Since, as others have pointed out, the ambient temperature isn't likely at 140 degrees outside the car, how about a solar powered fan that sucks cool in from beneath the car and blows it through your electronics storage compartment?
Cut a hole in the bottom of the trunk as an air intake, and set up the blower to suck in the "cool" air from beneath the car. Use a 30W solar panel (or pair of 15W panels) to charge a battery that runs your fan so it will continue to run for a while after dark until the car cools down. A 15W panel in full sunlight will run a 1 amp fan, so with 30W you can run the fan and charge the battery. The 1 amp fan should give you around 100 cubic feet/minute of airflow.
As long as the temperature in the shade under the car stays under your device's max storage temperature it should keep the devices safe. A thermoelectric cooler would give you a better margin of safety on a hot day, at the expense of higher current draw.
At my company, out of 500 computer users, we have around 60% Windows and 40% OSX, Linux users (including me) don't even account for 1% of our desktops (but factor heavily in our servers - we're around 50% Windows, 40% Linux and 10% OSX (which will be moved to Linux before the end of the year). Most of the OSX users are normal business users (finance, IT, etc) not graphic designers or other users that traditionally have preferred OSX.
There's little reason for anyone here to run Linux to do their work - Office 2011 runs well on OSX and gives users an Office Suite and Outlook that's compatible with the rest of the corporation. And there's the whole Apple Ecosystem that some people like to be inside of.
Even though I run Linux, I still do most of my work on a Win 7 virtual machine because some apps just don't run well (or at all) on Linux. I tried Crossover Office/Wine for a while to run Office, but it wasn't worth dealing with the quirks, it runs much better on Windows. Plus, some of our corporate tools and infrastructure management tools run only on Windows (or require MSIE for full functionality). We run a terminal server for OSX users that need to run Windows apps.
OSX may not have killed Linux, but it sure has kicked it into the corner.
Nope. Defeating port knocking is easy - just knock all the ports a few times and it opens up. (Alternatively, if your knock scheme demands a specific order, I can keep you out indefinitely by knocking some wrong port continously.)
And even when it works, the obscurity is only equivalent to a few more characters in the password.
Since there are 2^16 ports, each port is equivalent to 16 bits of password entropy (depending on how long it takes to test a port versus test a password).
If it takes 3 knocks to get in (i.e. knock 2 ports, then find the open port for the service you're looking for), that's equivalent to 48 bits of password entropy, or around 8 additional alphanumeric password characters.
Lock out an IP from unlocking the port after a few unsuccessful knocks and you pretty much eliminate any chance of brute force attack. You can try to attack from different IP addresses through a botnet or spoofing, but with 48 bits of entropy and less than 32 bits of IPv4 addressess to choose from, there aren't enough IP's to brute force.
Being judged by an idiot who knows nothing about the law is a cornerstone of our civilization.
That sounds better than the alternative of being judged by an idiot who uses his incorrect interpretation of the law. If there's a question about the law, the jury is supposed to ask the judge, not look to a jury foreman who may or may not have some experience in the field to interpret the law for them.
What the troll moderator who modded me down missed is that unless Toyota decides to sell only Priuses, they're going to need a 70-80 MPG car to balance out all the 30 MPG Camrys that they sell every year.
Or, when all manufacturers have the same gas mileage target, Toyota can sell more Camry Hybrids by reducing the price gap between the Hybrid and conventional Camry to boost their fleet mileage, and put a less powerful gas (or diesel) engine in the Camry to bring it closer to the mandated gas mileage target. Then they need to sell fewer Yaris's and Prius's to make up the gap. Right now there's no incentive to reduce the performance of the Camry which would make it underperform the Honda Accord (or Nissan Altima, etc) - many shoppers who compare horsepower, acceleration, etc will chose the more powerful car. But when all manufacturers are under the same constraints, then Toyota can put a smaller, more efficient engine into the Camry since Honda and the rest will have to do the same.
Toyota.com says that the 3rd Gen Prius starts at $24k, not $19k.
That is true, but the 3rd Gen Prius is not the same as the Prius C, which does have a list price of $18,950, according to Toyota: http://www.toyota.com/priusc/
And by this logic, why should anyone buy "a small tiny econobox" because you want to be safe. If you're going to try and legislate everyone drive a small car because it would make you happier, then you open yourself to being told you must buy a large car because it would make someone else happier if the votes go the other way. Freedom is all about people driving what they want. A contractor is not going to get much use out of fiat 500, just as you might have no use for an F350. As for you not feeling safe in a small car, that's one of the trade offs you have when you made your choice for a small car, just like gas-millage was the trade off for people who chose the large car. Not recognizing there are things more important to some people than gas millage (for example: like the ability to tow things up hills, carry more passengers, more cargo room, or whatever else) and desiring to make them unhappy by legislation is the problem here. Given 2 otherwise identical choices where the only difference is fuel economy, I think you'd find buyers pretty unified in what they'd choose to buy. Problem is the choices are not equal.
That's why I'd rather see taxes and fees used to drive car sizes and efficiency rather than regulation.
Since road wear increases with the 4th power of the car's axle weight, a 6000 lb Expedition should pay 81 times higher registration fees than a 2000 lb Smart Car. So if the smart car owner pays a $100 annual registration fee, the Expedition owner should pay $8100. A higher gas tax can also help encourage fuel efficient cars (and can help isolate us from volatility in fuel prices since the gas tax can be variable to help absorb large price fluctuations - which seems much better than tapping the strategic fuel reserve to help even out price fluctuations)
With higher taxes, the wealthy will still be able to buy any size car they want, but they may find it less useful when cities change infrastructure to accomodate the smaller cars (lane widths, parking space sizes, etc).
And what happens when inconvenient organic material, like, say a deer, comes in front of the lead car?
Instead of a 2s buffer between cars, you've got 5 feet. So you've got 2 miles of cars crashing into each other.
Since the cars all apply their brakes at the exact same time (as soon as the lead car detects the deer), and a 200 lb deer is not going to stop a 2500lb car dead in its tracks, the collision might affect the first few cars in the chain, but not the entire chain of cars.
But it's still a "better" collision than the more likely alternative today where the lead car slams on the brakes when he sees the deer, and by the time the guy in the trailing car 2 seconds away notices and slams on his brakes, he hits the first car with a 35mph speed differential, and the car that's 4 seconds behind slams into the first 2 cars with a 50mph speed differential. Humans can have a surprisingly long reaction time in emergency situations if they aren't alert and prepared for it
Now if the lead car struck an 18 wheeler stalled in the road without detecting it first and braking, then that could lead to an enormous pileup - much like what happens in heavy fog today.
>>>city driving, but that's where most people do most of their day-to-day driving.
Citation please. I don't go anywhere near a city for my commute, and neither do most people I know. In fact the average American drives almost 20 miles a day on an interstate or highway
80% of citizens live in "urban areas", and 86% of commuters travel by car. Even if you look only at workers that live and work inside their principal metro area, 82% of them commute by car).
Of course, not everyone in an Urban area has a "city driving" commute, nor does everyone in a rural area have a "highway" commute, but this is the closest metric I could find.
If you want to use personal anecdotes as evidence, most people I know live in a large city and commute to work either inside or near that city.
Don't know who makes Outback, but Audi and Subaru both have the best AWD of all time. Subaru is actually kicking ass. I drive a Mazda, I tend to light rail, I bicycle less now because I'm lazy but I envy a Trek 2.3 Apex.
Sorry, I should have been more specific -- it's a Subaru Outback. I've been quite happy with both the AWD and reliability of the car.
/I will be in an accident, so I must have a safe car
Naa, my primary "car" is a bicycle (which will fare equally poorly whether I'm run over by a Fiat or an Expedition), but when I do drive, I drive a 10 year old Outback station wagon (which I chose because of the the AWD for driving to the mountains during ski season).
The administration estimated that the new standards would save Americans $1.7 trillion in fuel costs, resulting in an average savings of more than $8,000 a vehicle by 2025.
Too bad the vehicles will cost $16,000 more (unadjusted for inflation).
Do you have a source for this?
2012 Prius C (53/46mpg) - $19,000 2012 Toyota Matrix (21/29mpg) - $19,000
Toyota is already selling hybrids today that are close to meeting the new standard for a few thousand dollars more than (or the same price as ) a conventional car.
Physics isn't going to change for the amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline. My 400 pound motorcycle gets about 50mpg. It could get more if it wasn't so much fun, but I don't see much hope of a 3,000 pound car getting much more than that without changing fuel sources.
A 2500lb prius-C is rated at 46/53mpg. Granted, the 53mpg is during city driving, but that's where most people do most of their day-to-day driving.
At some point you just have to account for the laws of physics.
Pushing a vehicle at 80MPH down the highway is going to be hard to do and get 54.5 MPG. No matter how "hybrid" the car is, no matter how good your regenerative breaking.. once you're at highway speeds, air resistance becomes insurmountable.
But add in a smart network letting cars drive down the freeway with a few feet of spacing between them, then air resistance is less of a factor at higher speeds. When the lead car can send its sensor data down the line to the trailing car so they can all react to obstacles and road conditions simultaneously, cars can safely drive close enough to reduce wind resistance. Periodically have the lead car drop back to be the trailing car to help even out the gas mileage of all cars.
All of the major car manufacturers back the higher standards, so they must feel that they are achievable.
Would lack of any regulations do a better job for road safety or fuel efficiency?
What exactly is wrong with letting individuals decide how safe and economical they want their vehicles to be?
Do you really want to be hit by a truck while driving a Fiat 500?
Well no, I'd rather be hit be a similarly sized 2500lb (1000kg) car. But if everyone else is driving 6000lb (2500kg) Ford Expeditions, then I'm forced to buy a larger car to compensate. So why should I be forced to pay more money for a larger, less fuel efficient car just to keep up with everyone else?
Because while things may have been well designed originally or planned including all the fancy redundancy, after years of no major issues it becomes a target of its own success: cutbacks and people saying "see, we never needed it, and look at how much money we can save". Such is the way of things.
If you personally are worried about 911 services being out then go write down the various 7 (or 10-digit if your exchange requires it) numbers for your local emergency services. 911 is not an exclusive to reach them, just the easiest. Whatever happened to the days of the list of those various numbers on the fridge? I'm not even that old and I remember my parents having the list posted just in case.
I thought I was already paying for a reliable E-911 service through the 911 service fees we've all been paying on our phone bills for years.
So what you're saying is that even though we've been paying for 911 for years, we've been paying for cheap, non-redundant service, and it we expect the type of multi-site redundancy that's normally reserved for moderately successful websites, then we need to pay even more? What value are we getting from the hundreds of millions of dollars already collected?
I've called 911 a handful of times, but never from my own house so I'm not sure how that list of phone numbers taped to the fridge is supposed to help me. There used to be a time when you could count on finding a phone book under the phone in your friend's house with the local emergency numbers inside the front cover, but I haven't seen a phone book at a friend's house in years.
Why don't they just fail over the critical life and fire safety systems to the backup datacenter, and keep normal services up at the primary datacenter while they do the work? They do have a second site, right? Surely no one would host a system deemed "critical" and "life safety" at a single site?
I call BS. 1. You can run all that on a Mac (the only Office apps not available are Project and Visio). 2. You could also ditch whatever you are using for a Chrome Book or similar, but I doubt you would because you know you play solitaire like crazy and wont give up all the other nice things Windows has to offer other than a thin client running a browser and office.
Call bullshit on what? That I run Microsoft apps on Windows? If I'm going to move to a different OS I'd rather move to Linux than OSX.
How would a Chromebook help me? Can I run MS Office on a Chromebook?
At work I run 2 applications on Windows: A web browser (Chrome),and the MS Office Suite (Outlook, Word, and Excel (in that order). If Office was available on Linux, I'd be perfectly happy on Linux.
I really don't care what the underlying operating system is, as long as it stays out of my way (and it sounds like the new Win8 UI might be annoying).
What kind of crack are you smoking? I've never seen an add on Slashdot, and it's still here. So boo hoo, tomorrow they close up because they can't figure out how to make money other than shoving ads in my face?
The site is still here because others are viewing the ads so they are still making enough revenue to keep the site running.
If they asked me to pay, I'll consider the request, and maybe will or maybe just go away.
They did ask you, that's why they keep reminding you about the Subscriber benefits. You just choose to ignore their requests because they aren't demanding it.
I actually do support other sites, usually getting something in return, like a book or a wallpaper. So, yeah, I'll pay money. But I rarely ever see ads. None of the sites I've ever been to that have closed down have complained that "ad money was down" so sorry, goodbye.
So why are you here if you're not getting anything in return? You've made over 100 comments, so surely you're getting some benefit from the site? Just because you're not getting a tangible reward (like a wallpaper? That's worth paying for!?) doesn't mean that the site doesn't offer any benefit.
You have a skewed way of thinking. You actually value the advertisers more than the websites you're visiting. That's just weird.
You have it backwards - I tolerate the ads so I can support the website. I don't visit the website to view the ads, if that's what I wanted I'd just to to the advertiser's site directly.
Slashdot Mirror
Since, as others have pointed out, the ambient temperature isn't likely at 140 degrees outside the car, how about a solar powered fan that sucks cool in from beneath the car and blows it through your electronics storage compartment?
Cut a hole in the bottom of the trunk as an air intake, and set up the blower to suck in the "cool" air from beneath the car. Use a 30W solar panel (or pair of 15W panels) to charge a battery that runs your fan so it will continue to run for a while after dark until the car cools down. A 15W panel in full sunlight will run a 1 amp fan, so with 30W you can run the fan and charge the battery. The 1 amp fan should give you around 100 cubic feet/minute of airflow.
As long as the temperature in the shade under the car stays under your device's max storage temperature it should keep the devices safe. A thermoelectric cooler would give you a better margin of safety on a hot day, at the expense of higher current draw.
There is a difference between "operating temperature" and "storage temperature".
iPhone max non-operating temperature: 113 deg F (45 deg C)
http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html
Motorola Droid RAZR max non-operating temperature: 113 deg F (45 deg C)
http://www.valuesphere.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SmartCards&Product_Code=Moto_Droid_Razr
Apple MacBook Pro max non-operating temperature: 113 deg F (45 deg C)
http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/
At my company, out of 500 computer users, we have around 60% Windows and 40% OSX, Linux users (including me) don't even account for 1% of our desktops (but factor heavily in our servers - we're around 50% Windows, 40% Linux and 10% OSX (which will be moved to Linux before the end of the year). Most of the OSX users are normal business users (finance, IT, etc) not graphic designers or other users that traditionally have preferred OSX.
There's little reason for anyone here to run Linux to do their work - Office 2011 runs well on OSX and gives users an Office Suite and Outlook that's compatible with the rest of the corporation. And there's the whole Apple Ecosystem that some people like to be inside of.
Even though I run Linux, I still do most of my work on a Win 7 virtual machine because some apps just don't run well (or at all) on Linux. I tried Crossover Office/Wine for a while to run Office, but it wasn't worth dealing with the quirks, it runs much better on Windows. Plus, some of our corporate tools and infrastructure management tools run only on Windows (or require MSIE for full functionality). We run a terminal server for OSX users that need to run Windows apps.
OSX may not have killed Linux, but it sure has kicked it into the corner.
Nope. Defeating port knocking is easy - just knock all the ports a few times and it opens up. (Alternatively, if your knock scheme demands a specific order, I can keep you out indefinitely by knocking some wrong port continously.)
And even when it works, the obscurity is only equivalent to a few more characters in the password.
Since there are 2^16 ports, each port is equivalent to 16 bits of password entropy (depending on how long it takes to test a port versus test a password).
If it takes 3 knocks to get in (i.e. knock 2 ports, then find the open port for the service you're looking for), that's equivalent to 48 bits of password entropy, or around 8 additional alphanumeric password characters.
Lock out an IP from unlocking the port after a few unsuccessful knocks and you pretty much eliminate any chance of brute force attack. You can try to attack from different IP addresses through a botnet or spoofing, but with 48 bits of entropy and less than 32 bits of IPv4 addressess to choose from, there aren't enough IP's to brute force.
Being judged by an idiot who knows nothing about the law is a cornerstone of our civilization.
That sounds better than the alternative of being judged by an idiot who uses his incorrect interpretation of the law. If there's a question about the law, the jury is supposed to ask the judge, not look to a jury foreman who may or may not have some experience in the field to interpret the law for them.
What the troll moderator who modded me down missed is that unless Toyota decides to sell only Priuses, they're going to need a 70-80 MPG car to balance out all the 30 MPG Camrys that they sell every year.
Or, when all manufacturers have the same gas mileage target, Toyota can sell more Camry Hybrids by reducing the price gap between the Hybrid and conventional Camry to boost their fleet mileage, and put a less powerful gas (or diesel) engine in the Camry to bring it closer to the mandated gas mileage target. Then they need to sell fewer Yaris's and Prius's to make up the gap. Right now there's no incentive to reduce the performance of the Camry which would make it underperform the Honda Accord (or Nissan Altima, etc) - many shoppers who compare horsepower, acceleration, etc will chose the more powerful car. But when all manufacturers are under the same constraints, then Toyota can put a smaller, more efficient engine into the Camry since Honda and the rest will have to do the same.
Toyota.com says that the 3rd Gen Prius starts at $24k, not $19k.
That is true, but the 3rd Gen Prius is not the same as the Prius C, which does have a list price of $18,950, according to Toyota: http://www.toyota.com/priusc/
And by this logic, why should anyone buy "a small tiny econobox" because you want to be safe. If you're going to try and legislate everyone drive a small car because it would make you happier, then you open yourself to being told you must buy a large car because it would make someone else happier if the votes go the other way. Freedom is all about people driving what they want. A contractor is not going to get much use out of fiat 500, just as you might have no use for an F350.
As for you not feeling safe in a small car, that's one of the trade offs you have when you made your choice for a small car, just like gas-millage was the trade off for people who chose the large car. Not recognizing there are things more important to some people than gas millage (for example: like the ability to tow things up hills, carry more passengers, more cargo room, or whatever else) and desiring to make them unhappy by legislation is the problem here. Given 2 otherwise identical choices where the only difference is fuel economy, I think you'd find buyers pretty unified in what they'd choose to buy. Problem is the choices are not equal.
That's why I'd rather see taxes and fees used to drive car sizes and efficiency rather than regulation.
Since road wear increases with the 4th power of the car's axle weight, a 6000 lb Expedition should pay 81 times higher registration fees than a 2000 lb Smart Car. So if the smart car owner pays a $100 annual registration fee, the Expedition owner should pay $8100. A higher gas tax can also help encourage fuel efficient cars (and can help isolate us from volatility in fuel prices since the gas tax can be variable to help absorb large price fluctuations - which seems much better than tapping the strategic fuel reserve to help even out price fluctuations)
With higher taxes, the wealthy will still be able to buy any size car they want, but they may find it less useful when cities change infrastructure to accomodate the smaller cars (lane widths, parking space sizes, etc).
And what happens when inconvenient organic material, like, say a deer, comes in front of the lead car?
Instead of a 2s buffer between cars, you've got 5 feet. So you've got 2 miles of cars crashing into each other.
Since the cars all apply their brakes at the exact same time (as soon as the lead car detects the deer), and a 200 lb deer is not going to stop a 2500lb car dead in its tracks, the collision might affect the first few cars in the chain, but not the entire chain of cars.
But it's still a "better" collision than the more likely alternative today where the lead car slams on the brakes when he sees the deer, and by the time the guy in the trailing car 2 seconds away notices and slams on his brakes, he hits the first car with a 35mph speed differential, and the car that's 4 seconds behind slams into the first 2 cars with a 50mph speed differential. Humans can have a surprisingly long reaction time in emergency situations if they aren't alert and prepared for it
Now if the lead car struck an 18 wheeler stalled in the road without detecting it first and braking, then that could lead to an enormous pileup - much like what happens in heavy fog today.
>>>city driving, but that's where most people do most of their day-to-day driving.
Citation please. I don't go anywhere near a city for my commute, and neither do most people I know. In fact the average American drives almost 20 miles a day on an interstate or highway
80% of citizens live in "urban areas", and 86% of commuters travel by car. Even if you look only at workers that live and work inside their principal metro area, 82% of them commute by car).
http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/archives/metropolitan_planning/cps2k.cfm
Of course, not everyone in an Urban area has a "city driving" commute, nor does everyone in a rural area have a "highway" commute, but this is the closest metric I could find.
If you want to use personal anecdotes as evidence, most people I know live in a large city and commute to work either inside or near that city.
Don't know who makes Outback, but Audi and Subaru both have the best AWD of all time. Subaru is actually kicking ass. I drive a Mazda, I tend to light rail, I bicycle less now because I'm lazy but I envy a Trek 2.3 Apex.
Sorry, I should have been more specific -- it's a Subaru Outback. I've been quite happy with both the AWD and reliability of the car.
You drive a Volvo, don't you?
/I will be in an accident, so I must have a safe car
Naa, my primary "car" is a bicycle (which will fare equally poorly whether I'm run over by a Fiat or an Expedition), but when I do drive, I drive a 10 year old Outback station wagon (which I chose because of the the AWD for driving to the mountains during ski season).
Too bad the vehicles will cost $16,000 more (unadjusted for inflation).
Do you have a source for this?
2012 Prius C (53/46mpg) - $19,000
2012 Toyota Matrix (21/29mpg) - $19,000
2012 Camry Hybrid (43/39mpg) - $26550
2012 Camry conventional (25/35mpg) - $22155
Toyota is already selling hybrids today that are close to meeting the new standard for a few thousand dollars more than (or the same price as ) a conventional car.
Physics isn't going to change for the amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline.
My 400 pound motorcycle gets about 50mpg. It could get more if it wasn't so much fun, but I don't see much hope of a 3,000 pound car getting much more than that without changing fuel sources.
A 2500lb prius-C is rated at 46/53mpg. Granted, the 53mpg is during city driving, but that's where most people do most of their day-to-day driving.
At some point you just have to account for the laws of physics.
Pushing a vehicle at 80MPH down the highway is going to be hard to do and get 54.5 MPG. No matter how "hybrid" the car is, no matter how good your regenerative breaking.. once you're at highway speeds, air resistance becomes insurmountable.
But add in a smart network letting cars drive down the freeway with a few feet of spacing between them, then air resistance is less of a factor at higher speeds. When the lead car can send its sensor data down the line to the trailing car so they can all react to obstacles and road conditions simultaneously, cars can safely drive close enough to reduce wind resistance. Periodically have the lead car drop back to be the trailing car to help even out the gas mileage of all cars.
All of the major car manufacturers back the higher standards, so they must feel that they are achievable.
Would lack of any regulations do a better job for road safety or fuel efficiency?
What exactly is wrong with letting individuals decide how safe and economical they want their vehicles to be?
Do you really want to be hit by a truck while driving a Fiat 500?
Well no, I'd rather be hit be a similarly sized 2500lb (1000kg) car. But if everyone else is driving 6000lb (2500kg) Ford Expeditions, then I'm forced to buy a larger car to compensate. So why should I be forced to pay more money for a larger, less fuel efficient car just to keep up with everyone else?
The summary says this:
VMware is back to more straightforwardly charging per physical processor core.
But I think they mean per socket. (or maybe per physical processor, but not per core)
Because while things may have been well designed originally or planned including all the fancy redundancy, after years of no major issues it becomes a target of its own success: cutbacks and people saying "see, we never needed it, and look at how much money we can save". Such is the way of things.
If you personally are worried about 911 services being out then go write down the various 7 (or 10-digit if your exchange requires it) numbers for your local emergency services. 911 is not an exclusive to reach them, just the easiest. Whatever happened to the days of the list of those various numbers on the fridge? I'm not even that old and I remember my parents having the list posted just in case.
I thought I was already paying for a reliable E-911 service through the 911 service fees we've all been paying on our phone bills for years.
So what you're saying is that even though we've been paying for 911 for years, we've been paying for cheap, non-redundant service, and it we expect the type of multi-site redundancy that's normally reserved for moderately successful websites, then we need to pay even more? What value are we getting from the hundreds of millions of dollars already collected?
I've called 911 a handful of times, but never from my own house so I'm not sure how that list of phone numbers taped to the fridge is supposed to help me. There used to be a time when you could count on finding a phone book under the phone in your friend's house with the local emergency numbers inside the front cover, but I haven't seen a phone book at a friend's house in years.
Why don't they just fail over the critical life and fire safety systems to the backup datacenter, and keep normal services up at the primary datacenter while they do the work? They do have a second site, right? Surely no one would host a system deemed "critical" and "life safety" at a single site?
Google Chrome - Get a fast new browser. For PC, Mac and Linux -> https://www.google.com/chrome?hl=en-gb
LibreOffice Productivity Suite -> www.libreoffice.org/download/
What? You mean Chrome runs on more than one operating system?
Thanks for the link to LibreOffice, but LibreOffice is not MS-Word.
Wine or Crossover might be an option, I'll try it out again, but last time I tried it I had lackluster results.
If Office was available on Linux, I'd be perfectly happy on Linux.
Have you tried LibreOffice?
I can't even use the expense report template without MS Office.
I use LibreOffice at home, but it is a complete non-starter at the office.
I call BS. 1. You can run all that on a Mac (the only Office apps not available are Project and Visio). 2. You could also ditch whatever you are using for a Chrome Book or similar, but I doubt you would because you know you play solitaire like crazy and wont give up all the other nice things Windows has to offer other than a thin client running a browser and office.
Call bullshit on what? That I run Microsoft apps on Windows? If I'm going to move to a different OS I'd rather move to Linux than OSX.
How would a Chromebook help me? Can I run MS Office on a Chromebook?
At work I run 2 applications on Windows: A web browser (Chrome),and the MS Office Suite (Outlook, Word, and Excel (in that order). If Office was available on Linux, I'd be perfectly happy on Linux.
I really don't care what the underlying operating system is, as long as it stays out of my way (and it sounds like the new Win8 UI might be annoying).
I'd just delete my Facebook account and then send regular Tweets about how the cops can't find me.
What kind of crack are you smoking? I've never seen an add on Slashdot, and it's still here. So boo hoo, tomorrow they close up because they can't figure out how to make money other than shoving ads in my face?
The site is still here because others are viewing the ads so they are still making enough revenue to keep the site running.
If they asked me to pay, I'll consider the request, and maybe will or maybe just go away.
They did ask you, that's why they keep reminding you about the Subscriber benefits. You just choose to ignore their requests because they aren't demanding it.
I actually do support other sites, usually getting something in return, like a book or a wallpaper. So, yeah, I'll pay money. But I rarely ever see ads. None of the sites I've ever been to that have closed down have complained that "ad money was down" so sorry, goodbye.
So why are you here if you're not getting anything in return? You've made over 100 comments, so surely you're getting some benefit from the site? Just because you're not getting a tangible reward (like a wallpaper? That's worth paying for!?) doesn't mean that the site doesn't offer any benefit.
You have a skewed way of thinking. You actually value the advertisers more than the websites you're visiting. That's just weird.
You have it backwards - I tolerate the ads so I can support the website. I don't visit the website to view the ads, if that's what I wanted I'd just to to the advertiser's site directly.