Because when it comes to open source software, when it stops becoming interesting and fun the projects stop being really maintained and start developing bugs with new hardware, security flaws that are unpatched, etc.
Because it tried to fix something that wasn't broken. There was absolutely nothing wrong with Gnome Panel for mouse and keyboard. Sure, GNOME shell might be nice if you've got a 10 inch touchscreen, but it gets in the way if you use a keyboard or mouse.
Don't "fix" what is broken, especially when it is a basic part of the system.
GNOME 3 missed the point of being a desktop environment which is to act like its supposed to and not get in the way of the user. The users of GNOME don't like GNOME 3, but the developers think that they somehow know better than the users of their product, naturally this lead to many users abandoning GNOME and forking it in projects like MATE.
GNOME was badly managed for years, but it was tolerable until GNOME 3.
The point of electronic locks are to be able to be opened by the owner in seconds in case they need to use the gun (such as in the event of a robbery or invasion). For example, you could stick the safe under your bed and it (in theory) shouldn't be able to be opened by a snooping kid very easily.
Because in order to stay modern they are going to have to make Steam compatible and integrate it well with Windows 8 because that is what a huge chunk of PC users are going to use simply because the OEM slapped it on there.
Um, let's see, the Galaxy S III was released first in late May/Early June. The iPhone 4S was released on October 14th 2011.
If Apple released the iPhone 4S-2 in June, yeah, it would be a fair comparison. But it isn't. A fair comparison would be between the Droid RAZR and the iPhone 4S. The Droid RAZR Maxx (as the first RAZR is no longer available, the Maxx being released just a few months later) sells for $99 on contract via Verizon, The iPhone 4S sells on contract for $200 via Verizon.
Of course they are having a hard time finding an honest leader (if you can say that there can be such a thing as an honest leader of a country). Romania switched to being a free-ish state in 1989, meaning that all their politicians were either raised in the communist state or were trained by politicians raised in the communist state.
It takes generations to break the cycle (if in fact the cycle will be broken).
Um, last time I checked Android supported Micro-SD cards just fine (I've got a 32 GB one loaded on my phone right now). Keep the default memory sizes but just include a Micro-SD card slot.
Sure, it might work for some people but it is such a glaring omission. Even my dumb-phones I had from 2005/6 had a Micro (or perhaps it was mini) SD card slot.
Not really. Google's products have always been popular in the right circles. The thing is, Google's previous physical products have been phones. The vast, vast, vast, majority of Americans buy their phones subsidized on contract, if the Google Nexus Phone X isn't there in the Verizon, ATT, T-Mobile or Sprint store, most people aren't going to buy it. Even among early adopters who look online they see $600 for a phone and can't justify paying that + contract price (and on contract is really the only way to keep a decent data plan today). They don't see a $600 phone when they buy the phone that costs them $50 on contract, they see a $50 phone. When you show them Google's phone, they see a very expensive piece of technology and understandably aren't buying it like crazy.
Tablets are different. Your average American isn't comparing the Google price to a substadized price, instead they are seeing you can buy a $200 tablet from Google, a $200 tablet from Amazon, a $400 high end Android tablet or a $500 low-end tablet from Apple.
Yep, its really depressing the level of service you get compared to the money you pay in the US, and I'm really not sure why. I don't know if it is the insurance mentality (I don't really have to pay this bill, my insurance will cover it) or whether its the lack of competition or something else. But hospitals (and even doctors offices) in the US are traditionally depressing and crappy. You get next to no service, you're lucky if you get a private room, they are often dirty, and the only amenities you get are free wi-fi (if you're lucky) and a tiny CRT television with a handful of channels.
Of course people want the 16 GB one over the 8 GB one, especially since there's no Micro SD card slot.
If they had a Micro-SD card slot, I'd be buying one, without one, I don't really see the point of buying a tablet in 2012 with such a pathetic amount of storage space. Really, why $50 for 16 GB? I can go out and buy a 32 Micro-SD card for $30 or less. I can buy a 64 GB SD card for under $50.
Which is why if you really want first class medical treatment you don't get it in the USA. Even routine things such as stitches at the hospital can easily run you $500 without insurance in the US at even a bottom-barrel hospital. Go to Mexico at a top-tier, first class hospital and you can get your hand stitched up for under $50 without insurance.
Not to mention that nearly every other country (even including those in Europe!) have more access to cutting edge treatments.
Unfortunately, most Americans won't think to really look abroad because they think that the US is the most advanced nation in the world and that they can really get the best care there.
But is a house really that great of an investment? Or will real estate prices continue to fall?
Even before that, lets say you've decided that buying a house is a good use of your money and in order to buy it you need X amount of cash which will take you 2-3 years to accumulate. So for those 2-3 years while you are accumulating it, it would make sense to put it in some safe investment that will meet or beat inflation so when you buy your house you only need X+Y amount of cash, not X+Y+Z (Y being the increase in the house price since when you made your goal 2-3 years ago and Z being the amount of money needed to add to X to keep up with inflation).
If we are to have a government, it only has 2 legitimate roles:
A) Protect its citizens from force (foreign attack, murder, theft, etc.)
B) Protect its citizens from fraud (misrepresentation, civil court system, etc.)
In a free market, companies have a single goal:
Make a profit.
How do they do that? By having people pay for services/goods. Why do they pay for goods and services? Because they improve people's quality of living. If they did not, they wouldn't be bought and the company would go out of business.
If government exists (as opposed to replacing the traditional functions of government with the free market), a government that only regulates force and fraud is the only way to ensure the highest possible quality of life for those who live under the jurisdiction of that government.
Of course a lot of it has to do with culture and people's individual habits, but the people who try to start saving undoubtedly don't keep it up because yields are so very low.
The fact that companies are sitting on piles of cash doesn't contradict my argument but rather confirms it. Currently there is really nothing for anyone to buy with cash that has any future yields so they just have cash in case a major opportunity comes by (buying a competitor or promising start-up). If CDs and bonds had positive yields, you'd see companies flocking to buy them, but since they don't, its easier to keep the cash in fully liquid form and hope for an opportunity than it is for them to make a guaranteed loss by saving it.
Myself I don't even know what to put my extra cash into other than silver and gold which are unlikely to really make me money but should keep their value better than cash, bonds or CDs. I don't even see IRAs as good investments anymore considering European governments have already started to seize their citizen's retirement accounts and I really don't see tax rates dropping in the future. It doesn't make much sense to not pay a low tax now and pay a high tax in the future.
I really have no problems with unions the abstract, but in practice I cannot support them due to the laws in the US. If workers are striking, the employer absolutely has the right to fire them. Just as every employee is different, so should their contract. Collective bargaining is an absolutely silly way to conduct business. Even though Joe, Bob and Frank all have the same job and the same experience, they each have their own wants, needs and ability levels. If Joe is much better than Bob and Frank at his job, Joe should get paid more. If Frank is a single young guy, having dental insurance is probably low on his priority list compared to Joe and Bob who both have growing families. Etc.
What I believe you are forgetting is that humans aren't machinery. The right employees can make and break a company. Companies who believe that employees are disposable and you can find another usually don't stay in business for very long.
And, no, I'm not talking about head CEOs or people with "vision" for the company but everyday, common, employees. If an employee adds no value compared to their cost, of course they will be replaced with someone who does, so the goal as an employee is not to do your "job" but add value to the product. If you add value, you will always have a job.
Swap a group of English speaking cashiers making slightly above the minimum wage for a group of foreigners working for less who speak with a thick accent in any American shop and watch that shop go out of business.
Why would that shop go out of business? Surely their costs were lowered, the foreigners had the same job description and could do the basics of the job well (scan items, make change, hand a receipt) but failed to really add any sort of value to the customer because they couldn't have conversations with them, they didn't know what certain customers wanted, etc.
You can win when you view yourself in the right light. You aren't hired to do a "job" you are hired to add value.
Here's the nice thing about the free market. If you don't like something your employer tells you to do, you don't have to work for them. In fact, with a free enough society, you can tell others what your employer tried to tell you to do which will either:
A) Cause the employer's customers not to support him and therefore he goes bust.
B) Cause the employees to all quit their job or demand higher pay to work.
C) Cause the employer to change his orders to prevent A or B from happening.
Don't like being told to hide radiation exposure? Don't work for the guy!
Slashdot Mirror
Because when it comes to open source software, when it stops becoming interesting and fun the projects stop being really maintained and start developing bugs with new hardware, security flaws that are unpatched, etc.
Every electronic lock worth its salt has a silent mode, usually activated by something like *#0*# or something.
Because it tried to fix something that wasn't broken. There was absolutely nothing wrong with Gnome Panel for mouse and keyboard. Sure, GNOME shell might be nice if you've got a 10 inch touchscreen, but it gets in the way if you use a keyboard or mouse.
Don't "fix" what is broken, especially when it is a basic part of the system.
GNOME 3 missed the point of being a desktop environment which is to act like its supposed to and not get in the way of the user. The users of GNOME don't like GNOME 3, but the developers think that they somehow know better than the users of their product, naturally this lead to many users abandoning GNOME and forking it in projects like MATE.
GNOME was badly managed for years, but it was tolerable until GNOME 3.
The point of electronic locks are to be able to be opened by the owner in seconds in case they need to use the gun (such as in the event of a robbery or invasion). For example, you could stick the safe under your bed and it (in theory) shouldn't be able to be opened by a snooping kid very easily.
Perhaps because its a pretty big college town and my guess is one of the developers studied at KU or a KU student provided the 3-D models of the town.
Because in order to stay modern they are going to have to make Steam compatible and integrate it well with Windows 8 because that is what a huge chunk of PC users are going to use simply because the OEM slapped it on there.
Better than the /, summaries that have nothing to do with TFA.
Um, let's see, the Galaxy S III was released first in late May/Early June. The iPhone 4S was released on October 14th 2011.
If Apple released the iPhone 4S-2 in June, yeah, it would be a fair comparison. But it isn't. A fair comparison would be between the Droid RAZR and the iPhone 4S. The Droid RAZR Maxx (as the first RAZR is no longer available, the Maxx being released just a few months later) sells for $99 on contract via Verizon, The iPhone 4S sells on contract for $200 via Verizon.
Ah yes, the US government has a stellar track record in recent years as it relates to civil liberties and basic privacies online...
Easier headline: exit interviews are pointless.
Of course they are having a hard time finding an honest leader (if you can say that there can be such a thing as an honest leader of a country). Romania switched to being a free-ish state in 1989, meaning that all their politicians were either raised in the communist state or were trained by politicians raised in the communist state.
It takes generations to break the cycle (if in fact the cycle will be broken).
Um, last time I checked Android supported Micro-SD cards just fine (I've got a 32 GB one loaded on my phone right now). Keep the default memory sizes but just include a Micro-SD card slot.
Sure, it might work for some people but it is such a glaring omission. Even my dumb-phones I had from 2005/6 had a Micro (or perhaps it was mini) SD card slot.
Not really. Google's products have always been popular in the right circles. The thing is, Google's previous physical products have been phones. The vast, vast, vast, majority of Americans buy their phones subsidized on contract, if the Google Nexus Phone X isn't there in the Verizon, ATT, T-Mobile or Sprint store, most people aren't going to buy it. Even among early adopters who look online they see $600 for a phone and can't justify paying that + contract price (and on contract is really the only way to keep a decent data plan today). They don't see a $600 phone when they buy the phone that costs them $50 on contract, they see a $50 phone. When you show them Google's phone, they see a very expensive piece of technology and understandably aren't buying it like crazy.
Tablets are different. Your average American isn't comparing the Google price to a substadized price, instead they are seeing you can buy a $200 tablet from Google, a $200 tablet from Amazon, a $400 high end Android tablet or a $500 low-end tablet from Apple.
Yep, its really depressing the level of service you get compared to the money you pay in the US, and I'm really not sure why. I don't know if it is the insurance mentality (I don't really have to pay this bill, my insurance will cover it) or whether its the lack of competition or something else. But hospitals (and even doctors offices) in the US are traditionally depressing and crappy. You get next to no service, you're lucky if you get a private room, they are often dirty, and the only amenities you get are free wi-fi (if you're lucky) and a tiny CRT television with a handful of channels.
Of course people want the 16 GB one over the 8 GB one, especially since there's no Micro SD card slot.
If they had a Micro-SD card slot, I'd be buying one, without one, I don't really see the point of buying a tablet in 2012 with such a pathetic amount of storage space. Really, why $50 for 16 GB? I can go out and buy a 32 Micro-SD card for $30 or less. I can buy a 64 GB SD card for under $50.
Which is why if you really want first class medical treatment you don't get it in the USA. Even routine things such as stitches at the hospital can easily run you $500 without insurance in the US at even a bottom-barrel hospital. Go to Mexico at a top-tier, first class hospital and you can get your hand stitched up for under $50 without insurance.
Not to mention that nearly every other country (even including those in Europe!) have more access to cutting edge treatments.
Unfortunately, most Americans won't think to really look abroad because they think that the US is the most advanced nation in the world and that they can really get the best care there.
Mod parent up.
But is a house really that great of an investment? Or will real estate prices continue to fall?
Even before that, lets say you've decided that buying a house is a good use of your money and in order to buy it you need X amount of cash which will take you 2-3 years to accumulate. So for those 2-3 years while you are accumulating it, it would make sense to put it in some safe investment that will meet or beat inflation so when you buy your house you only need X+Y amount of cash, not X+Y+Z (Y being the increase in the house price since when you made your goal 2-3 years ago and Z being the amount of money needed to add to X to keep up with inflation).
If we are to have a government, it only has 2 legitimate roles:
A) Protect its citizens from force (foreign attack, murder, theft, etc.)
B) Protect its citizens from fraud (misrepresentation, civil court system, etc.)
In a free market, companies have a single goal:
Make a profit.
How do they do that? By having people pay for services/goods. Why do they pay for goods and services? Because they improve people's quality of living. If they did not, they wouldn't be bought and the company would go out of business.
If government exists (as opposed to replacing the traditional functions of government with the free market), a government that only regulates force and fraud is the only way to ensure the highest possible quality of life for those who live under the jurisdiction of that government.
Of course a lot of it has to do with culture and people's individual habits, but the people who try to start saving undoubtedly don't keep it up because yields are so very low.
The fact that companies are sitting on piles of cash doesn't contradict my argument but rather confirms it. Currently there is really nothing for anyone to buy with cash that has any future yields so they just have cash in case a major opportunity comes by (buying a competitor or promising start-up). If CDs and bonds had positive yields, you'd see companies flocking to buy them, but since they don't, its easier to keep the cash in fully liquid form and hope for an opportunity than it is for them to make a guaranteed loss by saving it.
Myself I don't even know what to put my extra cash into other than silver and gold which are unlikely to really make me money but should keep their value better than cash, bonds or CDs. I don't even see IRAs as good investments anymore considering European governments have already started to seize their citizen's retirement accounts and I really don't see tax rates dropping in the future. It doesn't make much sense to not pay a low tax now and pay a high tax in the future.
I really have no problems with unions the abstract, but in practice I cannot support them due to the laws in the US. If workers are striking, the employer absolutely has the right to fire them. Just as every employee is different, so should their contract. Collective bargaining is an absolutely silly way to conduct business. Even though Joe, Bob and Frank all have the same job and the same experience, they each have their own wants, needs and ability levels. If Joe is much better than Bob and Frank at his job, Joe should get paid more. If Frank is a single young guy, having dental insurance is probably low on his priority list compared to Joe and Bob who both have growing families. Etc.
I can't keep up?
What I believe you are forgetting is that humans aren't machinery. The right employees can make and break a company. Companies who believe that employees are disposable and you can find another usually don't stay in business for very long.
And, no, I'm not talking about head CEOs or people with "vision" for the company but everyday, common, employees. If an employee adds no value compared to their cost, of course they will be replaced with someone who does, so the goal as an employee is not to do your "job" but add value to the product. If you add value, you will always have a job.
Swap a group of English speaking cashiers making slightly above the minimum wage for a group of foreigners working for less who speak with a thick accent in any American shop and watch that shop go out of business.
Why would that shop go out of business? Surely their costs were lowered, the foreigners had the same job description and could do the basics of the job well (scan items, make change, hand a receipt) but failed to really add any sort of value to the customer because they couldn't have conversations with them, they didn't know what certain customers wanted, etc.
You can win when you view yourself in the right light. You aren't hired to do a "job" you are hired to add value.
Um. No.
Here's the nice thing about the free market. If you don't like something your employer tells you to do, you don't have to work for them. In fact, with a free enough society, you can tell others what your employer tried to tell you to do which will either:
A) Cause the employer's customers not to support him and therefore he goes bust.
B) Cause the employees to all quit their job or demand higher pay to work.
C) Cause the employer to change his orders to prevent A or B from happening.
Don't like being told to hide radiation exposure? Don't work for the guy!