Windows 10 Pro allows you to wait to install updates until you want to. My production machines all run Windows 10 Pro now, except 1 still on Windows 7 for various reasons (it will go to 10 later this year).
No one doing real work on Windows should be running the home edition anyway, it lacks domain support, something that is quite commonly used in a business environment anyway.
Considering the push for the "Year of the Linux Desktop" it's strange Ubuntu does not support hibernate and hasn't for years now.
You're kidding, right?
"Year of the Linux Desktop" might have had a chance, 15 years ago... that day has come and gone and it won't be returning, ever...
Linux had its chance back when XP launched to various issues, back when Red Hat was the big name in town and talk of something besides Windows was growing.
Since that time, Microsoft has fixed (then broken, then fixed again) most of Windows' problems and now they have got it just about perfect in 10. Then MS doubled down and gave away Windows 10 to 2/3 of current computer owners.
Linux doesn't have a chance, that ship has sailed...
All that effort is better-spent making the OS start up and shut down quickly
No, it really isn't...
People who just want their computers to work also want their stuff to stay where it was when they closed their laptop. I know I do. I often have 5 to 10 programs open, sometimes 5 to 10 tabs open in a web browser.
When I turn off my notebook and turn it on a few hours later, I expect it all to be sitting there as I left it.
No one has managed to make it work reliably on Windows either. I don't think I've ever encountered a laptop on which Suspend wasn't either a game of Russian Roulette, or a guaranteed way to require a restart.
Then you haven't used very many laptops or you use really crappy ones.
On everything from a cheap Dell notebook to a really expensive Acer machine, they all suspend perfectly on Windows 7, 8.1, and 10.
On dozens of machines, both production and testing, suspend on Windows 7, 8.1, and 10 work perfectly, every time (unless it is a test machine that has hard frozen, but that isn't Window's fault, that is what test machines are for)...
Doesn't it indicate that he's not willing to take responsibility for his own actions
Huh? Are you suggesting that anyone who files for BK protection "isn't willing to take responsibility for their own actions"?
If so, then I feel very sorry for you and hope you never end up in that situation. That protection is there for a reason, there is no shame in using it when needed.
In any case, he has never filed for BK protection, 4 of his companies have, out of hundreds of companies...
The sad thing about this is that you aren't alone in your thinking, and it shows why this country is such a mess and why we keep electing idiots from both D and R parties, because so many people really don't understand money, business, or the law.
Only the debt he did not manage to evade thanks to fake bankruptcies and powerful friends protecting him from the law.
Can you show me where on the doll that Trump hurt you?
You have a bias since you don't have any actual facts. The fact is, he has used the law to his advantage, same as you do when you take every tax deduction you can come April 15th.
Don't like the law? Get it changed... but he hasn't had any "fake bankruptcies", he had 4 real ones. So what?
So he had 4 businesses that had to file for BK protection, out of hundreds of companies that did not have to...
Also how is his tactic of hiding money, declaring bankruptcy, then finding the money again going to apply at a national level?
That topic is not one that he has addressed very well, so I'll do it.
You misunderstand what it is that he is doing. He doesn't "hide money", he has had 4 businesses declare bankruptcy. He has never personally filed for bankruptcy.
That is a really key point.
He does have hundreds of businesses that have never filed for bankruptcy. So he is willing to pull the plug when something isn't working.
He just hasn't done a very good job of explaining that, but it might come with time, or it might not.
According to his federal filings (which are legal documents and it is a serious crime to lie on them), he is worth at least in the billions, after taking into account debt.
He claims $10 billion, his filings are over $1 billion (but don't really reflect the total, given how that works.
There was no bloody way Germany was going to start with 300 U-boats.
Not in 1939, but Germany was on a 10 year Navy build program running from 1935 to 1945. The Navy had been told to be ready for war in 1945 and they had plans to have 300 U-boats ready then.
That actually could have been done, but the war started 5 and a half years early.
Germany could not have had 300 U-boats within the confines of the 1935 treaty with Britain
Hitler broke that treaty, which is why she was building Battleships in the first place. Britain couldn't really complain since they had done so as well.
It would have been a large expenditure of resources aimed squarely at Britain, and Chamberlain would have reacted accordingly.
He did, for all the bad press Chamberlain has gotten, much of it deserved, he did start rearmament in 1938. It was way too late however, it needed to be started in 1936.
The Germans were doing their best in 1940. There was a real scare in early 1943, but the large number of sinkings was counterbalanced by heavy German U-boat losses
The bigger scares came with the first and second "happy times" in 1940 and 1942.
By 1943 the battle of the Atlantic was lost... U-Boats kept fighting until the end of the war, but largely out of desperation and having nothing else to do than with any real expectation of winning.
The real chance was in 1940, prior to invading the Soviet Union. Had Hitler put that off a year and focused 100% on Great Britain, he had a chance of winning. Once he invaded the Soviet Union, it was all over. He completely and totally had no idea what he was getting into by invading them, the reserves of manpower and material dwarfed what Germany could produce, after that it was just a matter of time. Even then, he did really well for the first year, but the USSR recovered and that was that.
Going back to the Atlantic, had the decision in 1935 been made to not build the big gun battleships but instead use those resources to build U-Boats, Germany probably could have had 120 to 150 of them ready in 1939 (you can built a lot of U-Boats out of the resources from a single Battleship).
Sept 1, 1939, Germany had less than 40 U-Boats, had they had 120 of them, they might have pulled it off. It took years before Great Britain had the ships and crews to fight them. By the time Germany did have 200 U-Boats, the British were ready to fight them and had trained ships and crews and the technology was ready.
The other problem is that while England advanced their technology, the Germans did not. They were still building Type 7 U-Boats in 1943, long after they should have been retired.
Re:There is an illusion today among younger people
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
Too bad. You don't get to redefine concepts that are millennia old to suit your purposes.
Neither do you, and you're wrong. You saying you're not doesn't make it so.
Are you so stupid that you replied to my remarks without reading them?
Pot, meet kettle... You didn't actually reply to what I wrote, you simply attacked me...
My point stands, everything is relative and ok in your world, you don't have any sense of right or wrong, good or evil...
There are indeed evil people in the world, it isn't just a verb, it is also a noun.
Who are these rough men you are talking about? ISIS?
I'm not surprised you would say that, given your rainbow happy world view.
Try the US military, the UK military, etc...
Please, go back to your hippie liberal coffee bar and leave the real world to those who live in it.
I agree. When monitors are 40 or 50 inch, then 4K will make sense for gaming. I just don't see it now. You need a lot of screen real estate to take advantage of that many pixels.
If that were true, then there would be no need for Anti Aliasing...
Since there is, then your point is simply incorrect...
Until there is no need for AA, then the resolution isn't high enough.
Yes, but that doesn't help since the topic is games, and the fact that most games are simply faster on Intel.
The why is beside the point...
A $185 Intel i5 chip runs most games faster than a $175 AMD FX chip does...
Linux is not a viable gaming platform, regardless of how much some people wish it were. Even if it was, you can't recompile any of the games so it completely doesn't matter. Battlefield is not open source, so the OS being open source wouldn't matter.
And then combine that with setups like free solar panels for your roof (http://www.solarcity.com/) and a Tesla PowerWall battery (http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall) which can charge up when electricity is cheap (if the sun is shining or the rates are low), then power your house with that free/low rate energy during peak times... and I'm pretty sure that the future is going to be friendly for consumers.
That all sounds great...
I just caution that we currently enjoy an amazingly dependable 24/7 power supply... we should be careful that in our rush to change, we don't lose it.
It costs a lot of money to maintain that grid, if we all go local/battery/solar, then the power company either has to charge a lot more, or has to charged fixed rates, or we lose the power grid...
Is that an improvement?
Re:There is an illusion today among younger people
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
Evil is a thing you do. It's a verb. There's no division into 'good' people and 'evil' people
Well, you're welcome to your viewpoint, but I disagree...
this is not a Disney cartoon with handsome, prancing heroes and dastardly villains with sycophants as offsiders. There's no musical cue or colouring choice to guide you into knowing whose arrogance and misogyny and murdering you need to contextualise as the forgivable failings of the good and whose wrongdoing arises because they are evil.
What a wonderful way to whitewash the whole subject and remove any responsibility... Everything is relative in your world, everything is ok...
Thankfully there are rough men (and now women) who are willing to stand up and do what is required, so you can sit there in your safe, warm house and make such absurd comments.
They became an engineering and manufacturing (?) giant, stealing some of the superiority from the US. That should count, right?
While of course I meant in a military fashion, since that is what we're talking about... In a sense, the long view would say that their rise is a testimate to our way of life, that we converted them to the Western worldview and in return that shows that we're right and the communist and fascist ways are wrong.
We also got a strong ally out of it, which doesn't hurt.
It doesn't bother me that Japan has done well, I'm happy for them. We both build each other up and become stronger for the relationship.
Re:False dichotomy of the guilty conscience
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. You expend the minimum amount of force needed to obtain your objective. You conserve your resources whilst forcing your opponent to expend his. *This* is how wars are won, not by going all gung-ho.
Lord... THAT is what you hear when you read those words?
No wonder you're so messed up... You clearly don't know much about Patton...
Study the man, his methods... Crushing the enemy is the quickest way to win, and he did it multiple times, even when his own leaders thought it was impossible.
Re:False dichotomy of the guilty conscience
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
And you might call that thing that went on for ~100 hours a "battle", but I have another word for anything with a result that lopsided: "massacre". You do realise that by destroying the Iraqi Army in that fashion, the US virtually guaranteed that the country would fall into the chaos into which it has indeed fallen, don't you?
You have your wars mixed up... That 100 hour battle was in 1991, Gulf War 1...
The current mess is a result of the invasion more than 10 years later, Gulf War 2...
And as far as what you call it, if a war is done right, it is indeed a massacre, of the other side... Why in the world would you want a bunch of dead people on OUR side?
Re:False dichotomy of the guilty conscience
on
Twilight of the Bomb
·
· Score: 1
For years, the US refused to bomb North Vietnamese cities. Only after Nixon lost it and sent the Air Force to perform a massive bombing campaign against Hanoi did the North Vietnamese actually take the situation seriously and agree to the Treaty of Paris that ended the (first) Vietnam War.
Had the US been willing to behave against North Vietnam in the 1960s like it did against Nazi Germany, the war would have ended much faster, with much less loss of life on both sides.
The Empire of Japan under the likes of Tojo was evil, its utter destruction and the rebuilding of Japan as a peaceable and democratic state was good, and whether anyone likes it or not, that was only going to come with an unconditional surrender, something not even the Hiroshima bomb produced. Remember, it took two of them to finally convince the Emperor that the war was not only unwinnable, but would lead to the destruction of much of Japan if he allowed his ministers and his armed forces to continue this suicidal campaign of fighting to the death.
Thank you... All these people who want to change one part of history while ignoring another would do well to read what you just wrote...
Had we allowed them to keep their government as it was and avoid unconditional surrender, we would not have the Japan of today...
Japan was perfectly free to surrender unconditionally before the bombs were used... They did not do so, but they did after the second one...
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 Pro allows you to wait to install updates until you want to. My production machines all run Windows 10 Pro now, except 1 still on Windows 7 for various reasons (it will go to 10 later this year).
No one doing real work on Windows should be running the home edition anyway, it lacks domain support, something that is quite commonly used in a business environment anyway.
I hate to tell you, but you can turn off automatic install of Windows Updates...
They download on my machines, but don't install until I click that button...
Considering the push for the "Year of the Linux Desktop" it's strange Ubuntu does not support hibernate and hasn't for years now.
You're kidding, right?
"Year of the Linux Desktop" might have had a chance, 15 years ago... that day has come and gone and it won't be returning, ever...
Linux had its chance back when XP launched to various issues, back when Red Hat was the big name in town and talk of something besides Windows was growing.
Since that time, Microsoft has fixed (then broken, then fixed again) most of Windows' problems and now they have got it just about perfect in 10. Then MS doubled down and gave away Windows 10 to 2/3 of current computer owners.
Linux doesn't have a chance, that ship has sailed...
All that effort is better-spent making the OS start up and shut down quickly
No, it really isn't...
People who just want their computers to work also want their stuff to stay where it was when they closed their laptop. I know I do. I often have 5 to 10 programs open, sometimes 5 to 10 tabs open in a web browser.
When I turn off my notebook and turn it on a few hours later, I expect it all to be sitting there as I left it.
I'm all for getting years of use out of a computer, but 8 years of XP?
It might be time for a fresh install... :)
No one has managed to make it work reliably on Windows either. I don't think I've ever encountered a laptop on which Suspend wasn't either a game of Russian Roulette, or a guaranteed way to require a restart.
Then you haven't used very many laptops or you use really crappy ones.
On everything from a cheap Dell notebook to a really expensive Acer machine, they all suspend perfectly on Windows 7, 8.1, and 10.
Then you have a computer problem...
On dozens of machines, both production and testing, suspend on Windows 7, 8.1, and 10 work perfectly, every time (unless it is a test machine that has hard frozen, but that isn't Window's fault, that is what test machines are for)...
Doesn't it indicate that he's not willing to take responsibility for his own actions
Huh? Are you suggesting that anyone who files for BK protection "isn't willing to take responsibility for their own actions"?
If so, then I feel very sorry for you and hope you never end up in that situation. That protection is there for a reason, there is no shame in using it when needed.
In any case, he has never filed for BK protection, 4 of his companies have, out of hundreds of companies...
The sad thing about this is that you aren't alone in your thinking, and it shows why this country is such a mess and why we keep electing idiots from both D and R parties, because so many people really don't understand money, business, or the law.
Only the debt he did not manage to evade thanks to fake bankruptcies and powerful friends protecting him from the law.
Can you show me where on the doll that Trump hurt you?
You have a bias since you don't have any actual facts. The fact is, he has used the law to his advantage, same as you do when you take every tax deduction you can come April 15th.
Don't like the law? Get it changed... but he hasn't had any "fake bankruptcies", he had 4 real ones. So what?
So he had 4 businesses that had to file for BK protection, out of hundreds of companies that did not have to...
What was your point?
They know squat about how an economy is supposed to work.
You are correct, but sadly too many people voting ALSO don't know squat about how an economy is supposed to work.
The lack of general financial knowledge among the general population is really bloody sad...
Also how is his tactic of hiding money, declaring bankruptcy, then finding the money again going to apply at a national level?
That topic is not one that he has addressed very well, so I'll do it.
You misunderstand what it is that he is doing. He doesn't "hide money", he has had 4 businesses declare bankruptcy. He has never personally filed for bankruptcy.
That is a really key point.
He does have hundreds of businesses that have never filed for bankruptcy. So he is willing to pull the plug when something isn't working.
He just hasn't done a very good job of explaining that, but it might come with time, or it might not.
He's still got negative net worth.
In terms of money?
According to his federal filings (which are legal documents and it is a serious crime to lie on them), he is worth at least in the billions, after taking into account debt.
He claims $10 billion, his filings are over $1 billion (but don't really reflect the total, given how that works.
Regardless, he is clearly a very rich man...
Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?
4, out of hundreds of them...
That is actually a really good record, for those who actually know anything about the subject...
A few thoughts:
There was no bloody way Germany was going to start with 300 U-boats.
Not in 1939, but Germany was on a 10 year Navy build program running from 1935 to 1945. The Navy had been told to be ready for war in 1945 and they had plans to have 300 U-boats ready then.
That actually could have been done, but the war started 5 and a half years early.
Germany could not have had 300 U-boats within the confines of the 1935 treaty with Britain
Hitler broke that treaty, which is why she was building Battleships in the first place. Britain couldn't really complain since they had done so as well.
It would have been a large expenditure of resources aimed squarely at Britain, and Chamberlain would have reacted accordingly.
He did, for all the bad press Chamberlain has gotten, much of it deserved, he did start rearmament in 1938. It was way too late however, it needed to be started in 1936.
The Germans were doing their best in 1940. There was a real scare in early 1943, but the large number of sinkings was counterbalanced by heavy German U-boat losses
The bigger scares came with the first and second "happy times" in 1940 and 1942.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
By 1943 the battle of the Atlantic was lost... U-Boats kept fighting until the end of the war, but largely out of desperation and having nothing else to do than with any real expectation of winning.
The real chance was in 1940, prior to invading the Soviet Union. Had Hitler put that off a year and focused 100% on Great Britain, he had a chance of winning. Once he invaded the Soviet Union, it was all over. He completely and totally had no idea what he was getting into by invading them, the reserves of manpower and material dwarfed what Germany could produce, after that it was just a matter of time. Even then, he did really well for the first year, but the USSR recovered and that was that.
Going back to the Atlantic, had the decision in 1935 been made to not build the big gun battleships but instead use those resources to build U-Boats, Germany probably could have had 120 to 150 of them ready in 1939 (you can built a lot of U-Boats out of the resources from a single Battleship).
Sept 1, 1939, Germany had less than 40 U-Boats, had they had 120 of them, they might have pulled it off. It took years before Great Britain had the ships and crews to fight them. By the time Germany did have 200 U-Boats, the British were ready to fight them and had trained ships and crews and the technology was ready.
The other problem is that while England advanced their technology, the Germans did not. They were still building Type 7 U-Boats in 1943, long after they should have been retired.
Too bad. You don't get to redefine concepts that are millennia old to suit your purposes.
Neither do you, and you're wrong. You saying you're not doesn't make it so.
Are you so stupid that you replied to my remarks without reading them?
Pot, meet kettle... You didn't actually reply to what I wrote, you simply attacked me...
My point stands, everything is relative and ok in your world, you don't have any sense of right or wrong, good or evil...
There are indeed evil people in the world, it isn't just a verb, it is also a noun.
Who are these rough men you are talking about? ISIS?
I'm not surprised you would say that, given your rainbow happy world view.
Try the US military, the UK military, etc...
Please, go back to your hippie liberal coffee bar and leave the real world to those who live in it.
I agree. When monitors are 40 or 50 inch, then 4K will make sense for gaming. I just don't see it now. You need a lot of screen real estate to take advantage of that many pixels.
If that were true, then there would be no need for Anti Aliasing...
Since there is, then your point is simply incorrect...
Until there is no need for AA, then the resolution isn't high enough.
You can recompile if you use Linux with OSS.
Yes, but that doesn't help since the topic is games, and the fact that most games are simply faster on Intel.
The why is beside the point...
A $185 Intel i5 chip runs most games faster than a $175 AMD FX chip does...
Linux is not a viable gaming platform, regardless of how much some people wish it were. Even if it was, you can't recompile any of the games so it completely doesn't matter. Battlefield is not open source, so the OS being open source wouldn't matter.
So its being a "fanboy" to not support corruption?
No, the fanboy part is where you keep comparing the i7 to the AMD chip, when the i5 is a better comparison...
For games and most users, the i7 offers nothing useful, the i5 is just as fast.
And the i5 is the same price, give or take $10, over the AMD chip.
And then combine that with setups like free solar panels for your roof (http://www.solarcity.com/) and a Tesla PowerWall battery (http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall) which can charge up when electricity is cheap (if the sun is shining or the rates are low), then power your house with that free/low rate energy during peak times... and I'm pretty sure that the future is going to be friendly for consumers.
That all sounds great...
I just caution that we currently enjoy an amazingly dependable 24/7 power supply... we should be careful that in our rush to change, we don't lose it.
It costs a lot of money to maintain that grid, if we all go local/battery/solar, then the power company either has to charge a lot more, or has to charged fixed rates, or we lose the power grid...
Is that an improvement?
Evil is a thing you do. It's a verb. There's no division into 'good' people and 'evil' people
Well, you're welcome to your viewpoint, but I disagree...
this is not a Disney cartoon with handsome, prancing heroes and dastardly villains with sycophants as offsiders. There's no musical cue or colouring choice to guide you into knowing whose arrogance and misogyny and murdering you need to contextualise as the forgivable failings of the good and whose wrongdoing arises because they are evil.
What a wonderful way to whitewash the whole subject and remove any responsibility... Everything is relative in your world, everything is ok...
Thankfully there are rough men (and now women) who are willing to stand up and do what is required, so you can sit there in your safe, warm house and make such absurd comments.
They became an engineering and manufacturing (?) giant, stealing some of the superiority from the US. That should count, right?
While of course I meant in a military fashion, since that is what we're talking about... In a sense, the long view would say that their rise is a testimate to our way of life, that we converted them to the Western worldview and in return that shows that we're right and the communist and fascist ways are wrong.
We also got a strong ally out of it, which doesn't hurt.
It doesn't bother me that Japan has done well, I'm happy for them. We both build each other up and become stronger for the relationship.
Exactly. You expend the minimum amount of force needed to obtain your objective. You conserve your resources whilst forcing your opponent to expend his. *This* is how wars are won, not by going all gung-ho.
Lord... THAT is what you hear when you read those words?
No wonder you're so messed up... You clearly don't know much about Patton...
Study the man, his methods... Crushing the enemy is the quickest way to win, and he did it multiple times, even when his own leaders thought it was impossible.
And you might call that thing that went on for ~100 hours a "battle", but I have another word for anything with a result that lopsided: "massacre". You do realise that by destroying the Iraqi Army in that fashion, the US virtually guaranteed that the country would fall into the chaos into which it has indeed fallen, don't you?
You have your wars mixed up... That 100 hour battle was in 1991, Gulf War 1...
The current mess is a result of the invasion more than 10 years later, Gulf War 2...
And as far as what you call it, if a war is done right, it is indeed a massacre, of the other side... Why in the world would you want a bunch of dead people on OUR side?
For years, the US refused to bomb North Vietnamese cities. Only after Nixon lost it and sent the Air Force to perform a massive bombing campaign against Hanoi did the North Vietnamese actually take the situation seriously and agree to the Treaty of Paris that ended the (first) Vietnam War.
Had the US been willing to behave against North Vietnam in the 1960s like it did against Nazi Germany, the war would have ended much faster, with much less loss of life on both sides.
^ This is the correct answer...
The Empire of Japan under the likes of Tojo was evil, its utter destruction and the rebuilding of Japan as a peaceable and democratic state was good, and whether anyone likes it or not, that was only going to come with an unconditional surrender, something not even the Hiroshima bomb produced. Remember, it took two of them to finally convince the Emperor that the war was not only unwinnable, but would lead to the destruction of much of Japan if he allowed his ministers and his armed forces to continue this suicidal campaign of fighting to the death.
Thank you... All these people who want to change one part of history while ignoring another would do well to read what you just wrote...
Had we allowed them to keep their government as it was and avoid unconditional surrender, we would not have the Japan of today...
Japan was perfectly free to surrender unconditionally before the bombs were used... They did not do so, but they did after the second one...