Most of the people i know here in canada fit what you describe there.....until they end up in a situation where the phone fails or is lost or stolen. Cellphone theft is the biggest cash cow in terms of the devices market for the providers.
Do they not have insurance in Canada? Mine is 2.99 a month and covers loss, theft, or virtually any type of damage. I've used it three times and it's painless and simple.
Boost Mobile (owned by Sprint-Nextel). No Contract.
Did I misunderstand you when you said "none of the competitors offer anything w/out a contract." because that ALL of the (major) competitors, and no contracts. There are literally dozens of options for cell service without a contract.
We're talking about large cheap laptops vs small cheap laptops. I fail to see how your totally irrelevant observation is either a problem or relevant in any way.
So Dell boxes are cheap crap. Please tell me how that in any way relates to a comparison of two Dell laptops? They're BOTH Dells, so how does their being cheap crap matter since they'd both be cheap crap?
I was (before retirement) a NASA employee for 35 years, and I do know the Hatch act well... as I ought to, it being drilled into us every year at mandatory and really boring "ethics" training. I feel it mandatory to quote "ethics" because it was just about laws and nothing about actual ethics, the subjects two having less correlation than one might hope.
If the meeting covered the Hatch act, it was about ethics. You were wrong.
I rather specifically said that I was talking about stuff *NOT* done on government time and equipment.
Please point that out in the first quote, which is what I was referencing. Hmm, it seems to be totally fucking absent. OOPS!
You also apparently have trouble with English comprehension in that I rather explicitly referred to the "ethics" training in general, rather than solely to the Hatch act stuff
And? You were wrong, what do you want? That you explicitly referenced the "ethics" training in general does nothing to moot the fact that the Hatch act WAS covered, which makes it about ethics, which makes you wrong again. Seems it's YOUR reading comprehension that sucks.
Then perhaps you ought to be a little less quick with the profanity-laced judgments.
Why would I do that when I was right about everything I said? Your post was bullshit, and your reply does nothing to change that. All you did in your reply, in fact, was to reference thing I care fuck all about and didn't discuss, and lie about that which I did.
Perhaps you could avoid saying shit that is wrong so you don't have to follow up with a pathetic reply defending your previous stupidity? It won't make you less stupid but at least you wouldn't be advertising it openly like you did with those two posts.
I agree Governments have no rights in and of them selves, they do have "rights" which have been surrendered by the people
NO THEY DON'T. Stop using that word incorrectly and diluting it's meaning. When people such as yourself use "rights" when you mean something entirely different, in pollutes the word and convolutes the discussion.
Governments do not have rights. Please stop misusing that word.
The things can do much better than most laptops can achieve.
THAT is what you were factually incorrect about. The batteries that come with these devices are themselves smaller, reducing battery life. They cannot do "much better" than most laptops, that is simply wrong.
In the meantime, reply to someone else; you're pretty insulting and I don't value your one-sided debating.
In other words "I'm wrong and I need a cheap out". I wasn't insulting, you're just wrong and over-sensitive. Please don't cry though, I thought we were playing nice-nice...
So what you're saying is that you disagree, but you are right and I am wrong?
Not exactly, but close.
I'd hardly call this an even remotely respectful debate
Because you're losing, I suspect. Replace "you are right and I am wrong" with "the market is right and I am wrong" and you'll understand what I'm getting at.
You're forwarding an argument. The market is disproving your assumptions on a daily basis, yet you continue to forward them. What does that say about your argument?
"I'm right, even though the market is proving me wrong." That's YOU. How does it look when your argument is simplified to it's lowest level?
The difference is 4inches
And the point is, despite the fact that YOU think otherwise, that 4 inch difference is VERY significant.
As others have previously said, your link lists something that happened decades ago. Even taking your statement at face value, 1980 belies the statement that "it keep on showing up here and thier" unless by "here and there" you meant "three decades ago."
It's gone man. It doesn't show up "here or there".
That's me, shamelessly banging everything that moves and constantly drunk off my ass in my "ivory tower".
Do you know how many terrorist strikes happen in India every year?
Name a number that you think would cause me to reconsider renouncing my rights for safety. Start with a BIG number, you'll waste a ton of time otherwise.
They laid siege to the parliament, blasted commuter trains, temples...
And? That was sufficient to make you renounce your rights as a human being? Sorry, you'll have to do better than that.
They have to maintain law and order in a society where more than half the population is functionally illiterate.
So, why is your solution to this is anything other than teach them to read?
And finally Indian constitution is not the same as US constitution.
Hey man, nothing's perfect.
Lastly, if you were being sarcastic (please please please say you were being sarcastic) then you got me.
Strike one. Not only are you factually incorrect (the batteries are smaller too), but this doesn't appear to be the reason people are buying them (mostly because it's not true). The VIA nanobook seems to com in at around 4.5 hours, with the eee being arounr 3 to 3.5 hours. Neither is significantly better than a "real" laptop, and they are actually worse than some full sized laptops.
but you don't need to make it worded as a personal attack.
Um, what? I didn't. If you felt attacked, it was your perception, get over it.
I understand what you're saying, however cars and trucks have distinctly different purposes.
Exactly, so do large heavy laptops and small, light laptops.
Those lines of functionality are distinctly closer with an ultraportable laptop and a plain jane cheap laptop.
To YOU. Consider the possibility that your opinion isn't representative of the population. To me big and heavy is decidedly different from small and light regardless of differences in features. Their function is similar (but so are cars and trucks, they move things) but the function isn't the determining factor.
"The last cases of smallpox in the world occurred in an outbreak of two cases (one of which was fatal) in Birmingham, England in 1978. A medical photographer, Janet Parker, died from the disease on 11 September 1978"
Now if you have a link that demonstrates a more recent case (which is possible as I'm no expert) then I'd love to see it.
However, as they are a company with sub 500$ laptops, they will be competing with themselves on some levels as mentioned:)
You'd think so, until you actually give it some real consideration. Then you'd realize how wrong that is.
The market for "cheapest possible laptop" isn't going to cross over with the "very small, very light laptop" very often. They are two different products. To make the ubiquitous car analogy, people who sell trucks aren't worried about cannibalizing their convertible market, even though the two products may overlap in price.
But for $500 you can get a regular fully functional laptop in many instances.
Yes you can. So my question to you then is, why are people snatching up these mini-notebooks left and right, with companies seemingly finding an urgent need to enter the niche?
Is it possible that you're missing something? Or do you ascribe the success of these devices to marketing and gullibility? I ask because I've seen your argument before, and responded to it before, but the responses never seem to register.
So what is your answer? Why are people going against what you think to be the intelligent choice? I ask again, is it possible that you missed something and that 500 dollar laptop you're touting doesn't measure up for some reason? I bet if you examine the two devices, you'll see the major difference that makes these devices desirable.
Hint: it's not processor speed, or hard drive size, or screen resolution. Those things matter little to the people considering an EEEPC or one of its competitors.
People seriously pondering something like this should accept the fact that their principled stand might find themselves in some trouble.
Funny, that would seem to be true of most "principled stands". That fear may cow you into submission, but I suspect that's not true of most people who would resist.
Then there's your tacit assumption that the people doing this would be imbeciles. Nothing you said there has any real bearing on how an intelligent, motivated individual would engage in an act of resistance where one of these setups was present.
I'd say that if you realize it was a joke, but then still try to make this into a serious, factual statement, that makes you look either stupid, humorless, or at best just a troll.
Of course you do, you agree with the sentiment. You're wrong, as analyzing a "joke" that clearly had serious underpinnings is done by intelligent people every day. Jokes aren't made in a vacuum.
The fact that you think analyzing something in the context it was presented makes one "stupid, humorless, or at best just a troll" illustrates how little value your opinion on the subject has.
Right... so what you want is a realistic explanation for a freakin' flying blue guy who can do anything?
No moron, what I want is for the author to not take the easy way out when HE HIMSELF introduced said "flying blue guy who can do anything". He took the easy way out and the story suffered.
Don't blame me because I'm not intellectually stunted enough to accept the ending, just be happy that you are.
Slashdot Mirror
They weren't. Rogers at least wasn't.
http://plans.boostmobile.com/unlimited.aspx
Check that out. TBH, it's an extremely good deal at $55 a month for unlimited talk, text and wireless web. Definitely not gouging.
Most of the people i know here in canada fit what you describe there.....until they end up in a situation where the phone fails or is lost or stolen. Cellphone theft is the biggest cash cow in terms of the devices market for the providers.
Do they not have insurance in Canada? Mine is 2.99 a month and covers loss, theft, or virtually any type of damage. I've used it three times and it's painless and simple.
Hmm. Let's examine this.
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/go-phones/
AT&T Go phone. No contract.
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/default.aspx?plancategory=4
T-Mobile. No contract.
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?item=prepayItem&action=viewINpulsePlanDetail
Verizon. No contract.
http://www.boostmobile.com/
Boost Mobile (owned by Sprint-Nextel). No Contract.
Did I misunderstand you when you said "none of the competitors offer anything w/out a contract." because that ALL of the (major) competitors, and no contracts. There are literally dozens of options for cell service without a contract.
I guess the answer is "constantly, all day long". Which I suspected already.
We're talking about large cheap laptops vs small cheap laptops. I fail to see how your totally irrelevant observation is either a problem or relevant in any way.
So Dell boxes are cheap crap. Please tell me how that in any way relates to a comparison of two Dell laptops? They're BOTH Dells, so how does their being cheap crap matter since they'd both be cheap crap?
Nope, I read it. You said
If the meeting covered the Hatch act, it was about ethics. You were wrong.
Please point that out in the first quote, which is what I was referencing. Hmm, it seems to be totally fucking absent. OOPS!
And? You were wrong, what do you want? That you explicitly referenced the "ethics" training in general does nothing to moot the fact that the Hatch act WAS covered, which makes it about ethics, which makes you wrong again. Seems it's YOUR reading comprehension that sucks.
Why would I do that when I was right about everything I said? Your post was bullshit, and your reply does nothing to change that. All you did in your reply, in fact, was to reference thing I care fuck all about and didn't discuss, and lie about that which I did.
Perhaps you could avoid saying shit that is wrong so you don't have to follow up with a pathetic reply defending your previous stupidity? It won't make you less stupid but at least you wouldn't be advertising it openly like you did with those two posts.
NO THEY DON'T. Stop using that word incorrectly and diluting it's meaning. When people such as yourself use "rights" when you mean something entirely different, in pollutes the word and convolutes the discussion.
Governments do not have rights. Please stop misusing that word.
THAT is what you were factually incorrect about. The batteries that come with these devices are themselves smaller, reducing battery life. They cannot do "much better" than most laptops, that is simply wrong.
In other words "I'm wrong and I need a cheap out". I wasn't insulting, you're just wrong and over-sensitive. Please don't cry though, I thought we were playing nice-nice...
Not exactly, but close.
Because you're losing, I suspect. Replace "you are right and I am wrong" with "the market is right and I am wrong" and you'll understand what I'm getting at.
You're forwarding an argument. The market is disproving your assumptions on a daily basis, yet you continue to forward them. What does that say about your argument?
"I'm right, even though the market is proving me wrong." That's YOU. How does it look when your argument is simplified to it's lowest level?
And the point is, despite the fact that YOU think otherwise, that 4 inch difference is VERY significant.
No, I'm deeply offended by people who assigned things to me which I never said or did.
Of course. That I choose not to is simply an indication of the contempt I have for people like you who manufacture arguments.
I genuinely don't care.
I learned. I learned that your opinion is not worth paying attention to, and that you'll contort yourself however necessary when confronted.
As others have previously said, your link lists something that happened decades ago. Even taking your statement at face value, 1980 belies the statement that "it keep on showing up here and thier" unless by "here and there" you meant "three decades ago."
It's gone man. It doesn't show up "here or there".
That's me, shamelessly banging everything that moves and constantly drunk off my ass in my "ivory tower".
Name a number that you think would cause me to reconsider renouncing my rights for safety. Start with a BIG number, you'll waste a ton of time otherwise.
And? That was sufficient to make you renounce your rights as a human being? Sorry, you'll have to do better than that.
So, why is your solution to this is anything other than teach them to read?
Hey man, nothing's perfect.
Lastly, if you were being sarcastic (please please please say you were being sarcastic) then you got me.
No, they do not. The have the powers and responsibilities of sovereignty, given to them by the people that instituted said government.
Calling it a "right" is a misuse of the term, and the rest of your post is just as factually inaccurate.
Strike one. Not only are you factually incorrect (the batteries are smaller too), but this doesn't appear to be the reason people are buying them (mostly because it's not true). The VIA nanobook seems to com in at around 4.5 hours, with the eee being arounr 3 to 3.5 hours. Neither is significantly better than a "real" laptop, and they are actually worse than some full sized laptops.
Um, what? I didn't. If you felt attacked, it was your perception, get over it.
Exactly, so do large heavy laptops and small, light laptops.
To YOU. Consider the possibility that your opinion isn't representative of the population. To me big and heavy is decidedly different from small and light regardless of differences in features. Their function is similar (but so are cars and trucks, they move things) but the function isn't the determining factor.
No. It has essentially been eradicated in the wild. THIRTY years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox#Eradication
"The last cases of smallpox in the world occurred in an outbreak of two cases (one of which was fatal) in Birmingham, England in 1978. A medical photographer, Janet Parker, died from the disease on 11 September 1978"
Now if you have a link that demonstrates a more recent case (which is possible as I'm no expert) then I'd love to see it.
You'd think so, until you actually give it some real consideration. Then you'd realize how wrong that is.
The market for "cheapest possible laptop" isn't going to cross over with the "very small, very light laptop" very often. They are two different products. To make the ubiquitous car analogy, people who sell trucks aren't worried about cannibalizing their convertible market, even though the two products may overlap in price.
Yes you can. So my question to you then is, why are people snatching up these mini-notebooks left and right, with companies seemingly finding an urgent need to enter the niche?
Is it possible that you're missing something? Or do you ascribe the success of these devices to marketing and gullibility? I ask because I've seen your argument before, and responded to it before, but the responses never seem to register.
So what is your answer? Why are people going against what you think to be the intelligent choice? I ask again, is it possible that you missed something and that 500 dollar laptop you're touting doesn't measure up for some reason? I bet if you examine the two devices, you'll see the major difference that makes these devices desirable.
Hint: it's not processor speed, or hard drive size, or screen resolution. Those things matter little to the people considering an EEEPC or one of its competitors.
Funny, that would seem to be true of most "principled stands". That fear may cow you into submission, but I suspect that's not true of most people who would resist.
Then there's your tacit assumption that the people doing this would be imbeciles. Nothing you said there has any real bearing on how an intelligent, motivated individual would engage in an act of resistance where one of these setups was present.
This shit infuriates me.
GOVERNMENTS DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS OF ANY KIND.
Governments have powers. This IS NOT a simple semantic argument.
Of course you do, you agree with the sentiment. You're wrong, as analyzing a "joke" that clearly had serious underpinnings is done by intelligent people every day. Jokes aren't made in a vacuum.
The fact that you think analyzing something in the context it was presented makes one "stupid, humorless, or at best just a troll" illustrates how little value your opinion on the subject has.
No moron, what I want is for the author to not take the easy way out when HE HIMSELF introduced said "flying blue guy who can do anything". He took the easy way out and the story suffered.
Don't blame me because I'm not intellectually stunted enough to accept the ending, just be happy that you are.
I didn't. Perhaps when speakingof reading, you could engage in some yourself.
You'll see that I DID acknowledge them, just that they had little impact. Reading isn't hard, why are you having difficulty?
In the future, for me specifically, if you plan to respond, please respond to what I said and not whatever stupid nonsense you chose to assign to me.