anyone who doesn't know anything about perion would. i think it's funny how apple users assume all apple users know about all the good software that covers "everything". they assume that people who use apple computers have a higher intelligence than people who use windows. sorry, but that's not true. a lot of the switchers who are switching for looks are dumb enough to not think twice and type in that admin password and install the trojan. this trojan isn't taking advantage of the "mac people". it's taking advantage of the average joe users who don't know any better. they're the same people who click "allow" in vista without thinking about what they're doing.
it might slightly damage apple's image as making a "perfect" OS (which is far from perfect). however, windows seems to install on almost any piece of hardware with few driver issues (vista aside). if MS can do it, why can't apple?
you didn't read what i wrote. if apple opened their OS to PC hardware, it would still be just as stable on apple hardware as it ever was. the only people who would notice any stability issues would be those running it on other hardware.
this, of course, assumes that OSX is a super stable operating system... kind of like linux, which runs on all sorts of hardware. go figure.
opening it up wouldn't make it less stable for apple hardware, it would just let other people use it and possibly have it less stable. though opening it up could hurt their closed proprietary hardware business, which wouldn't be too much of a shame if you ask me.
if you go in with an opinion that evolution can be argued, then you should go in with an opinion that every scientific theory held pretty closely to fact can be argued.
the majority of new computers are made with the same exact parts... including your beloved apples. business class machines are built with just slightly better same parts.
i've never been in a large business that had consumer class hardware.
the reason most people don't have good experiences with the computers used in their workplace is because the workplace is on a 4-5 year upgrade cycle while at home, they're on a 2-3 year (or shorter) cycle. they don't have good experiences because a lot of corporations lock their employees out of their computers and only allow them to do their actual work. they even block certain websites (including sites like gmail, hotmail, etc) and instant messaging. finally, they don't have good experiences because in many corporations, the IT department is considered a bunch of pricks, or at the very least extremely slow at getting things done or strict about their policies. it has nothing to do with the quality of the hardware, it's more the age.
never said everyone buys them just for the shiny factor. i will also argue that apples were not always shiny... in fact, they were quite ugly and clunky. the original imac had tons of issues. those after it were just pretty colors running an OS that had seen better days. now i'm not saying that windows is fabulous, but both XP and vista were pretty good improvements over those that preceded them (yes, i have been using vista for quite some time and i love it and have had very few issues with it, while i have had several issues with XP).
the girl actually knew how to use her windows machine. she knew absolutely nothing about her new apple. yes, she bought it for the shininess. and yes, i know that people will still buy apples despite the price difference and longer warranties. and i still know several people who hate apple's customer support because they had to send the same computer back several times (no fewer than 3 times) to get the same exact problem fixed because it was returned to them unresolved. if that is good support, then i should quite my job and go work for apple if i can get away with doing nothing.
they're called business class because they're designed for businesses to get a lot of use out of them. businesses want less downtime, so they buy better hardware, designed to last longer than consumer-class hardware. i don't know any businesses, except perhaps the small or home business, that buys the cheapest crappiest hardware they can find. yes, large businesses want the best deal, but that's usually easy to get with contracts with the big vendors (dell, HP, etc). and most vendors don't offer those kinds of deals with their crappy consumer lines.
someone above said this is not the case as he shows up late and ends up waiting for his bag. i also don't think it's necessarily the case. i think it depends on the order in which they empty the luggage cars and which bags end up on the bottom of each cart.
And if you think I'm being picky, bear in mind that Ryanair (cheap Irish airline that is popular in the UK) kept their costs down by removing the magazine holders on the backs of seats, simply because it was one less thing to clean up before flying again. if only american airline companies actually cleaned those out and made sure they all had the proper stuff in them (1 emergency instruction sheet, 1 airline magazine, 1 skymall). they keep costs down by not cleaning, just quickly glancing in each row to make sure there's no loose stuff.
honestly though, i think this is a great idea for united. i fly southwest airlines a lot, no first class, no priority flyers or anything. my luggage somehow comes out last every time i fly. i generally get to the airport about 1.5 hours in advance. i tend to try not to check anything, but when i do, i have to wait and wait for it to come out. it wouldn't bother me if they offered a prioritized luggage delivery fee. i'd consider it part of the cost to keep ticket prices down, which is what i care about most. everything else is just fluff. i get my free soft drink (usually water) and on those airlines that offer free pretzels or peanuts, i take those as well (southwest usually gives everyone 2 packets, which is nice). the worst experience i had was on northwest airlines who charged even for the peanuts (which was a trail mix, and admittedly larger than most airlines give you for peanuts). so there was no food, though i had to pay the $1 because i was hungry. generally, if i think i might get hungry on a flight, i'll buy something before getting to the airport or bring my own food.
i don't even know what you're talking about... anyone that knows anything about computers knows that the business line of most manufacturers tends to be more robust with better, more powerful hardware, designed with a 3-5 year lifespan as opposed to the 2-3 year lifespan of consumer line computers.
i never said HP was perfect, but we've been using HP laptops (and some servers as well) for years in our college (far longer than i have been there) and we haven't had a ton of problems. sure we end up with the occasional dead hard drive and the occasional dead power supply, but that's to be expected (and of course dead batteries). the people who possess them don't know how to properly care for them (like not transporting them while they're still turned on).
the students don't have a whole lot of problems with them either. as for my anecdotal evidence, perhaps it's coincidence, perhaps it's not. i don't know. what i do know is that they're several different models from difference years (going back pre-intel). the first apple laptop purchased by the college was sent back to apple no less than 3 times because of faulty hardware (i believe it was actually a faulty motherboard to be exact).
i also didn't say that everyone switched because they're shiny, but those i know who switched or purchased them were doing so because they are the cool thing to have. i deal with students on a daily basis and i give recommendations to students and parents when they start college on what kind of computer to purchase. i have yet to have a great reason to recommend apple based on the cost and problems i know of (the warranty given on the HP's through our vendor can't be beat and the hardware is the same as that in macbook pro's, but they are business class, so they're a bit more robust than the consumer line). i've had people try to convince me that the cost difference doesn't exist, when it really does, especially when it comes down to warranty. our vendor gives a 2 year full warranty with full accidental damage, and it can be extended to 4 years. can't really beat that living in a dorm. but those students and parents i speak with ask me about apples because they know nothing about them except that their son or daughter wants one even though they've had PC's their whole life. generally, it's because they're shiny and "cool" and not because they're better machines (the students at the college i work for could care less about quality computers).
i'm not saying apple is bad, but i'm not saying they're better than HP or microsoft.
the people who are switching aren't switching because of the quality... they're switching because of the shiny. i work in a college IT department and deal with move-in every year. we have a vendor who offers HP business class machines. the reasons i hear people going for apple is because they're prettier. seriously. i had a girl come in with her apple not knowing how to install office, install the virus protection, or how to even eject a CD. she didn't know a thing about her new computer because she bought it solely for the shine fact.
i also want to know what quality? i know at least 3 or 4 people who have apples that have sent them back and forth to apple to get fixed and they just can't get it right. one of them has sent it back and forth 7 times (at $80 a pop on apple's dime... you'd think they would've gotten him a new computer by now). the market share is growing because people value shine, not because of quality.
they're super popular because they're great game consoles. nothing more needs to be said about them. people of all ages, even senior citizens, love them. my fiancee's aunt and uncle just got one and they've never been into video games before. it's popular because it really is the gaming device for the masses and not just people who like gaming.
no, bush had said what he said before the report was ever released... in fact, it was around the same time that the petraeus was charged with the responsibility of the report.
i'm in rhode island and i know that the stores here, as well as the stores nearby in massachusetts and connecticut don't have them. i've had one since january, so i'm not out looking for them, but whenever i'm in a store that would sell them, i check. they don't have them.
i believe what i see and hear. i watched his testimony in the senate hearings and i've watched the things bush has said about the war. amazingly enough, they were just as i said. almost exactly word for word the same report.
yes, people are still having a hard time finding it. none of the stores i've been in have it around here (target, walmart, best buy, etc). i don't shop at places like eb games or gamestop very often, so i don't know about them.
i assume when you said
but I wonder if the Wii's availability is playing into effect of how hard the system is to find? that you meant "is the wii's popularity playing into effect of how hard it is to find?" the answer to that question is an obvious "yes". the wii is loved by the elderly, the young, the middle aged, the hard core gamer, the casual gamer, while the 360 and PS3 are mostly for people looking for good graphics and games like halo 3.
i was surprised to see that the PS2 had better sales than the PS3. that should say a lot to sony.
general betrayus deserved to be smeared. he did not report anything true about the situation in iraq. he simply reported what bush wanted him to report. it's quite obvious if you actually listen to what he said in his report and what bush has been saying all along. they are almost word for word exactly the same thing.
agreed. i played zelda for quite some time and haven't picked it up again in quite some time. i have more fun with games like rayman now. if zelda wasn't the same type of stuff over and over again, it'd be fun. eventually i think i'll pick it up just to say i beat it.
the only things thunderbird and sunbird (which last i checked wasn't even released yet, admittedly that was about 9 months ago) provide is email and calendar. they don't seamlessly fit in what outlook does when used with exchange. there's the journaling, task management, collaboration, etc. that is all used through outlook. if OO.o wants to provide a product that replaces MS office for the business user who isn't connecting to an exchange server, then yes, adding thunderbird is a great idea. but trying to say they're taking on outlook is just plain stupid and it could come back to haunt them when the first person tries, thinking that it'll work with exchange and they can't do their shared calendars and tasks and all that.
Slashdot Mirror
anyone who doesn't know anything about perion would. i think it's funny how apple users assume all apple users know about all the good software that covers "everything". they assume that people who use apple computers have a higher intelligence than people who use windows. sorry, but that's not true. a lot of the switchers who are switching for looks are dumb enough to not think twice and type in that admin password and install the trojan. this trojan isn't taking advantage of the "mac people". it's taking advantage of the average joe users who don't know any better. they're the same people who click "allow" in vista without thinking about what they're doing.
15 points... duh.
it might slightly damage apple's image as making a "perfect" OS (which is far from perfect). however, windows seems to install on almost any piece of hardware with few driver issues (vista aside). if MS can do it, why can't apple?
you didn't read what i wrote. if apple opened their OS to PC hardware, it would still be just as stable on apple hardware as it ever was. the only people who would notice any stability issues would be those running it on other hardware.
this, of course, assumes that OSX is a super stable operating system... kind of like linux, which runs on all sorts of hardware. go figure.
opening it up wouldn't make it less stable for apple hardware, it would just let other people use it and possibly have it less stable. though opening it up could hurt their closed proprietary hardware business, which wouldn't be too much of a shame if you ask me.
if you go in with an opinion that evolution can be argued, then you should go in with an opinion that every scientific theory held pretty closely to fact can be argued.
the majority of new computers are made with the same exact parts... including your beloved apples. business class machines are built with just slightly better same parts.
i've never been in a large business that had consumer class hardware.
the reason most people don't have good experiences with the computers used in their workplace is because the workplace is on a 4-5 year upgrade cycle while at home, they're on a 2-3 year (or shorter) cycle. they don't have good experiences because a lot of corporations lock their employees out of their computers and only allow them to do their actual work. they even block certain websites (including sites like gmail, hotmail, etc) and instant messaging. finally, they don't have good experiences because in many corporations, the IT department is considered a bunch of pricks, or at the very least extremely slow at getting things done or strict about their policies. it has nothing to do with the quality of the hardware, it's more the age.
never said everyone buys them just for the shiny factor. i will also argue that apples were not always shiny... in fact, they were quite ugly and clunky. the original imac had tons of issues. those after it were just pretty colors running an OS that had seen better days. now i'm not saying that windows is fabulous, but both XP and vista were pretty good improvements over those that preceded them (yes, i have been using vista for quite some time and i love it and have had very few issues with it, while i have had several issues with XP).
the girl actually knew how to use her windows machine. she knew absolutely nothing about her new apple. yes, she bought it for the shininess. and yes, i know that people will still buy apples despite the price difference and longer warranties. and i still know several people who hate apple's customer support because they had to send the same computer back several times (no fewer than 3 times) to get the same exact problem fixed because it was returned to them unresolved. if that is good support, then i should quite my job and go work for apple if i can get away with doing nothing.
they're called business class because they're designed for businesses to get a lot of use out of them. businesses want less downtime, so they buy better hardware, designed to last longer than consumer-class hardware. i don't know any businesses, except perhaps the small or home business, that buys the cheapest crappiest hardware they can find. yes, large businesses want the best deal, but that's usually easy to get with contracts with the big vendors (dell, HP, etc). and most vendors don't offer those kinds of deals with their crappy consumer lines.
someone above said this is not the case as he shows up late and ends up waiting for his bag. i also don't think it's necessarily the case. i think it depends on the order in which they empty the luggage cars and which bags end up on the bottom of each cart.
honestly though, i think this is a great idea for united. i fly southwest airlines a lot, no first class, no priority flyers or anything. my luggage somehow comes out last every time i fly. i generally get to the airport about 1.5 hours in advance. i tend to try not to check anything, but when i do, i have to wait and wait for it to come out. it wouldn't bother me if they offered a prioritized luggage delivery fee. i'd consider it part of the cost to keep ticket prices down, which is what i care about most. everything else is just fluff. i get my free soft drink (usually water) and on those airlines that offer free pretzels or peanuts, i take those as well (southwest usually gives everyone 2 packets, which is nice). the worst experience i had was on northwest airlines who charged even for the peanuts (which was a trail mix, and admittedly larger than most airlines give you for peanuts). so there was no food, though i had to pay the $1 because i was hungry. generally, if i think i might get hungry on a flight, i'll buy something before getting to the airport or bring my own food.
i don't even know what you're talking about... anyone that knows anything about computers knows that the business line of most manufacturers tends to be more robust with better, more powerful hardware, designed with a 3-5 year lifespan as opposed to the 2-3 year lifespan of consumer line computers.
i never said HP was perfect, but we've been using HP laptops (and some servers as well) for years in our college (far longer than i have been there) and we haven't had a ton of problems. sure we end up with the occasional dead hard drive and the occasional dead power supply, but that's to be expected (and of course dead batteries). the people who possess them don't know how to properly care for them (like not transporting them while they're still turned on).
the students don't have a whole lot of problems with them either. as for my anecdotal evidence, perhaps it's coincidence, perhaps it's not. i don't know. what i do know is that they're several different models from difference years (going back pre-intel). the first apple laptop purchased by the college was sent back to apple no less than 3 times because of faulty hardware (i believe it was actually a faulty motherboard to be exact).
i also didn't say that everyone switched because they're shiny, but those i know who switched or purchased them were doing so because they are the cool thing to have. i deal with students on a daily basis and i give recommendations to students and parents when they start college on what kind of computer to purchase. i have yet to have a great reason to recommend apple based on the cost and problems i know of (the warranty given on the HP's through our vendor can't be beat and the hardware is the same as that in macbook pro's, but they are business class, so they're a bit more robust than the consumer line). i've had people try to convince me that the cost difference doesn't exist, when it really does, especially when it comes down to warranty. our vendor gives a 2 year full warranty with full accidental damage, and it can be extended to 4 years. can't really beat that living in a dorm. but those students and parents i speak with ask me about apples because they know nothing about them except that their son or daughter wants one even though they've had PC's their whole life. generally, it's because they're shiny and "cool" and not because they're better machines (the students at the college i work for could care less about quality computers).
i'm not saying apple is bad, but i'm not saying they're better than HP or microsoft.
the people who are switching aren't switching because of the quality... they're switching because of the shiny. i work in a college IT department and deal with move-in every year. we have a vendor who offers HP business class machines. the reasons i hear people going for apple is because they're prettier. seriously. i had a girl come in with her apple not knowing how to install office, install the virus protection, or how to even eject a CD. she didn't know a thing about her new computer because she bought it solely for the shine fact.
i also want to know what quality? i know at least 3 or 4 people who have apples that have sent them back and forth to apple to get fixed and they just can't get it right. one of them has sent it back and forth 7 times (at $80 a pop on apple's dime... you'd think they would've gotten him a new computer by now). the market share is growing because people value shine, not because of quality.
they're super popular because they're great game consoles. nothing more needs to be said about them. people of all ages, even senior citizens, love them. my fiancee's aunt and uncle just got one and they've never been into video games before. it's popular because it really is the gaming device for the masses and not just people who like gaming.
no, bush had said what he said before the report was ever released... in fact, it was around the same time that the petraeus was charged with the responsibility of the report.
or the PS3 is overpriced, even after dropping the price?
i'm in rhode island and i know that the stores here, as well as the stores nearby in massachusetts and connecticut don't have them. i've had one since january, so i'm not out looking for them, but whenever i'm in a store that would sell them, i check. they don't have them.
i believe what i see and hear. i watched his testimony in the senate hearings and i've watched the things bush has said about the war. amazingly enough, they were just as i said. almost exactly word for word the same report.
i assume when you said but I wonder if the Wii's availability is playing into effect of how hard the system is to find? that you meant "is the wii's popularity playing into effect of how hard it is to find?" the answer to that question is an obvious "yes". the wii is loved by the elderly, the young, the middle aged, the hard core gamer, the casual gamer, while the 360 and PS3 are mostly for people looking for good graphics and games like halo 3.
i was surprised to see that the PS2 had better sales than the PS3. that should say a lot to sony.
general betrayus deserved to be smeared. he did not report anything true about the situation in iraq. he simply reported what bush wanted him to report. it's quite obvious if you actually listen to what he said in his report and what bush has been saying all along. they are almost word for word exactly the same thing.
agreed. i played zelda for quite some time and haven't picked it up again in quite some time. i have more fun with games like rayman now. if zelda wasn't the same type of stuff over and over again, it'd be fun. eventually i think i'll pick it up just to say i beat it.
some of the worst seafood i've ever had too... and WAY overpriced.
the only things thunderbird and sunbird (which last i checked wasn't even released yet, admittedly that was about 9 months ago) provide is email and calendar. they don't seamlessly fit in what outlook does when used with exchange. there's the journaling, task management, collaboration, etc. that is all used through outlook. if OO.o wants to provide a product that replaces MS office for the business user who isn't connecting to an exchange server, then yes, adding thunderbird is a great idea. but trying to say they're taking on outlook is just plain stupid and it could come back to haunt them when the first person tries, thinking that it'll work with exchange and they can't do their shared calendars and tasks and all that.
i tried lightning. thunderbird kept crashing on me when trying to use it. does lightning sync with exchange or can you only use it locally?
i have been waiting patiently for sunbird to be released.