Also any dam kills that local eco system that exists at that specific place. Trapping water is very dirty as it may take thousands of years for the nature around that trap to acclimatize. Beavers seems to be the only ones that can build a dam that doesn't impact too much on nature.
There is a completely renewable energy source, and you all (almost) have it. You got your legs, and arms. You eat to fuel them the rest products are disposed of in a fashion that it's renewable.
So what we can't do without muscle craft, should we be doing it at all? Ok that we can build machines but should we really rely on machines for everyday tasks. Especially if those machines only cause trouble in the long run, and waste resources.
Well just a taught for consideration, I'm no Amish type my self, but really is it sane to go on as we do?
Hmm your deserts are caused by cold, is kinda flawed. The Sahara dessert is purely caused by humans. It used to be a forrest.
And I live in an area which currently has temperatures around -25 degrees Celsius. That colder than your fridge which is around -18. Still in our more temperate season this is far from a dessert. California is a dessert compared to finland. And it's not cold there.
Do you really believe that is their problem the despots and dictators. The problem you have in those countries is spelled USA and formely Sovjet.
But the problem in those lands today are only a result of the politics that where during the Cold War and prior to that the colonization that European countries did.
Most of the war and the fights in the world that has lead to people suffering, also by hunger. Has been communism against democracy. And I don't know who to blame the most. To me it seems that the "Democratic" countries has done more damage than good. Look at vietnam, somalia etc etc.
True the cold war is all gone. But the aftereffects still remain, these countries are polarized, and if they learned anything is that money control weapons, weapons control the country. And you think going there "cleaning up" is the solution.
Well the American clean up of Iraq and Afghanistan has really proven successful? Give me a break. The food shortage problems could be easily solved if western countries would be willing to pay the price. But when you if you ever get the insight of what that price is, I bet you rather annihilate those who are suffering.
Have you ever killed anything, bigger than a fly? Try killing a bird, cat, dog or an other pet first and se how easy it is, especially without a gun. I've had to neck a bird that was sick once, and it wasn't easy to swing that axe. But I've shot 2 minks, that is much easier to do.
Shooting the minks from 10m distance was simple. Killing that bird with an axe, though it was so sick that there was no struggle was way way harder.
Reducing guns on the street will reduce crime. It will not remove crime, but it will be reduced significatly. Gun controle isn't the same as prohibiting guns. It's controlling who has access to one. And that can be in connection with schooling and checkups on mental suitability. Which can't be to hard for the ones owning the guns to obtain. Or if it is, they should not have them in the first place.
Where I live there is a regulatioin of how big knives your allowed to carry in public places, unless it's used as a tool in your job and your there working. The regulation is 5cm long blade at maximum.
Knifes of any size can though be transported freely, and used freely in non public areas. But you don't carry +5 cm blade in ur lessure time in public areas. Well this is quite much overlooked as many do carry their letherman or similar which is usually more than 5cm. But that is more a tool than a weapon.
It requres quite a lot more to cut someonecs throwht than tho shoot the same one. Banning guns won't stop those capable of using a knife, or even an pencil as their murder weapon. But it will stop most of those who easely does it with a gun. Whit a gun you can do it from distance, with a knife you'll be struggling with a viktim that might fight back effectively, an non the less you'll be looking your viktim in the eye.
Most triggerhappy gunmen would stop long before that. But far from all of them.
To me it's obvious, owning guns should be hand in hand with license and schooling. You don't give a car to someone without a drivinglicense and tell them to go to NewYork and have some fun, do you.
Infact that is Nokias biggest problem they get no money from their customers.
Apple has a bigger renevue with 4% market share than nokia had with over 50% marketshare that should tell you something about how bad Nokia is at making money out of their gadgets.
Well, if only you could compete there. Look at finland, the country with the lowest mobile costs of all. And that is all thanks to regulations on how your allowed to compete.
In USA there is no real competition between carriers. None of them are really forced to develop better services to better prices. Because they decide what phone your having and what functions your allowed to have on it.
Apple was the first company in US that was able to break away a little bit from the carrier control. In Finland on the contrary it used to be forbidden to bundle phones with carrier contracts. Which made carriers compete, with who gives the best and cheapest service.
Today the nation wide carriers are not even allowed to build separate networks. So there carrier that comes first gets the are he gets to, but then is forced to rent his part of the network to others. So again they compete on services to best price.
Regulations on how your allowed to compete are extremely good. When it comes to mobile services, US is in stone age in comparison. Finland has only 5M people, but a county big as New Mexico. Still almost anywhere I go I get a signal.
When I was in california, getting a signal was kinda random, and almost never did i get an 3G signal. So the competition your talking about is non existent in USA.
What you have is a Free Market, but that is not the same as free competition, quite the contrary.
The fins where no better, Nokia has had trouble because it's Finnish management, who been unable to take responsibility or ownership of their products/strategies and business.
As I said earlier, I'm a fin, but in this case I'm no patriot. Finnish companies cant compete internationally, because lame management. At least did the new CEO do something to Nokias problem, which is more than you can say about the former managers.
I doubt MS was a good choice i they wanted to keep their independence, but It might just save nokia as a company. Nokia has lost alarmingly high market share to Android. Apple a while age had only 4% of the market, took 50% of all the income the whole industry had. Nokia had back then 50% of the market, but just how bad was their income per gadget then.
Nokia I bleeding, and bleeding more for each day that goes. Continue like this and they soon would be loosing money if they already didn't.
This MS deal might just bring them back to be e profitable company.
Re:In that case, MS has failed beyond belief
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 1
Maemo/Meego, started of same time as Android.
Android is now out in version 2.3 where is that meego.
I'm a fin and a former Nokia user, Nokia lost it approximately 10 years ago. Sad though that in their fall they had to take down QT with them. Nokia has always had good hardware, still have. Better than the iphone i have, though my iphone is faster it's not better hardware. But nokia software has been a noogo, for a very long time. Suddenly Apple made a phone with proper software and it rocketed.
You can also have Safari to pose as IE windows. You might need to turn on developer menubar in preferences advanced. But then you can pose as many different webbrowser.
But I assume, that it's not about blocking other browser but about they supporting only IE functions, or IE specially coded incompatibility functions. You know, MS tried to have their own HTML standard.
Well, that i fully agree on, I hate the color explosion the dock creates. I really would like the dock to have a saturation option, then I could make it totally grayscale simply. I also dislike the thick bars in OSX.
But one thing they did right with osx, they removed the bars around a window that they introduced with MacOS8. Which really only came to be due to Win95 gray bar theme and that win95 got popular. Apple back then had little forward vision of what to do with their system. They had System 8 but no leadership behind it, it was their longhorn.
So imo there was no update to the system between System 7 and MacOSX. 8, 9 was all old system 7. Well if you consider the small details in improvement, still 7.6 was basically the same as the later ones.
The Macs handled colour back then pretty fine. Only that most monitors where monocrome or grayscale. Large color screens where available. Any mac back then handled colors even if you had a monocrome screen. I know as dad was in the marketing bussiness, he had a 19" greyscale monitor connected to a Mac SE, later SE/30, but still produced color prints. That computer was still in use as late as to 2000. Yeah it had become a server for less needed tasks, had a localtalk to ethernet bridge. But hey you could even surf the web with it. All on System 7. With a computer made 1989, that is the SE/30.
True, but I never get proper file assosiations in Windows, or linux. OSX10.6 is not much better thoug, that got pretty much screwed up in 10.6. With windows I don't get seamless integration. I'm not able to swiftly create workflows. In linux I could create shell scripts, but they are far from friendly, just like.bat files in DOS was. Are.bat files still supproted by windows?
All that MacOS has done for ages, while totally absent on other platforms, unless you happen to be a hardcore hacker and programmer. What about seamless backup or "ghosting" options, yeah you need a software for that too. Then incompatibilites with dll files, and that even with MS Office. Perfectly well working Access applications work in Office 2003. With 2007 or later "no can do", and MS is not even offering an alternative. All this and broken registry.
But yeah windows can display a picture, if i have correct applications installed. You can browse the web if you have correct browser installed. It's even able to handle PDF if i have everything installed properly. Oh and, it's able to play an MPEG-x media with the correct software installed. Yeah you can do all that, but's its a pain in the *ss.
If you really need windows, it's available for the mac. I don't need it and a certanily don't want it, I happily pay a premium to just not have to deal with windows. There is one software that is windows only that I use, but that one i run trough wine. It's a hazzle yes but so is windows.
To me it functions when it seamless and out of my way. It's not functional if I can make it to work. All that part of "make to work" is a show stopper to me. It's not that I'm not capable of it, I simply want to spend my time with other things. So yeah, I bought Apple for functionality. To get things done. To me it doesn't matter if the mac is faster or slower or overpriced vs similar hardware with windows. It's simply not overpriced if I can afford it.
Funny, I see just the opposite, people get impressed by things you could do on a apple product already in the -80s. Well true a NeXT computer was even better, but nobody had them, so hard to get impressed of anything that you never saw or knew about.
But oh windows -95, long file names and plug n play. Better name would have been plug n pray. But all this was something a mac user took for granted then. Oh, 1MB of ram was possible with a tweak. Apple user at that time had computers that could do 128MB ram, if they just afforded it. Network, Something that exploded on the PC side in mid -90s. Something that apple users been doing over a decade. High resolution screens over 640x480... an other things that was natural to a Apple user.
It's more been that the rest of the industry has been catching up on Apple, and yes in some areas they passed Apple tech, but Apple is back developing aggressively. And the industry is again starting to play catch up with Apple.
The funny thing was that back then in the -80s and beginning of -90 Apple users where accused for the same thing. Though in reality the industry was 10 years behind. Graphical user interface are not for real computer users... it's just a toy etc etc etc, 10 years later they started to do the same.
Oh at slashdot there are many trolls that are moderators. If you give a balanced and neutral comment, you most probably will be down modded. If you actually troll there is a greater change that you get modded as funny instead of a troll. But that depends on which side you troll. If you happen to troll for the most popular opinion, your mods will race in points. While if you happen to be balanced and not taking part for any brand etc, you'll be modded troll.
So if you want good scores pick your brand by popularity here and start trolling.
Apple's are pricy but they are not overpriced. Ok they are when it comes to peripherals like memory etc. But to actually compare the real components and the prices of the equivalents out on the market. Their hardware is not much pricy at all, it's sometimes even cheaper than the competition.
But people who compare a iMac to a PC makes the mistake that they compare it to a PC with yeah, same or faster CPU/Memory/Hard-disk/GFXCard. But always forget to compare the rest. Take the 27" iMac, it's really cheap in any configuration, where do you find that kind of a screen and a equvalent computer for that price. Things might have changed but last time i checked equivalent monitors costed as much as the iMac. And this is what mac vs pc price debaters fail to recognize .
Yeah you get a faster PC for the same money, you get a better graphic card. But you don't get a better package! And that is what Apple buyers buy into. They buy the whole package. Not just a few components here and there.
Compare it to people that fix their cars themselves. They do maintain their cars for much cheaper, but it requires time and effort. Others don't know or bother with doing it goes to the service station to get it fixed. But believe me some that bring their car to the service station do know what and how to fix it, but they valuate their time more than to do it them selves and are ready to pay for that freedom.
People that get apple stuff they buy a solution or an eco system, not a gadget or a toy.
Slashdot Mirror
Also any dam kills that local eco system that exists at that specific place. Trapping water is very dirty as it may take thousands of years for the nature around that trap to acclimatize. Beavers seems to be the only ones that can build a dam that doesn't impact too much on nature.
Well, it's only a hypothesis or theory that the oil we have is based o n decomposed fish etc.
But as so many other theories and hypothesis it's portrayed as a fact :(.
But If you can prove it to me I'll be more than happy to learn about it.
There is a completely renewable energy source, and you all (almost) have it. You got your legs, and arms. You eat to fuel them the rest products are disposed of in a fashion that it's renewable.
So what we can't do without muscle craft, should we be doing it at all? Ok that we can build machines but should we really rely on machines for everyday tasks. Especially if those machines only cause trouble in the long run, and waste resources.
Well just a taught for consideration, I'm no Amish type my self, but really is it sane to go on as we do?
You believe that OPEC isn't involved?
Hmm your deserts are caused by cold, is kinda flawed. The Sahara dessert is purely caused by humans. It used to be a forrest.
And I live in an area which currently has temperatures around -25 degrees Celsius. That colder than your fridge which is around -18. Still in our more temperate season this is far from a dessert. California is a dessert compared to finland. And it's not cold there.
Do you really believe that is their problem the despots and dictators. The problem you have in those countries is spelled USA and formely Sovjet.
But the problem in those lands today are only a result of the politics that where during the Cold War and prior to that the colonization that European countries did.
Most of the war and the fights in the world that has lead to people suffering, also by hunger. Has been communism against democracy. And I don't know who to blame the most. To me it seems that the "Democratic" countries has done more damage than good. Look at vietnam, somalia etc etc.
True the cold war is all gone. But the aftereffects still remain, these countries are polarized, and if they learned anything is that money control weapons, weapons control the country. And you think going there "cleaning up" is the solution.
Well the American clean up of Iraq and Afghanistan has really proven successful? Give me a break. The food shortage problems could be easily solved if western countries would be willing to pay the price. But when you if you ever get the insight of what that price is, I bet you rather annihilate those who are suffering.
Just how long do you think Nokia could be profitable with current development. How many do you think Nokia is about to sack at this very moment.
A company that profits enough, doesn't fire it's staff. A company that grows an profits gives growth in so many other ways than just it's own wallet.
Nokia is sacking to stay profitable. And how long will that continue?
Just quit the crap?
Illegal guns have a legal source, do the math young boy.
It is a problem.
Have you ever killed anything, bigger than a fly? Try killing a bird, cat, dog or an other pet first and se how easy it is, especially without a gun. I've had to neck a bird that was sick once, and it wasn't easy to swing that axe. But I've shot 2 minks, that is much easier to do.
Shooting the minks from 10m distance was simple. Killing that bird with an axe, though it was so sick that there was no struggle was way way harder.
Reducing guns on the street will reduce crime. It will not remove crime, but it will be reduced significatly. Gun controle isn't the same as prohibiting guns. It's controlling who has access to one. And that can be in connection with schooling and checkups on mental suitability. Which can't be to hard for the ones owning the guns to obtain. Or if it is, they should not have them in the first place.
Where I live there is a regulatioin of how big knives your allowed to carry in public places, unless it's used as a tool in your job and your there working. The regulation is 5cm long blade at maximum.
Knifes of any size can though be transported freely, and used freely in non public areas. But you don't carry +5 cm blade in ur lessure time in public areas. Well this is quite much overlooked as many do carry their letherman or similar which is usually more than 5cm. But that is more a tool than a weapon.
It requres quite a lot more to cut someonecs throwht than tho shoot the same one. Banning guns won't stop those capable of using a knife, or even an pencil as their murder weapon. But it will stop most of those who easely does it with a gun. Whit a gun you can do it from distance, with a knife you'll be struggling with a viktim that might fight back effectively, an non the less you'll be looking your viktim in the eye.
Most triggerhappy gunmen would stop long before that. But far from all of them.
To me it's obvious, owning guns should be hand in hand with license and schooling. You don't give a car to someone without a drivinglicense and tell them to go to NewYork and have some fun, do you.
Infact that is Nokias biggest problem they get no money from their customers.
Apple has a bigger renevue with 4% market share than nokia had with over 50% marketshare that should tell you something about how bad Nokia is at making money out of their gadgets.
Before iPhone NA market was stonage, and people still use those call peepers, that tells you someone called but you cannot call from your self.
Common It's 20 years ago i saw one of those here in use, but i did see them in US.
Well, if only you could compete there. Look at finland, the country with the lowest mobile costs of all. And that is all thanks to regulations on how your allowed to compete.
In USA there is no real competition between carriers. None of them are really forced to develop better services to better prices. Because they decide what phone your having and what functions your allowed to have on it.
Apple was the first company in US that was able to break away a little bit from the carrier control. In Finland on the contrary it used to be forbidden to bundle phones with carrier contracts. Which made carriers compete, with who gives the best and cheapest service.
Today the nation wide carriers are not even allowed to build separate networks. So there carrier that comes first gets the are he gets to, but then is forced to rent his part of the network to others. So again they compete on services to best price.
Regulations on how your allowed to compete are extremely good. When it comes to mobile services, US is in stone age in comparison. Finland has only 5M people, but a county big as New Mexico. Still almost anywhere I go I get a signal.
When I was in california, getting a signal was kinda random, and almost never did i get an 3G signal. So the competition your talking about is non existent in USA.
What you have is a Free Market, but that is not the same as free competition, quite the contrary.
Yeah I said exactly the that about Nokia....
The fins where no better, Nokia has had trouble because it's Finnish management, who been unable to take responsibility or ownership of their products/strategies and business.
As I said earlier, I'm a fin, but in this case I'm no patriot. Finnish companies cant compete internationally, because lame management. At least did the new CEO do something to Nokias problem, which is more than you can say about the former managers.
I doubt MS was a good choice i they wanted to keep their independence, but It might just save nokia as a company. Nokia has lost alarmingly high market share to Android. Apple a while age had only 4% of the market, took 50% of all the income the whole industry had. Nokia had back then 50% of the market, but just how bad was their income per gadget then.
Nokia I bleeding, and bleeding more for each day that goes. Continue like this and they soon would be loosing money if they already didn't.
This MS deal might just bring them back to be e profitable company.
Maemo/Meego, started of same time as Android.
Android is now out in version 2.3 where is that meego.
I'm a fin and a former Nokia user, Nokia lost it approximately 10 years ago. Sad though that in their fall they had to take down QT with them. Nokia has always had good hardware, still have. Better than the iphone i have, though my iphone is faster it's not better hardware. But nokia software has been a noogo, for a very long time. Suddenly Apple made a phone with proper software and it rocketed.
Maemo/Meego, where suffering because of Nokia.
You can also have Safari to pose as IE windows. You might need to turn on developer menubar in preferences advanced. But then you can pose as many different webbrowser.
But I assume, that it's not about blocking other browser but about they supporting only IE functions, or IE specially coded incompatibility functions. You know, MS tried to have their own HTML standard.
Well, that i fully agree on, I hate the color explosion the dock creates. I really would like the dock to have a saturation option, then I could make it totally grayscale simply. I also dislike the thick bars in OSX.
But one thing they did right with osx, they removed the bars around a window that they introduced with MacOS8. Which really only came to be due to Win95 gray bar theme and that win95 got popular. Apple back then had little forward vision of what to do with their system. They had System 8 but no leadership behind it, it was their longhorn.
So imo there was no update to the system between System 7 and MacOSX. 8, 9 was all old system 7.
Well if you consider the small details in improvement, still 7.6 was basically the same as the later ones.
There are many types of autoimmune diseases, I have diabetes type -1. Which is usually a autoimmune disease.
A few ohters are;
Reumathism, psoriasis and well yeah lupus as some mentioned.
Here is a uncomplete wiki list of autoimmune diseases; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoimmune_disease
The Macs handled colour back then pretty fine. Only that most monitors where monocrome or grayscale. Large color screens where available. Any mac back then handled colors even if you had a monocrome screen. I know as dad was in the marketing bussiness, he had a 19" greyscale monitor connected to a Mac SE, later SE/30, but still produced color prints. That computer was still in use as late as to 2000. Yeah it had become a server for less needed tasks, had a localtalk to ethernet bridge. But hey you could even surf the web with it. All on System 7. With a computer made 1989, that is the SE/30.
True, but I never get proper file assosiations in Windows, or linux. OSX10.6 is not much better thoug, that got pretty much screwed up in 10.6. .bat files in DOS was. Are .bat files still supproted by windows?
With windows I don't get seamless integration. I'm not able to swiftly create workflows. In linux I could create shell scripts, but they are far from friendly, just like
All that MacOS has done for ages, while totally absent on other platforms, unless you happen to be a hardcore hacker and programmer. What about seamless backup or "ghosting" options, yeah you need a software for that too. Then incompatibilites with dll files, and that even with MS Office. Perfectly well working Access applications work in Office 2003. With 2007 or later "no can do", and MS is not even offering an alternative. All this and broken registry.
But yeah windows can display a picture, if i have correct applications installed. You can browse the web if you have correct browser installed. It's even able to handle PDF if i have everything installed properly. Oh and, it's able to play an MPEG-x media with the correct software installed. Yeah you can do all that, but's its a pain in the *ss.
If you really need windows, it's available for the mac. I don't need it and a certanily don't want it, I happily pay a premium to just not have to deal with windows. There is one software that is windows only that I use, but that one i run trough wine. It's a hazzle yes but so is windows.
To me it functions when it seamless and out of my way. It's not functional if I can make it to work. All that part of "make to work" is a show stopper to me. It's not that I'm not capable of it, I simply want to spend my time with other things. So yeah, I bought Apple for functionality. To get things done. To me it doesn't matter if the mac is faster or slower or overpriced vs similar hardware with windows. It's simply not overpriced if I can afford it.
Funny, I see just the opposite, people get impressed by things you could do on a apple product already in the -80s. Well true a NeXT computer was even better, but nobody had them, so hard to get impressed of anything that you never saw or knew about.
But oh windows -95, long file names and plug n play. Better name would have been plug n pray. But all this was something a mac user took for granted then.
Oh, 1MB of ram was possible with a tweak. Apple user at that time had computers that could do 128MB ram, if they just afforded it.
Network, Something that exploded on the PC side in mid -90s. Something that apple users been doing over a decade.
High resolution screens over 640x480... an other things that was natural to a Apple user.
It's more been that the rest of the industry has been catching up on Apple, and yes in some areas they passed Apple tech, but Apple is back developing aggressively. And the industry is again starting to play catch up with Apple.
The funny thing was that back then in the -80s and beginning of -90 Apple users where accused for the same thing. Though in reality the industry was 10 years behind. Graphical user interface are not for real computer users... it's just a toy etc etc etc, 10 years later they started to do the same.
Oh at slashdot there are many trolls that are moderators. If you give a balanced and neutral comment, you most probably will be down modded. If you actually troll there is a greater change that you get modded as funny instead of a troll. But that depends on which side you troll. If you happen to troll for the most popular opinion, your mods will race in points. While if you happen to be balanced and not taking part for any brand etc, you'll be modded troll.
So if you want good scores pick your brand by popularity here and start trolling.
Make a real comparison once, and get over it.
Apple's are pricy but they are not overpriced. Ok they are when it comes to peripherals like memory etc. But to actually compare the real components and the prices of the equivalents out on the market. Their hardware is not much pricy at all, it's sometimes even cheaper than the competition.
But people who compare a iMac to a PC makes the mistake that they compare it to a PC with yeah, same or faster CPU/Memory/Hard-disk/GFXCard. But always forget to compare the rest. Take the 27" iMac, it's really cheap in any configuration, where do you find that kind of a screen and a equvalent computer for that price. Things might have changed but last time i checked equivalent monitors costed as much as the iMac. And this is what mac vs pc price debaters fail to recognize .
Yeah you get a faster PC for the same money, you get a better graphic card. But you don't get a better package! And that is what Apple buyers buy into. They buy the whole package. Not just a few components here and there.
Compare it to people that fix their cars themselves. They do maintain their cars for much cheaper, but it requires time and effort. Others don't know or bother with doing it goes to the service station to get it fixed. But believe me some that bring their car to the service station do know what and how to fix it, but they valuate their time more than to do it them selves and are ready to pay for that freedom.
People that get apple stuff they buy a solution or an eco system, not a gadget or a toy.