osC is great as long as you want to take what they give you out of the box and do nothing else. The moment you want a feature it doesn't have, or to change the look a bit, it becomes a nightmare. It is simply a badly designed web program as far as customizability/expandability. That's not to say that it doesn't have merit, many people don't care to customize anything, and want just a simple solution.
The reason AC won is transmission. Transmitting DC over long distances requires different feats of engineering. That's not to say someone can't figure out a clever way to overcome the limitations today, but it was just an expensive fire hazard back then.
Dell is out to make a profit. There is no money in selling Linux desktops.
Let me clarify that. The amount of profit/marketshare in selling Linux desktops is far outweighed by the cost of promoting them. It is a stupid business move to spend advertising resources snubbing one of your biggest business partners (Microsoft.) It is a stupid business move to spend millions advertising a free product that will not help you move yours. It is a stupid business move to introduce a factor into your business which will exponentially increase the number of support/service requests that you are neither prepared or willing to support (because people will call out of ignorance.)
While xbox 360 is positioned decently well, it hasn't had the landslide success people were expecting. At the price point sony may come in at, and the lateness... nintendo may well regain the home-console throne, at least in numbers. Mass appeal to non-hardcore gamers, low entry cost, *REAL* backwards compatibility are going to make the revolution an easy sell.
It seems to me that they evaluated good decisions based on how happy people were with them after a period of time.
Was the sleeping on it relevant? Isn't this just showing that people took longer to come to the decision? To me it seems rather common sense that you are more likely to be happy with your decision if you don't rush into it.
I recently switched from windows to mac. OSX was the primary reason I switched, secondary being quality control/limited hardware sets promote stability and reliability.
I'm a windows developer by trade, I can't imagine going back. I cannot tell you how nice it is to go home to a computer that "just works", works intuitively, and elegantly after a long day FIGHTING with windows systems. Apple would lose a substantial portion of it's customer base and just become a novelty hardware dealer like alienware.
His key points here on how "no one switched/came over because of the ipod" are just wrong. It's true it wasn't a groundswell, but apple's PC marketshare is growing at about 19%. That's pretty fast, and it's better than it was a couple years back.
There are several other online music purchasing systems: no monopoly there. There are many other mp3 players: no monopoly there.
So the monopoly they're disputing is the fact that you can only (effectively) use apple's service with apple devices? Or is it that the iPod doesn't play very nicely with other music services?
What a crime to have a device specific to a service. It's also annoying that my XM receiver doesn't work with Sirius under one subscription, my cable box doesn't pick up sattelite, my video game systems only take games made for them (and not each other), a turkey won't fit in my george foreman grill, and my ford car doesn't easily accept a bmw engine.
The problem has never been the technology.
on
Polite Cell Phones
·
· Score: 1
While, I can't really complain that this sort of thing is being developed, I know it can only help. Still, it's very sad that people need to spend valuable technology r&d time solving a problem of human ignorance/rudeness!
I for one have not been to a movie in YEARS where I did not hear at least one cell phone go off. Usually it's 2 or 3. I'm somewhat desensitized to where I only get ANGRY when they answer and start having a conversation.
Is the main reason for this simply because of the DRM on songs downloaded from iTunes? I can definitely understand that being an annoyance, but personally don't find it very restrictive. I've put purchased iTunes on a couple computers, I guess if you use quite a few computers day to day and want to access your music on all of them it could get troublesome.
Or is it just the concept of having any type of restriction on a purchased product?
I like the.Net CLR alright, it serves my purposes well. Outside of large corporations I have yet to find a client who is interested in a java solution for anything. Most people's experience with java is limited to bad web pages, so the view is tainted. This carries through to most busineses. It's ignorance, yes. But honestly, how many people/companies that need an application know or care how it works--as long as it does the job?
Have you tried wacom tablets? They let you set the tablet up as a 1:1 representation of your monitor. If you don't like using stylus/pen they all still come with a mouse that can be used the same way if you so desire. There's also a wide range of adjustability in the behavior?
Doesn't answer your gripe about macs, but it does sound up your alley in pointing devices!
I'd agree you had a point if there was a compelling reason to click the cached link. Most people don't, and the people that do are semi-technically literate, and usually do it simply because of slow response times to the site in question.
Google image search if they want anything other than a thumbnail will in fact visit your site on a click. Cached web pages are usually just partially cached (text only possibly,) making for a mess in many cases.
Obviously, I really don't think this is an issue, but feel free to prove me wrong. I'd be interested to see if there are for some reason a lot of people simply browsing google's cache
Sure, I can search for certain things simple things and get the result via google. Google even has tools built in for conversions like... "5280 feet in miles" will tell you that it is 1 mile. If I'm actually RESEARCHING something, or looking for detailed information then I have to go to the result sites.
First of all, I'm really not at all worried by all the bacteria/fungi etc on my keyboard, but I would like to keep it looking nice.
It's a given there's going to be bacteria and such... part of life, and really they're pretty friendly to me it seems, but what about dust, hairs, dead skin (gross!) and other less than aesthetically pleasing bits that may wind up on a keyboard? It's not enough to wipe it down now and then.
Honestly, a keyboard has got to be one of the hardest things to clean thoroughly. I once thought of getting one of those roll up membrane keyboards, but just couldn't get used to the feel/response.
Anyone have some tricks they could share short of removing all the keys?
I'm sorry, what WAS the story? I seem to have missed it, all I saw was a short blurb about something that's already been reported, and no expounding on it. What qualifies a story nowadays?
I'm a mac Advocate. I run a mac at home, I wish I could run one at work.
I have no problem. The only way you've gotten on my nerves it to throw insults at me, and make these assumptions that seem to have no logical basis. All I've done is ask questions. Questions you haven't answered. I have nothing against the transition, I encourage it--however if you have apps you can't leave behind, then I don't think you should try it.
Why? Because you have to leave them behind and you don't want to! More: You don't need to!
Thus my question which I'll ask again. If you have these apps/games you don't want to do away with, why do you want to make the switch in the first place?
So comparing switching computing platforms to switching mechanical, or gaming platforms is illogical? I don't see it, those are the closest similar situations I could think of, and you plainly agree with me that it's not logical to except something from one system to work on another. Why is this the exception?
It's not a matter of making it hard, it is hard. I'm not arguing that. You have to learn a new system, new software, give up things you're used to, etc. I'm just pointing out that you think you're entitled to something from apple. I'm not saying that you should switch if it's hard for you, I'm simply asking:
If it is difficult for you to switch, why would you want to? Why would you consider it? Apple hardware and OSX is very nice in my opinion, but there's nothing it does that windows or linux can't do, it's just a matter of what best works for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot has gotten just plain idiotic. Next story up: Sky is blue.
that's enough for me.
osC is great as long as you want to take what they give you out of the box and do nothing else. The moment you want a feature it doesn't have, or to change the look a bit, it becomes a nightmare. It is simply a badly designed web program as far as customizability/expandability. That's not to say that it doesn't have merit, many people don't care to customize anything, and want just a simple solution.
I'd liken it to phpBB and nuke/postnuke
The reason AC won is transmission. Transmitting DC over long distances requires different feats of engineering. That's not to say someone can't figure out a clever way to overcome the limitations today, but it was just an expensive fire hazard back then.
Dell is out to make a profit. There is no money in selling Linux desktops.
Let me clarify that. The amount of profit/marketshare in selling Linux desktops is far outweighed by the cost of promoting them. It is a stupid business move to spend advertising resources snubbing one of your biggest business partners (Microsoft.) It is a stupid business move to spend millions advertising a free product that will not help you move yours. It is a stupid business move to introduce a factor into your business which will exponentially increase the number of support/service requests that you are neither prepared or willing to support (because people will call out of ignorance.)
No one is required to open their sources. If they do, good for us! If not, it's not for us to demand that they do.
I have no idea what you just said.
Last I checked WOW was for entertainment purposes only. Just thought I'd point that out.
While xbox 360 is positioned decently well, it hasn't had the landslide success people were expecting. At the price point sony may come in at, and the lateness... nintendo may well regain the home-console throne, at least in numbers. Mass appeal to non-hardcore gamers, low entry cost, *REAL* backwards compatibility are going to make the revolution an easy sell.
That's all really. Better yet find some physical labour camp and let him know what real hoest work is. Never let him out.
It seems to me that they evaluated good decisions based on how happy people were with them after a period of time.
Was the sleeping on it relevant? Isn't this just showing that people took longer to come to the decision? To me it seems rather common sense that you are more likely to be happy with your decision if you don't rush into it.
I recently switched from windows to mac. OSX was the primary reason I switched, secondary being quality control/limited hardware sets promote stability and reliability.
I'm a windows developer by trade, I can't imagine going back. I cannot tell you how nice it is to go home to a computer that "just works", works intuitively, and elegantly after a long day FIGHTING with windows systems. Apple would lose a substantial portion of it's customer base and just become a novelty hardware dealer like alienware.
His key points here on how "no one switched/came over because of the ipod" are just wrong. It's true it wasn't a groundswell, but apple's PC marketshare is growing at about 19%. That's pretty fast, and it's better than it was a couple years back.
Yes, you're right, the same as with Microsoft was sued--punishing success when no real monopoly exists!
all it takes for an mp3 player to emerge is for it to be better, and marketed as well as the ipod.
There are several other online music purchasing systems: no monopoly there. There are many other mp3 players: no monopoly there.
So the monopoly they're disputing is the fact that you can only (effectively) use apple's service with apple devices? Or is it that the iPod doesn't play very nicely with other music services?
What a crime to have a device specific to a service. It's also annoying that my XM receiver doesn't work with Sirius under one subscription, my cable box doesn't pick up sattelite, my video game systems only take games made for them (and not each other), a turkey won't fit in my george foreman grill, and my ford car doesn't easily accept a bmw engine.
While, I can't really complain that this sort of thing is being developed, I know it can only help. Still, it's very sad that people need to spend valuable technology r&d time solving a problem of human ignorance/rudeness!
I for one have not been to a movie in YEARS where I did not hear at least one cell phone go off. Usually it's 2 or 3. I'm somewhat desensitized to where I only get ANGRY when they answer and start having a conversation.
Is the main reason for this simply because of the DRM on songs downloaded from iTunes? I can definitely understand that being an annoyance, but personally don't find it very restrictive. I've put purchased iTunes on a couple computers, I guess if you use quite a few computers day to day and want to access your music on all of them it could get troublesome.
Or is it just the concept of having any type of restriction on a purchased product?
I like the .Net CLR alright, it serves my purposes well. Outside of large corporations I have yet to find a client who is interested in a java solution for anything. Most people's experience with java is limited to bad web pages, so the view is tainted. This carries through to most busineses. It's ignorance, yes. But honestly, how many people/companies that need an application know or care how it works--as long as it does the job?
yeah.. go ahead and mod this down, I just couldn't resist.
Have you tried wacom tablets? They let you set the tablet up as a 1:1 representation of your monitor. If you don't like using stylus/pen they all still come with a mouse that can be used the same way if you so desire. There's also a wide range of adjustability in the behavior?
Doesn't answer your gripe about macs, but it does sound up your alley in pointing devices!
I'd agree you had a point if there was a compelling reason to click the cached link. Most people don't, and the people that do are semi-technically literate, and usually do it simply because of slow response times to the site in question.
Google image search if they want anything other than a thumbnail will in fact visit your site on a click. Cached web pages are usually just partially cached (text only possibly,) making for a mess in many cases.
Obviously, I really don't think this is an issue, but feel free to prove me wrong. I'd be interested to see if there are for some reason a lot of people simply browsing google's cache
Sure, I can search for certain things simple things and get the result via google. Google even has tools built in for conversions like... "5280 feet in miles" will tell you that it is 1 mile. If I'm actually RESEARCHING something, or looking for detailed information then I have to go to the result sites.
What exactly was the problem again?
First of all, I'm really not at all worried by all the bacteria/fungi etc on my keyboard, but I would like to keep it looking nice.
It's a given there's going to be bacteria and such... part of life, and really they're pretty friendly to me it seems, but what about dust, hairs, dead skin (gross!) and other less than aesthetically pleasing bits that may wind up on a keyboard? It's not enough to wipe it down now and then.
Honestly, a keyboard has got to be one of the hardest things to clean thoroughly. I once thought of getting one of those roll up membrane keyboards, but just couldn't get used to the feel/response.
Anyone have some tricks they could share short of removing all the keys?
I'm sorry, what WAS the story? I seem to have missed it, all I saw was a short blurb about something that's already been reported, and no expounding on it. What qualifies a story nowadays?
... that's brilliant, and crazy enough to actually work.
I'll let you know!
I'm a mac Advocate. I run a mac at home, I wish I could run one at work.
I have no problem. The only way you've gotten on my nerves it to throw insults at me, and make these assumptions that seem to have no logical basis. All I've done is ask questions. Questions you haven't answered. I have nothing against the transition, I encourage it--however if you have apps you can't leave behind, then I don't think you should try it.
Why? Because you have to leave them behind and you don't want to! More: You don't need to!
Thus my question which I'll ask again. If you have these apps/games you don't want to do away with, why do you want to make the switch in the first place?
So comparing switching computing platforms to switching mechanical, or gaming platforms is illogical? I don't see it, those are the closest similar situations I could think of, and you plainly agree with me that it's not logical to except something from one system to work on another. Why is this the exception?
It's not a matter of making it hard, it is hard. I'm not arguing that. You have to learn a new system, new software, give up things you're used to, etc. I'm just pointing out that you think you're entitled to something from apple. I'm not saying that you should switch if it's hard for you, I'm simply asking:
If it is difficult for you to switch, why would you want to? Why would you consider it? Apple hardware and OSX is very nice in my opinion, but there's nothing it does that windows or linux can't do, it's just a matter of what best works for you.