What? It is simply property. I'm not going to be pissed if my neighbor steals my shovel and pays me back for it. Yeah, its not going to be my favorite thing in the world to have happened to me, but its not a huge deal.
Oh no not my cat what ever will I do?! Except, you know simply have them pay for the cost of replacing a cat, which isn't too much plus a bit more for re-training and then I'd be happy again.
This is from a state that requires warning labels to be put on anything more than pure water (and even then they are probably attempting to pass a bill with a warning sticker "This product contains Water a chemical known to the state of California to cause drowning and water poisoning"), who basically is bankrupt, who thinks they need to tax everything for the little they do to help the people and now have this. The people running California, I'd have to say, are basically brain-dead idiots.
Exactly. What we really need to do is stop using jails as "time out" and start only keeping violent people there. If the crime was non-violent and they don't pose a threat to society, put them on probation and make them pay restitution. If there was no one harmed to pay restitution to, how was it a crime in the first place? On the same vain, we need to elect our executive branch by allowing for the direct election, supervision and removal of police officers and make every move they make public record so we can end police brutality and abuse.
What is next? A list of people who bought cigarettes, drinks and porn?
My guess is with the way things are going a "gateway drug" list, after all we know that anyone who has ever smoke, drank or even did pot is now snorting coke right? And if we have an alcohol and cigarette list we will know that our kids aren't being exposed to second hand smoke and we can monitor parties! After all, its not like its a constitutional right to be able to have people to gather peacefully and do what they are legally allowed to do...
No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state?
Yes, actually that is what they do. I'm from the midwest and in a city (I think it was near Kansas City) they were proposing opening a small (like 1 week) hunting season in this park that was overwhelmed with deer (far beyond the carrying capacity and people kept hitting deer left and right) and they seriously proposed putting birth control or something in the food to stop this overpopulation. And this is in Missouri where the first day of deer season practically is a state holiday! Let alone what the idiots in California are thinking.
But when it comes to animal abuse, I loose some of that rationality. Animal abusers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to harm people, especially given a one in a million encounter.
Same thing could be said for any number of behaviours. Let me reword your post.
But when it comes to porn watching, I loose some of that rationality. porn watchers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to have sex with someone, especially given a one in a million encounter.
And hopefully you will see how stupid it sounds.
Sure, let animal abusers serve their time. Even give'em a job. Good luck feeling inner piece when your daughter says she is going camping with him, when his little discresion in life was nailing a cat to a plank of wood while performing some autopsy while it was still alive. Over the course of an hour.
Who cares? Guess what? Everyone has done strange things in their life. Does that mean we get to label those who got caught and classify them as "dangerous"? No, of course not. The entire point of justice is you serve time and you are free and don't have to keep serving it forever. The other way is tyranny.
Yes, but have you seen the paranoia over these "sex" offender registries? People are afraid to move into houses because there might be a "sex offender" living on the next block. Never mind that these people don't seem to look at the real picture and look at the trial and see that his only crime was peeing in public and he is now 73 years old and wheelchair bound. The point is, taxpayer funds are being used for this completely stupid project that adds nothing (who the hell cares if someone kicked a dog? I sure as hell don't), adds more debt to an already bankrupt state (next thing you know my federal taxes are going to be "bailing out" financially challenged California) and takes away rights (once you have served time, you should be treated as a full citizen, taking away voting rights for felons is honestly tyranny because they have suffered more harm by the state than anyone else, and even taking away second amendment rights I believe is questionable).
In short, this is a terrible idea because taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill for yet another useless project from a bankrupt state.
Who cares about animals. Seriously. I'd much rather be alive with some pain then to go to a "shelter" where they kill you. Hm, sounds like one nice shelter, one moment you are enjoying a nice existence in the streets, the next your entire reason for existence is taken away from you (entire life-purpose of animals is to reproduce) and then you are dead. Sounds like some shelter right?
But OS X would not be successful if it was not open. If OS X would not allow various apps that wouldn't be allowed on the iPhone to be on OS X, it would have almost no marketshare.
It is only a temporary glitch of the failures of all other mobile OSes at the time (Windows Mobile, Symbian, That crappy Java-Based OS, etc), large portions of the phone being paid for by phone carriers and the like that let the iPhone get even a small marketshare. If Google ever gets their act together, Android can easily crush the momentum from the iPhone. If Palm can saturate -all- carriers and not just CDMA ones with WebOS phones, WebOS can get decent marketshare. It would really help Apple if they didn't piss off their developers and users. They might be number one now, but they were number one with the Apple II and look at how quickly they lost that lead.
The thing is, the iPhone OS is short-term, a desktop OS is long-term. Even if design principles of iPhone OS doesn't change much in 2013, hardware will have advanced monumentally to the point where it might be nearly impossible to even run applications.
What really makes sense on high-capacity devices such as the iPhone is to allow small "emulated" apps to be run in earlier versions of iPhone OS with the older APIs when it detects a version that is untested with the current version.
Judging from the post, it seems like there really isn't any intention to share it at the time.
The impression I got is they have, say, 5 designers making, say, a logo. Designers 1-4 are the workers and designer 5 is the son. 1-4 work on different logos to present to the company, designer 5 was supposed to but instead sees what designers 1-4 are doing, takes elements from there and creates another design (claiming it was his own of course). At least thats the impression I got.
You measure an OS's superiority by how well it can run on almost obsolete hardware? Then I guess DOS is the best OS of them all, followed by Linux with only a bash shell.
A P4 is hardly "almost obsolete". Yes, if you are buying a new computer its going to be a lot faster. But if I was going to design an operating system circa 2006, I'd make sure that it would work very with a CPU that wouldn't be discontinued for 2 more years afterwords and with the default memory shipping on most -new- computers, especially cheaper ones that people tend to buy.
Almost obsolete would be about a Pentium III (which can run a light, but modern, version of Linux without too much problems) especially in 2006 which is when Vista was released.
I assume the OP doesn't see anything wrong with having 20 slightly different versions of the same design?
That could very well be the point. Especially in advertising where you might want to have say, 4 different versions of a logo and let the client choose which one they want.
When you use weasel-words like "universal knowledge" (what the hell does that even mean?)
Because just about any person who has touched a computer in the last 9 years has used XP compared to very few who have used Windows 7.
But Microsoft does indeed do usability testing, a lot of it, and Windows 7 is provably more user friendly than Windows XP. (And since it's bound to come up: so is Office 2007.)
"usability" doesn't mean crap when it means re-learning. Very, very few people actually want to take time to re-learn computers. Hence why Linux hasn't taken off. Any small difference even if it improves usability is a hindrance to most people who use computers simply to get work done. While it might be great for us geeks who actually use computers to do more than basic tasks, most other people have things simply memorized. Ever rearrange icons on someone's computer and then have them not know how to do a basic task? Yeah, most people simply learn where things are, any change is bad for them.
And Vista might be "considered trash," but it's also measurably superior to XP--
Run Vista and XP on a Pentium 4 with 512 MB of RAM, see which OS you can do more on.
Yes, Vista does work better than XP when dealing with loads upon loads of RAM, but at the time that Vista was released -a lot- of the machines came loaded with specs no better than a Pentium 4 and 512 MB of RAM.
in fact I think it says something that Vista and Windows 7 are virtually identical, yet for some reason 7 is liked and Vista is hated.
Mostly because everything is overpowered. Of course something is going to run decently when even a $300 cheap-as-free laptop has 2 gigs of RAM and a 2.2 Ghz 64 bit CPU. If something -didn't- run decently on 2 gigs of RAM and a 2.2 Ghz CPU something is -seriously- wrong. Back with Vista the same priced machine would have only 512 MB of RAM and a sluggish CPU.
Usability isn't about hand-waving or saying "I think this color looks nice," it's about sitting people in front of your product and watching them use it. It's about defining a task, and measuring how well they complete it using your OS. It's about statistics, not hunches. Most divisions of Microsoft do that consistently and habitually. (Some don't.)
Like I said, usability doesn't matter for a lot of people. Familiarity does. Familiarity leads to lessened costs for businesses when compared to usability. Chances are that 65 year old woman in -insert obscure department here- isn't going to use a computer beyond what is required. A lot of people don't -use- a computer they memorize where things are.
Its like a language, geeks like you, me and the rest of/. are fluent speakers, a lot of other people are simply reading out of the dictionary "translating" concepts from pen and paper to the computer.
To -many- people XP still is considered to be the best OS. Vista is considered to be trash and this basically sums up people's feelings about Windows 7 http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png . Yes, Windows 7 isn't terrible, but it lacks the user-friendlyness and universal knowledge that XP had. Show almost any computer user an XP machine and chances are they can navigate it very well, show a lot of people a Windows 7 machine and they will be puzzled.
Lol, what? Ever sped some time -talking- to the people there in AT&T stores? They know one phone and own one phone. The iPhone. They can tell you what is in stock with the other phones and thats it.
...Such as? And is it not available or not used by default? Just about every "missing" feature simply isn't installed by default because a lot of people don't like it. A lot of people like XP more than 7.
Ok, think about this, your battery goes out on your iPhone, it is jailbroken and of course didn't have anything to do with the battery. But, since the tech notices it was jailbroken, they refuse to honor your warranty and you are out of luck. Unfair? Yes. Stupid? Yes. A big deal for someone trying to keep their $600 phone around for 2 years? Yes.
Because if someone gets crap tethering on a Samsung, Nokia, or BlackBerry they are going to blame the phone because they didn't get the "best" phone in the AT&T lineup which is presented in ads as the iPhone. Every carrier restricts their "flagship" phones somewhat if they don't think that some features aren't the best.
Slashdot Mirror
What? It is simply property. I'm not going to be pissed if my neighbor steals my shovel and pays me back for it. Yeah, its not going to be my favorite thing in the world to have happened to me, but its not a huge deal.
Oh no not my cat what ever will I do?! Except, you know simply have them pay for the cost of replacing a cat, which isn't too much plus a bit more for re-training and then I'd be happy again.
This is from a state that requires warning labels to be put on anything more than pure water (and even then they are probably attempting to pass a bill with a warning sticker "This product contains Water a chemical known to the state of California to cause drowning and water poisoning"), who basically is bankrupt, who thinks they need to tax everything for the little they do to help the people and now have this. The people running California, I'd have to say, are basically brain-dead idiots.
The word "fellated" means oral. Not penetration.
Mod parent up.
Exactly. What we really need to do is stop using jails as "time out" and start only keeping violent people there. If the crime was non-violent and they don't pose a threat to society, put them on probation and make them pay restitution. If there was no one harmed to pay restitution to, how was it a crime in the first place? On the same vain, we need to elect our executive branch by allowing for the direct election, supervision and removal of police officers and make every move they make public record so we can end police brutality and abuse.
What is next? A list of people who bought cigarettes, drinks and porn?
My guess is with the way things are going a "gateway drug" list, after all we know that anyone who has ever smoke, drank or even did pot is now snorting coke right? And if we have an alcohol and cigarette list we will know that our kids aren't being exposed to second hand smoke and we can monitor parties! After all, its not like its a constitutional right to be able to have people to gather peacefully and do what they are legally allowed to do...
No more hunting. Oh, and when a heard of deer needs to be thinned out, does that mean they're going to ask the deer to take birth control and leave the state?
Yes, actually that is what they do. I'm from the midwest and in a city (I think it was near Kansas City) they were proposing opening a small (like 1 week) hunting season in this park that was overwhelmed with deer (far beyond the carrying capacity and people kept hitting deer left and right) and they seriously proposed putting birth control or something in the food to stop this overpopulation. And this is in Missouri where the first day of deer season practically is a state holiday! Let alone what the idiots in California are thinking.
Here is a link about it: (can't find primary source but this is as good as any that helps show how stupid these people are) http://www.shawneedispatch.com/news/2009/sep/17/protests-deer-hunt-shawnee-mission-park-continue/
But when it comes to animal abuse, I loose some of that rationality. Animal abusers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to harm people, especially given a one in a million encounter.
Same thing could be said for any number of behaviours. Let me reword your post.
But when it comes to porn watching, I loose some of that rationality. porn watchers are dangerous and cant be trusted. And I believe it is a behavior that once practiced may never leave a person. They may suppress it for the rest of their lives, but underneath the potential is there to have sex with someone, especially given a one in a million encounter.
And hopefully you will see how stupid it sounds.
Sure, let animal abusers serve their time. Even give'em a job. Good luck feeling inner piece when your daughter says she is going camping with him, when his little discresion in life was nailing a cat to a plank of wood while performing some autopsy while it was still alive. Over the course of an hour.
Who cares? Guess what? Everyone has done strange things in their life. Does that mean we get to label those who got caught and classify them as "dangerous"? No, of course not. The entire point of justice is you serve time and you are free and don't have to keep serving it forever. The other way is tyranny.
Yes, but have you seen the paranoia over these "sex" offender registries? People are afraid to move into houses because there might be a "sex offender" living on the next block. Never mind that these people don't seem to look at the real picture and look at the trial and see that his only crime was peeing in public and he is now 73 years old and wheelchair bound. The point is, taxpayer funds are being used for this completely stupid project that adds nothing (who the hell cares if someone kicked a dog? I sure as hell don't), adds more debt to an already bankrupt state (next thing you know my federal taxes are going to be "bailing out" financially challenged California) and takes away rights (once you have served time, you should be treated as a full citizen, taking away voting rights for felons is honestly tyranny because they have suffered more harm by the state than anyone else, and even taking away second amendment rights I believe is questionable).
In short, this is a terrible idea because taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill for yet another useless project from a bankrupt state.
Who cares about animals. Seriously. I'd much rather be alive with some pain then to go to a "shelter" where they kill you. Hm, sounds like one nice shelter, one moment you are enjoying a nice existence in the streets, the next your entire reason for existence is taken away from you (entire life-purpose of animals is to reproduce) and then you are dead. Sounds like some shelter right?
But OS X would not be successful if it was not open. If OS X would not allow various apps that wouldn't be allowed on the iPhone to be on OS X, it would have almost no marketshare.
It is only a temporary glitch of the failures of all other mobile OSes at the time (Windows Mobile, Symbian, That crappy Java-Based OS, etc), large portions of the phone being paid for by phone carriers and the like that let the iPhone get even a small marketshare. If Google ever gets their act together, Android can easily crush the momentum from the iPhone. If Palm can saturate -all- carriers and not just CDMA ones with WebOS phones, WebOS can get decent marketshare. It would really help Apple if they didn't piss off their developers and users. They might be number one now, but they were number one with the Apple II and look at how quickly they lost that lead.
The thing is, the iPhone OS is short-term, a desktop OS is long-term. Even if design principles of iPhone OS doesn't change much in 2013, hardware will have advanced monumentally to the point where it might be nearly impossible to even run applications.
What really makes sense on high-capacity devices such as the iPhone is to allow small "emulated" apps to be run in earlier versions of iPhone OS with the older APIs when it detects a version that is untested with the current version.
What does Apple gain by removing these things?
Anyone else think from the title that MySpace has enough load (how, I don't know because who even uses it anymore) to consistently test its capacity?
Judging from the post, it seems like there really isn't any intention to share it at the time.
The impression I got is they have, say, 5 designers making, say, a logo. Designers 1-4 are the workers and designer 5 is the son. 1-4 work on different logos to present to the company, designer 5 was supposed to but instead sees what designers 1-4 are doing, takes elements from there and creates another design (claiming it was his own of course). At least thats the impression I got.
You measure an OS's superiority by how well it can run on almost obsolete hardware? Then I guess DOS is the best OS of them all, followed by Linux with only a bash shell.
A P4 is hardly "almost obsolete". Yes, if you are buying a new computer its going to be a lot faster. But if I was going to design an operating system circa 2006, I'd make sure that it would work very with a CPU that wouldn't be discontinued for 2 more years afterwords and with the default memory shipping on most -new- computers, especially cheaper ones that people tend to buy.
Almost obsolete would be about a Pentium III (which can run a light, but modern, version of Linux without too much problems) especially in 2006 which is when Vista was released.
I assume the OP doesn't see anything wrong with having 20 slightly different versions of the same design?
That could very well be the point. Especially in advertising where you might want to have say, 4 different versions of a logo and let the client choose which one they want.
When you use weasel-words like "universal knowledge" (what the hell does that even mean?)
Because just about any person who has touched a computer in the last 9 years has used XP compared to very few who have used Windows 7.
But Microsoft does indeed do usability testing, a lot of it, and Windows 7 is provably more user friendly than Windows XP. (And since it's bound to come up: so is Office 2007.)
"usability" doesn't mean crap when it means re-learning. Very, very few people actually want to take time to re-learn computers. Hence why Linux hasn't taken off. Any small difference even if it improves usability is a hindrance to most people who use computers simply to get work done. While it might be great for us geeks who actually use computers to do more than basic tasks, most other people have things simply memorized. Ever rearrange icons on someone's computer and then have them not know how to do a basic task? Yeah, most people simply learn where things are, any change is bad for them.
And Vista might be "considered trash," but it's also measurably superior to XP--
Run Vista and XP on a Pentium 4 with 512 MB of RAM, see which OS you can do more on.
Yes, Vista does work better than XP when dealing with loads upon loads of RAM, but at the time that Vista was released -a lot- of the machines came loaded with specs no better than a Pentium 4 and 512 MB of RAM.
in fact I think it says something that Vista and Windows 7 are virtually identical, yet for some reason 7 is liked and Vista is hated.
Mostly because everything is overpowered. Of course something is going to run decently when even a $300 cheap-as-free laptop has 2 gigs of RAM and a 2.2 Ghz 64 bit CPU. If something -didn't- run decently on 2 gigs of RAM and a 2.2 Ghz CPU something is -seriously- wrong. Back with Vista the same priced machine would have only 512 MB of RAM and a sluggish CPU.
Usability isn't about hand-waving or saying "I think this color looks nice," it's about sitting people in front of your product and watching them use it. It's about defining a task, and measuring how well they complete it using your OS. It's about statistics, not hunches. Most divisions of Microsoft do that consistently and habitually. (Some don't.)
Like I said, usability doesn't matter for a lot of people. Familiarity does. Familiarity leads to lessened costs for businesses when compared to usability. Chances are that 65 year old woman in -insert obscure department here- isn't going to use a computer beyond what is required. A lot of people don't -use- a computer they memorize where things are.
/. are fluent speakers, a lot of other people are simply reading out of the dictionary "translating" concepts from pen and paper to the computer.
Its like a language, geeks like you, me and the rest of
To -many- people XP still is considered to be the best OS. Vista is considered to be trash and this basically sums up people's feelings about Windows 7 http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png . Yes, Windows 7 isn't terrible, but it lacks the user-friendlyness and universal knowledge that XP had. Show almost any computer user an XP machine and chances are they can navigate it very well, show a lot of people a Windows 7 machine and they will be puzzled.
In order to be really secure, the machine is powered off, placed in a locked, bombproof, uncrackable safe and left there. Anything else exposes risks.
Lol, what? Ever sped some time -talking- to the people there in AT&T stores? They know one phone and own one phone. The iPhone. They can tell you what is in stock with the other phones and thats it.
...Such as? And is it not available or not used by default? Just about every "missing" feature simply isn't installed by default because a lot of people don't like it. A lot of people like XP more than 7.
Ok, think about this, your battery goes out on your iPhone, it is jailbroken and of course didn't have anything to do with the battery. But, since the tech notices it was jailbroken, they refuse to honor your warranty and you are out of luck. Unfair? Yes. Stupid? Yes. A big deal for someone trying to keep their $600 phone around for 2 years? Yes.
Because if someone gets crap tethering on a Samsung, Nokia, or BlackBerry they are going to blame the phone because they didn't get the "best" phone in the AT&T lineup which is presented in ads as the iPhone. Every carrier restricts their "flagship" phones somewhat if they don't think that some features aren't the best.
Someone hasn't used an AV in a while.