for the record, I am NOT roman catholic, nor orthodox, nor any mainstream religion.
I believe the Bible, and only the Bible. No traditions of the elders, no stupid laws preventing marriage etc.
And also for the record, the Bible talks about the Roman Catholic system, in many places. All of them in a negative context. Talk about predicting the future - see 2 Thessalonians - early verses, particularly verse 4, speaking of "the son of perdition"..."Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."
No prizes for guessing who that is talking about.
IN Revelation 17, a women rides a beast. the woman is described as being "full of names of blasphemy" (see above), v6 - she was "drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus".
When the Bible uses imagery involving a woman, it is always speaking of a religious system/power. Only 1 religious power has been responsible for the deaths of anyone who read the Bible, and those who confessed to believe in Jesus. You guessed it - Revelation 17 is speaking of none other than the Roman Catholic Church.
Please do yourself a favour and at least read the Bible. You may not believe its message, but how can you reject it until you've read it.
It was written by ~40 different authors over a period of 1000+ years, yet it agrees 100% with itself. Critics try to claim that it doesn't but most can be easily answered, and some require a bit more Bible understanding to fully explain. But the truth is there. There is no inconsistency.
The difference between those who believe the Bible vs those who refuse to, is the attitude with which they read it.
Science can only explain scientific things - it cannot explain Bible prophecy.
I'm not arguing for religion. I'm arguing for the Bible. Most of it was written BC and a smaller part AD.
We have so many christian-based religions because people fail at reading/interpreting. They have changed so much for the same reason.
The Bible hasn't changed - so you've got to question the religions but the only source of truth is the Bible (on this matter).
As for evolution theory - we just dont know if its wrong. And far from being a complete theory, if the details were a football oval, current theory accounts for about a 20c piece worth. Its so vague and missing so much detail that its really hard to base one's life on it.
Fair enough if scientists want to explore stuff - that's fine - but when it becomes an accepted "worldview" that someone bases their life on, then it is in religion's territory.
The Bible takes a completely different view. How we got here isn't all that important - it spends just a couple of chapters on it and then the rest is to tell us about God. It speaks of how to live (to become like God) and it also promises a reward for doing so.
You may think the Bible is just a history book or something, but its whole purpose is to give us a better future.
I hate mainstream religion as much as the next person - and if you line up what they say with the Bible, you'll find them lacking.
Immortal soul, 3 Gods in one, magic holy spirit gifts of healing, its all just because people cant read well. The Bible says none of it.
What it DOES promise, is a future kingdom ON EARTH, headed by Jesus Christ. The time period? Well, when there are wars, rumours of wars, famine, frequent earthquakes and other natural disasters, and when the world's moral standards drop significantly. Shouldn't have long to go now.
And when it does happen, people will be crying out that there was no warning.
If you dont want to believe it - that's fine. Go, live your life. ~70 years is all you get...make them count (whatever that means).
And it predicted the Jews firstly being scattered out of their land and then much later returning to their land. It also predicted HOW they would return. It also predicted them not just being in the land but becoming "confident".
When things happen that were predicted with such accuracy over 2000 years earlier, one has to admit that science cannot explain it.
I believe, because I have seen. I have witnessed miracles both on a world scale and in my own life. My belief has a firm basis.
What about yours?
I'm sorry to hear your ignorance about the Bible, but it wasn't just "made up". Say what you like about it, but the history is accurate, the people are accurate, many of the stories have been verified by archeology etc. and it agrees with itself from cover to cover despite being written by many authors over a time period of greater than 1000 years.
There isn't a single other book that can come close to those claims. Challenge it all you like, but it stands on its own. You owe it to yourself to at least read it.
The problem with the original book is that it uses the following hypothesis:
If I have an alternative theory that doesn't require there to be a God, then God must not exist. Or that just because science has found a theory that supposedly explains life, that the other theory immediately becomes disproven, or false.
The reality is that, well, now we have 2 theories. There are a lot of mistakes and things yet to learn in dawkin's theory. Not saying its wrong, but both theories are asking that you base your life on it.
When evolution theory has stood the test of time, being unchanged for over 1800 years and still relevant...then we'll have a contest.
The problem is that science cant prove anything either. It can hypothesize and make all kinds of claims each based on each other (circular reasoning is rampant), but it cannot disprove the Bible. It only offers an alternative view.
Science says the earth had to form a certain way because the timeline proves this and that happened at these specific times, which were all millions of years ago etc. The Bible says that just like Adam was created having an "age" of around 20 years, so the universe also was created having an "age". Science claims that everything must have existed for millions of years but cannot disprove the idea that it could have just been created that way.
The Bible does provide some evidence, but it works different to science. The Bible says, if A and B, through X are proven to be true, then Y and Z should be assumed to be true. That is what faith means. Heb 11:1 says that faith is based on substance. Faith says that if God says X and it happened, then when he says Y that will also happen.
We have the jews in the land of Israel (Ezek 37), the destruction of the ancient city of tyre (Ezek 26), weakening of world governments (Dan 2) - resulting in the weakest form of government (democracy - where the power is upside down - with the people instead of the government). We have seen the disappearance of morals (2 Tim 3), and now as we speak we see events in the middle east as countries take sides - aligning perfectly with Ezek 38. The only thing left is the return of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:11).
The Bible spends just 1 or 2 chapters on the things science so proudly boasts as being so important. and yet science has no explanation for prophecy.
No one can prove God to an atheist, but the reverse should be equally true.
Finally, believing what religious people TELL you about the Bible is just as bad as believing the conclusions of scientists. Scientists dont look at all possible outcomes, just the ones that fit their pre-conceived ideas. Also, many religious people fail at reading. For example the notion of going to heaven at death isn't in the Bible. It also seems a bit strange to come up with the idea the Jesus and God are actually the same person. So Jesus effectively prayed to himself for strength? Or at his baptism he (God) anointed himself (Jesus) with himself (holy spirit). Doesn't really make sense does it? the alternative is much easier to understand - that when Jesus said "I and my father are one" that he meant they were simply united. Or when it says "the word was God...and the word was made flesh" that the words "was made" indicate that the flesh and the word were not the same thing. If God (the "word", if you like) had a son that "was made" of flesh, then that makes perfect sense. Anyway, too much to discuss here...but people fail to look at all of the possibilities, which is why science rejects theism and there are so many christian-based religions.
1 million monkeys on typewriters coming up with 9 CHARACTERS of shakespeare each is just a tad more likely than any monkey (from a team of 1 million) coming up with the ENTIRE WORK of shakespeare.
I'm not really sure what this guy set out to prove.
Re:Not only be screwed by local problems!
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
I'm not suggesting that OSX or Linux are better than Windows - more than any general-purpose multi-tasking OS is not suited to games.
Yes it can run games, and most of the time acceptably, but its a compromise.
The cache I referred to is the hard drive's own internal cache (usually 8+ MB these days).
When I mentioned I saw no slowdown after turning off indexing and superfetch, I was referring to there being no perceivable loss in the usual windows performance, since I dont use desktop search and as far as I'm concerned superfetch is only going to kill your hard drive sooner.
However, the choppiness during game-play still persists. I'm surprised that you dont experience it - it seems the only way that would be possible is to not run anything else at the same time. That would be a real pain for anyone who also uses their PC for other things (that require services etc that run in the background).
You mention the virus scanner - which is interesting because obviously you dont play online games, or even network games for that matter.
I'd like to believe you that your system is perfect, but I suspect the truth is that you're a lot less fussy than me. I've also been burned enough by Windows in the past that I refuse to use it if I can help it. Fortunately I'm not a gamer.
on the other hand, what if you did actually start to enjoy the beginning of the rollercoaster...and because you were experiencing enjoyment - wanted to change your mind?
The red bull air race has a limit of 12g - indicating that pilots can survive even that much.
I have witnessed pilots exceed 12g and be disqualified because of it - and the same pilot complained that the 12g limit was stupid. The limit is there to stop pilots from pushing it too far, in a bid to curb "lap" times.
However, how many super-fit and healthy people would be interested in euthanasia? not many I'd guess.
Re:Not only be screwed by local problems!
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Not sure what the original poster meant - and that is probably who you're really directing this to...
but for me, Windows is slow. Compared to linux, even just general day-to-day use is much slower in windows than in Linux.
The problem is that other OS's like Linux and OSX are hampered by driver support etc - so there really isn't any decent comparison you could do.
The problem with Windows for gaming is that it is also checking your email, checking for windows/office updates, and indexing your hard drive to make your files and emails searchable, and it also loves to sit there reading your hard drive for reasons I've never been able to figure out. I turn indexing and superfetch off - and I've never noticed any slowdown. Most of the time its faster because the hard drive isn't as busy, and its cache isn't full of crap.
One minute you're blazing along in some car game, and the next its going all choppy because Windows has decided to thrash your hard disk a bit. Its the most frustrating thing ever. I have a quad-core system with a fairly fast graphics card, but still gameplay is nowhere near as smooth as a console.
I'm not normally a fan of consoles for gaming - but if Windows wants to be great for games, it needs a special "game mode" you can boot into that doesn't do anything but games.
A multi-tasking general purpose OS is really not good for gaming. Or at least not the sort of games we normally refer to when we speak of gaming.
Samsung has since announced that it is still heavily developing its own Bada OS, and now HTC is talking of their own OS as well. Coincidence? Of course not!
Its not that they will ditch Android, they wont, at least for now. But they need something there so that if Google ever play dodgy with Android, for example giving "Motorola" an unfair advantage, then they have something to fall back on.
Yes, but without the app infrastructure, they have a steep hill to climb. How should they ever hope to get market acceptance without it?
I cant answer that one. There are quite a few apps out there for Bada already - but the point is that these companies are reacting to Google's purchase of Motorola - it sounds like a desperate plan for sure, but the fact that they are making these plans is very interesting.
The more interesting part of this - is how Google found out the location of your wifi access point in the first place?
Your wifi router does not have GPS - only an internet connection (likely).
I think it relies on the Google cars driving around and collecting this info - that's about the only reliable way to do it - so the delay could be because their street view cars haven't been past your new location since you moved...
Unless they use more cars, or find a better way to update this stuff, I can see it getting very jumbled and inaccurate.
When you enable network location services, do you even know what networks it uses to get your location?
This is about fixed wireless AP's, not your phone, or anything that actually gets the location.
Its about whether or not they can use your public wifi AP as a means of calculating someone's location. I'm pretty sure that someone wouldn't have any idea that the service was using your wifi signal strength, and they certainly wouldn't be able to identify you.
These same people would be able to see your wifi SSID by scanning nearby wireless networks anyway - and they can still do that even if you opt out of this Google thing. It doesn't save you much in terms of privacy...
Re:Not only be screwed by local problems!
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Windows is SLOW. Even XP. I switched from Linux to XP a few years back.
After finding that XP continually freezes for seconds at a time every time you do I/O (eg. copy files, or anything involving a CD/DVD), I bought Vista.
I actually found vista to be ok, but it was a memory hog and superfetch killed my hard drive. So once windows 7 was released I upgraded yet again...all good so far. Windows is a mess but things do work ok.
Then one day I decided to try Linux again - so I installed it on a separate partition and was blown away by how fast it was. Having not used Linux for the better part of a year, I had forgotten just how quick it was.
It booted faster, logged in faster, files copied faster, programs opened faster - it was just incredible. It was enough for me to switch back to linux. I still use windows occasionally...but not to the same extent I used to.
And now I own a mac...so its a whole new world again...so far I'm enjoying it. The window management is lacking but on the whole its pretty nice to use.
Re:Not only be screwed by local problems!
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Not that I use Windows for anything than gaming, and even there it sucks.
Windows sucks for gaming?
If you had an alternative, you'd know for sure...but for now its pretty much all there is...and that in itself sucks.
Here's how IT management is interpreting that: "We might completely break Windows again. A lot. It's gonna confuse users. It's gonna make them less productive. Don't even think about using this product in a business environment without considering all of the extra support they're going to need."
Guess what?
Hang on, isn't that the reason most of you IT techie people have a job?
Slashdot Mirror
for the record, I am NOT roman catholic, nor orthodox, nor any mainstream religion.
I believe the Bible, and only the Bible. No traditions of the elders, no stupid laws preventing marriage etc.
And also for the record, the Bible talks about the Roman Catholic system, in many places. All of them in a negative context. ..."Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."
Talk about predicting the future - see 2 Thessalonians - early verses, particularly verse 4, speaking of "the son of perdition"
No prizes for guessing who that is talking about.
IN Revelation 17, a women rides a beast. the woman is described as being "full of names of blasphemy" (see above), v6 - she was "drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus".
When the Bible uses imagery involving a woman, it is always speaking of a religious system/power. Only 1 religious power has been responsible for the deaths of anyone who read the Bible, and those who confessed to believe in Jesus. You guessed it - Revelation 17 is speaking of none other than the Roman Catholic Church.
Please do yourself a favour and at least read the Bible.
You may not believe its message, but how can you reject it until you've read it.
It was written by ~40 different authors over a period of 1000+ years, yet it agrees 100% with itself. Critics try to claim that it doesn't but most can be easily answered, and some require a bit more Bible understanding to fully explain. But the truth is there. There is no inconsistency.
The difference between those who believe the Bible vs those who refuse to, is the attitude with which they read it.
Science can only explain scientific things - it cannot explain Bible prophecy.
You misread my post.
I'm not arguing for religion. I'm arguing for the Bible. Most of it was written BC and a smaller part AD.
We have so many christian-based religions because people fail at reading/interpreting. They have changed so much for the same reason.
The Bible hasn't changed - so you've got to question the religions but the only source of truth is the Bible (on this matter).
As for evolution theory - we just dont know if its wrong.
And far from being a complete theory, if the details were a football oval, current theory accounts for about a 20c piece worth. Its so vague and missing so much detail that its really hard to base one's life on it.
Fair enough if scientists want to explore stuff - that's fine - but when it becomes an accepted "worldview" that someone bases their life on, then it is in religion's territory.
The Bible takes a completely different view. How we got here isn't all that important - it spends just a couple of chapters on it and then the rest is to tell us about God. It speaks of how to live (to become like God) and it also promises a reward for doing so.
You may think the Bible is just a history book or something, but its whole purpose is to give us a better future.
I hate mainstream religion as much as the next person - and if you line up what they say with the Bible, you'll find them lacking.
Immortal soul, 3 Gods in one, magic holy spirit gifts of healing, its all just because people cant read well. The Bible says none of it.
What it DOES promise, is a future kingdom ON EARTH, headed by Jesus Christ. The time period? Well, when there are wars, rumours of wars, famine, frequent earthquakes and other natural disasters, and when the world's moral standards drop significantly. Shouldn't have long to go now.
And when it does happen, people will be crying out that there was no warning.
If you dont want to believe it - that's fine. Go, live your life. ~70 years is all you get...make them count (whatever that means).
I have a book to go on at least.
And it predicted the Jews firstly being scattered out of their land and then much later returning to their land. It also predicted HOW they would return.
It also predicted them not just being in the land but becoming "confident".
When things happen that were predicted with such accuracy over 2000 years earlier, one has to admit that science cannot explain it.
I believe, because I have seen. I have witnessed miracles both on a world scale and in my own life. My belief has a firm basis.
What about yours?
I'm sorry to hear your ignorance about the Bible, but it wasn't just "made up". Say what you like about it, but the history is accurate, the people are accurate, many of the stories have been verified by archeology etc. and it agrees with itself from cover to cover despite being written by many authors over a time period of greater than 1000 years.
There isn't a single other book that can come close to those claims. Challenge it all you like, but it stands on its own. You owe it to yourself to at least read it.
Good book about the subject: The God Delusion
Good book about that book: The Dawkins Delusion
The problem with the original book is that it uses the following hypothesis:
If I have an alternative theory that doesn't require there to be a God, then God must not exist. Or that just because science has found a theory that supposedly explains life, that the other theory immediately becomes disproven, or false.
The reality is that, well, now we have 2 theories. There are a lot of mistakes and things yet to learn in dawkin's theory. Not saying its wrong, but both theories are asking that you base your life on it.
When evolution theory has stood the test of time, being unchanged for over 1800 years and still relevant...then we'll have a contest.
the manufacturer and retire....
wait, what? so you sue the manufacturer of the robot lawyers? who do you think will represent them in court?
The problem is that science cant prove anything either. It can hypothesize and make all kinds of claims each based on each other (circular reasoning is rampant), but it cannot disprove the Bible. It only offers an alternative view.
Science says the earth had to form a certain way because the timeline proves this and that happened at these specific times, which were all millions of years ago etc.
The Bible says that just like Adam was created having an "age" of around 20 years, so the universe also was created having an "age". Science claims that everything must have existed for millions of years but cannot disprove the idea that it could have just been created that way.
The Bible does provide some evidence, but it works different to science. The Bible says, if A and B, through X are proven to be true, then Y and Z should be assumed to be true. That is what faith means. Heb 11:1 says that faith is based on substance. Faith says that if God says X and it happened, then when he says Y that will also happen.
We have the jews in the land of Israel (Ezek 37), the destruction of the ancient city of tyre (Ezek 26), weakening of world governments (Dan 2) - resulting in the weakest form of government (democracy - where the power is upside down - with the people instead of the government). We have seen the disappearance of morals (2 Tim 3), and now as we speak we see events in the middle east as countries take sides - aligning perfectly with Ezek 38. The only thing left is the return of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:11).
The Bible spends just 1 or 2 chapters on the things science so proudly boasts as being so important. and yet science has no explanation for prophecy.
No one can prove God to an atheist, but the reverse should be equally true.
Finally, believing what religious people TELL you about the Bible is just as bad as believing the conclusions of scientists. Scientists dont look at all possible outcomes, just the ones that fit their pre-conceived ideas. Also, many religious people fail at reading. For example the notion of going to heaven at death isn't in the Bible. It also seems a bit strange to come up with the idea the Jesus and God are actually the same person. So Jesus effectively prayed to himself for strength? Or at his baptism he (God) anointed himself (Jesus) with himself (holy spirit). Doesn't really make sense does it? the alternative is much easier to understand - that when Jesus said "I and my father are one" that he meant they were simply united. Or when it says "the word was God...and the word was made flesh" that the words "was made" indicate that the flesh and the word were not the same thing. If God (the "word", if you like) had a son that "was made" of flesh, then that makes perfect sense. Anyway, too much to discuss here...but people fail to look at all of the possibilities, which is why science rejects theism and there are so many christian-based religions.
Surely this is obvious.
1 million monkeys on typewriters coming up with 9 CHARACTERS of shakespeare each is just a tad more likely than any monkey (from a team of 1 million) coming up with the ENTIRE WORK of shakespeare.
I'm not really sure what this guy set out to prove.
I'm not suggesting that OSX or Linux are better than Windows - more than any general-purpose multi-tasking OS is not suited to games.
Yes it can run games, and most of the time acceptably, but its a compromise.
The cache I referred to is the hard drive's own internal cache (usually 8+ MB these days).
When I mentioned I saw no slowdown after turning off indexing and superfetch, I was referring to there being no perceivable loss in the usual windows performance, since I dont use desktop search and as far as I'm concerned superfetch is only going to kill your hard drive sooner.
However, the choppiness during game-play still persists. I'm surprised that you dont experience it - it seems the only way that would be possible is to not run anything else at the same time. That would be a real pain for anyone who also uses their PC for other things (that require services etc that run in the background).
You mention the virus scanner - which is interesting because obviously you dont play online games, or even network games for that matter.
I'd like to believe you that your system is perfect, but I suspect the truth is that you're a lot less fussy than me. I've also been burned enough by Windows in the past that I refuse to use it if I can help it. Fortunately I'm not a gamer.
I'm predicting a massive surge in encrypted traffic to/from italy.
on the other hand, what if you did actually start to enjoy the beginning of the rollercoaster...and because you were experiencing enjoyment - wanted to change your mind?
That would suck.
The red bull air race has a limit of 12g - indicating that pilots can survive even that much.
I have witnessed pilots exceed 12g and be disqualified because of it - and the same pilot complained that the 12g limit was stupid. The limit is there to stop pilots from pushing it too far, in a bid to curb "lap" times.
However, how many super-fit and healthy people would be interested in euthanasia? not many I'd guess.
Not sure what the original poster meant - and that is probably who you're really directing this to...
but for me, Windows is slow. Compared to linux, even just general day-to-day use is much slower in windows than in Linux.
The problem is that other OS's like Linux and OSX are hampered by driver support etc - so there really isn't any decent comparison you could do.
The problem with Windows for gaming is that it is also checking your email, checking for windows/office updates, and indexing your hard drive to make your files and emails searchable, and it also loves to sit there reading your hard drive for reasons I've never been able to figure out. I turn indexing and superfetch off - and I've never noticed any slowdown. Most of the time its faster because the hard drive isn't as busy, and its cache isn't full of crap.
One minute you're blazing along in some car game, and the next its going all choppy because Windows has decided to thrash your hard disk a bit. Its the most frustrating thing ever. I have a quad-core system with a fairly fast graphics card, but still gameplay is nowhere near as smooth as a console.
I'm not normally a fan of consoles for gaming - but if Windows wants to be great for games, it needs a special "game mode" you can boot into that doesn't do anything but games.
A multi-tasking general purpose OS is really not good for gaming. Or at least not the sort of games we normally refer to when we speak of gaming.
Whether its evil or not, everyone I know on facebook uses their real names.
To me, Google+ is technically better but its biggest problem is that facebook already has all my/your friends and its already "good enough".
Either Google needs to be prepared to lose a lot of money on it or just ditch it and move on.
Light pollution? so light is bad now? someone tell the sun...
No plugins - so if Microsoft dont support it - you dont get it.
If microsoft dont do it well, you dont get it well done.
I suspect this is the equivalent of forcing the IE rendering engine on everyone, yet again?
so imagine if HTC bought webOS, then open-sourced it (but kept the role of maintainer etc)?
That would be awesome...and would definitely generate a lot of interest right across the industry.
Samsung has since announced that it is still heavily developing its own Bada OS, and now HTC is talking of their own OS as well. Coincidence? Of course not!
Its not that they will ditch Android, they wont, at least for now. But they need something there so that if Google ever play dodgy with Android, for example giving "Motorola" an unfair advantage, then they have something to fall back on.
Yes, but without the app infrastructure, they have a steep hill to climb. How should they ever hope to get market acceptance without it?
I cant answer that one. There are quite a few apps out there for Bada already - but the point is that these companies are reacting to Google's purchase of Motorola - it sounds like a desperate plan for sure, but the fact that they are making these plans is very interesting.
The more interesting part of this - is how Google found out the location of your wifi access point in the first place?
Your wifi router does not have GPS - only an internet connection (likely).
I think it relies on the Google cars driving around and collecting this info - that's about the only reliable way to do it - so the delay could be because their street view cars haven't been past your new location since you moved...
Unless they use more cars, or find a better way to update this stuff, I can see it getting very jumbled and inaccurate.
what?
When you enable network location services, do you even know what networks it uses to get your location?
This is about fixed wireless AP's, not your phone, or anything that actually gets the location.
Its about whether or not they can use your public wifi AP as a means of calculating someone's location. I'm pretty sure that someone wouldn't have any idea that the service was using your wifi signal strength, and they certainly wouldn't be able to identify you.
These same people would be able to see your wifi SSID by scanning nearby wireless networks anyway - and they can still do that even if you opt out of this Google thing. It doesn't save you much in terms of privacy...
Windows is SLOW. Even XP. I switched from Linux to XP a few years back.
After finding that XP continually freezes for seconds at a time every time you do I/O (eg. copy files, or anything involving a CD/DVD), I bought Vista.
I actually found vista to be ok, but it was a memory hog and superfetch killed my hard drive. So once windows 7 was released I upgraded yet again...all good so far.
Windows is a mess but things do work ok.
Then one day I decided to try Linux again - so I installed it on a separate partition and was blown away by how fast it was. Having not used Linux for the better part of a year, I had forgotten just how quick it was.
It booted faster, logged in faster, files copied faster, programs opened faster - it was just incredible.
It was enough for me to switch back to linux. I still use windows occasionally...but not to the same extent I used to.
And now I own a mac...so its a whole new world again...so far I'm enjoying it. The window management is lacking but on the whole its pretty nice to use.
Not that I use Windows for anything than gaming, and even there it sucks.
Windows sucks for gaming?
If you had an alternative, you'd know for sure...but for now its pretty much all there is...and that in itself sucks.
Here's how IT management is interpreting that: "We might completely break Windows again. A lot. It's gonna confuse users. It's gonna make them less productive. Don't even think about using this product in a business environment without considering all of the extra support they're going to need."
Guess what?
Hang on, isn't that the reason most of you IT techie people have a job?
If Windows was perfect, you'd have nothing to do.
Here's another idea - why not just NOT buy windows 8 and stick with windows 7 if it bothers you that much?
The number 255 is still the 256th number if you start at 0 - makes no difference.
Leap years raise a good question...we should have it a day earlier on leap years. :-)
mate I wanna know where you worked as a programmer if they got their glory on a daily basis...
I'd say the 2 are more similar than they are different - and for the same reasons.