Someone complains about the price and someone else says they can build a linux box cheaper and it does just as good of a job.
Nope. Not even close.
The tivo, for what you get and pay for, is a bargain. I bought the lifetime subscription 3 years ago for $200 and I haven't paid a penny for my tivo since.
The best things about the tivo are ease of use, plug and play, and the interface.
Sure you can probably build something that comes close but doesn't work as well and has a clunky interface. While it is cheaper up front, you have to deal with the clumsiness every single time you want to use it.
Bingo! That's the joy of a war on terrorism - it never has to end.
Are you insane? So because ANY insane bomber or shooter can mount a terrorist attack you are saying we can't win? so what should we do? nothing? Should we do nothing about crime since we can't eradicate it? Or literacy? We can't eliminate illiteracy so we should do nothing?
What is even MORE disturbing is that you think the current administration takes glee, or even hopes, in terrorist attacks.
Nonsense. Bush's policiss have given more people than ever a motive to commit terrorist acts against the United States - and have made the U.S. government more of a clear and present danger to its own citizens than terrorism.
Still waiting for you to list the attacks on American soil since 9/11. We are killing the terrorist and destroying their ability to launch attacks. The proof of this is obvious. NO MORE ATTACKS. but i've got a feeling that NO MATTER what Bush does, you will think he failed. And feel free to list how the U.S. government is "more of a clear and present danger" than terrorism. That is just a fucking stupid statement. I am guessing you mean the 'Patriot Act'. Well, I hate to rain on your parade but Bush DIDN'T pass the Patriot Act. BOTH houses of congress OVERWHELMINGLY passed it. So if you want to bitch about it, bitch to your congressman. THEY passed it.
And you may want to check that "motive to commit terrorist acts against the United States" attitude. Last time I check Syria and Saudi arabis were turning over terrorists to the U.S. Think that would have happened 6 years ago?
clinton decided to tackle terrorism with legal action. That failed miserably. The terrorists continued to commit terrorist activities that escalated higher and higher until the 9/11 WTC attacks. Yes, I consider the 9/11 attacks to be mainly against clinton's policies since they were shown to have taken OVER 5 years to plan and execute.
Bush has decided to deal with terrorism with the military and it has shown to be infinitely more effective. How do I know this? NO MORE ATTACKS.
Which doesn't address the point that no declaration of war was made
Who cares. Congress AUTHORIZED both clinton and Bush to deal with Iraq. and BTW, so did the U.N. Bush just didn't decide one morning to invade Iraq. You refusing to accept this shows you are refusing to face facts.
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq was lawless (until we came in and destroyed the governments - sucky governments, true, but functioning ones), and Iraq had little to do with terrorism.
Keep thinking that. Afghanistan was about as lawless as a country could be. Iraq was about the same. About Iraq not having anything to do with terrorism, WAKE UP. Iraq was a BREEDING ground for terrorism. This has been documented. Terrorist training grounds were in Iraq. saddam was paying bounties for terrorist activities. The CIA has shown constant meetings of terrorist in Iraq. Moneys being funneled to terrorists.
Funny how you equate "sucky governments" with hundreds of thousands of mass graves, professional rapists, death squads, gassing the populace, mutilations, refusing to educate women, and terrorizing their own populace.
And why just Afghanistan and Iraq, in world full of nasty governments? Could it be...oil?
I don't think so. But you have used one liberal argument (the one about oil). I will guess that your next posting will include the other liberal argument (Bush was upset about Iraq trying to assassinate daddy).
I would wager that we went after afghanistan because the taliban were headquartered there and wouldn't turn over al quaeda. I would then wager we went after Iraq because Iraq was shown to have dealings with terrorists, al quaeda, and shown to have WMD (since the 90's) and they were willing to export or sell them. We knew Iraq had WMD and that is why Congress authorized BOTH clinton and Bush to d
Is it one war, the "War on Terrorism", fought on two fronts? But terrorism seems to still exist, and Bush's policies have been a terrorist recruitment officer's wet dream. No win there.
Not true. By using your definition, terrorism will NEVER cease to exist. Every arab terrorist could be dead and some Philippino muslim could blow up a bomb in a disco. So you could argue terrorism still exists. Bush's policies have made this country safer. How many attacks have occurred in this country since 9/11? what was that? Could you repeat that for the jury? NONE. Exactly. The same people who hated the US before the war hate us now. Big deal. We ain't gonna change their opinion in a few years. But the big picture is that they are on the run. that makes a huge difference. They no longer have a safe place to sleep at night and they always have to keep moving. As long as they keep moving they will make mistakes and we will catch them.
Is there a war in Afganistan, and another in Iraq, with the goals of capturing or killing Bin Laden and Hussein? Both are still at large, and Americans are still getting killed in both places. 0 for 2 there.
You may want to say either war will not be won until we catch a single man. That is ridiculous. What if they are dead? does that mean we can't win the war? Yes, Americans are getting killed in WAR not in our cities from terrorists' attacks. Big difference. As a former Marine, I can tell you that there is NO WAY that we can completely eliminate these tragic deaths. But we have succeeded in moving the front lines from our cities to their lands. And as long as the terrorists, from around the world mind you, go to Iraq to fight that that is what we want.
Is there any war at all, given the lack of a formal declaration of such by Congress? Last time I check, Congress gave the president the authority to attack Iraq. president clinton, that is. Oh, and by the way, they ALSO voted and gave president Bush the authority.
And last time I checked we won just about every battle in vietnam. The politicians simply quit vietnam.
But my "measure of victory" is removing the terrorist and lawless regimes in afghanistan and iraq and replacing them with pro-U.S. democratic governments. And to win the wars, we must first remove the old militaries. We are doing that.
But the big "measure of victory" is how safe we keep our homeland. And no one can't say that Bush, Ashcroft, the military, and law-enforcement are doing a wonderful job.
LCDs are flat and easier on the eyes but you can't get anything above 1280X1024 resolution for under $1000. I have seen 19" CRTs with 1600x1200 for just over $100.
I bought my Dell 2000FP (1600x1200, 20") from Dell last Christmas for $768 shipped. VGA,DVI, composite, & svideo inputs.
I regularly see 1600x1200 LCD monitors @ $850 or so.
You can get 17" 1280x1024 as cheap as $300 now.
I understand your point and yes, LCDs are more expensive than CRTs. But they are worth every penny. And the more you use them the more you realize how much better they are for your eyes.
I just got a vonage IP phone and couldn't be happier.
911 works like this. You have to manually submit your address for 911 service. Usually takes a day for the 911 records to be updates. After that, 911 works exactly the same as POTS.
Ok, I don't know much about video cards--but, isn't releasing a driver every month a bad thing? What are they fixing every month if the things is not buggy?
Well, I said every other month.:)
Sure, there are bugs in every video driver from every manufacturer.
But by releasing new drivers every other month they are fixed quickly (old ones and new ones from new games) and new features are added.
ATi used to release drivers every year, Yup, it was that bad.
I just got the ATi 9800 Pro with Half-Life 2 included (DL later when available).
ATi has always had the best video quality but they always released buggy drivers that were updated every 5 months. Not any more.
New Catalyst drivers are released every other month and are no longer buggy.
The card's performance is outstanding. My card settings are 6X anti-aliasing and 16x anisotropic filtering with all of the eye-candy. I run all my games at 1600x1200 and there is no stuttering at all.
anonymous coward gayly posted Instructor: Welcome to UCA. Would you like to start?
SensitiveMale: Hello, my name is SensitiveMale and I'm a UnNecessary CapitAlizer.
Instructor: Yes, I can see from the parent post that you called Microsoft "MicroSoft". Have you ever called an Apple Macintosh MacIntosh?
SensitiveMale: No, but maybe I should; wasn't it Apple who started the whole CramWordsTogether(tm) thing in the first place?
Instructor: NotSure(tm), but they were big fans of it nonetheless. Don't worry, being an UnNecessary CapitAlizer isn't nearly as bad as being a Microsoft Apologist.
hey you nimrod. I spelled microsoft as MicroSoft to make obvious the abbreviation MSAA.
you of course dicked it up with UCA = UnNecessary CapitAlizer.
Do you see any anisotrophic highlights in the grey window border elements? No? Then it wouldn't be brushed metal, it would be a grey gradient now wouldn't it? Besides, this is an interim UI for the alpha and quite likely the beta. The final UI, much like with XP won't be introduced until the OS is well on its way and close to release.
Instructor: Welcome to MSAA. Would you like to start?
Stubear: Hello, my name is stubear and I'm a MicroSoft Apologist.
Class: Hello stubear.
Instructor: thank you stubear. Welcome to MicroSoft Apologist Anonymous.
It's something like a Roman Centurion around 200 AD saying "Christianity is dying. I mean, why shell out for one god when you can have a whole pantheon, and with significantly fewer commandments to follow!"
Slashdot Mirror
It is those damn Hell's Angels rising up once again!!!!!
I hope this doesn't carry over to the US.
I just purchased a 5.8 GHz phone because my 2.4 GHz phone was interfering with wireless network.
I don't want to have to drop back to a 900 MHz phone because of networking.
I can only hope FLOSS is catching on in Great Britain also.
Fluoride also.
Oh wait....
Paying $10 an hour for Wi-Fi access is almost twice as you pay for a movie.
Woo-hoo. Then I made money paying only $5.70 for over 3 hours of LoTR:RoTK.
Should he be known as Dr. Quadrapus then?
And no, his real arms and legs don't count.
Someone complains about the price and someone else says they can build a linux box cheaper and it does just as good of a job.
Nope. Not even close.
The tivo, for what you get and pay for, is a bargain. I bought the lifetime subscription 3 years ago for $200 and I haven't paid a penny for my tivo since.
The best things about the tivo are ease of use, plug and play, and the interface.
Sure you can probably build something that comes close but doesn't work as well and has a clunky interface. While it is cheaper up front, you have to deal with the clumsiness every single time you want to use it.
Tivo is damn cheap for what you get.
Once businesses learn that the most expensive component of any new computer is windows.
Bingo! That's the joy of a war on terrorism - it never has to end.
Are you insane? So because ANY insane bomber or shooter can mount a terrorist attack you are saying we can't win? so what should we do? nothing? Should we do nothing about crime since we can't eradicate it? Or literacy? We can't eliminate illiteracy so we should do nothing?
What is even MORE disturbing is that you think the current administration takes glee, or even hopes, in terrorist attacks.
Nonsense. Bush's policiss have given more people than ever a motive to commit terrorist acts against the United States - and have made the U.S. government more of a clear and present danger to its own citizens than terrorism.
Still waiting for you to list the attacks on American soil since 9/11. We are killing the terrorist and destroying their ability to launch attacks. The proof of this is obvious. NO MORE ATTACKS. but i've got a feeling that NO MATTER what Bush does, you will think he failed. And feel free to list how the U.S. government is "more of a clear and present danger" than terrorism. That is just a fucking stupid statement. I am guessing you mean the 'Patriot Act'. Well, I hate to rain on your parade but Bush DIDN'T pass the Patriot Act. BOTH houses of congress OVERWHELMINGLY passed it. So if you want to bitch about it, bitch to your congressman. THEY passed it.
And you may want to check that "motive to commit terrorist acts against the United States" attitude. Last time I check Syria and Saudi arabis were turning over terrorists to the U.S. Think that would have happened 6 years ago?
clinton decided to tackle terrorism with legal action. That failed miserably. The terrorists continued to commit terrorist activities that escalated higher and higher until the 9/11 WTC attacks. Yes, I consider the 9/11 attacks to be mainly against clinton's policies since they were shown to have taken OVER 5 years to plan and execute.
Bush has decided to deal with terrorism with the military and it has shown to be infinitely more effective. How do I know this? NO MORE ATTACKS.
Which doesn't address the point that no declaration of war was made
Who cares. Congress AUTHORIZED both clinton and Bush to deal with Iraq. and BTW, so did the U.N. Bush just didn't decide one morning to invade Iraq. You refusing to accept this shows you are refusing to face facts.
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq was lawless (until we came in and destroyed the governments - sucky governments, true, but functioning ones), and Iraq had little to do with terrorism.
Keep thinking that. Afghanistan was about as lawless as a country could be. Iraq was about the same. About Iraq not having anything to do with terrorism, WAKE UP. Iraq was a BREEDING ground for terrorism. This has been documented. Terrorist training grounds were in Iraq. saddam was paying bounties for terrorist activities. The CIA has shown constant meetings of terrorist in Iraq. Moneys being funneled to terrorists.
Funny how you equate "sucky governments" with hundreds of thousands of mass graves, professional rapists, death squads, gassing the populace, mutilations, refusing to educate women, and terrorizing their own populace.
And why just Afghanistan and Iraq, in world full of nasty governments? Could it be...oil?
I don't think so. But you have used one liberal argument (the one about oil). I will guess that your next posting will include the other liberal argument (Bush was upset about Iraq trying to assassinate daddy).
I would wager that we went after afghanistan because the taliban were headquartered there and wouldn't turn over al quaeda. I would then wager we went after Iraq because Iraq was shown to have dealings with terrorists, al quaeda, and shown to have WMD (since the 90's) and they were willing to export or sell them. We knew Iraq had WMD and that is why Congress authorized BOTH clinton and Bush to d
Is it one war, the "War on Terrorism", fought on two fronts? But terrorism seems to still exist, and Bush's policies have been a terrorist recruitment officer's wet dream. No win there.
Not true. By using your definition, terrorism will NEVER cease to exist. Every arab terrorist could be dead and some Philippino muslim could blow up a bomb in a disco. So you could argue terrorism still exists. Bush's policies have made this country safer. How many attacks have occurred in this country since 9/11? what was that? Could you repeat that for the jury? NONE. Exactly. The same people who hated the US before the war hate us now. Big deal. We ain't gonna change their opinion in a few years. But the big picture is that they are on the run. that makes a huge difference. They no longer have a safe place to sleep at night and they always have to keep moving. As long as they keep moving they will make mistakes and we will catch them.
Is there a war in Afganistan, and another in Iraq, with the goals of capturing or killing Bin Laden and Hussein? Both are still at large, and Americans are still getting killed in both places. 0 for 2 there.
You may want to say either war will not be won until we catch a single man. That is ridiculous. What if they are dead? does that mean we can't win the war? Yes, Americans are getting killed in WAR not in our cities from terrorists' attacks. Big difference. As a former Marine, I can tell you that there is NO WAY that we can completely eliminate these tragic deaths. But we have succeeded in moving the front lines from our cities to their lands. And as long as the terrorists, from around the world mind you, go to Iraq to fight that that is what we want.
Is there any war at all, given the lack of a formal declaration of such by Congress?
Last time I check, Congress gave the president the authority to attack Iraq. president clinton, that is. Oh, and by the way, they ALSO voted and gave president Bush the authority.
And last time I checked we won just about every battle in vietnam. The politicians simply quit vietnam.
But my "measure of victory" is removing the terrorist and lawless regimes in afghanistan and iraq and replacing them with pro-U.S. democratic governments. And to win the wars, we must first remove the old militaries. We are doing that.
But the big "measure of victory" is how safe we keep our homeland. And no one can't say that Bush, Ashcroft, the military, and law-enforcement are doing a wonderful job.
Like how George Bush has experience going to war.
Last time I checked, Bush is 2 wins for 2 wars.
In a word, this is unfair. Other states should have the capabilities which the United States takes for granted. Very disappointed in my country.
Are you a FUCKING IDIOT?
As a former Marine, I can tell you that the LAST THING you want in a battle is a fair fight.
Why in the world would you EVER want to give ANY advantage to the enemy?
Get out of your little liberal cocoon and stop questioning how people defend your freedom to make stupid comments.
Now if you want to make a comment on how the EU caved, that is a different thing completely.
LCDs are flat and easier on the eyes but you can't get anything above 1280X1024 resolution for under $1000. I have seen 19" CRTs with 1600x1200 for just over $100.
I bought my Dell 2000FP (1600x1200, 20") from Dell last Christmas for $768 shipped. VGA,DVI, composite, & svideo inputs.
I regularly see 1600x1200 LCD monitors @ $850 or so.
You can get 17" 1280x1024 as cheap as $300 now.
I understand your point and yes, LCDs are more expensive than CRTs. But they are worth every penny. And the more you use them the more you realize how much better they are for your eyes.
Don't say that.
Switch's hardware was sexy.
Anybody know how VoIP 911 access works?
I just got a vonage IP phone and couldn't be happier.
911 works like this. You have to manually submit your address for 911 service. Usually takes a day for the 911 records to be updates. After that, 911 works exactly the same as POTS.
Ok, I don't know much about video cards--but, isn't releasing a driver every month a bad thing? What are they fixing every month if the things is not buggy?
:)
Well, I said every other month.
Sure, there are bugs in every video driver from every manufacturer.
But by releasing new drivers every other month they are fixed quickly (old ones and new ones from new games) and new features are added.
ATi used to release drivers every year, Yup, it was that bad.
I just got the ATi 9800 Pro with Half-Life 2 included (DL later when available).
ATi has always had the best video quality but they always released buggy drivers that were updated every 5 months. Not any more.
New Catalyst drivers are released every other month and are no longer buggy.
The card's performance is outstanding. My card settings are 6X anti-aliasing and 16x anisotropic filtering with all of the eye-candy. I run all my games at 1600x1200 and there is no stuttering at all.
Simply amazing.
and this is what happens.
Lords knows she probably started writing the script and he couldn't stop here.
So am I to assume that "SensitiveMale" is you name, not an alias?
Nope, it is a handle. But I am not posting my messages anonymously. I did set up an account.
Every single person arguing for CocoaTech to release the entire code is posting anonymously.
Apparently no one has the balls to attach their name to their "demands".
Don't forget that the Patriot Act passed both houses of Congress. By a wide margin.
So instead of demonizing the man in charge of prosecuting our nation's laws why not blame your representative in congress for passing it?
anonymous coward gayly posted Instructor: Welcome to UCA. Would you like to start?
SensitiveMale: Hello, my name is SensitiveMale and I'm a UnNecessary CapitAlizer.
Instructor: Yes, I can see from the parent post that you called Microsoft "MicroSoft". Have you ever called an Apple Macintosh MacIntosh?
SensitiveMale: No, but maybe I should; wasn't it Apple who started the whole CramWordsTogether(tm) thing in the first place?
Instructor: NotSure(tm), but they were big fans of it nonetheless. Don't worry, being an UnNecessary CapitAlizer isn't nearly as bad as being a Microsoft Apologist.
hey you nimrod. I spelled microsoft as MicroSoft to make obvious the abbreviation MSAA.
you of course dicked it up with UCA = UnNecessary CapitAlizer.
what a moron.
Do you see any anisotrophic highlights in the grey window border elements? No? Then it wouldn't be brushed metal, it would be a grey gradient now wouldn't it? Besides, this is an interim UI for the alpha and quite likely the beta. The final UI, much like with XP won't be introduced until the OS is well on its way and close to release.
Instructor: Welcome to MSAA. Would you like to start?
Stubear: Hello, my name is stubear and I'm a MicroSoft Apologist.
Class: Hello stubear.
Instructor: thank you stubear. Welcome to MicroSoft Apologist Anonymous.
It's something like a Roman Centurion around 200 AD saying "Christianity is dying. I mean, why shell out for one god when you can have a whole pantheon, and with significantly fewer commandments to follow!"
:)
that was damn funny.
Mario Lemieux