Not going to find my doctor through either Facebook OR google. Chances are I'm going to use one my mom or dad or sister recommends and chances are that doctor is not a "friend" of theirs on facebook nor are they a "fan" of that Doctor.
Facebook, to this point in time, is nothing really more than a "hey, I had 6 beers last night check out my photos", or "oooh, look at my kid jump into the pool," type of site (ok, well a bit more deep than that perhaps). But it's still primarily "entertainment" as I see it.
Google has more going for it from a "serious" and business perspective. Search. Maps. Finding pizza close by. Serious stuff.
If I had to stop using one site or companies sites, guess which one I could easily do without? Which one would you rather have close by? Google, or Facebook? I rest my case.
Another quick point is that from a Job or professional standpoint, hasn't zuckerberg heard that when looking for a job (or trying to keep one), Facebook is not really something you want to be messing around with. Not that YOU will do something wrong, but one of your stupid friends may decide now was a good time to show that above photo of the 6 empty beer cans on your head.
Yeah except it's counterintuitive to how one normally writes. I mean, seeing your hand/finger from upside down/backwards, would me (almost) like suddenly drawing or writing inside out or backwards. Think about it.... if your finger is UNDER the device, sure, you can see it better, but you want to draw what appears to your eye, a line that goes left to right. Except your hand would be physically drawing it right to left.
Bad idea. Bad.
What other software of Microsoft was made irrelevant?
Encarta.
Encarta was irrelevant 10 years ago. I honestly haven't heard that software package name since... wow... before google. Or before Google was Google. The demise of Encarta predates Wikipedia or even XP I think. That's def a windows "me" era package and was doomed for other reasons.
I think the bottomline is, and microsoft probably won't say this directly or admit it, but most of these "extra" apps MS tossed into windows systems (or sold separately) , MS was HOPING someone would make them irrelevant so they didn't have to keep wasting time on them. But they had to built some core crap stuff because no one else really did for awhile.
I seriously doubt Microsoft was placing their bets on Paint vs Photoshop. Outlook express is a perfect example too. That was irrelevant 10 years ago also but again, since there was not a good cheap alternative and they weren't willing to offer office for free... it's like "hey, here's this until someone does a better one, we don't really care."
>>they only sold 300 million copies this year, and barely 200 million copies of Office 2007
You sell 300 million ANYthing, you're not doing too bad. Flop? Compared to what? XP? Mac? TRS-80's? Don't kid yourself.
300 million in ONE year. That's even more remarkable.
What's disappointing to MS is all the people who didn't have the hardware to upgrade to Vista and are still on XP. I don't know.... give me a product, I'll sell it for as low as 10 cents and if I can can sell it to 300 million users in one year...hmm... I'll be happy.
>>The Web made a lot of Microsoft software irrelevant.
Like what, Word? If anyone believes Google Docs has replaced Word, that's also delusional.
Google Docs has replaced Notepad.
What other software of Microsoft was made irrelevant? I mean, I'm trying to think of stuff besides crap like Paint and chess but I'm not convinced anything online or on the web has replaced anything Microsoft seriously develops.
Ok, so we have a super hadron particle collider creating mini "big bangs" for idiotic scientists to examine where "everything" started from that can be broken into over the internet.
And some idiots are thinking it's cool to break into this and potentially create, what? A mini black hole vortex that starts sucking up Europe and then Asia and makes it away across the planet until finally around 2012 (January they say if you read some of those history books) there's nice soft "Pop!" and Hackers, not terrorists, not Nukes or the Russians or Chinese or Americans, not Iran, not Iraq, not Osama, not Obama, not Palin nor Putin nor McCain nor Rhasputin manages to do what no one could do before and never will again, start a new chapter in the Universe called "The Little Bang" Theory.
Wonder if CERN is using Macs or PCs?
Gates looked totally embarrassed to be in that commercial and I can't blame him. I prefer PC's (but love the Mac vs PC ads) but that has got to be the worst commercial for ANYthing I've ever seen.
What is wrong with some of these ad agencies these days? Its like they're living in some abstract reality thinking up totally stupid ideas and believe it's funny. Fire that company now. Fire Seinfeld if he had any part of it. I love Sein, but my god, he's gotten twisted in his old age if he wrote that.
Funny, I had IE8 open with 8 tabs, some of the ones listed in that article. None of the 6 instances of iexplorer took more than 50 megs, most only took 8-15 megs. CPU use was zero on all unless I did something. Closing 1 instances doesn't kill the entire thing/browser window (nice). Ram creepage didn't appear to happen in any of the instances.
I have FF3 also and funny, I have 4 tabs and it's eating up nearly 120 megs.
Running Vista, 4 gigs of RAM, dual core cpu.
Slashdot Mirror
Not going to find my doctor through either Facebook OR google. Chances are I'm going to use one my mom or dad or sister recommends and chances are that doctor is not a "friend" of theirs on facebook nor are they a "fan" of that Doctor. Facebook, to this point in time, is nothing really more than a "hey, I had 6 beers last night check out my photos", or "oooh, look at my kid jump into the pool," type of site (ok, well a bit more deep than that perhaps). But it's still primarily "entertainment" as I see it. Google has more going for it from a "serious" and business perspective. Search. Maps. Finding pizza close by. Serious stuff. If I had to stop using one site or companies sites, guess which one I could easily do without? Which one would you rather have close by? Google, or Facebook? I rest my case. Another quick point is that from a Job or professional standpoint, hasn't zuckerberg heard that when looking for a job (or trying to keep one), Facebook is not really something you want to be messing around with. Not that YOU will do something wrong, but one of your stupid friends may decide now was a good time to show that above photo of the 6 empty beer cans on your head.
Yeah except it's counterintuitive to how one normally writes. I mean, seeing your hand/finger from upside down/backwards, would me (almost) like suddenly drawing or writing inside out or backwards. Think about it.... if your finger is UNDER the device, sure, you can see it better, but you want to draw what appears to your eye, a line that goes left to right. Except your hand would be physically drawing it right to left. Bad idea. Bad.
Encarta.
Encarta was irrelevant 10 years ago. I honestly haven't heard that software package name since... wow... before google. Or before Google was Google. The demise of Encarta predates Wikipedia or even XP I think. That's def a windows "me" era package and was doomed for other reasons. I think the bottomline is, and microsoft probably won't say this directly or admit it, but most of these "extra" apps MS tossed into windows systems (or sold separately) , MS was HOPING someone would make them irrelevant so they didn't have to keep wasting time on them. But they had to built some core crap stuff because no one else really did for awhile. I seriously doubt Microsoft was placing their bets on Paint vs Photoshop. Outlook express is a perfect example too. That was irrelevant 10 years ago also but again, since there was not a good cheap alternative and they weren't willing to offer office for free... it's like "hey, here's this until someone does a better one, we don't really care."
>>they only sold 300 million copies this year, and barely 200 million copies of Office 2007 You sell 300 million ANYthing, you're not doing too bad. Flop? Compared to what? XP? Mac? TRS-80's? Don't kid yourself. 300 million in ONE year. That's even more remarkable. What's disappointing to MS is all the people who didn't have the hardware to upgrade to Vista and are still on XP. I don't know.... give me a product, I'll sell it for as low as 10 cents and if I can can sell it to 300 million users in one year...hmm... I'll be happy.
>>The Web made a lot of Microsoft software irrelevant. Like what, Word? If anyone believes Google Docs has replaced Word, that's also delusional. Google Docs has replaced Notepad. What other software of Microsoft was made irrelevant? I mean, I'm trying to think of stuff besides crap like Paint and chess but I'm not convinced anything online or on the web has replaced anything Microsoft seriously develops.
Ok, so we have a super hadron particle collider creating mini "big bangs" for idiotic scientists to examine where "everything" started from that can be broken into over the internet. And some idiots are thinking it's cool to break into this and potentially create, what? A mini black hole vortex that starts sucking up Europe and then Asia and makes it away across the planet until finally around 2012 (January they say if you read some of those history books) there's nice soft "Pop!" and Hackers, not terrorists, not Nukes or the Russians or Chinese or Americans, not Iran, not Iraq, not Osama, not Obama, not Palin nor Putin nor McCain nor Rhasputin manages to do what no one could do before and never will again, start a new chapter in the Universe called "The Little Bang" Theory. Wonder if CERN is using Macs or PCs?
Gates looked totally embarrassed to be in that commercial and I can't blame him. I prefer PC's (but love the Mac vs PC ads) but that has got to be the worst commercial for ANYthing I've ever seen. What is wrong with some of these ad agencies these days? Its like they're living in some abstract reality thinking up totally stupid ideas and believe it's funny. Fire that company now. Fire Seinfeld if he had any part of it. I love Sein, but my god, he's gotten twisted in his old age if he wrote that.
Funny, I had IE8 open with 8 tabs, some of the ones listed in that article. None of the 6 instances of iexplorer took more than 50 megs, most only took 8-15 megs. CPU use was zero on all unless I did something. Closing 1 instances doesn't kill the entire thing/browser window (nice). Ram creepage didn't appear to happen in any of the instances. I have FF3 also and funny, I have 4 tabs and it's eating up nearly 120 megs. Running Vista, 4 gigs of RAM, dual core cpu.