The self install guide that I got from Pac Bell when i got DSL was pretty bad that way. It didn't help that all of the "helpful screen shots" were from Mac OS...
Re:Not only the net. THe article mentions CPRM als
on
Taming the Web
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The slashdotted article states:"I can write a program that lets you break the copy protection on a music file," says Dan Farmer, an independent computer security consultant in San Francisco. "But I can't write a program that solders new connections onto a chip for you."
This statement is somewhat naive... One can always write a program to emulate any piece of hardware, and there will always be ways of breaking them.
It also completely ignores the existence of hardware hackers. Remember how the Playstation wasn't supposed to be able to read copied games?
Basically, that's exactly what I was going to say, although I don't really care about independent functionality. A bookmark function is essential in my opinion. The capacity isn't really a big deal either, as long as I can back up the books I've purchased (like to CD for example). Note also the use of the word "purchased" as opposed to "liscenced", "rented", or any other term that does not imply ownership by me. Also, I think I would rather have it be thin, around the thickness of a PDA, but maybe with a bit larger screen. Basically the ones Piccard always had in ST:TNG. Did I mention non-proprietary? I hate proprietary formats. That's why I don't buy anything made by Sony.
Those times are pretty accurate, unfortunately. It was an extremely unhappy experience for me, especially after listening to all my friends rave for months about how great win2k was and how everything just worked and how that wasn't the case with Linux. Well, my experience was exactly the opposite. The most discouraging part is that it's been easier for me to find support info from hardware manufacturers for Linux than for Win2k.
The arguement is often made that Linux is only free if your time is worthless. I have to agree with this, but I still maintain that it's cheaper than windows.
I'll use SuSE in my example, since that's my distro of choice. Why? Because that's what the guy who introduced me to Linux used, and it works well for me. I'd rather not get into a discussion about the relative merits of various distros, mostly because it's largely irrelevant to the arguement I'm trying to make. So, with that out of the way...
I recently bought SuSE Professional for about $85 including shipping. It took about 2 hours to do the full install (bootable DVDs rock!), and everything worked except my printer. So far I've spent about 45 minutes on that problem, and while it isn't fixed, I know how to fix it as soon as I get the time to do it. I expect it will take about 1 hour for me to complete that, or considerably less if I enlist the aide of the afore-mentioned friend.
Yesterday, it was determined that all the computers at my place of employment were to be upgraded to Windows 2000, starting with mine. The upgrade version cost us a little under $200. That should be per station, but frankly, we can't afford that. It took me about 1.5 hours to perform the OS upgrade, plus.5 hours to upgrade Office 2000, plus 1 hour to reinstall the CAD software we use, plus 1 hour to get my NIC to work (mostly because, for some unknown reason, Win2k support info is hard to find), plus 4 hours to discover that our HP JetDirect won't work with Windows 2000 and we will have to buy a new print server(see previous parentheses), which will cost us about $130. I estimate it will take me about an hour to get that working when it arives.
Now, to find the actual cost of Windows, we need to add the prices of Photoshop and MS Office (which I honestly haven't looked at prices for in a while, but I'm going to arbitrarily say $500 each), plus $150 or so for the copy of Windows 98 that we were uprading from.
That gives us a cost of about $1500 and 8 hours for Windows, versus $85 and 4 hours for Linux, to achieve the same functionality (I've left the CAD software out of this equation, mostly because I haven't checked out any of the CAD packages available for Linux. If there's one that's comparable you can add $9000 and 1 hour to the Windows totals).
I think we can safely conclude that Windows has been much more expensive, in terms of both time and money, than Linux. However, even if the times were switched, I don't know anyone who's time is worth over $300 per hour, so I think it's safe to say that Linux would still be considerably cheaper.
That said, I think it would take me a lot of distro buying to equal the amount I have to spend to get the same functionality under Windows. After all, a computer with only an OS installed is just an expensive boat anchor.
Hopefully it will jar my manager into listening to me when question his desire to lock us into particular vendors of proprietary crap (both hardware and software).
It honestly boggles my mind that, for a very small company with no cash to spare, he refuses to even consider open source options.
I personally got into linux because I'm too cheap to pay $400 (winME + office2k) for a $30 OS (SuSE personal). I would also rather pay $70 (SuSE proffesional) for a $1500 OS (Novell small business).
The computer industry NEEDS WinXP to be launched in October to help fuel consumer and business buying, thus giving the tech companies a much-needed boost.
I believe that the poster of this coment meant that the computer HARDWARE industry needs WinXP to help to help fuel consumer and business buying. This is a reference to Microsofts cavalier attitude towards system resources. It often seems to me that MS purposefully makes every new version of their software 50% larger than the last in order to prop up the hardware industry. The buyer says "I've upgraded Windows and Office and now my computer is so slow, but I don't want to give up all the cool new features, so I have to buy a new computer." How often do you hear a Linux user say that? And on the rare occasions that you do, how old is their machine?
Anyway, the point is that code bloat supports the hardware industry. Thus, MS supports the hardware industry.
Of what use is a "game controller" with no tactile feedback? Yippee! It's touch sensative and I can use cool little icons! But if you keep having to look at it to find the right place to touch, all it's going to do is get you killed. One of the most important parts of a game controller is tactile feedback, so you don't have to look away from the screen.
The racks used by musicians to hold effects are the same size (maybe not as deep, but that shouldn't be a problem if you're leaving the covers off anyway) and they are typically 2 to 12 spaces. As an added bonus, they are portable (i.e. they have handles and/or casters) and generally well armored and the better ones are even shock mounted in order to thwart the feindish airline baggage handlers.
Hey, DVD technology is an issue of National Security! This is no laughing matter.
Just think what could happen if the Chinese Red Army had training videos with the same image quality as those we might someday use to train our troops. Remember, the main advantage the US armed forces has is technological!
First of all, I never said that they were scientific, just that they publish one of the best newspapers in the world, and that the articles are well researched and unbiased.
Second, some of the greatest scientific minds have also been religious. Albert Einstein, for example. Religious beleif is not diametrically opposed to scientific rigor, as your narrow western mind defines it. It is merely a recognition that there are things you don't understand, which is an essential part of the scientific method. If anything is diametrically opposed to scientific rigor, it is hubris.
Third, since you obviously know nothing about Christian Science in general, or the First Church of Christ, Scientist in particular, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to judge it.
The Christian Science Monitor is probably the best newspaper in the world. It reports REAL news in an unbiased and solidly researched manner. Obviously you have never read CSM. Try it before you bash it.
According to my Brother-in-Law who is a CHP, the standard is usually 10 mph over. As I recall if you're going more than 20 mph over the posted speed limit it's felony reckless driving.
I know, real men read man pages, but real men already know how to use a computer, so that approach won't really help. Thus, my suggestion...
The best book I've found for first time PC users is by Cliff's Notes, and it's called "Using Your First PC" or something obvious like that. I got it for my mom when I finally dragged her kicking and screaming into the digital age (her typewriter actually has keys that jam!!!). The best thing about it is that it's small, as you would expect from Cliff's Notes. It's just a basic reference with tons of screen shots.
Recently my school changed over to Java as well for "Intro to Programming", their basic OO class. The impression that I got is that it didn't change the class much due to the similarities between Java and C++ (which is what they used when I took it). For the next class you can choose either C++ or Java (or both, if you've got the time).
I agree with the poster who said Assembly should be first. That's the first language I took (I started out as a hardware geek taking Tech classes) and it helped me a lot.
I totally agree. This is exactly what I plan on doing when it becomes an issue (my daughter is only 13 months now, so at her current rate of learning I figure I have a year or two;p ).
My wife would like to just have the computer in a public area, but I can see reasons for our daughter to have her own computer (and for me to have my own as well) and I don't think it's likely that we will have a family room that big.
The way I figure it, I don't have a problem IF she figures out how to get around any monitoring or filters I may set up, in fact I want to encourage her to learn, but I will certainly want to know WHY.
Ask them to list things you can do with a computer (or what they think you can do with one). Throw in a few examples of cool stuff like animation and games if they seem to be having trouble.
From there you can pick something to teach them, or even have them pick something they want to learn more about.
Participation is really the key. The more you can get them to participate, the more they will enjoy it and the more they will learn.
Keep them doing stuff. The busier they are the better. Lecture is what will kill the enthusiasm.
I was a math tutor for almost 3 years (mostly college level, some high school and younger kids) and believe me, if these tricks can for math, they can certainly work for something interesting, like computers.
The cost of building nuclear, gas and oil plants is very expensive. If you are talking about solar etc, it is not nearly capable of handeling the load required for California yet.
It is true that these types of plants are expensive to build and to operate, and the operating expenses will only go up as supply of these resources runs low. That's why they are stupid technologies to use.
Solar IS capable of handling the load, all it requires is surface area, and I see a lot of empty rooftops in California. Besides the standard ugly solar panels, you can also get solar cell shingles (in a variety of colors) and solar sheet roofing, if the appearance of your building is important. One of the major advantages is that it puts power production in the same physical location as the usage, minimizing line loss and the need for high-tension transmission capacity. The only real barrier for solar is production capacity, but allowing consumers to be paid for power they produce would probably take care of that. There is a lot of unused production capacity right now in fab facilities that are capable of producing solar cells (though that may not be their primary purpose).
And, in fact, the number of plants that are down for "unscheduled maintenance" is suspicious to the inspectors who's job it is to make sure these same plants are properly maintained. I don't know about you, but I'll take their word over Duke's PR folks any day.
I have never been to Mexico, and it's not in all cases that the government is keeping others out of business by force.
It's interesting that you speak so matter-of-factly about something you admit you know nothing about. The government has very little to do with Mexico's financial problems, other than that they take a hands off approach. The wealthy in Mexico (I call them that because that's what they are), who are the folks who own the factories and other large businesses, keep wages low so no one can save up enough money to go into business for themselves. No one is being driven out of business by force, they just can't get the capital to go into business in the first place. That's exactly where America would be if not for the New Deal and the Socialist reforms it brought. As I said, review your history.
The truth is that Mexico is far more Capitalist than America is. They are also Nationalist (which I think is the root of your misconceptions of how they deal with property), but that only means that you can only own property in Mexico if you are a Mexican citizen. It is absolutely not Socialist or Communist in any way, and that's why they have so many problems with poverty and crime.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pro-Socialism or anti-Capitalism. I think they both have strong merits as well as strong flaws. I think a balance between them is what's needed, and I think the balance we have here in America is pretty good. All I'm trying to do is make you see that the benefits you enjoy do not all come from Capitalism. There are a lot more benefits that you directly receive from our Socialist policies than you are aware of.
The math here is incorrect. You have to take into consideration not the percentage, but the actual dollar amounts. (I also want to comment that the wealthy don't "control" the wealth, they OWN the wealth.. it is theirs). Now if you take that into consideration, the wealthy and companies pay 30% on the actual dollar amount of the 90% of the wealth of the nation. You and I only pay on 10% of the wealth.
Actually, my math is correct. The wealthiest 10% pay only 30% of the actual tax dollars paid. That's a well documented statistic. How much did the VP actually pay after al his rebates, credits, refunds, etc? A lot less than you think.
Not true, corporations didn't "abuse" people, they paid what they were worth to sit and do an easy but monotonous job on a factory line.
Yes they did. Review your history. Any history book will reveal how completely skewed your view of the Industrial Revolution is.
You obviously don't understand my point about Microsoft. Microsoft has so much money that they are essentially immune to Capitalist market forces. Whether their products succeed has nothing to do with whether they are better than their competition. In fact, they generally aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
The self install guide that I got from Pac Bell when i got DSL was pretty bad that way. It didn't help that all of the "helpful screen shots" were from Mac OS...
This statement is somewhat naive... One can always write a program to emulate any piece of hardware, and there will always be ways of breaking them.
It also completely ignores the existence of hardware hackers. Remember how the Playstation wasn't supposed to be able to read copied games?
Oh, well...
I'll use SuSE in my example, since that's my distro of choice. Why? Because that's what the guy who introduced me to Linux used, and it works well for me. I'd rather not get into a discussion about the relative merits of various distros, mostly because it's largely irrelevant to the arguement I'm trying to make. So, with that out of the way...
I recently bought SuSE Professional for about $85 including shipping. It took about 2 hours to do the full install (bootable DVDs rock!), and everything worked except my printer. So far I've spent about 45 minutes on that problem, and while it isn't fixed, I know how to fix it as soon as I get the time to do it. I expect it will take about 1 hour for me to complete that, or considerably less if I enlist the aide of the afore-mentioned friend.
Yesterday, it was determined that all the computers at my place of employment were to be upgraded to Windows 2000, starting with mine. The upgrade version cost us a little under $200. That should be per station, but frankly, we can't afford that. It took me about 1.5 hours to perform the OS upgrade, plus .5 hours to upgrade Office 2000, plus 1 hour to reinstall the CAD software we use, plus 1 hour to get my NIC to work (mostly because, for some unknown reason, Win2k support info is hard to find), plus 4 hours to discover that our HP JetDirect won't work with Windows 2000 and we will have to buy a new print server(see previous parentheses), which will cost us about $130. I estimate it will take me about an hour to get that working when it arives.
Now, to find the actual cost of Windows, we need to add the prices of Photoshop and MS Office (which I honestly haven't looked at prices for in a while, but I'm going to arbitrarily say $500 each), plus $150 or so for the copy of Windows 98 that we were uprading from.
That gives us a cost of about $1500 and 8 hours for Windows, versus $85 and 4 hours for Linux, to achieve the same functionality (I've left the CAD software out of this equation, mostly because I haven't checked out any of the CAD packages available for Linux. If there's one that's comparable you can add $9000 and 1 hour to the Windows totals). I think we can safely conclude that Windows has been much more expensive, in terms of both time and money, than Linux. However, even if the times were switched, I don't know anyone who's time is worth over $300 per hour, so I think it's safe to say that Linux would still be considerably cheaper.
That said, I think it would take me a lot of distro buying to equal the amount I have to spend to get the same functionality under Windows. After all, a computer with only an OS installed is just an expensive boat anchor.
There's my $0.02. Bring on the flames...
Of course, they keep sending them, so I wonder how much that really cuts down the traffic on their system...
It honestly boggles my mind that, for a very small company with no cash to spare, he refuses to even consider open source options.
Of course, he also wants to lock us in to a single hardware vendor, so what does he know.
Call me crazy...
I believe that the poster of this coment meant that the computer HARDWARE industry needs WinXP to help to help fuel consumer and business buying. This is a reference to Microsofts cavalier attitude towards system resources. It often seems to me that MS purposefully makes every new version of their software 50% larger than the last in order to prop up the hardware industry. The buyer says "I've upgraded Windows and Office and now my computer is so slow, but I don't want to give up all the cool new features, so I have to buy a new computer." How often do you hear a Linux user say that? And on the rare occasions that you do, how old is their machine?
Anyway, the point is that code bloat supports the hardware industry. Thus, MS supports the hardware industry.
Just think what could happen if the Chinese Red Army had training videos with the same image quality as those we might someday use to train our troops. Remember, the main advantage the US armed forces has is technological!
Second, some of the greatest scientific minds have also been religious. Albert Einstein, for example. Religious beleif is not diametrically opposed to scientific rigor, as your narrow western mind defines it. It is merely a recognition that there are things you don't understand, which is an essential part of the scientific method. If anything is diametrically opposed to scientific rigor, it is hubris.
Third, since you obviously know nothing about Christian Science in general, or the First Church of Christ, Scientist in particular, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to judge it.
Oh, and the nipple is a learned interface, too.
The best book I've found for first time PC users is by Cliff's Notes, and it's called "Using Your First PC" or something obvious like that. I got it for my mom when I finally dragged her kicking and screaming into the digital age (her typewriter actually has keys that jam!!!). The best thing about it is that it's small, as you would expect from Cliff's Notes. It's just a basic reference with tons of screen shots.
I agree with the poster who said Assembly should be first. That's the first language I took (I started out as a hardware geek taking Tech classes) and it helped me a lot.
My wife would like to just have the computer in a public area, but I can see reasons for our daughter to have her own computer (and for me to have my own as well) and I don't think it's likely that we will have a family room that big.
The way I figure it, I don't have a problem IF she figures out how to get around any monitoring or filters I may set up, in fact I want to encourage her to learn, but I will certainly want to know WHY.
Ask them to list things you can do with a computer (or what they think you can do with one). Throw in a few examples of cool stuff like animation and games if they seem to be having trouble.
From there you can pick something to teach them, or even have them pick something they want to learn more about.
Participation is really the key. The more you can get them to participate, the more they will enjoy it and the more they will learn.
Keep them doing stuff. The busier they are the better. Lecture is what will kill the enthusiasm.
I was a math tutor for almost 3 years (mostly college level, some high school and younger kids) and believe me, if these tricks can for math, they can certainly work for something interesting, like computers.
Solar IS capable of handling the load, all it requires is surface area, and I see a lot of empty rooftops in California. Besides the standard ugly solar panels, you can also get solar cell shingles (in a variety of colors) and solar sheet roofing, if the appearance of your building is important. One of the major advantages is that it puts power production in the same physical location as the usage, minimizing line loss and the need for high-tension transmission capacity. The only real barrier for solar is production capacity, but allowing consumers to be paid for power they produce would probably take care of that. There is a lot of unused production capacity right now in fab facilities that are capable of producing solar cells (though that may not be their primary purpose).
And, in fact, the number of plants that are down for "unscheduled maintenance" is suspicious to the inspectors who's job it is to make sure these same plants are properly maintained. I don't know about you, but I'll take their word over Duke's PR folks any day.
I have never been to Mexico, and it's not in all cases that the government is keeping others out of business by force.
It's interesting that you speak so matter-of-factly about something you admit you know nothing about. The government has very little to do with Mexico's financial problems, other than that they take a hands off approach. The wealthy in Mexico (I call them that because that's what they are), who are the folks who own the factories and other large businesses, keep wages low so no one can save up enough money to go into business for themselves. No one is being driven out of business by force, they just can't get the capital to go into business in the first place. That's exactly where America would be if not for the New Deal and the Socialist reforms it brought. As I said, review your history.
The truth is that Mexico is far more Capitalist than America is. They are also Nationalist (which I think is the root of your misconceptions of how they deal with property), but that only means that you can only own property in Mexico if you are a Mexican citizen. It is absolutely not Socialist or Communist in any way, and that's why they have so many problems with poverty and crime.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pro-Socialism or anti-Capitalism. I think they both have strong merits as well as strong flaws. I think a balance between them is what's needed, and I think the balance we have here in America is pretty good. All I'm trying to do is make you see that the benefits you enjoy do not all come from Capitalism. There are a lot more benefits that you directly receive from our Socialist policies than you are aware of.
Actually, my math is correct. The wealthiest 10% pay only 30% of the actual tax dollars paid. That's a well documented statistic. How much did the VP actually pay after al his rebates, credits, refunds, etc? A lot less than you think.
Not true, corporations didn't "abuse" people, they paid what they were worth to sit and do an easy but monotonous job on a factory line.
Yes they did. Review your history. Any history book will reveal how completely skewed your view of the Industrial Revolution is.
You obviously don't understand my point about Microsoft. Microsoft has so much money that they are essentially immune to Capitalist market forces. Whether their products succeed has nothing to do with whether they are better than their competition. In fact, they generally aren't.