Your sarcasm ignores the fact that you cannot run any OS older than 4 years on a Macintosh, thus forcing a user to do an expensive upgrade. The older OSes (10.2) no longer run programs like Firefox or Safari.
Contrast that with the Windows OS where you can still run Firefox and other programs on an 11-year-old OS (Win98), therefore no need to waste money on an upgrade.
Apple is a luxury brand. Wintel is better for budget-conscious consumers.
>>>3: If you ignore the fact that it's already a bullshit comparison because you are just pointing out that it costs money to upgrade your OS and doesn't cost money to not do so >>>
FALSE. My Mac originally came with 10.1. It is impossible to continue using that OS, even if I wanted to. Contrast that with the Wintel OS which not only supports the dominant OS of that period (XP) but also as far back as Win98. Apple forces users to upgrade, or else face a broken machine that will no longer work properly.
Therefore Apple is more expensive, simply because a user is forced to upgrade.
"Hackers follow a culture of anti-authoritarianism"
In other words they commit acts that the authorities consider crimes, like breaking-into secure computers, making free phonecalls, copying software without permission, et cetera. Just like I said previously. (Also it's worth nothing that wikipedia article is marked "unverified claims" so it's basically an invalid reference and proves nothing.)
>>>Speed limits need to be set on a case by case basis for each road segment, taking into account typical actual traffic patterns including typical actual speeds, >>>
Which is not what happens. The State legislatures set an arbitrary maximum limit. Even if the engineers designed a new strip of road for 120mph (max) and 85 (recommended), the signs would still read 65 due to an arbitrary decision by out-ouf-touch politicians that 65 will be the max allowed across the whole state.
I think 65 makes sense in areas like Philadelphia or Washington, but when I find myself driving down an empty road in rural Virginia or Pennsylvania, it quickly demonstrates the hypocrisy. These isolated rural insterstates could easily be raised to 85 if the "max limit law" did not exist.
>>>The speed limit was set to 55mph in the mid-70s to conserve oil.
By that reasoning the national speed limit should be set to 40mph, which is the *most* efficient speed for most cars (1900-2000 rpm is the engine's sweet spot). Obviously I think the "saves oil" argument is flawed, because while it may save oil, it defeats the purpose of having a car in the first place (to travel long distances in as short a period of possible). Now maybe for you an extra 15 minute per day commute is no big deal, but I do a lot of travel to distant cities like Minnesota, Baltimore, Oklahoma City. Slowing me down from the current 70-75 limits to 55 literally adds hours to my trips.
Yeah I know - "take the plane" - well an airplane burns a heck of a lot more fuel than driving a car. Let's not handicap a perfectly-good technology like the modern internal combustion engine with stupidly speed limits..... else we might as well dump our cars and get horses instead, like our 1800s ancestors.
BTW:
My Insight gets around 80mpg and is ULEV qualified, so I'm doing my part to conserve. You can be clean without sacrificing the vehicle's usability.
This is not a solution. What needs to be done is to allow time for review of the bill in private - at least a month. Why rush lawmaking, especially when these laws last decades.
I don't understand the modern viewpoint that cars are evil, and their usage should be discouraged. They are simply an update of the classic horse-and-cart that humans have used for 10,000 years, and the reason humans used these carts was because they were great for carrying lots of stuff.
Don't believe me? Well I just bought almost a month's worth of groceries. Try carrying 20 bags onto the local subway or bus or walk home. I think I'll keep my horseless cart. Thanks.
As to the point of the article - This is just more of the same politician stupidity that gave us hackable, error-prone computer voting (and eventually led to the return of paper ballots). Just because something is "new" doesn't mean it's better than the old system. The old mechanical meters invented in the 1920s may not be sexy, but they get the job done, and as this article demonstrates the new meters are not any better.
An upgrade to new tech is only worthwhile if it's an actual UPgrade, rather than a downgrade.
How else can you explain an engineering report that lists 120mph as the designed maximum limit for an interstate, and an 85mph recommended limit for travel, but somehow gets signed at 65? The only reason I can conclude why politicians ignore engineers' recommendations is because the politicians view the twenty mph gap as an opportunity - to increase tax revenue.
And of course the Bernie Madoff-like scammers we call insurance companies also benefit because they can double or triple your rates if you get speeding tickets, even if you are a perfect driver who's never wrecked.
I've been using computers since the early 80s, and hacking very specifically meant someone doing things that the "authorities" would consider crimes - like phreaking to get free phone calls. Or wardialing to find computers to break into. Or just guessing people's passwords on BBSes so you can raise havoc. And of course cracking software so it could be copied freely amongst friends (aka piracy).
Adjusting settings hardly qualifies you as a "hacker" - that's just your average, ordinary computer "user" and nothing special. Anyone can adjust settings if they just put in the time.
>>>the Super Famicom Jr. as the Super Nintendo Jr.
That's trivial. There's no real difference between a S-Famicom and an SNES other than a name. HE LEFT OUT PREVIOUS GENERATIONS:
- NES released as more-compact NES 2
- Sega Master System released as SMS 2
- Atari VCS/2600 released as Atari 2600 jr.
- Intellivision released as Intellivision 2, and then the INTV
- Commodore 64 was released as compact, lighter-colored C64C. Yeah I know it's not a game console, but nearly everyone who owned this computer used it exclusively for gaming. It helped us survive the 1983-85 videogame crash, so it's worth mentioning.
Well technically "bandwidth" is the width of your line in terms of frequency. I don't know what it is for cable, but for my DSL it's somewhere around 500 megahertz with the bottom 8 kilohertz set-side for the voicecalls and the rest used for data.
50 kbit/s is the *bitrate* that's available over an 8 kilohertz-wide phoneline. Higher bitrates for DSL or cable.
And the GB/month would be the maximum data allowance, aka data cap.
No what would happen is that they'd just keep pushing everyone backwards, until towards the end of the day some guy who was supposed to leave at 11 p.m. gets to ride on the near-empty midnight plane instead.
It's kinda similar to how the doctor's office works, shoving everyone backward in time but still managing to see all his patients' that same day, even if the last patient doesn't leave until 2 hours past the official 5 p.m. closing time.
>>>The douchebags stealing info from banks aren't hackers... they are thieves and crackers.
You don't know your definitions son. For as long as I can remember, a hacker was someone who broke-into secured computers. I don't see how you can claim there's anything "good" about such a person. (shrug). And a "cracker" is someone who defeats copy-protection. Originally that applied to cracking floppies, but now it also applies to CDs, DVDs and downloaded media like MP3/AAC files.
So in other words the article used the proper terminology for somebody hacking to secure websites - hackers.
>>>Given the present one in 100 million risk of being caught...
And since our lazy leaders, who don't even bother to read the bills they pass, are unlikely to change this statistic, I'm going to go close my online bank account right now. The last thing I need is some asshole swiping my half-million life savings. I'll just drive to the bank instead.
- He who has the money to buy credits (cough - trillion-dollar bailouts), or high-level characters (Congress) to exert power over everybody else. He who does not have money just gets shoved around.
This is the same argument ISPs make when they boot their Bittorrent users - yes they lost 2% of their revenue, but they cut costs by eliminating the heavy users, so overall it's a net profit.
>>>They are claiming that cutting the players reduced their system load by 20%, so the loss of 2% of their revenues might have been offset by lower per user costs and increased their profits
This is the same argument ISPs make when they boot their Bittorrent users. I hope they're not listening.
I would agree with that statement, but my G4 Mac came with a single-button mouse which really slows me down. I get frustrated with the lack of right button xontext menus, and yes I could upgrade to a 2-button mouse, but that's yet another $expense$ incurred by Apple.:-)
>>>Interestingly, you weren't forced to upgrade to 10.3, 10.4 or 10.5, either.
Actually, you are. Try running Firefox or Safari on 10.2 or 10.3. You can't. Apple forces its users to upgrade by obsoleting OSes that are barely 4 years old, whereas Wintel users can still use XP without any problem (in fact you could still use 98 in many cases).
>>>I am always amazed at the incredibly huge number of whiners out there -- as if any of it mattered?
Yeah well I get tired of the Apple zealots trying to sell me on why Apple is better. I've been using Macs since 1991 and they are fine machines, but that's all they are - machines. I don't need the technological equivalent of Hari Krishnas knocking on my door.
When I was young I went through that phase of thinking I HAD to get everyone to use MY computer - but I've outgrown that nonsense. It's just a computer not a messiah. To quote a not-wise but sometimes insightful man: "Get a life!" - William Shatner
Macs are expensive to operate. They cost a lot to purchase (at least $700) and a lot of maintain (annual OS upgrades). The forced tieins to Apple-made peripherals also increase ownership costs. You may disagree with that opinion, but it IS my opinion, and I'm not changing it just because you resort to gradeschool insults like "idiot" or "troll".
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Why would you just not buy the 10.5 outright?
???. It didn't exist in 2002. That's why my Mac came with 10.1. Duh.
Apple is a luxury brand for people with $$$ to waste (because you can't use any OS older than 4 years).
Wintel is lower cost for the budget-conscious consumer (can still use 11-year-old OSes like Win98).
Your sarcasm ignores the fact that you cannot run any OS older than 4 years on a Macintosh, thus forcing a user to do an expensive upgrade. The older OSes (10.2) no longer run programs like Firefox or Safari.
Contrast that with the Windows OS where you can still run Firefox and other programs on an 11-year-old OS (Win98), therefore no need to waste money on an upgrade.
Apple is a luxury brand.
Wintel is better for budget-conscious consumers.
>>>3: If you ignore the fact that it's already a bullshit comparison because you are just pointing out that it costs money to upgrade your OS and doesn't cost money to not do so
>>>
FALSE. My Mac originally came with 10.1. It is impossible to continue using that OS, even if I wanted to. Contrast that with the Wintel OS which not only supports the dominant OS of that period (XP) but also as far back as Win98. Apple forces users to upgrade, or else face a broken machine that will no longer work properly.
Therefore Apple is more expensive, simply because a user is forced to upgrade.
Since +5 mph falls within the error of the radar gun, that ticket would quickly be voided by the courts.
"Hackers follow a culture of anti-authoritarianism"
In other words they commit acts that the authorities consider crimes, like breaking-into secure computers, making free phonecalls, copying software without permission, et cetera. Just like I said previously. (Also it's worth nothing that wikipedia article is marked "unverified claims" so it's basically an invalid reference and proves nothing.)
P.S.
>>>Speed limits need to be set on a case by case basis for each road segment, taking into account typical actual traffic patterns including typical actual speeds,
>>>
Which is not what happens. The State legislatures set an arbitrary maximum limit. Even if the engineers designed a new strip of road for 120mph (max) and 85 (recommended), the signs would still read 65 due to an arbitrary decision by out-ouf-touch politicians that 65 will be the max allowed across the whole state.
I think 65 makes sense in areas like Philadelphia or Washington, but when I find myself driving down an empty road in rural Virginia or Pennsylvania, it quickly demonstrates the hypocrisy. These isolated rural insterstates could easily be raised to 85 if the "max limit law" did not exist.
>>>The speed limit was set to 55mph in the mid-70s to conserve oil.
By that reasoning the national speed limit should be set to 40mph, which is the *most* efficient speed for most cars (1900-2000 rpm is the engine's sweet spot). Obviously I think the "saves oil" argument is flawed, because while it may save oil, it defeats the purpose of having a car in the first place (to travel long distances in as short a period of possible). Now maybe for you an extra 15 minute per day commute is no big deal, but I do a lot of travel to distant cities like Minnesota, Baltimore, Oklahoma City. Slowing me down from the current 70-75 limits to 55 literally adds hours to my trips.
Yeah I know - "take the plane" - well an airplane burns a heck of a lot more fuel than driving a car. Let's not handicap a perfectly-good technology like the modern internal combustion engine with stupidly speed limits..... else we might as well dump our cars and get horses instead, like our 1800s ancestors.
BTW:
My Insight gets around 80mpg and is ULEV qualified, so I'm doing my part to conserve. You can be clean without sacrificing the vehicle's usability.
DEMOCRATS Speed-read Bill:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uxsAuY1AF4
This is not a solution. What needs to be done is to allow time for review of the bill in private - at least a month. Why rush lawmaking, especially when these laws last decades.
I don't understand the modern viewpoint that cars are evil, and their usage should be discouraged. They are simply an update of the classic horse-and-cart that humans have used for 10,000 years, and the reason humans used these carts was because they were great for carrying lots of stuff.
Don't believe me? Well I just bought almost a month's worth of groceries. Try carrying 20 bags onto the local subway or bus or walk home. I think I'll keep my horseless cart. Thanks.
As to the point of the article - This is just more of the same politician stupidity that gave us hackable, error-prone computer voting (and eventually led to the return of paper ballots). Just because something is "new" doesn't mean it's better than the old system. The old mechanical meters invented in the 1920s may not be sexy, but they get the job done, and as this article demonstrates the new meters are not any better.
An upgrade to new tech is only worthwhile if it's an actual UPgrade, rather than a downgrade.
U.S. speed limits are also set artificially low.
How else can you explain an engineering report that lists 120mph as the designed maximum limit for an interstate, and an 85mph recommended limit for travel, but somehow gets signed at 65? The only reason I can conclude why politicians ignore engineers' recommendations is because the politicians view the twenty mph gap as an opportunity - to increase tax revenue.
And of course the Bernie Madoff-like scammers we call insurance companies also benefit because they can double or triple your rates if you get speeding tickets, even if you are a perfect driver who's never wrecked.
I've been using computers since the early 80s, and hacking very specifically meant someone doing things that the "authorities" would consider crimes - like phreaking to get free phone calls. Or wardialing to find computers to break into. Or just guessing people's passwords on BBSes so you can raise havoc. And of course cracking software so it could be copied freely amongst friends (aka piracy).
Adjusting settings hardly qualifies you as a "hacker" - that's just your average, ordinary computer "user" and nothing special. Anyone can adjust settings if they just put in the time.
>>> /grammar nazi
In my dialect we just abbreviate this as "ass"
>>>the Super Famicom Jr. as the Super Nintendo Jr.
That's trivial. There's no real difference between a S-Famicom and an SNES other than a name. HE LEFT OUT PREVIOUS GENERATIONS:
- NES released as more-compact NES 2
- Sega Master System released as SMS 2
- Atari VCS/2600 released as Atari 2600 jr.
- Intellivision released as Intellivision 2, and then the INTV
- Commodore 64 was released as compact, lighter-colored C64C. Yeah I know it's not a game console, but nearly everyone who owned this computer used it exclusively for gaming. It helped us survive the 1983-85 videogame crash, so it's worth mentioning.
Well technically "bandwidth" is the width of your line in terms of frequency. I don't know what it is for cable, but for my DSL it's somewhere around 500 megahertz with the bottom 8 kilohertz set-side for the voicecalls and the rest used for data.
50 kbit/s is the *bitrate* that's available over an 8 kilohertz-wide phoneline. Higher bitrates for DSL or cable.
And the GB/month would be the maximum data allowance, aka data cap.
No what would happen is that they'd just keep pushing everyone backwards, until towards the end of the day some guy who was supposed to leave at 11 p.m. gets to ride on the near-empty midnight plane instead.
It's kinda similar to how the doctor's office works, shoving everyone backward in time but still managing to see all his patients' that same day, even if the last patient doesn't leave until 2 hours past the official 5 p.m. closing time.
>>>The douchebags stealing info from banks aren't hackers... they are thieves and crackers.
You don't know your definitions son. For as long as I can remember, a hacker was someone who broke-into secured computers. I don't see how you can claim there's anything "good" about such a person. (shrug). And a "cracker" is someone who defeats copy-protection. Originally that applied to cracking floppies, but now it also applies to CDs, DVDs and downloaded media like MP3/AAC files.
So in other words the article used the proper terminology for somebody hacking to secure websites - hackers.
>>>Given the present one in 100 million risk of being caught...
And since our lazy leaders, who don't even bother to read the bills they pass, are unlikely to change this statistic, I'm going to go close my online bank account right now. The last thing I need is some asshole swiping my half-million life savings. I'll just drive to the bank instead.
Go into Task Manager.
Select program you want to run in real time
Right click and "go to process"
Right click and "set priority"
Choose real time.
Easy. I do this for Windows Media Player since it eliminates annoying lags while watching the pro....er, downloaded movies.
So these online RPGs are just like real life
- He who has the money to buy credits (cough - trillion-dollar bailouts), or high-level characters (Congress) to exert power over everybody else. He who does not have money just gets shoved around.
This is the same argument ISPs make when they boot their Bittorrent users - yes they lost 2% of their revenue, but they cut costs by eliminating the heavy users, so overall it's a net profit.
I hope they're not listening.
>>>They are claiming that cutting the players reduced their system load by 20%, so the loss of 2% of their revenues might have been offset by lower per user costs and increased their profits
This is the same argument ISPs make when they boot their Bittorrent users.
I hope they're not listening.
I would agree with that statement, but my G4 Mac came with a single-button mouse which really slows me down. I get frustrated with the lack of right button xontext menus, and yes I could upgrade to a 2-button mouse, but that's yet another $expense$ incurred by Apple. :-)
>>>Interestingly, you weren't forced to upgrade to 10.3, 10.4 or 10.5, either.
Actually, you are. Try running Firefox or Safari on 10.2 or 10.3. You can't. Apple forces its users to upgrade by obsoleting OSes that are barely 4 years old, whereas Wintel users can still use XP without any problem (in fact you could still use 98 in many cases).
>>>I am always amazed at the incredibly huge number of whiners out there -- as if any of it mattered?
Yeah well I get tired of the Apple zealots trying to sell me on why Apple is better. I've been using Macs since 1991 and they are fine machines, but that's all they are - machines. I don't need the technological equivalent of Hari Krishnas knocking on my door.
When I was young I went through that phase of thinking I HAD to get everyone to use MY computer
- but I've outgrown that nonsense. It's just a computer not a messiah.
To quote a not-wise but sometimes insightful man: "Get a life!" - William Shatner
Macs are expensive to operate. They cost a lot to purchase (at least $700) and a lot of maintain (annual OS upgrades). The forced tieins to Apple-made peripherals also increase ownership costs. You may disagree with that opinion, but it IS my opinion, and I'm not changing it just because you resort to gradeschool insults like "idiot" or "troll".