Chrome/Chromium still doesn't have an adblocker that actually blocks ads instead of just hiding them. Adblock Plus saves bandwidth, finishes loading a page quicker because you'll never get hung up on a slow/dead ad server, and neatly reformats the page to work without the ads.
Once THAT level of functionality in an adblocker arrives with Chrome/Chromium, only then will I consider switching. And don't tell me to use a HOSTS file; what if I want to whitelist certain sites?
Max Payne 2 didn't originally have DRM, it had copy protection. The difference being Rockstar wasn't able to control how you used the game once you bought it - you were no longer at their mercy. Copy protection with MP2 simply meant a CD check. DRM would have meant online activation, limited number of installs, something like that. A simple CD check in itself isn't really classified as rights management. DRM does perform the same goal - copy protection - but it goes way further.
Am I the only one left that hasn't been eaten by the "If we force it and make them look at it often enough they'll eventually like it, no matter how bad" syndrome that seems to be affecting everyone with regards to that stupid ribbon?
You're appear to be stuck in a logical fallacy where you're unable to comprehend the idea that people might actually like the ribbon based on their use and experiences with it, and the clear benefits it provides, rather than for any other reason.
In other words, you think no-one can like the ribbon, so if people do, there must be a negative reason. For goodness sakes, Microsoft are making good products these days; open your mind a tiny bit.
I DO want more of a game I like. I don't tend to buy games that promise sub-10 hour gameplay.
I don't like really long games anymore. I did when I was young and had the time, but I don't anymore. I'm sure it's possible to play the game a few hours a day and progress though it that way, but it'll take a rather long time to finish and if it's something like an RPG, you'll get bored with your character soon enough and be begging for it to finish soon so you can try a new playthrough.
Grinding through a really long game can be a chore unless it's *always* interesting, and very few games are these days. Eventually you'll want to just get it over with, and a really long game might mean you give up without ever finishing it, and move onto something new and fresh.
Disclaimer: this is obviously my opinion. I'm not saying everyone dislikes longer games and am not pushing for shorter games at all. However, really long games have a habit of killing re-playability as you'll be reluctant to trawl through a really long game twice. The exception to that is if you only have a small handful of games and enjoy getting the most of what you have, which is something I can attest to.
I've found freetards are completely unable to comprehend this. They simply can't fathom how anyone could LIKE Windows, which is why they feel anyone using Windows must be in pain while doing so. It's this flaw in their logic which makes them so frustrating to deal with.
It's so simple for Sony at this point on what to do - release a firmware update which puts the Other OS functionality back and all this will go away quite quickly. Is its removal worth the legal expense/PR?
Honestly if you're working on papers on your computer most of the time, flip the monitor to vertical.
I tried that, but my colleagues were looking at me funny given my monitor is bolted to my laptop and working with my arms at an angle is rather strenuous.
Yes I know you can plug in an external monitor, but that defeats the purpose of a laptop doesn't it.:)
I still think there is an unfortunately large number of people who don't care where their stuff comes from and what the real cost is as long as it works for the short term.
There's a reason for that - the open-source community hasn't been able to successfully present a long term disadvantage to using closed-source tech that people can relate to.
I'm still using Windows because I honestly can't see a long term disadvantage in doing so. By using it I have all the software I could possibly want, guaranteed compatibility with current and future hardware, and so on. I've tried Linux and all I end up with is compromises to tangible things I want to do with my computer. If long term issues become foreseeable with Windows, then I can give it the flick and change to something else.
You HAVE to present to people a tangible long term issue with using closed-source software that they can UNDERSTAND. Geek ideology isn't enough, and if that's all that you've got, then no wonder closed-source tech is still going to dominate.
I always thought Australia was a developed country, economically, and politically.
I think we are, for the most part. The problem is that we have a shitty Government, and the opposition isn't much better either. I can't say it's any better or worse than any other developed nation. Every nation has its problems; the key is that the voting public should be able to educate themselves about what's important in their lives and choose representatives which reflect those ideals.
Currently, there is a massive backlash against the Internet filter, and I think it's going to have a significant impact on the party people vote for come election time later this year. At least I hope it does.
Until Windows users realize that all their favorite apps run great on Linux as well as Windows.
A lot of the apps I use are open source and run on Linux. The reason I continue to use Windows (Windows 7 specifically) is because I prefer Windows to Linux as an operating system.
Windows runs cooler on this laptop because it has better chipset drivers I suppose. It also runs cooler because the proprietary ATI drivers for the graphics chip have proper power management, whereas the open source drivers in Linux do not (unless you use the proprietary drivers in which case you lose the benefits of an open source system). I also have better battery life due to the above two aspects. PLUS I have the benefit of using any commercial software which does not have a Linux equivalent/version and don't have to wrangle with Wine or virtualization.
Believe it or not, some people do prefer the Windows way of doing things than Linux.
The bit where Jeff Goldblum's character hacks the alien mothership's network to upload a virus, isn't so far fetched after all. Earlier on in the movie he notes how the aliens were using "our own satellites against us", implying they had somehow managed to establish an uplink with our electronics and protocols.
If the aliens could control our systems, one would believe the reverse could also be true (in the realm of the movie at least).
Slashdotters, like most people I guess, don't like it when someone gets off on a "technicality". People often wish the law employed more common sense when determine verdicts.
However, when it comes to torrent sites in which is it obvious to everyone that the site facilitates the downloading of pirated content, people WANT to use technicalities to show that the site is not at fault, either because the.torrent files aren't copyrighted themselves, or that Google also facilitates the download process. They want to use technicalities here as a legal defence, but hate it when the MPAA use them themselves for example.
This is a stupid idea, but not the way you think. It's stupid for us, but not for EA.
This will work for EA for the same reason why they can sell DLC which is probably developed at the same time as the game, or considered "cut" content released in the DLC. It will work because impulse gamers DON'T CARE, and will willingly pay money for this shit. We are going down the nickel and dime road of gaming because of apathy and ignorance from the vast majority of consumers who don't know any better and can't be bothered to educate themselves.
Shit, I still see people who think the DRM in Assassin's Creed 2 or CNC 4 is fine because their internet connection is "rock solid". Yeah, great. Unfortunately it doesn't mean you will still be able to play the game, particularly if EA themselves can't keep their shit working.
Honestly it's getting to the point where I'm going to take one of there options: (1) Stick with old, quality games until I get burnt out on them (2) Stick with open-source games which don't do this DRM shit, and only purchase commercial games from independent developers who won't risk this kind of behavior (3) Find a new hobby. Probably the most healthy option anyway.
Fair enough. I wasn't aware of Forefront but it sounds like it should do what you want if Sophos is too annoying. I admit Sohpos does tax the system a bit when it updates, so if the desktop update schedule is too aggressive it may be a big cause of all the CPU usage. I use MSE on my laptop even though I'm allowed to use the Sophos Home Edition as part of my employment, so go figure.
At work (a university) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos. It is, well, crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources. So, instead we use Security Essentials on many systems.
My company uses Sophos (and IT techs like myself deploy it elsewhere). I haven't had too many issues with it really, but I suppose it's all personal experience. One think I know is that it has central management of all computers on a domain, whereas MSE doesn't, so why did your IT department decide to go with Security Essentials despite the fact it's not designed for enterprise-level networks?
Slashdot Mirror
Chrome/Chromium still doesn't have an adblocker that actually blocks ads instead of just hiding them. Adblock Plus saves bandwidth, finishes loading a page quicker because you'll never get hung up on a slow/dead ad server, and neatly reformats the page to work without the ads.
Once THAT level of functionality in an adblocker arrives with Chrome/Chromium, only then will I consider switching. And don't tell me to use a HOSTS file; what if I want to whitelist certain sites?
Yeah! I mean this fancy Project Natal (Kinect) crap they've been working on, that'll never come to fruition!
Oh wait...
It only takes one example to ruin your FUD.
[kicking Walt Whitman's tombstone]
Homer: Damn you, Walt Whitman! I-hate-you-Walt-freaking-Whitman! "Leaves of Grass", my ass!
They should have used Unreal Tournament nomenclature.
M-m-m-monster KILL... Kill... kill...
Very nice, solid post. I agree completely.
Jamie: Well there's your problem!
Max Payne 2 didn't originally have DRM, it had copy protection. The difference being Rockstar wasn't able to control how you used the game once you bought it - you were no longer at their mercy. Copy protection with MP2 simply meant a CD check. DRM would have meant online activation, limited number of installs, something like that. A simple CD check in itself isn't really classified as rights management. DRM does perform the same goal - copy protection - but it goes way further.
Glad I'm not the only one who feels the same about our populace, although I won't deny being hypocritical about it myself, even if I'm aware of it.
You're appear to be stuck in a logical fallacy where you're unable to comprehend the idea that people might actually like the ribbon based on their use and experiences with it, and the clear benefits it provides, rather than for any other reason.
In other words, you think no-one can like the ribbon, so if people do, there must be a negative reason. For goodness sakes, Microsoft are making good products these days; open your mind a tiny bit.
I don't like really long games anymore. I did when I was young and had the time, but I don't anymore. I'm sure it's possible to play the game a few hours a day and progress though it that way, but it'll take a rather long time to finish and if it's something like an RPG, you'll get bored with your character soon enough and be begging for it to finish soon so you can try a new playthrough.
Grinding through a really long game can be a chore unless it's *always* interesting, and very few games are these days. Eventually you'll want to just get it over with, and a really long game might mean you give up without ever finishing it, and move onto something new and fresh.
Disclaimer: this is obviously my opinion. I'm not saying everyone dislikes longer games and am not pushing for shorter games at all. However, really long games have a habit of killing re-playability as you'll be reluctant to trawl through a really long game twice. The exception to that is if you only have a small handful of games and enjoy getting the most of what you have, which is something I can attest to.
I've found freetards are completely unable to comprehend this. They simply can't fathom how anyone could LIKE Windows, which is why they feel anyone using Windows must be in pain while doing so. It's this flaw in their logic which makes them so frustrating to deal with.
Specifically this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/570765
It's so simple for Sony at this point on what to do - release a firmware update which puts the Other OS functionality back and all this will go away quite quickly. Is its removal worth the legal expense/PR?
I tried that, but my colleagues were looking at me funny given my monitor is bolted to my laptop and working with my arms at an angle is rather strenuous.
Yes I know you can plug in an external monitor, but that defeats the purpose of a laptop doesn't it. :)
There's a reason for that - the open-source community hasn't been able to successfully present a long term disadvantage to using closed-source tech that people can relate to.
I'm still using Windows because I honestly can't see a long term disadvantage in doing so. By using it I have all the software I could possibly want, guaranteed compatibility with current and future hardware, and so on. I've tried Linux and all I end up with is compromises to tangible things I want to do with my computer. If long term issues become foreseeable with Windows, then I can give it the flick and change to something else.
You HAVE to present to people a tangible long term issue with using closed-source software that they can UNDERSTAND. Geek ideology isn't enough, and if that's all that you've got, then no wonder closed-source tech is still going to dominate.
I think we are, for the most part. The problem is that we have a shitty Government, and the opposition isn't much better either. I can't say it's any better or worse than any other developed nation. Every nation has its problems; the key is that the voting public should be able to educate themselves about what's important in their lives and choose representatives which reflect those ideals.
Currently, there is a massive backlash against the Internet filter, and I think it's going to have a significant impact on the party people vote for come election time later this year. At least I hope it does.
A lot of the apps I use are open source and run on Linux. The reason I continue to use Windows (Windows 7 specifically) is because I prefer Windows to Linux as an operating system.
Windows runs cooler on this laptop because it has better chipset drivers I suppose. It also runs cooler because the proprietary ATI drivers for the graphics chip have proper power management, whereas the open source drivers in Linux do not (unless you use the proprietary drivers in which case you lose the benefits of an open source system). I also have better battery life due to the above two aspects. PLUS I have the benefit of using any commercial software which does not have a Linux equivalent/version and don't have to wrangle with Wine or virtualization.
Believe it or not, some people do prefer the Windows way of doing things than Linux.
Wouldn't it have been shorter and easier just to say "Windows?"
Yeah, just like the numerous regressions I see in the Linux kernel, WINE, Ubuntu releases etc.
The bit where Jeff Goldblum's character hacks the alien mothership's network to upload a virus, isn't so far fetched after all. Earlier on in the movie he notes how the aliens were using "our own satellites against us", implying they had somehow managed to establish an uplink with our electronics and protocols.
If the aliens could control our systems, one would believe the reverse could also be true (in the realm of the movie at least).
Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit with UAC entirely disabled, Adobe Reader 9.3, file opens with no warning and no calc.exe.
Slashdotters, like most people I guess, don't like it when someone gets off on a "technicality". People often wish the law employed more common sense when determine verdicts.
However, when it comes to torrent sites in which is it obvious to everyone that the site facilitates the downloading of pirated content, people WANT to use technicalities to show that the site is not at fault, either because the .torrent files aren't copyrighted themselves, or that Google also facilitates the download process. They want to use technicalities here as a legal defence, but hate it when the MPAA use them themselves for example.
Hypocrites.
This is a stupid idea, but not the way you think. It's stupid for us, but not for EA.
This will work for EA for the same reason why they can sell DLC which is probably developed at the same time as the game, or considered "cut" content released in the DLC. It will work because impulse gamers DON'T CARE, and will willingly pay money for this shit. We are going down the nickel and dime road of gaming because of apathy and ignorance from the vast majority of consumers who don't know any better and can't be bothered to educate themselves.
Shit, I still see people who think the DRM in Assassin's Creed 2 or CNC 4 is fine because their internet connection is "rock solid". Yeah, great. Unfortunately it doesn't mean you will still be able to play the game, particularly if EA themselves can't keep their shit working.
Honestly it's getting to the point where I'm going to take one of there options:
(1) Stick with old, quality games until I get burnt out on them
(2) Stick with open-source games which don't do this DRM shit, and only purchase commercial games from independent developers who won't risk this kind of behavior
(3) Find a new hobby. Probably the most healthy option anyway.
Fair enough. I wasn't aware of Forefront but it sounds like it should do what you want if Sophos is too annoying. I admit Sohpos does tax the system a bit when it updates, so if the desktop update schedule is too aggressive it may be a big cause of all the CPU usage. I use MSE on my laptop even though I'm allowed to use the Sophos Home Edition as part of my employment, so go figure.
My company uses Sophos (and IT techs like myself deploy it elsewhere). I haven't had too many issues with it really, but I suppose it's all personal experience. One think I know is that it has central management of all computers on a domain, whereas MSE doesn't, so why did your IT department decide to go with Security Essentials despite the fact it's not designed for enterprise-level networks?