I use macs and unless it's stuff that works with Linux (or, the one exception, the lexmark drivers, which are beyond horrible), you don't do much shopping for osx either.
Also because of urban spread encouraged by the great road builders, the killing of the electric train and certain large metropolitan areas' public transit.
I'm sure they'll be enchanted to switch to it on such a vague, misleading report : "if it's as insecure as the windows we use, surely we can trust it with the security of the nation"
It has nothing to do with not seeing but with there not being descriptive sound and screen reader friendly text, something that is easily implemented, for which there are standards and that doesnt get done because the geeks' precious easter eggs are so much more important, or because omg having a flash extravaganza for their website makes it look so much more professional (hint to Sony: it doesn't, using standards to do things just as flashy without CPU-guzzling adobe crap? That's professional). As for another rating system, why do we not need one? Why is this important to you what other people do to judge or rate a game based on their needs? As for very small percentage, the part of the world, there's about 17% people with various disabilities most of which fall under sight, hearing or motor stuff. Not all of them cause issues with video games, and depending on the thing not with all of them, but having options in doesn't take things away from you, since devs already spend time doing frivolous stuff anyway while complaining of not having the time.
As I said above, what are your kind doing on a computer, shouldn't you be busy cutting down your communications to a more geographically convenient area so as to not go against nature or something? Overcompensating? Is that how you reply to anyone "oh you're overcompensating because I make things unaccessible for you" - most accessibility features are just part of doing things the right way, having subtitles, proper formatting of documents, audio that gives enough info, etc. And for what is exceptional, so what, you're the kind of people who'd have bitched and moaned that we shouldn't plant our own food.
That's because you're used to seeing - besides, considering movie theory is obsessed about music and ambiant sound and what not about which I don't really care (deafness), there's likely something more to a movie than to a book reading, no matter how well done.
McAfee is indeed malware, they after all provide an antivirus for MacOS X that seems to only defend from viruses that can't affect it since their list is 99.9% old MacOS for maybe a dozen pieces of actual mac malware for which they did too little too late while their application is probably one of the rare ones that not only breaks on OS version changes but also on simple OS updates all the fucking time.
That said, true, McAfee is obviously not the only source of malware on linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice try, cute but it doesn't scan at all.
These projects have been even more of a failure than Linux. Quite honestly why you think they make the argument more credible is beyond me.
I use macs and unless it's stuff that works with Linux (or, the one exception, the lexmark drivers, which are beyond horrible), you don't do much shopping for osx either.
If slashdot had an extreme anti-MS slant, blatant ms shilling wouldn't be getting +5 mods, so go baw elsewhere.
"The new macbook pro, now with AMD... and only 3 hours of battery"
Somehow I think AMD still has a few things to learn about mobiles, and that's the mac's main market.
That it's vigorously defended doesn't change that it should have been legally public domain for close to a century.
You haven't used a mac in 10 years, amirite
*statisticians cringing in 10...9...* ;)
Checking my family... the people around me... statistically it's more not being born in it than not making it :p
Also because of urban spread encouraged by the great road builders, the killing of the electric train and certain large metropolitan areas' public transit.
Go indie, be happy
I'm sure they'll be enchanted to switch to it on such a vague, misleading report : "if it's as insecure as the windows we use, surely we can trust it with the security of the nation"
It has nothing to do with not seeing but with there not being descriptive sound and screen reader friendly text, something that is easily implemented, for which there are standards and that doesnt get done because the geeks' precious easter eggs are so much more important, or because omg having a flash extravaganza for their website makes it look so much more professional (hint to Sony: it doesn't, using standards to do things just as flashy without CPU-guzzling adobe crap? That's professional).
As for another rating system, why do we not need one? Why is this important to you what other people do to judge or rate a game based on their needs?
As for very small percentage, the part of the world, there's about 17% people with various disabilities most of which fall under sight, hearing or motor stuff. Not all of them cause issues with video games, and depending on the thing not with all of them, but having options in doesn't take things away from you, since devs already spend time doing frivolous stuff anyway while complaining of not having the time.
Well, I cry for the poor people who will be forced to go without a blooper reel.
As I said above, what are your kind doing on a computer, shouldn't you be busy cutting down your communications to a more geographically convenient area so as to not go against nature or something? Overcompensating? Is that how you reply to anyone "oh you're overcompensating because I make things unaccessible for you" - most accessibility features are just part of doing things the right way, having subtitles, proper formatting of documents, audio that gives enough info, etc. And for what is exceptional, so what, you're the kind of people who'd have bitched and moaned that we shouldn't plant our own food.
So I figure there's ample time to implement since Warcraft 3 came with a blooper reel and hydralisks and I know no game that doesn't have easter eggs.
You're quite honestly an idiot - being at peace with oneself also allows to have projects.
Adding features and options doesn't take off your enjoyment, you just keep them off that's all, and you can go back to gazing your navel all you want.
So you don't use glasses, computers or agriculture, right?
That's because you're used to seeing - besides, considering movie theory is obsessed about music and ambiant sound and what not about which I don't really care (deafness), there's likely something more to a movie than to a book reading, no matter how well done.
You can make movies accessible to the blind actually. It's called descriptive audio.
McAfee is indeed malware, they after all provide an antivirus for MacOS X that seems to only defend from viruses that can't affect it since their list is 99.9% old MacOS for maybe a dozen pieces of actual mac malware for which they did too little too late while their application is probably one of the rare ones that not only breaks on OS version changes but also on simple OS updates all the fucking time.
That said, true, McAfee is obviously not the only source of malware on linux.
Actually, 3G in some of the south american countries is probably better than in the US, it's certainly better than in Canada :p
There is no such thing as a Nobel Prize in economics.
Wait, what? You're either misreading or being intentionally obtuse, you, on the other hand, did with your comments on movies.