else fails, we can just resort to all numbers.
Their new name, from this day forward would be "Comapny 16843329" - not to be confused with 16843328 or 16843330 which make coat hangers and tampons respectively.
I should probably not say anymore since as it is, I've said too much and feel that perhaps a consulting fee is in order.
and one of the bays is just a fricken subwoofer - as if I care about that on my laptop.
in terms of batter life, it is going to be hard to get good battery life from a 17" screen - that is just a lot of power that it has to supply and I imagine paritially why the resolution still is a bit crappy on the 17" ones - to increase the resolution would have to increase the actual screen density of pixels, which would then require more power... and it is already a power hog as it is.
That site is pretty cool though, never knew it existed.
I still don't get why go up in size and then barely go up in resolution.
while you claim that 1440x900 is "nice" - I can get 1400x1050 on my 15" screen of my laptop right now. And I currently don't like it - I want one of the new laptops that can do more than that -there are plenty of laptops out there that go higher. I want to be able to fit more on my screen - not just have everything look bigger.
Why do you go up in screen size but not increase the resolution? I don't see what the point is.
Why bother having such a large screen and then having such a pants (my new favorite derogatory term) resolution?
My current laptop has a 15" screen and is at that resolution 1400somethingXwhatever.
Why not get the new Dell Inspiron 8500
that have the 15.4" and the WUXGA that runs up to fantastically high resolutions like 1920x1200, of even its younger sibling WSXGA+ that goes to a wonderful 1680x1050?
To get a bigger screen to me is absolutely pointless without an increase in resolution. Is it for the serior citizen on the go that needs a wide screen to fit more crap on it, but also needs things to be large and in charge for their agin eyes?
I love a larger screen, but this seems like a total miss to me. I have posted on here as a joke before that my ideal laptop had the dimensions of... x, y, z, etc - they were all things that an ideal desktop had.
Now it seems that someone at Toshiba actually legitimately thinks this way.
That comedian always had the zaniest things to say.
And his pants!
The article doesn't mention anything about Linux having any issue with his pants. Big, billowy pants - likely what inspired MC Hammer now that I think of it.
yeah, I'll bet he is hurting under the load of his wife's career constantly pulling him down.
I just hope that they have enough to eat tonight.