Actually, if renting was the same cost as streaming, and the same quality, I'd be ok with it.
Yes so let's not pretend this about the "younger generation" and the idea that they misunderstand the concept of "borrowing". And yes if you want higher quality (DVD vs BR, SD vs HD) or higher convenience (no need to wait for deliveries or drive anywhere) you need to pay more.
That only works if you carry your router with you everywhere you take your computer. That would be a totally feasible thing if someone produced a micro router/firewall that was the size of a bluetooth dongle, but I haven't been able to find anything like that yet.
Why are you running Windows 10 anyway? If you really need to run it for some specific applications then just dual boot, yes it's slightly inconvenient but that is the price of privacy.
Ok so it seems we've now drilled down to the root of the issue, it's just that a lot of people don't mind spending a couple of dollars for the convenience of not having to go and drive to the store and back to rent a disc and then doing it again to return it. I can see you want to blame the "younger individuals" but really it just comes down to the fact that you'd rather save a couple of bucks and suffer the inconvenience, others prefer the convenience, and that's ok.
Last I looked, it costs me $5 to stream a lower quality crappy soundtrack version and >$10 if I wish to see something really recent that I can only "buy", but not own.
Have you got actual examples? What specifically do you mean by "lower quality crappy soundtrack version"? And on iTunes if I buy a movie it ends up on my NAS drive just like with a DVD the movie is on the disc. And just like you can rip a DVD you can strip the DRM from the movie if you prefer it that way.
How old are you? Seriously you must on death's door if you think Blockbuster and their ilk are the product of "younger individuals".
You're mistaken - borrowing is fine for one time things. However, paying a purchase price for borrowing, that's just flat out stupid.
You used to go to Blockbuster and pay a few bucks to rent a movie, now you go on iTunes and pay a few bucks to rent a movie. Or you could go to a store and buy the DVD for a bit more or likewise buy it on iTunes.
It is clearly a generational thing. Many younger individuals can't seem to get the concept that paying over and over for "borrowing" something is a bad deal.
How old are you? Seriously you must on death's door if you think Blockbuster and their ilk are the product of "younger individuals".
It's clearly a generational thing. Many older individuals can't seem to understand that dvds are inconvenient.
We understand, but not everything, and certainly not everything worthwhile, revolves around convenience. You'll learn that as you get older.
Nobody said it did, just that in the case of movies it is. Which makes sense, unless it's going to the cinema (which is often a spur of the moment thing anyway) I don't plan movie-watching in advance, it's a case of "hey I want to watch this movie" and sure if the store is still open I could get in the car, drive there (not doable at all if by this time the kids are in bed), buy the bluray and then drive back home and watch it or I could just get it immediately online. Of course the latter is preferrable.
There will not be a year of the Linux Desktop, but not because people do not want it, but because people do not care.
Of course they don't care, before Apple came along and popularized smartphones nobody really cared what cell phone they had either so even when they had to make a choice they just chose the incumbent. Given the choice of Windows or Linux they'd probably still choose Windows. That will be the case until Linux comes up with some disruptive, innovative feature that users just have to have. At the moment it's just another OS that doesn't run as many programs, if you really don't want Windows then OSX is a better choice than Linux.
People buy an android phone and an iPad and a Win10 Portable. Because people do not care. And Microsoft is well aware of that.
This has been the case with smartphones and tablets too, the incumbent tablet is the iPad and the choice in smartphones comes down to Android or iOS. There have been plenty of other options like Windows Phone, webOS, Meego, etc but why would anybody want them when they do the same thing? People don't want to express individuality through choice of electronic devices, it's just a tool to do a job.
Have Linux pre-installed on a machine and people will buy it.
No, they won't. Even Best Buy had them on shelves and nobody wanted them.
I mean in the store with no option of selecting anything else. Not just one store, all of the stores and if they want Windows, they need to download and install it themselves.
So the only way to get Linux used is to effectively force it on people.
The solution to that is to actually pay people for their work. And it would be a good idea to treat them like human beings as well.
Ok what exactly are these jobs?
Bottom line here is that the companies in most cases don't feel like providing a compelling offer to applicants and are rewarded with nobody worthwhile applying.
What jobs are you referring to, how much are they offering and how much should they be offering?
I didn't criticize, I just asked the question about if there are hundreds of thousands of jobs that experienced programmers don't want to do then who is going to do them, the only response was "oh you must be in management".
If the jobs are there and experienced programmers don't want them, you don't want H1Bs to have them and you don't want to train local workers to do them then how exactly do you propose they get done? And no I'm not in management so don't bother using that to try and avoid the question.
Why would anyone spend time and money to train for a low pay bullshit job?
That's the point, there are jobs there that nobody seems to want to do. If people have gone through a CS degree and feel that the sort of job on offer is beneath them then perhaps there is another way to train workers for those jobs that isn't as costly and time consuming. The work obviously needs to be done so what's your suggestion? More H1B visa workers to do them?
Perhaps. Having the average computer user exposing their scripts to internet is very dangerous. Which made it much easier when I learned, before the www was a thing.
I'm talking about command line as an alternative to GUI. What sort of scripts are you talking about?
Being able to write scripts to automate bits of work is a great thing, having the average computer user familiar with using the command line rather than relying on dumbed down GUIs would be hugely beneficial. Not to mention the skills are much more portable, you can write bash scripts on just about any platform for example.
So I must be in management (FWIW I'm not) because I point out that experience programmers don't want to do low paid bullshit jobs? The fact that you think you would need to be a manager to work that out is probably the reason you're standing in the unemployment line.
And learning to code is no different than learning to engineer a bridge or learning to perform brain surgery.
Rubbish. Learning software development maybe but not just learning to code. The idea that computer users would be comfortable controlling their machines by writing scripts and using the command line rather than always having to rely on a dumbed down GUI is a good thing!
Precisely! The same thing happened with the Apple Watch. I got suckered into it, a (relatively) inexpensive watch that can do all sorts of other things too sounded pretty enticing. But ultimately I just found myself just using it as a watch, for the most part you need your phone with you anyway so you just use that instead because it does way more things and is far easier to use so ultimately gave it away. I get the gimmicky aspect of it but I understand the sales plunge.
It really doesn't matter, the pain in the ass aspect is the need to carry adapters with you that you didn't before. But this seems to be the way they are going, you can't even plug a standard USB stick into the new Macbook Pro without a dongle. Their mantra seems to be "upsell dongles", it's a pretty smart move really. For those wanting OSX it means you pay the same price you always used to but everybody also has to spend an extra $10-$15 here and there to get their existing devices to work with it. Need USB-A? Just buy a dongle. Need HDMI? Just buy a dongle. Need Thunderbolt 2? Just buy a dongle. Forgot to bring them with you? Just got to your local Apple store and buy some more. Just taking the 2016 Macbook Pro around the building is an annoyance now because it always has a bunch of dongles handing out of the sides. I hope they go back to integrated solutions rather than ones that require adapters.
Oh don't get so butthurt about it, you're evangelizing a solution that you said is free when clearly it isn't. If you're making the point to say you don't have to pay anything when clearly you do then you obviously have an agenda that you're pushing.
I think that is in reference to the Alibaba shares and the shares in a few other China-based companies that Verizon isn't acquiring, so what's left will basically be a holding company for those shares and probably some patents too.
Well here you said you don't have to pay anything, but of course that is wrong as I pointed out and you have now admitted. And as I said if you really must have access to pretty much everything then you do need a combination of both, but that's personal preference.
You actually think iTunes is the only way to transfer songs via USB? Really? But that's not the point anyway, if you want to listen to music that is on your desktop from your mobile then regardless of how you transfer you only have to do that once, you don't have to use iTunes to listen to your music.
...or you could just rip your CDs, store your files locally and pick exactly what you want to hear, and not pay anything.
Well you still have to buy those CDs. But if you really must have access to pretty much everything then you need a combination of both, it's not particularly costly.
So why can't you just use something else to play your music? There are stacks of programs to play various music formats, there's no reason you have to use iTunes.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if renting was the same cost as streaming, and the same quality, I'd be ok with it.
Yes so let's not pretend this about the "younger generation" and the idea that they misunderstand the concept of "borrowing". And yes if you want higher quality (DVD vs BR, SD vs HD) or higher convenience (no need to wait for deliveries or drive anywhere) you need to pay more.
That only works if you carry your router with you everywhere you take your computer. That would be a totally feasible thing if someone produced a micro router/firewall that was the size of a bluetooth dongle, but I haven't been able to find anything like that yet.
Why are you running Windows 10 anyway? If you really need to run it for some specific applications then just dual boot, yes it's slightly inconvenient but that is the price of privacy.
Ok so it seems we've now drilled down to the root of the issue, it's just that a lot of people don't mind spending a couple of dollars for the convenience of not having to go and drive to the store and back to rent a disc and then doing it again to return it. I can see you want to blame the "younger individuals" but really it just comes down to the fact that you'd rather save a couple of bucks and suffer the inconvenience, others prefer the convenience, and that's ok.
Last I looked, it costs me $5 to stream a lower quality crappy soundtrack version and >$10 if I wish to see something really recent that I can only "buy", but not own.
Have you got actual examples? What specifically do you mean by "lower quality crappy soundtrack version"? And on iTunes if I buy a movie it ends up on my NAS drive just like with a DVD the movie is on the disc. And just like you can rip a DVD you can strip the DRM from the movie if you prefer it that way.
How old are you? Seriously you must on death's door if you think Blockbuster and their ilk are the product of "younger individuals".
You're mistaken - borrowing is fine for one time things. However, paying a purchase price for borrowing, that's just flat out stupid.
You used to go to Blockbuster and pay a few bucks to rent a movie, now you go on iTunes and pay a few bucks to rent a movie. Or you could go to a store and buy the DVD for a bit more or likewise buy it on iTunes.
It is clearly a generational thing. Many younger individuals can't seem to get the concept that paying over and over for "borrowing" something is a bad deal.
How old are you? Seriously you must on death's door if you think Blockbuster and their ilk are the product of "younger individuals".
I found it to be the opposite ;) Take whatever opportunity you can get.
It's clearly a generational thing. Many older individuals can't seem to understand that dvds are inconvenient.
We understand, but not everything, and certainly not everything worthwhile, revolves around convenience. You'll learn that as you get older.
Nobody said it did, just that in the case of movies it is. Which makes sense, unless it's going to the cinema (which is often a spur of the moment thing anyway) I don't plan movie-watching in advance, it's a case of "hey I want to watch this movie" and sure if the store is still open I could get in the car, drive there (not doable at all if by this time the kids are in bed), buy the bluray and then drive back home and watch it or I could just get it immediately online. Of course the latter is preferrable.
There will not be a year of the Linux Desktop, but not because people do not want it, but because people do not care.
Of course they don't care, before Apple came along and popularized smartphones nobody really cared what cell phone they had either so even when they had to make a choice they just chose the incumbent. Given the choice of Windows or Linux they'd probably still choose Windows. That will be the case until Linux comes up with some disruptive, innovative feature that users just have to have. At the moment it's just another OS that doesn't run as many programs, if you really don't want Windows then OSX is a better choice than Linux.
People buy an android phone and an iPad and a Win10 Portable. Because people do not care. And Microsoft is well aware of that.
This has been the case with smartphones and tablets too, the incumbent tablet is the iPad and the choice in smartphones comes down to Android or iOS. There have been plenty of other options like Windows Phone, webOS, Meego, etc but why would anybody want them when they do the same thing? People don't want to express individuality through choice of electronic devices, it's just a tool to do a job.
Have Linux pre-installed on a machine and people will buy it.
No, they won't. Even Best Buy had them on shelves and nobody wanted them.
I mean in the store with no option of selecting anything else. Not just one store, all of the stores and if they want Windows, they need to download and install it themselves.
So the only way to get Linux used is to effectively force it on people.
The solution to that is to actually pay people for their work. And it would be a good idea to treat them like human beings as well.
Ok what exactly are these jobs?
Bottom line here is that the companies in most cases don't feel like providing a compelling offer to applicants and are rewarded with nobody worthwhile applying.
What jobs are you referring to, how much are they offering and how much should they be offering?
I didn't criticize, I just asked the question about if there are hundreds of thousands of jobs that experienced programmers don't want to do then who is going to do them, the only response was "oh you must be in management".
If the jobs are there and experienced programmers don't want them, you don't want H1Bs to have them and you don't want to train local workers to do them then how exactly do you propose they get done? And no I'm not in management so don't bother using that to try and avoid the question.
Why would anyone spend time and money to train for a low pay bullshit job?
That's the point, there are jobs there that nobody seems to want to do. If people have gone through a CS degree and feel that the sort of job on offer is beneath them then perhaps there is another way to train workers for those jobs that isn't as costly and time consuming. The work obviously needs to be done so what's your suggestion? More H1B visa workers to do them?
Perhaps. Having the average computer user exposing their scripts to internet is very dangerous. Which made it much easier when I learned, before the www was a thing.
I'm talking about command line as an alternative to GUI. What sort of scripts are you talking about?
Being able to write scripts to automate bits of work is a great thing, having the average computer user familiar with using the command line rather than relying on dumbed down GUIs would be hugely beneficial. Not to mention the skills are much more portable, you can write bash scripts on just about any platform for example.
So I must be in management (FWIW I'm not) because I point out that experience programmers don't want to do low paid bullshit jobs? The fact that you think you would need to be a manager to work that out is probably the reason you're standing in the unemployment line.
And learning to code is no different than learning to engineer a bridge or learning to perform brain surgery.
Rubbish. Learning software development maybe but not just learning to code. The idea that computer users would be comfortable controlling their machines by writing scripts and using the command line rather than always having to rely on a dumbed down GUI is a good thing!
This. "500,000 current job openings."
All low pay, bullshit jobs. There *ARE* at least that many *EXPERIENCED* programmers that are out of work or under-employed *TODAY*.
Well somebody has to do the low pay bullshit jobs, if the experienced programmers don't want to do them then who is going to?
Precisely! The same thing happened with the Apple Watch. I got suckered into it, a (relatively) inexpensive watch that can do all sorts of other things too sounded pretty enticing. But ultimately I just found myself just using it as a watch, for the most part you need your phone with you anyway so you just use that instead because it does way more things and is far easier to use so ultimately gave it away. I get the gimmicky aspect of it but I understand the sales plunge.
No, it's that they lack courage.
It really doesn't matter, the pain in the ass aspect is the need to carry adapters with you that you didn't before. But this seems to be the way they are going, you can't even plug a standard USB stick into the new Macbook Pro without a dongle. Their mantra seems to be "upsell dongles", it's a pretty smart move really. For those wanting OSX it means you pay the same price you always used to but everybody also has to spend an extra $10-$15 here and there to get their existing devices to work with it. Need USB-A? Just buy a dongle. Need HDMI? Just buy a dongle. Need Thunderbolt 2? Just buy a dongle. Forgot to bring them with you? Just got to your local Apple store and buy some more. Just taking the 2016 Macbook Pro around the building is an annoyance now because it always has a bunch of dongles handing out of the sides. I hope they go back to integrated solutions rather than ones that require adapters.
Oh don't get so butthurt about it, you're evangelizing a solution that you said is free when clearly it isn't. If you're making the point to say you don't have to pay anything when clearly you do then you obviously have an agenda that you're pushing.
WTF? Investment company?
I think that is in reference to the Alibaba shares and the shares in a few other China-based companies that Verizon isn't acquiring, so what's left will basically be a holding company for those shares and probably some patents too.
Well here you said you don't have to pay anything, but of course that is wrong as I pointed out and you have now admitted. And as I said if you really must have access to pretty much everything then you do need a combination of both, but that's personal preference.
How do you transfer songs via usb without itunes?
You actually think iTunes is the only way to transfer songs via USB? Really? But that's not the point anyway, if you want to listen to music that is on your desktop from your mobile then regardless of how you transfer you only have to do that once, you don't have to use iTunes to listen to your music.
...or you could just rip your CDs, store your files locally and pick exactly what you want to hear, and not pay anything.
Well you still have to buy those CDs. But if you really must have access to pretty much everything then you need a combination of both, it's not particularly costly.
So why can't you just use something else to play your music? There are stacks of programs to play various music formats, there's no reason you have to use iTunes.