Health care in private does not work because it is upside down economics. It is not like getting car insurance because for the most part you can avoid getting into an accident. BUT when you get old you cannot avoid cancer or a whole host of diseases that will afflict you.
This means when you are young you should actually pay more in insurance so that you are covered for the future. But health insurance is priced like car insurance and thus as you get sick you end up paying more. It is wrong!
When Ron Paul and such talk they talk CRAP, yes you read that right CRAP. They talk about breaking a leg, giving birth, etc. They are not talking about chronic diseases, which are actually the core of our health care dilemna. We have people who should have kissed their lives goodbye still living. And that COSTS A WHOLE HEAPING LOAD OF MONEY!
So if you are going to talk private I say make youngsters pay more when they are healthy than when they are old.
Oh yeah that will not work since we tend to be people who only react when they are having problems.
Let me give you a secret, do some research on Bismarck the state leader. He introduced concept of health care, and pensions. He did so to pacify the people. But he did so with a very high bar because he knew that health care and pensions can suck a government dry.
The true cost of health care, pensions and society can only be borne by the populace as a whole. Do the math and you will see there is no other solution.
Well there is a solution, those that have the money get it, those that don't die...
You bring up an interesting point. Reagan was as hard assed as they came with respect to terrorists, and rogue states.
Yet for the life of me I can't actually remember him having this paranoia? All I remember were a bunch of demonstrations and Reagan saying, "Gorbachv knock down your walls."
What I am guessing will happen is that TomTom will kiss its US operations goodbye. TomTom does not have a huge market penetration, and the US is actually not really a growth area. Hence why bother getting into a licensing deal.
If MS were to file in the EU on things like FAT well then Microsoft would be royally F***D since that is being anti-competitive.
Personally I wish Microsoft would become more innovative and do something good with their R&D money...
I use Windows as well, and Microsoft has become a laughing stock.... This company has become completely incompetent.
A good friend of mine has said things have changed. I asked how so. Well it used to be Microsoft would produce good stuff, now the management is there to do checkmarks.
I again asked, checkmarks?
Yes managers go there do a product cycle or so and then move on. They are not there to see the crap that they produce. They see the other crap and say, "oh this is how things are better and put in something else, thus adding to the crap." Then when they move on in a few years they get the Microsoft name on their resume and do real things...
There is some truth because NOBODY would work at Microsoft to get vested. The Microsoft share price has been doing nothing for the past 8 years. Thus the only thing you could get is a checkmark on the resume...
There is computer price X, which includes the price of OS Y.
Thus when you buy a Vista machine you pay X + Y.
When you downgrade you are removing Y, and replacing it with Y1.
The question becomes what is the price of Y1? Answer Y1 > Y since you are paying to have a downgrade.
The thing is that X + Y = Y1 + X, ideally...
But what I think is happening is that the computer makers are saying with the downgrade you get X + Y + Y1. However the client has clearly stated that they want to downgrade and hence want to buy only X + Y1, and thus should not be charged with Y.
YET again Microsoft screws it up... Microsoft has become the laughing stock of the PC industry!
>By 2050 nearly 80% of the worldâ(TM)s population will reside in urban centers, and 109 hectares of arable land will be needed to feed them.
109 hectares is all we will need to feed all of the worlds city population! Cool...;)
Though getting to your points:
>Plants (especially plants like alfalfa or grasses [wikivisual.com] as depicted) have massive root systems requiring literally tons of soil to be healthy.
No not really... What plants need are nutrients, sun, and water. Soil is not necessary actually. What soil does is moderate the distribution of those things.
>Plants need water. Lots of water.
Well that depends. It depends on how you will distribute the water to them.
>Buildings don't like water.
Not necessarily, it really depends on the materials used to build them.
> Plants die & rot (it's natural). Rotting plants smell. People don't like smelly buildings.
Plants need to be trimmed and taken care off. We have a gardening philosophy where you grow and let it die.
>Currently we use large machines to cultivate plants because it sucks, none of these images look like that would be possible.
You know I have a product that is doing very well, and I am hoping to be bought out. Though if it does not I will have enough clients. But I digress...
If say Google were to buy me out and the success of this product depended on whether or not I could recruit engineers I would say screw it!
Google would have bought me out so I would have my money. And if Google is too stupid to do anything with the investment its their problem, not mine.
I mean so I could work there twiddle my thumbs surf, and do nothing until I could leave...
Personally I never thought too much of the Program Manager approach. Lends itself to be less focused in my opinion.
I have found that the best companies have REALLY good visionaries who say, "lets do this, and if you don't like it its your problem not mine." Yes many companies fail, but there are many who do quite well as a result of it.
And Linux is not a monolithic do-it-all library architecture?
And UNIX is easier to bug fix? Huh? Come on this is fairy tale stuff...
What they are talking about here is that a Windows application using Wine is faster than a UNIX application on UNIX.
I also would believe your argument if we were talking about a UNIX app built specifically for UNIX and Windows app built specifically for Windows. But we are not. We are talking about Firefox...
My guess is like a poster up above who said that optimization flags were used on Windows, and not on the Linux native build.
Many people are skeptical that the A380 will sell. YET, think of when the 747 was launched, and when the A380 was launched... Around the same time with same economics...
I think the A380 will be a success because there will be more cattle to transport at a more effective cost...
Yeah... Great guess which plane I will be avoiding!!!!
If Microsoft is truly afraid of Linux then they should scared s***less by OSX. OSX has jumped that critical mass hurdle and that should preoccupy Microsoft.
Linux has not and I doubt will jump that critical mass. On the contrary. I have in the last year or so met quite a few people who dropped Linux in favor of OSX.
The biggest comment:
- I get UNIX in a box that works.
People are tired of things not working with Linux. They just want to get on with their lives and this is a big advantage for OSX.
About face is a very old book written by Alan Cooper. And in the book he was very critical of things that have been completely ignored by the computing mainstream.
One of the things he critiques is the notion of files that need to read and written. That is not how people expect things to happen.
I actually think this guy is not a crackpot, but understands completely what is going on. What I think bothers people is that he is not following current dogma.
Having the OS as a virtual machine sounds very attractive because as we all know now, the virtual machine can do things that C, C++, assembler cannot.
For example with a virtual machine you have all of the metadata that you need to serialize, and transport data. With C, C++, and assembler you must explicitly say I have four bytes that need to go to point a. A big big difference in my mind.
We are already writing this code today, and it is called ORM, persistance frameworks, etc... He is just saying why not make this an operating that is part of the operating system?
>Memory in all computers is mapped to address space. I get the idea that these guys are programmers who don't really understand how the hardware works.
No I think they know what they are talking about. Instead what they are saying is that if you look at the VM concept (eg.NET with AppDomains) you can run everything into a single address space.
Of course underneath there is an address space, but remember that each process has its own address space that the CPU has to maintain. There is quite a bit of legwork that the CPU does that he thinks is probably not necessary.
>Nobody needs files? How, exactly, can I retrieve a document then? This FA is damned short on details.
Have you read About Face from Alan Cooper? He explains in that the concept of a file is horrible from a user perspective. Files are added as a concept because it is a hack and makes it easier for the programmer. A user in fact does not want to have say, "oh I have to save this?"
Thus the idea is that you have an entity that you can manipulate. And whatever changes you make are immediately persisted. This is what users expect.
>I really don't think I'm interested in this OS.
I am extremely interested in this OS because he is simplifying things. Remember one thing that we learned with Jit'ing is that "slower" apps can actually be very fast. C++ is not the fastest game in town. And that should make us all think.
Frankly you are thinking like an old operating system.
How does it handle locking conflicts? Well, think about it, how do you handle locking conflicts in your program? That is your answer.
The idea from this Phantom OS is that you don't need to think about "paging", or "locking conflicts" etc. You only need to think about your objects that are serialized to the system. Contention? Well create a server process. Think Erlang...
I don't agree here at all. If you look back at my comments you see that I am a Mono critique. But frankly I have changed my perspective.
Mono is actually all right...
What Mono did and it surprises me is that a Mono developer = Microsoft.NET developer, but a Microsoft.NET developer != Mono developer.
What I am saying is that if you learned Mono you can use your skills on Microsoft.NET, but not the other way around. This is because of the libraries that they use. Frankly this is good since it means they are independent and will adopt what they need to adopt no more no less.
Though with respect to UAC the real issue is that you cannot easily apply it to Windows.
In a Linux/UNIX world I have the ability to install an application in my local home directory. Whereas Windows has the issue that it wants to install in my home, program files, and windows system. This is absolutely NUTS! I cannot install Office in my own home directory.
Because of this scatter effect it is REALLY hard to keep security descriptors straight since applications have to go across the hard disk.
>Of course the same / similar functionality in Linux is great!
No, Linux contains everything in a single directory namely the users home directory. Whereas Windows likes to spread itself around. Hence UAC is dumb since it cannot be easily applied to Windows.
>Sounds like an HP problem to me.
Yes it is an HP problem, but the fact that Windows does a screen flash to show the problem is dumb! They could just as easily have created a dialog box with red color around it. I have three screens, and doing a screen flash to a single screen is not easy on the eyes.
>Huh? The only time a reboot is forced is if you're on a domain and your network admin has forced the install of an update. Otherwise there's always the "go away" option.
Then obviously you are not using Vista because with Vista you can't make it go away for anything longer than 3 hours. I run trading systems, and Monte Carlo simulations. And more often than not I get back to my system and Vista has told me, "oh look I rebooted to make you safe."
>Huh? What are you talking about, specifically? I have IR working on Vista fine.
Again the issue here is that my Multi-media edition of Vista requires a wireless. If wireless is not available I could buy an adaptor. My beef is that why do I have to buy something so that I can see the satellite screen? In the configuration of the feed the screen shows up fine.
> Example, please?
I type in a file name and want to add extra bits. With XP I had a little sidebar where I could specify everything. I have a terrabyte of data and it is very hard to search.
The reason why Windows is such a pain in the ass is because Windows was never designed for this.
Let's say I install OSX. The OSX app is self-contained, which means that it does not need anything outside of its circle.
Let's say that I install on Linux. The Linux app can either be installed locally per the user or for everybody. But it is a clear cut case.
Windows? WTF... I need to access the registry, the windows system directory, the program files directory, and the local user directory. It is a bleeding mess!
Microsoft to this day does not understand that the issue is the fact that they have not revamped the complete installation process. There is absolutely no need for Office, or any other application to need anything other the system files if it is running in "install to user" mode.
This is the problem, and until Microsoft understands that nothing will change.
No actually Vista is garbage... I actually have a handy list:
1) UAC 2) Hard disk action as Vista constantly wants to search my hard disk. I have a quad core machine, but because the hard disk is single access or restricted all too often I have the issue of not being able to do anything because the hard disk is being searched. 3) Bug in lower level drivers distributed by vendors causes a screen switch, which with multiple screens is hard. This occured to me with the HP driver when the printer was not on the network. 4) Reboots when unwanted. I run trading strategies and having a forced reboot, while you are in a trade is brain dead!!! 5) Forcing me to buy a converter from IR to Wireless so that I can watch my satellite is ABSOLUTELY brain dead. 6) search is dumb since it assumes things and if you don't enter the search to MS's standard things wont work.
>Which gives me pause and causes me to wonder... are they really going to use the same marketing strategy they did with Vista?
Microsoft has not learned. They think that Vista is good. They even have studies that they did internally that proved that Vista is fine. These were real user studies, no fakes. What they think is a problem is that Vista got a bad rep. And that is the flaw of their thinking. They are being mule headed.
Vista like Windows 7 will be a dud! I read in ZDNet how they have X versions, but more than 80% will be two main versions; Home Premium, and Professional.
This leads me to ask WTF are you doing releasing the other ones? So Microsoft is going waste money for less than 20% sales on 5 additional versions. Go for it Microsoft you guys are DUMB!
I have to admit once Bill G left Microsoft has had absolutely no tech vision or guidance! And Ray Ozzie is no role model...
I do believe in Darwinian evolution. BUT I cannot say that there is no God.
Here is my example. Imagine for the moment you showed up around the years 5000 BC. You had a flashlight, calculator, gun, etc. People would consider you a God.
My point is that a being that is able to traverse the galaxies could very well be construed as a God by us. So while many religious people have their beliefs on what is a God I am saying that what is construed as a God might just be a super being race.
We don't know the 100% truth one way or the other. And debates on who is right is actually quite pointless since it cannot be proven one way or the other.
Ok here is a question. Do you pay attention to street people? When you see street people what do you do? Do you walk on the other side of the road? Do you look down and avoid eye contact...
Now let's flip the table, street people = earth, and alien race = us. I sure as heck would not see any advantage whatsoever in contacting with us.
Aliens get the wealth of our planet? ROTFL.... Whatever. A bit of water, a bit of sky, a bit of dirt?
Any race that is able to travel between galaxies would look at our planet like a piece of dirt on a beach.
The reality is that we not significant! We are completely irrelevant! If tomorrow an asteroid came towards the planet, there is absolutely SQUAT we could do other than say our final goodbyes...
The issue I have with movies is that they premise behavior on human behavior...
>I just love how some people seem think that all wars are religious...
Yeah wars start due to religion! Let's take some recent examples shall we.
9/11: Religion Iraq: Religion called democracy
Goto dictionary.com and look at the definition of religion.
What I think you are referring to is called faith. And that does not always result in a war. But religion does because you believe you are right, and the other party is wrong. And hence you are going to beat each other over the head until they agree with you.
Slashdot Mirror
Speak for yourself buddy! Because these things are dysfunctional in YOUR country does not mean that they are dysfunctional in other countries!
Dude what have you been smoking?
First let's tackle health care shall we...
Health care in private does not work because it is upside down economics. It is not like getting car insurance because for the most part you can avoid getting into an accident. BUT when you get old you cannot avoid cancer or a whole host of diseases that will afflict you.
This means when you are young you should actually pay more in insurance so that you are covered for the future. But health insurance is priced like car insurance and thus as you get sick you end up paying more. It is wrong!
When Ron Paul and such talk they talk CRAP, yes you read that right CRAP. They talk about breaking a leg, giving birth, etc. They are not talking about chronic diseases, which are actually the core of our health care dilemna. We have people who should have kissed their lives goodbye still living. And that COSTS A WHOLE HEAPING LOAD OF MONEY!
So if you are going to talk private I say make youngsters pay more when they are healthy than when they are old.
Oh yeah that will not work since we tend to be people who only react when they are having problems.
Let me give you a secret, do some research on Bismarck the state leader. He introduced concept of health care, and pensions. He did so to pacify the people. But he did so with a very high bar because he knew that health care and pensions can suck a government dry.
The true cost of health care, pensions and society can only be borne by the populace as a whole. Do the math and you will see there is no other solution.
Well there is a solution, those that have the money get it, those that don't die...
You bring up an interesting point. Reagan was as hard assed as they came with respect to terrorists, and rogue states.
Yet for the life of me I can't actually remember him having this paranoia? All I remember were a bunch of demonstrations and Reagan saying, "Gorbachv knock down your walls."
They can't file in the EU... Anticompetitive...
What I am guessing will happen is that TomTom will kiss its US operations goodbye. TomTom does not have a huge market penetration, and the US is actually not really a growth area. Hence why bother getting into a licensing deal.
If MS were to file in the EU on things like FAT well then Microsoft would be royally F***D since that is being anti-competitive.
Personally I wish Microsoft would become more innovative and do something good with their R&D money...
I hear you...
I use Windows as well, and Microsoft has become a laughing stock.... This company has become completely incompetent.
A good friend of mine has said things have changed. I asked how so. Well it used to be Microsoft would produce good stuff, now the management is there to do checkmarks.
I again asked, checkmarks?
Yes managers go there do a product cycle or so and then move on. They are not there to see the crap that they produce. They see the other crap and say, "oh this is how things are better and put in something else, thus adding to the crap." Then when they move on in a few years they get the Microsoft name on their resume and do real things...
There is some truth because NOBODY would work at Microsoft to get vested. The Microsoft share price has been doing nothing for the past 8 years. Thus the only thing you could get is a checkmark on the resume...
There is computer price X, which includes the price of OS Y.
Thus when you buy a Vista machine you pay X + Y.
When you downgrade you are removing Y, and replacing it with Y1.
The question becomes what is the price of Y1? Answer Y1 > Y since you are paying to have a downgrade.
The thing is that X + Y = Y1 + X, ideally...
But what I think is happening is that the computer makers are saying with the downgrade you get X + Y + Y1. However the client has clearly stated that they want to downgrade and hence want to buy only X + Y1, and thus should not be charged with Y.
YET again Microsoft screws it up... Microsoft has become the laughing stock of the PC industry!
Hmmm.... From the article:
>By 2050 nearly 80% of the worldâ(TM)s population will reside in urban centers, and 109 hectares of arable land will be needed to feed them.
109 hectares is all we will need to feed all of the worlds city population! Cool... ;)
Though getting to your points:
>Plants (especially plants like alfalfa or grasses [wikivisual.com] as depicted) have massive root systems requiring literally tons of soil to be healthy.
No not really... What plants need are nutrients, sun, and water. Soil is not necessary actually. What soil does is moderate the distribution of those things.
>Plants need water. Lots of water.
Well that depends. It depends on how you will distribute the water to them.
>Buildings don't like water.
Not necessarily, it really depends on the materials used to build them.
> Plants die & rot (it's natural). Rotting plants smell. People don't like smelly buildings.
Plants need to be trimmed and taken care off. We have a gardening philosophy where you grow and let it die.
>Currently we use large machines to cultivate plants because it sucks, none of these images look like that would be possible.
How about the iRobot company?
For example you do the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroponics
You know I have a product that is doing very well, and I am hoping to be bought out. Though if it does not I will have enough clients. But I digress...
If say Google were to buy me out and the success of this product depended on whether or not I could recruit engineers I would say screw it!
Google would have bought me out so I would have my money. And if Google is too stupid to do anything with the investment its their problem, not mine.
I mean so I could work there twiddle my thumbs surf, and do nothing until I could leave...
Personally I never thought too much of the Program Manager approach. Lends itself to be less focused in my opinion.
I have found that the best companies have REALLY good visionaries who say, "lets do this, and if you don't like it its your problem not mine." Yes many companies fail, but there are many who do quite well as a result of it.
And Linux is not a monolithic do-it-all library architecture?
And UNIX is easier to bug fix? Huh? Come on this is fairy tale stuff...
What they are talking about here is that a Windows application using Wine is faster than a UNIX application on UNIX.
I also would believe your argument if we were talking about a UNIX app built specifically for UNIX and Windows app built specifically for Windows. But we are not. We are talking about Firefox...
My guess is like a poster up above who said that optimization flags were used on Windows, and not on the Linux native build.
Many people are skeptical that the A380 will sell. YET, think of when the 747 was launched, and when the A380 was launched... Around the same time with same economics...
I think the A380 will be a success because there will be more cattle to transport at a more effective cost...
Yeah... Great guess which plane I will be avoiding!!!!
no apple pushes both to create the Apple experience. Thus if they loose the ability to push hardware the apple experience will go down.
Look at the iPod or iPhone. It is because you have the hardware with the software (iTunes Appstore) that competitors cannot match.
If Microsoft is truly afraid of Linux then they should scared s***less by OSX. OSX has jumped that critical mass hurdle and that should preoccupy Microsoft.
Linux has not and I doubt will jump that critical mass. On the contrary. I have in the last year or so met quite a few people who dropped Linux in favor of OSX.
The biggest comment:
- I get UNIX in a box that works.
People are tired of things not working with Linux. They just want to get on with their lives and this is a big advantage for OSX.
Linux on the server side = excellent
Linux on the desktop? Forget it...
About face is a very old book written by Alan Cooper. And in the book he was very critical of things that have been completely ignored by the computing mainstream.
One of the things he critiques is the notion of files that need to read and written. That is not how people expect things to happen.
I actually think this guy is not a crackpot, but understands completely what is going on. What I think bothers people is that he is not following current dogma.
Having the OS as a virtual machine sounds very attractive because as we all know now, the virtual machine can do things that C, C++, assembler cannot.
For example with a virtual machine you have all of the metadata that you need to serialize, and transport data. With C, C++, and assembler you must explicitly say I have four bytes that need to go to point a. A big big difference in my mind.
We are already writing this code today, and it is called ORM, persistance frameworks, etc... He is just saying why not make this an operating that is part of the operating system?
>Memory in all computers is mapped to address space. I get the idea that these guys are programmers who don't really understand how the hardware works.
No I think they know what they are talking about. Instead what they are saying is that if you look at the VM concept (eg .NET with AppDomains) you can run everything into a single address space.
Of course underneath there is an address space, but remember that each process has its own address space that the CPU has to maintain. There is quite a bit of legwork that the CPU does that he thinks is probably not necessary.
>Nobody needs files? How, exactly, can I retrieve a document then? This FA is damned short on details.
Have you read About Face from Alan Cooper? He explains in that the concept of a file is horrible from a user perspective. Files are added as a concept because it is a hack and makes it easier for the programmer. A user in fact does not want to have say, "oh I have to save this?"
Thus the idea is that you have an entity that you can manipulate. And whatever changes you make are immediately persisted. This is what users expect.
>I really don't think I'm interested in this OS.
I am extremely interested in this OS because he is simplifying things. Remember one thing that we learned with Jit'ing is that "slower" apps can actually be very fast. C++ is not the fastest game in town. And that should make us all think.
Frankly you are thinking like an old operating system.
How does it handle locking conflicts? Well, think about it, how do you handle locking conflicts in your program? That is your answer.
The idea from this Phantom OS is that you don't need to think about "paging", or "locking conflicts" etc. You only need to think about your objects that are serialized to the system. Contention? Well create a server process. Think Erlang...
Here is I think his link...
http://www.dz.ru/en/solutions/phantom/
I don't agree here at all. If you look back at my comments you see that I am a Mono critique. But frankly I have changed my perspective.
Mono is actually all right...
What Mono did and it surprises me is that a Mono developer = Microsoft .NET developer, but a Microsoft .NET developer != Mono developer.
What I am saying is that if you learned Mono you can use your skills on Microsoft .NET, but not the other way around. This is because of the libraries that they use. Frankly this is good since it means they are independent and will adopt what they need to adopt no more no less.
>don't think most programs require access to the windows/system directory,
Office, Visual Studio, etc.... The list is fairly lengthy...
These apps DO NOT need access to the windows and system directories. Exception is Visual Studio and the writing of drivers.
THANK-YOU....
You explained it much better than I did.
Though with respect to UAC the real issue is that you cannot easily apply it to Windows.
In a Linux/UNIX world I have the ability to install an application in my local home directory. Whereas Windows has the issue that it wants to install in my home, program files, and windows system. This is absolutely NUTS! I cannot install Office in my own home directory.
Because of this scatter effect it is REALLY hard to keep security descriptors straight since applications have to go across the hard disk.
>Of course the same / similar functionality in Linux is great!
No, Linux contains everything in a single directory namely the users home directory. Whereas Windows likes to spread itself around. Hence UAC is dumb since it cannot be easily applied to Windows.
>Sounds like an HP problem to me.
Yes it is an HP problem, but the fact that Windows does a screen flash to show the problem is dumb! They could just as easily have created a dialog box with red color around it. I have three screens, and doing a screen flash to a single screen is not easy on the eyes.
>Huh? The only time a reboot is forced is if you're on a domain and your network admin has forced the install of an update. Otherwise there's always the "go away" option.
Then obviously you are not using Vista because with Vista you can't make it go away for anything longer than 3 hours. I run trading systems, and Monte Carlo simulations. And more often than not I get back to my system and Vista has told me, "oh look I rebooted to make you safe."
>Huh? What are you talking about, specifically? I have IR working on Vista fine.
Again the issue here is that my Multi-media edition of Vista requires a wireless. If wireless is not available I could buy an adaptor. My beef is that why do I have to buy something so that I can see the satellite screen? In the configuration of the feed the screen shows up fine.
> Example, please?
I type in a file name and want to add extra bits. With XP I had a little sidebar where I could specify everything. I have a terrabyte of data and it is very hard to search.
Vista = garbage!
The reason why Windows is such a pain in the ass is because Windows was never designed for this.
Let's say I install OSX. The OSX app is self-contained, which means that it does not need anything outside of its circle.
Let's say that I install on Linux. The Linux app can either be installed locally per the user or for everybody. But it is a clear cut case.
Windows? WTF... I need to access the registry, the windows system directory, the program files directory, and the local user directory. It is a bleeding mess!
Microsoft to this day does not understand that the issue is the fact that they have not revamped the complete installation process. There is absolutely no need for Office, or any other application to need anything other the system files if it is running in "install to user" mode.
This is the problem, and until Microsoft understands that nothing will change.
No actually Vista is garbage... I actually have a handy list:
1) UAC
2) Hard disk action as Vista constantly wants to search my hard disk. I have a quad core machine, but because the hard disk is single access or restricted all too often I have the issue of not being able to do anything because the hard disk is being searched.
3) Bug in lower level drivers distributed by vendors causes a screen switch, which with multiple screens is hard. This occured to me with the HP driver when the printer was not on the network.
4) Reboots when unwanted. I run trading strategies and having a forced reboot, while you are in a trade is brain dead!!!
5) Forcing me to buy a converter from IR to Wireless so that I can watch my satellite is ABSOLUTELY brain dead.
6) search is dumb since it assumes things and if you don't enter the search to MS's standard things wont work.
No Vista is GARBAGE!
>Which gives me pause and causes me to wonder ... are they really going to use the same marketing strategy they did with Vista?
Microsoft has not learned. They think that Vista is good. They even have studies that they did internally that proved that Vista is fine. These were real user studies, no fakes. What they think is a problem is that Vista got a bad rep. And that is the flaw of their thinking. They are being mule headed.
Vista like Windows 7 will be a dud! I read in ZDNet how they have X versions, but more than 80% will be two main versions; Home Premium, and Professional.
This leads me to ask WTF are you doing releasing the other ones? So Microsoft is going waste money for less than 20% sales on 5 additional versions. Go for it Microsoft you guys are DUMB!
I have to admit once Bill G left Microsoft has had absolutely no tech vision or guidance! And Ray Ozzie is no role model...
I find it sad that this is posted as flamebait!
I do believe in Darwinian evolution. BUT I cannot say that there is no God.
Here is my example. Imagine for the moment you showed up around the years 5000 BC. You had a flashlight, calculator, gun, etc. People would consider you a God.
My point is that a being that is able to traverse the galaxies could very well be construed as a God by us. So while many religious people have their beliefs on what is a God I am saying that what is construed as a God might just be a super being race.
We don't know the 100% truth one way or the other. And debates on who is right is actually quite pointless since it cannot be proven one way or the other.
Ok here is a question. Do you pay attention to street people? When you see street people what do you do? Do you walk on the other side of the road? Do you look down and avoid eye contact...
Now let's flip the table, street people = earth, and alien race = us. I sure as heck would not see any advantage whatsoever in contacting with us.
Aliens get the wealth of our planet? ROTFL.... Whatever. A bit of water, a bit of sky, a bit of dirt?
Any race that is able to travel between galaxies would look at our planet like a piece of dirt on a beach.
The reality is that we not significant! We are completely irrelevant! If tomorrow an asteroid came towards the planet, there is absolutely SQUAT we could do other than say our final goodbyes...
The issue I have with movies is that they premise behavior on human behavior...
>I just love how some people seem think that all wars are religious...
Yeah wars start due to religion! Let's take some recent examples shall we.
9/11: Religion
Iraq: Religion called democracy
Goto dictionary.com and look at the definition of religion.
What I think you are referring to is called faith. And that does not always result in a war. But religion does because you believe you are right, and the other party is wrong. And hence you are going to beat each other over the head until they agree with you.