This is a fantasy. Microsoft has always been a corporation that seizes someone else's idea and does it better, faster, cheaper than they ever dreamed of doing. They 'follow' by definition, so they can spot the ideas worth stealing.
That's Apple's process, too. Except the cheaper part.
Shocking news. Microsoft exec upset by the success of a member of the competition.
It's actually kind of surprising, usually company execs aren't quite as blatant as that in expressing things like that. In fact, they almost never are. I find it refreshing.
I wonder why they don't sell a Microsoft PC/Xbox? Since they have this crazy desire to enter the hardware market in the first place, why didn't they go all the way?
Mass revolt by the PC companies, who might refuse to ship PCs with windows (or work together to develop a desktop OS alternative). I think that's the reason they wouldn't even create a keyboard or mouse for the Xbox.
If any of you PC bigots have ever owned an Apple product I might listen to your "product advice" about build quality
If you had actually read my response you would notice that (a) I said my opinion was based partially on the mac products I've owned; and (b) I was referencing STRUCTURAL DESIGN FLAWS, not build quality.
The thing that really strikes me these days is the hatred for ordinary Americans by the elites.
I've heard this sort of claim before and I never really got the classification system here. Who are the "elites" exactly? Is it based on money? Because a lot of the people railing against the "elites" have more money than the "elites" they rail against. Is it based on self-perception? The big city professional may look down on the Bible belt housewife as unsophisticated, tacky, and ignorant, but the Bible belt housewife may look down on the big city professional as immoral, degenerate, effeminate, and communist. Does that make the housewife an "elite"?
Uhh.... A battery failure that wasn't their fault and unsightly fine cracks? You fanboys have resorted to just making things up, havnt you. Go play halo er something.
Uh oh, I made one of them mad. Hopefully he didn't spill his organic espresso on his vintage Ramones t-shirt, or his underemployed coworkers down at the indie record store will make fun of him.
Out of the two macs I've owned, one ultimately died because the power supply burnt out (which has never happened with any of the dozen or so PCs I've owned in my life), and the other, a macbook, stopped sending data to the screen because of a poorly designed hinge (Apple fixed it once, but would not fix it the second time it happened).
And maybe I WILL play Halo when I get home. It's an excellent game.
The idiot in the exchange is more likely a smug IT sociopath who fancies himself a "designer" because he's the only wonk in his small dysfunctional company with the cracked copy of Photoshop and the free time on endless weekends home alone to spend learning enough about it not to electrocute himself when scaling a photograph.
Why would an IT guy pretend to be a graphics designer? My impression was in the business world graphics designers are pretty much low men/women on the totem pole. The secretary probably makes more money than this guy.
Because it's not pointless cruelty, it's a rather... extended manner of telling people that his skills aren't worthless. People (particularly businesspeople) are to quick to assume that artistic work is simple and worthless (fun fact: simplicity and minimalism are more difficult than complexity).
If his skills were worthless she wouldn't have asked him to help. And she wasn't asking for anything that requires a degree of incredible artistic talent, just a picture of a cat, and LOST CAT down at the bottom with a phone number. He should lose his perception of himself as a precious jewel considering how precarious his career is. What if the secretary is well-liked by his superiors? It's just a little dumb to make enemies when you could be replaced anytime by someone equally talented from the huge number of graphics designers living in their parents basement and working at starbucks.
Yep I never understood the point of this other than pointless cruelty. Making a legitimate missing poster with a picture and a simple caption would take him what, 3 minutes at the most?
We still differ. Harming another human being should in most cases be illegal. The illegality of it should not hinge on what the harmer thought, beyond his intent to commit the harm or lack of it. Not hiring someone is not harming them.
Freedom does have a logical limit- your freedom cannot be worth more than everybody else's - it ENDS the moment you use it to harm anybody else.
No, not under your definition of "harm" which is way too broad. He has the right to the free pursuit of happiness, but not the right to private employment. That's not "pursuit."
I've no idea what you are talking about in the Knox case. There was a trial, the atmosphere in the Italian media was not tense at all, no one assumed really anything about her being guilty or innocent. The case was complicated and there were plenty of bogeymen.
Where did I make one statement about the Italian media?
At the very least, it is beyond discussion that she knowingly accused an innocent man, token nigger Patrick Lumumba. Because the bad guy is always a black male, not a white girl.
Then she can be convicted of obstruction of justice, or whatever the analogue crime is in Italy.
You are rooting for Knox the way you would be rooting for a football team.
Completely unsupported and false. I think the Italian boyfriend was railroaded, too, and am just as angry at his treatment as I am over Knox's. And I am equally as angry when similar things happen in the US; the difference is, on a structural level the US gives more rights to criminal defendants than Italy does. You have to stop thinking in terms of tribalism; remember Martin Luther King's words: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Keep in mind that the victim was British and the accomplice was an Italian, Knox' boyfriend. If anything, Italian media and public opinion should have been skewed towards the defendants.
My anger is limited to the Italian courts and the prosecutor, not all Italians or the Italian media.
You are right, the case is about evidence. There was almost none. This case should have been laughed out of court.
Right, because if the victim of injustice is American, it's not really injustice because Americans, even foolish 20 year old Americans, are history's great villains.
The moment it DOES - you've lost the right to. The moment you pass me over for promotion because I'm the wrong color even though I'm the best candidate you SHOULD be committing a crime.
Well that's where we differ. If you let your racist hiring decisions affect how you run your business, I may dislike it but it's your business. You should be able to choose not to hire me because you don't like my skin color, or eye color, or because the your hallucination of St. Peter told your enfeebled brain that if you hired me your moustache would turn green. Freedom is freedom; if you have to qualify it like you want to do it's not freedom anymore.
And that assessment is based on what, exactly? The fact that the court convicted an American based on overwhelming evidence of her guilt?
Fabrication of evidence? Absence of evidence? Or in your country is it allowed for a prosecutor to state on the record that there was a "ritual killing" despite no evidence of such? After a troubled drifter who actually confessed to being at the crime scene, a confession that was supported by actual physical evidence, was already convicted? Where is the "overwhelming evidence of her guilt"? And the nationality of the person convicted has nothing to do with my repulsion at the Italian justice system. I feel the same anger at anyone who is railroaded by a dysfunctional and criminally incompetent justice system.
If you only need one trial to prove the system is broken how do you defend the us justice system?
The prosecutor was allowed to fabricate motive and create bizarre stories without any proof. Observers at the time familiar with the Italian justice system stated this was actually completely normal in Italian criminal cases.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a fantasy. Microsoft has always been a corporation that seizes someone else's idea and does it better, faster, cheaper than they ever dreamed of doing. They 'follow' by definition, so they can spot the ideas worth stealing.
That's Apple's process, too. Except the cheaper part.
Shocking news. Microsoft exec upset by the success of a member of the competition.
It's actually kind of surprising, usually company execs aren't quite as blatant as that in expressing things like that. In fact, they almost never are. I find it refreshing.
I wonder why they don't sell a Microsoft PC/Xbox? Since they have this crazy desire to enter the hardware market in the first place, why didn't they go all the way?
Mass revolt by the PC companies, who might refuse to ship PCs with windows (or work together to develop a desktop OS alternative). I think that's the reason they wouldn't even create a keyboard or mouse for the Xbox.
They did it right with the Xbox.
Making $150,000 a year is having their blood sucked from them?
If any of you PC bigots have ever owned an Apple product I might listen to your "product advice" about build quality
If you had actually read my response you would notice that (a) I said my opinion was based partially on the mac products I've owned; and (b) I was referencing STRUCTURAL DESIGN FLAWS, not build quality.
Organic espresso? Go fuck yourself.
Oooh, hit close to home there, huh?
The thing that really strikes me these days is the hatred for ordinary Americans by the elites.
I've heard this sort of claim before and I never really got the classification system here. Who are the "elites" exactly? Is it based on money? Because a lot of the people railing against the "elites" have more money than the "elites" they rail against. Is it based on self-perception? The big city professional may look down on the Bible belt housewife as unsophisticated, tacky, and ignorant, but the Bible belt housewife may look down on the big city professional as immoral, degenerate, effeminate, and communist. Does that make the housewife an "elite"?
Uhh.... A battery failure that wasn't their fault and unsightly fine cracks? You fanboys have resorted to just making things up, havnt you. Go play halo er something.
Uh oh, I made one of them mad. Hopefully he didn't spill his organic espresso on his vintage Ramones t-shirt, or his underemployed coworkers down at the indie record store will make fun of him.
Out of the two macs I've owned, one ultimately died because the power supply burnt out (which has never happened with any of the dozen or so PCs I've owned in my life), and the other, a macbook, stopped sending data to the screen because of a poorly designed hinge (Apple fixed it once, but would not fix it the second time it happened).
And maybe I WILL play Halo when I get home. It's an excellent game.
The idiot in the exchange is more likely a smug IT sociopath who fancies himself a "designer" because he's the only wonk in his small dysfunctional company with the cracked copy of Photoshop and the free time on endless weekends home alone to spend learning enough about it not to electrocute himself when scaling a photograph.
Why would an IT guy pretend to be a graphics designer? My impression was in the business world graphics designers are pretty much low men/women on the totem pole. The secretary probably makes more money than this guy.
I have 7 cats
Hey, didn't know crazy cat people posted on slashdot.
Because it's not pointless cruelty, it's a rather... extended manner of telling people that his skills aren't worthless. People (particularly businesspeople) are to quick to assume that artistic work is simple and worthless (fun fact: simplicity and minimalism are more difficult than complexity).
If his skills were worthless she wouldn't have asked him to help. And she wasn't asking for anything that requires a degree of incredible artistic talent, just a picture of a cat, and LOST CAT down at the bottom with a phone number. He should lose his perception of himself as a precious jewel considering how precarious his career is. What if the secretary is well-liked by his superiors? It's just a little dumb to make enemies when you could be replaced anytime by someone equally talented from the huge number of graphics designers living in their parents basement and working at starbucks.
Yep I never understood the point of this other than pointless cruelty. Making a legitimate missing poster with a picture and a simple caption would take him what, 3 minutes at the most?
Considering the past 20 years of structural design flaws, as well.
You should bash Java, and C++ devs will agree. You should bash C++, and Java devs will agree.
As a non-programmer I like to bash every language, while pretending to know what I'm talking about. Coders are so much fun to aggravate.
You honestly would not characterize Jobs as smug? Seriously?
We still differ. Harming another human being should in most cases be illegal. The illegality of it should not hinge on what the harmer thought, beyond his intent to commit the harm or lack of it. Not hiring someone is not harming them.
Barbarism is about selfishness; do what I say, or I smite you. What you describe is the same thing. Being wrong should not be a crime.
With a private employer you do not have a right to "fair" working conditions. That's my point.
Freedom does have a logical limit- your freedom cannot be worth more than everybody else's - it ENDS the moment you use it to harm anybody else.
No, not under your definition of "harm" which is way too broad. He has the right to the free pursuit of happiness, but not the right to private employment. That's not "pursuit."
I've no idea what you are talking about in the Knox case. There was a trial, the atmosphere in the Italian media was not tense at all, no one assumed really anything about her being guilty or innocent. The case was complicated and there were plenty of bogeymen.
Where did I make one statement about the Italian media?
At the very least, it is beyond discussion that she knowingly accused an innocent man, token nigger Patrick Lumumba. Because the bad guy is always a black male, not a white girl.
Then she can be convicted of obstruction of justice, or whatever the analogue crime is in Italy.
You are rooting for Knox the way you would be rooting for a football team.
Completely unsupported and false. I think the Italian boyfriend was railroaded, too, and am just as angry at his treatment as I am over Knox's. And I am equally as angry when similar things happen in the US; the difference is, on a structural level the US gives more rights to criminal defendants than Italy does. You have to stop thinking in terms of tribalism; remember Martin Luther King's words: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Keep in mind that the victim was British and the accomplice was an Italian, Knox' boyfriend. If anything, Italian media and public opinion should have been skewed towards the defendants.
My anger is limited to the Italian courts and the prosecutor, not all Italians or the Italian media.
You are right, the case is about evidence. There was almost none. This case should have been laughed out of court.
Right, because if the victim of injustice is American, it's not really injustice because Americans, even foolish 20 year old Americans, are history's great villains.
The moment it DOES - you've lost the right to. The moment you pass me over for promotion because I'm the wrong color even though I'm the best candidate you SHOULD be committing a crime.
Well that's where we differ. If you let your racist hiring decisions affect how you run your business, I may dislike it but it's your business. You should be able to choose not to hire me because you don't like my skin color, or eye color, or because the your hallucination of St. Peter told your enfeebled brain that if you hired me your moustache would turn green. Freedom is freedom; if you have to qualify it like you want to do it's not freedom anymore.
And that assessment is based on what, exactly? The fact that the court convicted an American based on overwhelming evidence of her guilt?
Fabrication of evidence? Absence of evidence? Or in your country is it allowed for a prosecutor to state on the record that there was a "ritual killing" despite no evidence of such? After a troubled drifter who actually confessed to being at the crime scene, a confession that was supported by actual physical evidence, was already convicted? Where is the "overwhelming evidence of her guilt"? And the nationality of the person convicted has nothing to do with my repulsion at the Italian justice system. I feel the same anger at anyone who is railroaded by a dysfunctional and criminally incompetent justice system.
If you only need one trial to prove the system is broken how do you defend the us justice system?
The prosecutor was allowed to fabricate motive and create bizarre stories without any proof. Observers at the time familiar with the Italian justice system stated this was actually completely normal in Italian criminal cases.
As with the US, which, as the OJ Simpson trial showed, does not have a functioning justice system.
And why do you say that? What aspect of how the trial was conducted leads you to conclude that?