Except that the arguments have been rebutted repeatedly and scientists have a lot better things to do than repeat the same research ad infinitum every time someone who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about calls the whole thing a crock based on some very shaky arguments.
There's also huge money to be lost from the changes required to deal with climate change too so I'd be skeptical of both sides of the argument personally.
Are there attacks on WPA2/AES that people need to worry about? So you're saying I should pay lots of money for something which is highly unlikely to add any value to my house (BFD this place has network sockets that will tie me to certain places and leave lots of untidy cables lying around when I'm trying to use my laptop) instead of using the WiFi router included as part of my broadband package?
Wireless has always been a train wreck compromise for people too cheap to set up a proper network.
Those words were what I was responding to. If you can find a similar example of me insulting Bedouins for not building their dwellings then please post it. Otherwise keep your laughable non-arguments to yourself.
Or alternatively you could spend your time doing something enjoyable. The reason wireless is more widespread than wired in home networking is because it's convenient. If you have loads of free time to wire up your house good for you but don't knock those who'd rather do something else instead.
It's not just the average Slashdotter it's the courts in the US and the EU. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist and is therefore held to a different standard to organisations that haven't broken the law in this way. Why is this so hard to understand?
Access to knives, blunt instruments or chemicals that can be used to make explosives is easy and very hard to outlaw. A chef or a butcher owns a nice lethal arsenal as part of their job and even the knives in my kitchen could be used to injure or kill. Lack of guns or swords (which are very conspicuous by the way) hasn't stopped determined people before.
A court imposing punishment for breaking the law. What were they thinking? Oh no it's an aggressive agenda designed to punish success by evil Yooroe socialists. Even though the US courts did it first.
Try not to get too angry. There are so many people on here who don't have the ability to run a google search to see why MS are so unpopular and just blindly believe it's because the ungrateful Yooroes who would all be speaking Kraut if it wasn't for Uncle Sam are punishing a successful US corp for being successful.
Are you really this clueless? Google Microsoft Findings of Fact as a starting point rather than trotting out the same tired old bollocks that always seems to crop up on this site.
Most people want a lot more than a phone, like an MP3 player, MP4 player, camera, video recording, MMS, email, social networking and many more things that haven't been thought of yet. You're massively underestimating the appeal of having one device that can do everything you want, especially to young and not so young wannabes.
Intel's illegal business practices have also made headlines, as have Volkswagen's and the various chip manufacturers' as have so many others. The real fact of the matter is that people don't like criminals to get away with crimes, especially when those criminals are rich and powerful habitual criminals.
For him Microsoft seems like a bad guy because they dare to sell products at a price
And nothing at all to do with being a convicted predatory monopoly that has repeatedly broken the law in order to cement an undeserved position in the marketplace. A reading of some of the anti-trust rulings against them would improve your lack of knowledge here.
Microsoft as an organisation is a habitual criminal and general bad citizen of the IT community. That kind of reputation, just like any human criminal, is hard to shake off.
Any other company this would not be big news. However a company with a long history of copyright violations and other illegal practices doesn't get let off so easily. Much like any other habitual criminal, people remain suspicious for a long time and the criminal has to be whiter than white for a long time before that trust is earned again. It's not that hard to understand really.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the arguments have been rebutted repeatedly and scientists have a lot better things to do than repeat the same research ad infinitum every time someone who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about calls the whole thing a crock based on some very shaky arguments.
There's also huge money to be lost from the changes required to deal with climate change too so I'd be skeptical of both sides of the argument personally.
Are there attacks on WPA2/AES that people need to worry about? So you're saying I should pay lots of money for something which is highly unlikely to add any value to my house (BFD this place has network sockets that will tie me to certain places and leave lots of untidy cables lying around when I'm trying to use my laptop) instead of using the WiFi router included as part of my broadband package?
Wireless has always been a train wreck compromise for people too cheap to set up a proper network.
Those words were what I was responding to. If you can find a similar example of me insulting Bedouins for not building their dwellings then please post it. Otherwise keep your laughable non-arguments to yourself.
Or alternatively you could spend your time doing something enjoyable. The reason wireless is more widespread than wired in home networking is because it's convenient. If you have loads of free time to wire up your house good for you but don't knock those who'd rather do something else instead.
You're lucky your parents are so accommodating.
It's not just the average Slashdotter it's the courts in the US and the EU. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist and is therefore held to a different standard to organisations that haven't broken the law in this way. Why is this so hard to understand?
Access to knives, blunt instruments or chemicals that can be used to make explosives is easy and very hard to outlaw. A chef or a butcher owns a nice lethal arsenal as part of their job and even the knives in my kitchen could be used to injure or kill. Lack of guns or swords (which are very conspicuous by the way) hasn't stopped determined people before.
So you can't stab, smash or blow up anything once your firearms are gone?
A court imposing punishment for breaking the law. What were they thinking? Oh no it's an aggressive agenda designed to punish success by evil Yooroe socialists. Even though the US courts did it first.
Try not to get too angry. There are so many people on here who don't have the ability to run a google search to see why MS are so unpopular and just blindly believe it's because the ungrateful Yooroes who would all be speaking Kraut if it wasn't for Uncle Sam are punishing a successful US corp for being successful.
Well then they shouldn't have repeatedly broken the law then should they? It's one of the downsides of being a criminal.
Are you really this clueless? Google Microsoft Findings of Fact as a starting point rather than trotting out the same tired old bollocks that always seems to crop up on this site.
Most people want a lot more than a phone, like an MP3 player, MP4 player, camera, video recording, MMS, email, social networking and many more things that haven't been thought of yet. You're massively underestimating the appeal of having one device that can do everything you want, especially to young and not so young wannabes.
If this isn't Score: 5, Funny by the time I wake up tomorrow I will be most disappointed.
Scientology is a religion in the same way as Dunkin Donuts is a restaurant
Intel's illegal business practices have also made headlines, as have Volkswagen's and the various chip manufacturers' as have so many others. The real fact of the matter is that people don't like criminals to get away with crimes, especially when those criminals are rich and powerful habitual criminals.
For him Microsoft seems like a bad guy because they dare to sell products at a price
And nothing at all to do with being a convicted predatory monopoly that has repeatedly broken the law in order to cement an undeserved position in the marketplace. A reading of some of the anti-trust rulings against them would improve your lack of knowledge here.
Don't you have to the Micro Framework installed on the phone to run any of these apps or am I being incredibly dim here?
Microsoft as an organisation is a habitual criminal and general bad citizen of the IT community. That kind of reputation, just like any human criminal, is hard to shake off.
And if you're a student you can get VS2008 Pro (and 2010 Ultimate it appears now) for nothing from here
As would realising that nowhere is one word.
Any other company this would not be big news. However a company with a long history of copyright violations and other illegal practices doesn't get let off so easily. Much like any other habitual criminal, people remain suspicious for a long time and the criminal has to be whiter than white for a long time before that trust is earned again. It's not that hard to understand really.
Bye then, see you next week.
Giving them mad cow disease sounds a bit harsh