Do they need to know how to install the OS first, or should I let them look that up on their own while I make them power-users?
Yes! (Not the first class, but before they leave your care anyway). If they can't install it, they can't use it at home.
Teach Clean install. Repartition. Dual boot.
Essentially show: It's not that complicated. I went for years not wanting to mess with the OS because of the fear factor. (Computers are very important for most people. IE. They have valuable data. They can't be down--and risking that in most families is not allowed.)
The entire U.S. space program in the 1960's and 1970's cost roughly the same amount of money that U.S. consumers spent on cosmetics in the same period of time.
Yeah, but to be truthfull, I get off more on the things that wear cosmetics
Abolitionists were extremists. Often, those who fight for the free press? Extremists. Revolutions--always extremists. Including (for example) the American Revolution.
If you don't support "extreme" positions than quite likely you support the status quo. Which is fine! But, please don't insult democracy by saying that people with extreme views are by definition irrational and unwanted.
I think that storing everything on computers will make historians jobs MUCH less difficult but a lot less fun.
I think it's more that i will be different people. Understanding most of history is constrained by the lack of data about that time. Our age is precisely the opposite. We try and save EVERYTHING we can possible afford--because we know that crap will be valuable to many people later on. For next centuries historians it will be about data sampling and extracting the gold nuggets from all the crap we have saved.
It will be the folks who built google. Not the current type of folks.
That said. It's better to have too much than too little.
And I'll say it again. I'm the geekiest guy I know. I ran a BBS in the 90s, have earned a few bucks setting up an office network and am generally known as the local/family tech guru. I've used Windows, OS 9, OSX and BeOS, but no linux. BUT I've never even seen a computer running Linux. At least not with it's monitor on.
Why?
Because most of my friends are not geeks. I'm not in comp sci. I don't run servers and I have only ONE computer. Windows may not be pretty, but it functions on par with 95% of the world. Sometimes that's enough.
Mostly, I don't like screwing around with the operating system. As a student, if my computer didn't work, I was fu**ed. A new OS gave me lots of chance to screw things up. As did its installation.
When BeOS offered the "install through windows" they got me. I tried it. I liked it, but the apps weren't there. The company also went out of business, so I gave up. If linux offered a similar thing? I'd be there. I might even pay to try it out.
I finally got "willing to pay money" fed up with Win 98 last year. I formatted my computer and set it up with a new partition for eventual dual boot. I moved up to XP for $50 (MS deal) a few months ago. It's slower than I'd like (old hardware, but has better stability)
(Key to this was XP offered me a program to check if my system was compatible.)
Will I putting Linux on there to play around? Maybe, if I get bored, but probably not. My GF needs it for her grad school. If it's down--I'm Fu**ed (or not getting... F'd as the case may be)
But in the end. I won't see it, unless *I* install it. And that's "expensive" timewise. Neither will any of the people around me. (My GF is still confused by my two weeks of switching between OS's as I moved things I needed over)
I'll have to go to significant effort just to learn what is neccesary to install. It's a lot of work--with a guarantee that things will be different, but not neccesarily better.
Mostly, asking to use Linux is like asking me to try out this great new product--and if I walk across town I have a chance to buy it without getting to kick a tire.
...and OS X comes on expensive hardware. I just grad'd and run a PII 400 Mhz. I could consider Apple hardware for the soon-to-be neccesary upgrade, but it's only worth it in my mind at the high end or laptops. Neither of which I have managed to justify in the wallet yet;-).
Err, any chip that Intel is releasing has faster brothers and sisters in the lab;-)
Oh wait I'm grumpy without the tags anyway...
Err, hasn't their been some other chip that's faster than this? (Ok, maybe not at a competitive price) but... wouldn't calling Intel's fastest desktop processor the "fastest every" be like calling a corvette or something the fastest land car ever?
I still find it refreshing when slashdot, a mere weblog, pulls out a headline with sardonic spin. I also find it amusing that people feel the need to rush to the defense of Microsoft. Seems as silly as protecting god with a sword.
I'd imagine that some people just find baseless criticism is more likely to backfire then do any damage to Microsoft.
NASA should say they're actually correct to get the funding it to really do it this time.... The saddest thing is that it seems the government actually did send up people instead of faking the moon landings. Think how much cheaper it would have been. I mean how much did we really gain from the landings other than social pride;-).
I was going to knock you about that comment. Vaporware requires the promise of a product--and there is no chance this is close to the realistic implementation plan--so vaporware would put this in a more "advanced" state than any promise they could make.
Except--the company actually is promising this.
It's an interesting idea, but it's wrong on so many levels
The government is a provides much of the funds for transportation. This would be totally privatized and would need to be MUCH cheaper to compete
People aren't stupid. Patents on software is one thing. Patents for transportation won't go over with the public--at all. The public will Get It(TM) and won't pay a charge.
Trains don't work. This seems like more expensive trains...
NY Times only asks that you spend 30 seconds of your life to make a login. They don't spam you and they won't sell your e-mail. Support the media when they create something you're actually interested in. CLICK ON IT... or just go to the Google link. Or DON'T READ IT!
An interesting question: Why can't Slashdot get a partner link like Google has.
I'm not sure how many companies out there only need "a little" time on a "supercomputer" though...
I'm reminded of that lovely quote: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - IBM Chairman Thomas Watson, 1943
First, if companies had supercomputer capabilities, many might come up with reasons to use it. For example. My company publishes a newsletter over the internet. We charge nearly $1,000 for our dailies. Such a publication would have been impossible before the internet. We are not on the internet for fun. We use it because it's the only way to get a niche product out to a geographically diverse readership in a timely manner. What companies might arise if such a service were available?
Back to this specific point though. Another example:. The company I work for has some databases that need to be run at the end of the day. However, we want it quickly after we get all the data in. Some are more time consuming than we would like. Perhaps buying a few minutes of processing power could make things faster--and save us some dough. We could invest in uberserver as well. But it would sit there gather dust 95% of the day.
Re:For all those bashing "Blogs"
on
Blogger Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Funny
But don't compare blogs to a BBS... those were the days when you actually had to have a brain to get online, versus now, when Bertha Walmartski can blog it up to tell the world that one of her three toy poodles is depressed.
You never signed on to my BBS did you
For all those bashing "Blogs"
on
Blogger Hacked
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Blogs have achieved one of the most fantastic of things ever on the internet. They killed the personal web site! Anyone been asked to visit anyones "personal web page" recently? I think not!
Personal web pages were 50 times worse than any blog. It's evolution--not revolution;-).
Anyway... My friend has a blog. It's is like the BBS I ran when I was 14. Some friends log in. We talk about intersting things (or not) publicly. Eventually when I did things right, a few extra people came along and we had some good conversations.
This is a poppycock story. I am a journaist and usually defend the media... but this article claims humans "use" and not "influence" this land. They have different meanings!
Analysis of the Human Footprint indicates that 83% of the land's surface is directly influenced by human agency. 98% of the areas where it's possible to grow rice or wheat or corn (maize) are similarly influenced.
Slashdot Mirror
Do they need to know how to install the OS first, or should I let them look that up on their own while I make them power-users?
Yes! (Not the first class, but before they leave your care anyway). If they can't install it, they can't use it at home.
Teach Clean install. Repartition. Dual boot.
Essentially show: It's not that complicated. I went for years not wanting to mess with the OS because of the fear factor. (Computers are very important for most people. IE. They have valuable data. They can't be down--and risking that in most families is not allowed.)
The entire U.S. space program in the 1960's and 1970's cost roughly the same amount of money that U.S. consumers spent on cosmetics in the same period of time.
Yeah, but to be truthfull, I get off more on the things that wear cosmetics
Don't support any extremist.
If you don't support "extreme" positions than quite likely you support the status quo. Which is fine! But, please don't insult democracy by saying that people with extreme views are by definition irrational and unwanted.
I think that storing everything on computers will make historians jobs MUCH less difficult but a lot less fun.
I think it's more that i will be different people. Understanding most of history is constrained by the lack of data about that time. Our age is precisely the opposite. We try and save EVERYTHING we can possible afford--because we know that crap will be valuable to many people later on. For next centuries historians it will be about data sampling and extracting the gold nuggets from all the crap we have saved.
It will be the folks who built google. Not the current type of folks.
That said. It's better to have too much than too little.
For $399 can I get one without a giant red bow? I'm not sure the extra bulge in my pants is necessary.
Is that your Palm in your pants or are you just glad to see me.
Wait a sec. . .
And I'll say it again. I'm the geekiest guy I know. I ran a BBS in the 90s, have earned a few bucks setting up an office network and am generally known as the local/family tech guru. I've used Windows, OS 9, OSX and BeOS, but no linux. BUT I've never even seen a computer running Linux. At least not with it's monitor on.
...and OS X comes on expensive hardware. I just grad'd and run a PII 400 Mhz. I could consider Apple hardware for the soon-to-be neccesary upgrade, but it's only worth it in my mind at the high end or laptops. Neither of which I have managed to justify in the wallet yet ;-).
Why?
Because most of my friends are not geeks. I'm not in comp sci. I don't run servers and I have only ONE computer. Windows may not be pretty, but it functions on par with 95% of the world. Sometimes that's enough.
Mostly, I don't like screwing around with the operating system. As a student, if my computer didn't work, I was fu**ed. A new OS gave me lots of chance to screw things up. As did its installation.
When BeOS offered the "install through windows" they got me. I tried it. I liked it, but the apps weren't there. The company also went out of business, so I gave up. If linux offered a similar thing? I'd be there. I might even pay to try it out.
I finally got "willing to pay money" fed up with Win 98 last year. I formatted my computer and set it up with a new partition for eventual dual boot. I moved up to XP for $50 (MS deal) a few months ago. It's slower than I'd like (old hardware, but has better stability)
(Key to this was XP offered me a program to check if my system was compatible.)
Will I putting Linux on there to play around? Maybe, if I get bored, but probably not. My GF needs it for her grad school. If it's down--I'm Fu**ed (or not getting... F'd as the case may be)
But in the end. I won't see it, unless *I* install it. And that's "expensive" timewise. Neither will any of the people around me. (My GF is still confused by my two weeks of switching between OS's as I moved things I needed over)
I'll have to go to significant effort just to learn what is neccesary to install. It's a lot of work--with a guarantee that things will be different, but not neccesarily better.
Mostly, asking to use Linux is like asking me to try out this great new product--and if I walk across town I have a chance to buy it without getting to kick a tire.
>Instead of paying $27 for my four DVD set of Lord >of the Rings, I might have only paid $17 if this >technology were available today?
>No, you'd still pay $27, but you could watch the >whole movie without changing discs.
No, you'd pay $35 because of the "added value"
Err, any chip that Intel is releasing has faster brothers and sisters in the lab
Oh wait I'm grumpy without the tags anyway...
Err, hasn't their been some other chip that's faster than this? (Ok, maybe not at a competitive price) but... wouldn't calling Intel's fastest desktop processor the "fastest every" be like calling a corvette or something the fastest land car ever?
(Second part an actualy question!)
I still find it refreshing when slashdot, a mere weblog, pulls out a headline with sardonic spin. I also find it amusing that people feel the need to rush to the defense of Microsoft. Seems as silly as protecting god with a sword.
I'd imagine that some people just find baseless criticism is more likely to backfire then do any damage to Microsoft.
Has any politician who did this ever defended this process in public? Is there one politician left who takes this whole democracy thing seriously?
It's called compromise. I'm on the edge on this bill, but...if you give this to my state/pet issue you have my vote
When will businesses learn that being circular and shiny doesn't mean its a CD!
You're both wrong. We lose either way.
NASA should say they're actually correct to get the funding it to really do it this time. ... The saddest thing is that it seems the government actually did send up people instead of faking the moon landings. Think how much cheaper it would have been. I mean how much did we really gain from the landings other than social pride ;-).
I was going to knock you about that comment. Vaporware requires the promise of a product--and there is no chance this is close to the realistic implementation plan--so vaporware would put this in a more "advanced" state than any promise they could make.
Except--the company actually is promising this.
It's an interesting idea, but it's wrong on so many levels
Obligatory request to MOD THIS DOWN!
NY Times only asks that you spend 30 seconds of your life to make a login. They don't spam you and they won't sell your e-mail. Support the media when they create something you're actually interested in. CLICK ON IT... or just go to the Google link. Or DON'T READ IT!
An interesting question: Why can't Slashdot get a partner link like Google has.
Feel free, to mod ME down with the above post.
I'm not sure how many companies out there only need "a little" time on a "supercomputer" though...
I'm reminded of that lovely quote:
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - IBM Chairman Thomas Watson, 1943
First, if companies had supercomputer capabilities, many might come up with reasons to use it. For example. My company publishes a newsletter over the internet. We charge nearly $1,000 for our dailies. Such a publication would have been impossible before the internet. We are not on the internet for fun. We use it because it's the only way to get a niche product out to a geographically diverse readership in a timely manner. What companies might arise if such a service were available?
Back to this specific point though. Another example:. The company I work for has some databases that need to be run at the end of the day. However, we want it quickly after we get all the data in. Some are more time consuming than we would like. Perhaps buying a few minutes of processing power could make things faster--and save us some dough. We could invest in uberserver as well. But it would sit there gather dust 95% of the day.
Score!
;-)
I have exactly a 3.0! I can do everything!
Take that "4.0" mom & "honor student" dad
But don't compare blogs to a BBS... those were the days when you actually had to have a brain to get online, versus now, when Bertha Walmartski can blog it up to tell the world that one of her three toy poodles is depressed.
You never signed on to my BBS did you
Blogs have achieved one of the most fantastic of things ever on the internet. They killed the personal web site! Anyone been asked to visit anyones "personal web page" recently? I think not!
;-).
Personal web pages were 50 times worse than any blog. It's evolution--not revolution
Anyway... My friend has a blog. It's is like the BBS I ran when I was 14. Some friends log in. We talk about intersting things (or not) publicly. Eventually when I did things right, a few extra people came along and we had some good conversations.
It's also at At the BBC BBC
(Where it's not slashdotted)
Notice to Cowboyneal:
;-0
The U.N. Security Council has determined you need to cut back.
Nice reminder, but it's old news. That's why you were rejected. Useful to post here though.
This is something I've never understood about IT upgrades.
If wordstar and typewriters are working, why spend $6b to replace them?
Standards. Standards. Standards.
In otherwords. It's not working very well and it's going to get worse. Typewriters? Be serious.
Oh and any computer running wordstar can't do a lot of tasks needed today.
Now, will the project standardize on MS word 10.1 and be obsolete by MS word 10.11. You betcha!