[citation needed] Seriously. It's not like I paid for my A/V software. It's not like I run scans when I'm using the system, so my work isn't being slowed.
Then, vs. just OSX, the hardware's cheaper, you can upgrade it and futureproof it, so you don't need to buy an entirely new $1.5k machine, and software's same price or cheaper, with more options. And as for security, may I point you to the Mac-only botnet that was recently discovered due to pirated copies of iLife, or iWork, or whatever it was? Stupid people will fuck up any system you give them, regardless of OS. Windows is not inherently superior or inferior, it's just the one that does what I need.
No, screaming brats are NOT okay. But the only proven method for shutting them up tends to be frowned upon in most legal circles. However, the constant nattering of someone on the phone does not need to be added to the situation. I fail to see how VoIP and screaming kids are even close to analogous. There's factors such as "kid's ticket was paid for, person being chatted with did not purchase ticket." Thus, it's in their interests to keep things as quiet as possible for the people who have actual tickets.
See, this is what I get for being Canadian. Most of my US Criminal Law knowledge comes from Law & Order, and early teenhood spend reading various law sites in a vague interest to becoming a lawyer.
Actually, he could probably be convicted for both if it was proven that he didn't break in, but instead commissioned the theft. I don't think there's a "Conspiracy to thieve" charge, so they went for the next best. Thus, he's the proximate cause of the theft, and received the stolen property.
Granted, that's all *really* convoluted. So it'd probably never happen.
Actually, since Blizzard only has 3 IPs, or 2.5, if you wanna consider Starcraft an offshoot of Warcraft, Blizzard should care that I don't care. If there's going to be 10 years between installments, they need to bring something new to the table. The same 3 races with the same basic attributes are not something new. People will just find equivalents to the old units, and the game will feel much like the first, with prettier graphics. You know the first bit of excitement I had over SCII? The April Fool's Day prank about the transforming base. I knew it was a prank, but I wanted it to be real, because that'd be something new. It wouldn't even be a precident, really, since they have units that combine to new ones (Templar to Archon), buildings that receive add-ons, (Machine Shop to Factory, for instance), and units that changed attributes on deployment (Siege tanks). So takes those ideas together, and make it so you need to build the components together, and they need to deploy, and take time to change. It would be a magnificent addition. Late game high-tier unit rushes would be counterable by making your base defend itself!
Instead, they take the idea, and make it a joke.
So, we have nothing substantially new gameplay-wise in SCII. WoW means we won't see a Warcraft IV for ages (WCIII sucked. I like massive battles. An 80 unit cap is unacceptable. Otherwise, it tried new things, so I can't completely hate it.) Diablo III again looks like more of the same, right down to including a bunch of the same classes. Blizzard's stagnant, and should hear from fans as to why they lose interest. I literally put hundreds of hours in to each of their previous games. I WAS their core audience. Delays may make for a better game, sometimes, but if they're not using that to innovate, but instead just polish the pixels, how many others are just going to shrug to themselves, and joke about how that's "so 90's."?
Simply put Windows is an OS for people to afraid to use a computer, you don't have enough control , quick access or power use. So if you want to listen to music and write a word document go ahead and waste that thousand dollar computer, but if you want to any real work go ahead and get a real OS.
Not to be a troll, or flamebait, or whathave you, but are you sure you weren't using a Mac there? You also seem to be saying anyone just using their computer for office work is just wasting their machine. Guess we should go back to pens and paper, or typewriters?
And the *majority* of users aren't going to want most of what you just said they should add. A built-in C compiler? After all the shit Microsoft got in just for including a browser (yeah, yeah, I know the full story, point still made)? What's more, you're talking like a programmer, not like a casual user. Define "windows users not being able to use their machine." I figure if they can turn it on, install a program, run the program, and use the program, that's using it well enough.
The one I agree on though would be a proper shell, so you could apt-get a compiler of your choice, or a browser, or whatever. Or since they're getting big on multiple versions of the OS (*sigh* don't get me started on that crap), maybe a power-user version that would come with the stuff you wanted, since for the average email-checking, IMing, web-surfing, gaming user, most of what you said would only get them in further trouble trying to use their machine. You're trying to turn the OS in to something it's not really meant to be. You'd be better sticking to *nix systems.
This game's about 5 years too late for me to care anymore. I played the living snot out of Starcraft. Hell, the map editor was amazing. Friend and I made a damned hockey map. Now? Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3, Supreme commander Forged Alliance, those are the games. StarCraft II will sell no matter how good or bad it is, just because it's Blizzard. But same 3 races? Sorry, Bliz, but my cash will stay mine this time.
I've used Vista since about August of last year, played with the Win7 beta, and just switched my desktop over to the RC (laptop's where all my data's kept, desktop's mostly for gaming). Honestly, it installs a bit faster, starts up a bit faster, and shuts down a bit faster ootb. If you tweak it, you can probably get some performance gains. If you're used to XP, you'll have a learning curve since everything's moved. If you used Vista, it's a bit less.
As for actual usage, the preview windows are relatively useful, but only if you're running multiple instances of a program (like 3 or 4 documents). The biggest things, as far as I'm concerned, is the number of ways to set it so you can quickly access your stuff. There's the libraries, which are okay for media files, then there's the taskbar, which you can fit a fair amount of crap on to, and pin in there for quick use. You can pin it to the start menu, as always, and then you can pin some things to File Explorer, which also shows what you've used recently. If you have a heirarchy of what you use and how often, it makes for a decent way to organize things.
As for installing programs, UAC isn't quite as ass-tarded annoying as previously. Pops up quickly, asks you once for the program, then goes away quickly, and has more settings than just "on or off." You can also pick what warning will show up in the notification area, so if you run without an anti-virus, you can turn off that warning (so if you're on an isolated box, for instance, and don't need one).
I haven't found a way to make my account run as full administator all the time yet, so it still asks me "do you want to run as administrator?"
Other than that, though, my biggest gripe is that you can't set Windows Media Center as the default player for DVDs in the "select default programs" menu. Very annoying, since WMP isn't as good.
Also, default drivers are decent, beta drivers from companies seem to work well, and Windows Update actually pulled the updated drivers for my mouse and keyboard from the company they were made by. Overall, I'd call it a solid step up from Vista, and comparable to XP.
what does the average user do? By a PC that they don't really need?
Uh... yes? Have you *looked* at PCs lately? That's the only thing that drives pre-built system sales. The average user has no clue how to maintain their system, it starts falling apart, they buy a new one that costs about the same as their old one did new. Then, they either run their old programs, or upgrade if they won't run on the new OS. The average computer user doesn't need multi-core systems and DDR3 RAM. They run a web browser, email client, and IM client. Maybe watch a movie. A system from 5 years ago can do that easily, and older ones could still probably do that.
Well, any half-way decent lawyer would just point to the original point of the levy, which was to reimburse artists for lost royalties from music recorded off the radio. It's completely equivalent to then say that same levy compensates for music downloaded. Hell, if they want a way to track it to make the royalties fairly distributed, make a centralized database, and have Canadians all download from that. But if a judge ever said downloading was illegal, then you'd have 6 groups filing a suit to get the levy removed the next day. It's in the *AA's best interests, at the moment, to keep it ambiguous. Which is why the continual finger-pointing at Canada is such an idiotic idea. The eventual Canadian ruling could be even more damaging than TPB case ever was capable of being.
Just because you do not think a terrorist will takeover a plane and crash it does not mean you do not have a drunk pilot or a suicidal pilot or maybe a disabled plane. You also have to take into account that 9/11 happened in New York.
That would be why the jets are there. I'm fairly certain that they'd have disabled the jet *long* before it got to NYC if they were off-course, had no permission to take off, etc. After all, 9/11 happened in NYC. Thus, if a jet's flying along happily, being followed by 2 F-16s, there's not likely to be an issue. It'd only be a situation if the jets were doing manuvers, or if the plane was acting funny. And about 10 seconds observation would let you tell that.
So yes, either the people overreacted, were dumbasses, or as others have suggested, wanted time off. Many people have just thrown their brains away when it comes to stuff like this. "OMG! IT HAPPENED BEFORE IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN I GOTTA MOVE!" If they're that terrified of being a target, they should move. It's their location, not them personally. But since they haven't moved, on some level, they _know_ an incident isn't likely.
Frankly, if this happened anywhere *but* NYC, I'd be more charitable to the people who evac'd.
The only optical media I use is for installs (games, programs, movies), and I only use it the first time. After that, I try and keep an up-to-date image of my HDD jic.
There is a very real threat and people are justifiably concerned.
Brett
No there isn't. It's one of those once-in-a-lifetime events. I could be worried about an elevator car falling 20 stories and killing me in the fall, or being hit by lightning. Either of those are more likely than a repeat of 9/11. Vigilance against threat is one thing. To focus on one event to the point where it affects your work is excessive. There's no reason to worry specifically that any random jet is going to crash in to your building. That's just fearmongering.
Because underground excavation would be hideously expensive to the depths of a normal sky scraper.
Because there's airports whose approaches require flying near cities, and god forbid a rogue update or hack gets in to the turret systems.
Ever tried BASE jumping? Instructors won't teach anyone without skydiving experience. Now, have a couple hundred people, all panicked, jumping out of a building, untrained. Doesn't work. Not to mention most windows are shatterproof, and for safety reasons cannot be opened when that high up, so you'd waste valuable time trying to break a window.
A plane is being escorted by F-16s. And this causes hundreds of people to flee for their lives by making a mad dash out of their building? There's being careful, then there's being an overly paranoid idiot. I'm pretty sure that if the jets are there, you'd be safer *in a building* rather than where all the explodey shrapnel can get to you.
Same thing that stops the prosecution from manufacturing evidence, or people being held without trial, etc. etc. Absolutely nothing except people who are able to prove it happened.
I cannot remember the source of the quote, but there's one along the lines of "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often. And usually for the same reasons."
That's how I was thinking of it. Of course you wouldn't want to run your phone off it completely, but it'd make a way to extend battery life, and if you were really in a bind, you'd be able to work up a really tiny bit of charge to make a quick call.
The fact that this wouldn't be integrated on to phones for years makes this kinda of a non-story though. =\
I dunno. I had a Kyocera, and it got reception in places no one else I knew could, it never froze up, unlike my current and past phones, and it was fairly durable. Except for when I dropped it and the case split a tiny bit on the seam, so the pinhole charger wouldn't stay in place properly. Lasted 3 years, all told, and would have been longer if I hadn't dropped it.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, mine does that. Just installed Win7, the default admin account still asks me to run things as admin. Hmm.
Plus both have lower total cost of ownership.
[citation needed]
Seriously. It's not like I paid for my A/V software. It's not like I run scans when I'm using the system, so my work isn't being slowed.
Then, vs. just OSX, the hardware's cheaper, you can upgrade it and futureproof it, so you don't need to buy an entirely new $1.5k machine, and software's same price or cheaper, with more options. And as for security, may I point you to the Mac-only botnet that was recently discovered due to pirated copies of iLife, or iWork, or whatever it was? Stupid people will fuck up any system you give them, regardless of OS. Windows is not inherently superior or inferior, it's just the one that does what I need.
No, screaming brats are NOT okay. But the only proven method for shutting them up tends to be frowned upon in most legal circles. However, the constant nattering of someone on the phone does not need to be added to the situation. I fail to see how VoIP and screaming kids are even close to analogous. There's factors such as "kid's ticket was paid for, person being chatted with did not purchase ticket." Thus, it's in their interests to keep things as quiet as possible for the people who have actual tickets.
See, this is what I get for being Canadian. Most of my US Criminal Law knowledge comes from Law & Order, and early teenhood spend reading various law sites in a vague interest to becoming a lawyer.
Actually, he could probably be convicted for both if it was proven that he didn't break in, but instead commissioned the theft. I don't think there's a "Conspiracy to thieve" charge, so they went for the next best. Thus, he's the proximate cause of the theft, and received the stolen property.
Granted, that's all *really* convoluted. So it'd probably never happen.
Actually, since Blizzard only has 3 IPs, or 2.5, if you wanna consider Starcraft an offshoot of Warcraft, Blizzard should care that I don't care. If there's going to be 10 years between installments, they need to bring something new to the table. The same 3 races with the same basic attributes are not something new. People will just find equivalents to the old units, and the game will feel much like the first, with prettier graphics. You know the first bit of excitement I had over SCII? The April Fool's Day prank about the transforming base. I knew it was a prank, but I wanted it to be real, because that'd be something new. It wouldn't even be a precident, really, since they have units that combine to new ones (Templar to Archon), buildings that receive add-ons, (Machine Shop to Factory, for instance), and units that changed attributes on deployment (Siege tanks). So takes those ideas together, and make it so you need to build the components together, and they need to deploy, and take time to change. It would be a magnificent addition. Late game high-tier unit rushes would be counterable by making your base defend itself!
Instead, they take the idea, and make it a joke.
So, we have nothing substantially new gameplay-wise in SCII. WoW means we won't see a Warcraft IV for ages (WCIII sucked. I like massive battles. An 80 unit cap is unacceptable. Otherwise, it tried new things, so I can't completely hate it.) Diablo III again looks like more of the same, right down to including a bunch of the same classes. Blizzard's stagnant, and should hear from fans as to why they lose interest. I literally put hundreds of hours in to each of their previous games. I WAS their core audience. Delays may make for a better game, sometimes, but if they're not using that to innovate, but instead just polish the pixels, how many others are just going to shrug to themselves, and joke about how that's "so 90's."?
Simply put Windows is an OS for people to afraid to use a computer, you don't have enough control , quick access or power use. So if you want to listen to music and write a word document go ahead and waste that thousand dollar computer, but if you want to any real work go ahead and get a real OS.
Not to be a troll, or flamebait, or whathave you, but are you sure you weren't using a Mac there? You also seem to be saying anyone just using their computer for office work is just wasting their machine. Guess we should go back to pens and paper, or typewriters?
And the *majority* of users aren't going to want most of what you just said they should add. A built-in C compiler? After all the shit Microsoft got in just for including a browser (yeah, yeah, I know the full story, point still made)? What's more, you're talking like a programmer, not like a casual user. Define "windows users not being able to use their machine." I figure if they can turn it on, install a program, run the program, and use the program, that's using it well enough.
The one I agree on though would be a proper shell, so you could apt-get a compiler of your choice, or a browser, or whatever. Or since they're getting big on multiple versions of the OS (*sigh* don't get me started on that crap), maybe a power-user version that would come with the stuff you wanted, since for the average email-checking, IMing, web-surfing, gaming user, most of what you said would only get them in further trouble trying to use their machine. You're trying to turn the OS in to something it's not really meant to be. You'd be better sticking to *nix systems.
PS: It's "retarded." Not "retarted."
This game's about 5 years too late for me to care anymore. I played the living snot out of Starcraft. Hell, the map editor was amazing. Friend and I made a damned hockey map. Now? Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3, Supreme commander Forged Alliance, those are the games. StarCraft II will sell no matter how good or bad it is, just because it's Blizzard. But same 3 races? Sorry, Bliz, but my cash will stay mine this time.
aww, I can't believe you posted that AC. That should have been owned up to. Completely awesome satire.
I've used Vista since about August of last year, played with the Win7 beta, and just switched my desktop over to the RC (laptop's where all my data's kept, desktop's mostly for gaming). Honestly, it installs a bit faster, starts up a bit faster, and shuts down a bit faster ootb. If you tweak it, you can probably get some performance gains. If you're used to XP, you'll have a learning curve since everything's moved. If you used Vista, it's a bit less.
As for actual usage, the preview windows are relatively useful, but only if you're running multiple instances of a program (like 3 or 4 documents). The biggest things, as far as I'm concerned, is the number of ways to set it so you can quickly access your stuff. There's the libraries, which are okay for media files, then there's the taskbar, which you can fit a fair amount of crap on to, and pin in there for quick use. You can pin it to the start menu, as always, and then you can pin some things to File Explorer, which also shows what you've used recently. If you have a heirarchy of what you use and how often, it makes for a decent way to organize things.
As for installing programs, UAC isn't quite as ass-tarded annoying as previously. Pops up quickly, asks you once for the program, then goes away quickly, and has more settings than just "on or off." You can also pick what warning will show up in the notification area, so if you run without an anti-virus, you can turn off that warning (so if you're on an isolated box, for instance, and don't need one).
I haven't found a way to make my account run as full administator all the time yet, so it still asks me "do you want to run as administrator?"
Other than that, though, my biggest gripe is that you can't set Windows Media Center as the default player for DVDs in the "select default programs" menu. Very annoying, since WMP isn't as good.
Also, default drivers are decent, beta drivers from companies seem to work well, and Windows Update actually pulled the updated drivers for my mouse and keyboard from the company they were made by. Overall, I'd call it a solid step up from Vista, and comparable to XP.
what does the average user do? By a PC that they don't really need?
Uh... yes? Have you *looked* at PCs lately? That's the only thing that drives pre-built system sales. The average user has no clue how to maintain their system, it starts falling apart, they buy a new one that costs about the same as their old one did new. Then, they either run their old programs, or upgrade if they won't run on the new OS. The average computer user doesn't need multi-core systems and DDR3 RAM. They run a web browser, email client, and IM client. Maybe watch a movie. A system from 5 years ago can do that easily, and older ones could still probably do that.
I dunno. I've used both. 1.1 doesn't sound right.
It's got to be _at least_ 1.3 or 1.4.
Well, any half-way decent lawyer would just point to the original point of the levy, which was to reimburse artists for lost royalties from music recorded off the radio. It's completely equivalent to then say that same levy compensates for music downloaded. Hell, if they want a way to track it to make the royalties fairly distributed, make a centralized database, and have Canadians all download from that. But if a judge ever said downloading was illegal, then you'd have 6 groups filing a suit to get the levy removed the next day. It's in the *AA's best interests, at the moment, to keep it ambiguous. Which is why the continual finger-pointing at Canada is such an idiotic idea. The eventual Canadian ruling could be even more damaging than TPB case ever was capable of being.
Just because you do not think a terrorist will takeover a plane and crash it does not mean you do not have a drunk pilot or a suicidal pilot or maybe a disabled plane. You also have to take into account that 9/11 happened in New York.
That would be why the jets are there. I'm fairly certain that they'd have disabled the jet *long* before it got to NYC if they were off-course, had no permission to take off, etc. After all, 9/11 happened in NYC. Thus, if a jet's flying along happily, being followed by 2 F-16s, there's not likely to be an issue. It'd only be a situation if the jets were doing manuvers, or if the plane was acting funny. And about 10 seconds observation would let you tell that.
So yes, either the people overreacted, were dumbasses, or as others have suggested, wanted time off. Many people have just thrown their brains away when it comes to stuff like this. "OMG! IT HAPPENED BEFORE IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN I GOTTA MOVE!" If they're that terrified of being a target, they should move. It's their location, not them personally. But since they haven't moved, on some level, they _know_ an incident isn't likely.
Frankly, if this happened anywhere *but* NYC, I'd be more charitable to the people who evac'd.
The only optical media I use is for installs (games, programs, movies), and I only use it the first time. After that, I try and keep an up-to-date image of my HDD jic.
Do 747s often have military escorts over there?
Ones outside designated commercial flight paths often have escorts, yes.
Well fuck me. I can only blame my idiocy on a lack of sleep. *bows* I apologize, and recognize a master of irony.
There is a very real threat and people are justifiably concerned.
Brett
No there isn't. It's one of those once-in-a-lifetime events. I could be worried about an elevator car falling 20 stories and killing me in the fall, or being hit by lightning. Either of those are more likely than a repeat of 9/11. Vigilance against threat is one thing. To focus on one event to the point where it affects your work is excessive. There's no reason to worry specifically that any random jet is going to crash in to your building. That's just fearmongering.
Because underground excavation would be hideously expensive to the depths of a normal sky scraper.
Because there's airports whose approaches require flying near cities, and god forbid a rogue update or hack gets in to the turret systems.
Ever tried BASE jumping? Instructors won't teach anyone without skydiving experience. Now, have a couple hundred people, all panicked, jumping out of a building, untrained. Doesn't work. Not to mention most windows are shatterproof, and for safety reasons cannot be opened when that high up, so you'd waste valuable time trying to break a window.
And this got upvoted?
First off, to get it out of my system:
Was also spurred evacuations
*headdesk*
Okay, now for the real comment:
A plane is being escorted by F-16s. And this causes hundreds of people to flee for their lives by making a mad dash out of their building? There's being careful, then there's being an overly paranoid idiot. I'm pretty sure that if the jets are there, you'd be safer *in a building* rather than where all the explodey shrapnel can get to you.
Same thing that stops the prosecution from manufacturing evidence, or people being held without trial, etc. etc. Absolutely nothing except people who are able to prove it happened.
I cannot remember the source of the quote, but there's one along the lines of "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often. And usually for the same reasons."
Well, I'd say boo, bad form, but considering I just spent the last half-minute laughing at it, I don't think I have a right to say anything XD
That's how I was thinking of it. Of course you wouldn't want to run your phone off it completely, but it'd make a way to extend battery life, and if you were really in a bind, you'd be able to work up a really tiny bit of charge to make a quick call.
The fact that this wouldn't be integrated on to phones for years makes this kinda of a non-story though. =\
I dunno. I had a Kyocera, and it got reception in places no one else I knew could, it never froze up, unlike my current and past phones, and it was fairly durable. Except for when I dropped it and the case split a tiny bit on the seam, so the pinhole charger wouldn't stay in place properly. Lasted 3 years, all told, and would have been longer if I hadn't dropped it.