It's certainly better support than Apple. XP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?
Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).
>>>in some ways currency needs to devalue, doing so stops people from sitting on vast piles
It has devalued by 95% since my grandfather was a young man. He earned about $10,000 a year and saved a lot of it, so that he had about $200,000 saved when he retired. Then he passed the money to his children. BUT today thanks to devaluation, it is nothing. An entire lifetime of work devalued to just 2-3 years of current labor.
I prefer the 1800s economy. Back then the U.S. dollar lost none of its value. A dollar in 1800 had just as much purchasing power in 1900. It was a stable currency and when you stored away your money, you knew it would still be there ~100 years later, rather than devalued to just 5%.
It's a lie. I have a laptop that, when I remove the RAM expansion, drops down to 128 and it thrashes the hard drive severely. Yeah sure it "runs" but you can't open a web browser or Word file.
As for Win 7, its minimum appears to be 256 MB, though it has the same hard drive thrashing problems.
Is Apple any better? WinXP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?
Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).
>>>So you have millions of computers that will be unuseable because the OS manufacturer refuses to suport it
I doubt many XP machines will still be working two years from now. I know mine certainly won't (the hard drives are already generating errors). My laptop might still be operational but with only a Pentium 3 I doubt I'll want to continue using it.
Time to jump from XP to 7 which, now that they removed the bugs, is a decent OS. BTW: I doubt your Linux would fit inside my desktop or laptop: They're only 1/2 and 1/3rd gig respectively. Linux is almost as bad when it comes to memory bloat.
I can't help reading this and thinking, "Poor, poor Motorola." They used to have a processor that made them as dominant on the desktop as Intel. (They had Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, Apple Macintosh, and the Sega Genesis console.) Even when these systems jumped to PowerPC, Motorola still had a piece of the pie since they were part of the AIM alliance. They collected tons of money.
But now they have almost nothing, and are forced to act like patent trolls.
Digital currency just means the Central bank can wipe-out our savings more efficiently (by devaluing the dollar). You work and scrimp to save a million dollars for retirement. But by the time you're an old man, its purchasing power will be diminished to just 100,000 thanks to the actions of the rich bankers,
We're heading in the wrong direction. We should be looking for a STABLE currency that can not be devalued.
"Why Microsoft is such a target for bashing" Microsoft is bashed so often (unfairly, in my opinion) because of past issues and the perceptions surrounding those issues, including:
â-Microsoft was embroiled in antitrust matters. That's old news for Microsoft, but it may be novel for Apple, which is coming under government scrutiny, not that you hear much about it. â-Microsoft products are criticized for security holes -- that Vista filled in. Thanks to 10 years of its Trustworthy Computing effort, Microsoft is a leader in teaching the Secure Development Life Cycle methodology to other companies. â-Microsoft was criticized for not being innovative -- although the Xbox and the Kinect are two of the many areas showing just the opposite. â-Microsoft was criticized for being closed and guarded, and for not playing nice with other ecosystems -- despite, in recent years, the amazing amount of open information through MSDN blogs and an open source forum called Codeplex. The fact that Microsoft releases software for other platforms like Mac OS X and iOS should dispel this critique.
>>>Why are you willing to let Google get away with monopolistic behavior that Microsoft gets crucified for?
no idea.
But I definitely don't let them get away. They all suck. Google, Apple, etc might write better software than Microsoft but they still engage in similar behaviors I find objectionable. (And then I get modded down for saying it.)
BTW I thought this article was interesting - Why Google is not the most-used browser. " Microsoft on Sunday posted an analysis of the web-browser usage-share measurement, noting that StatCounter's metrics are seriously skewed because of pre-rendering and other factors. As a result, Microsoft claims, StatCounter can't be trusted as a reliable source of information." http://www.winsupersite.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/microsoft-chrome-number-reports-142638
I don't remember that. I've thought PCs and their MS-OS have sucked for as long as I remember. There was Commodore, Atari, Apple..... and then that boring beast called the IBM/Microsoft PC that everyone associated with work (slow, no music, almost no color, and definitely not cutting-edge).
In your OPINION I am a "troll", but you shouldn't be moderating based upon opinion or personal dislike. BTW I don't watch FOX 'cause I don't have cable. I watch the freebie channels like RT, France24, NHK.
Most diets emphasize exercise, and studies now show exercise stimulates hunger. Thus people stay fat. Or they quit exercise but don't downsize their food intake (thus regaining what they lost).
For me the most effective diet was simply continuing my normal lifestyle but eating half as much. (But you can't sell a book with just one sentence.)
Seems pretty obvious to me -- don't waste your time consuming junk like FB/twitter posts. I usually do it once a day and focus the rest of my day more important stuff.
Quoting another review: "He proposes conscious consumption of information which is not about consuming less, but developing a balanced and healthy habit just like when you go on diet..... The method describe there is very similar to the Pomodoro techinque, and there are plenty of great books on how to manage your tasks and stay focused (GTD, Personal Kanban)."
Another negative review:
"the first irony is that the book is fat. Everything interesting here could be said in a magazine article. Too many empty calories, alas.
"The second problem, and one I would hope most readers would care about, though I have my doubts, is the painfully obvious bias the author exhibits when he divides up information into "health food" and "junk food." Kudos to the author for at least acknowledging that he's a liberal who has worked in Democratic politics for years, but that still doesn't excuse the exquisitely obvious way that he divides up the landscape. For pages, I literally dreaded his first mention of Fox News (a station, I must note, that I never watch), for I knew it was coming, and I knew exactly what he would say about it. I won't bore the reader with the details--if you're honest, you know exactly what the most predictable leftist take on conservative media would be. Yet when you have high hopes for a book, to cringe, literally, as it becomes obvious what kind of flatulent, flat-footed bias will be passed off as objectivity... well, it was disheartening.
"I could add that, while I don't like any television news stations, what made the predictable Fox-bashing seem more horrible was the way it was couched in a defense of CNN as "the facts." For you see, Fox (and later MSNBC, cynically following Roger Ailes' model) is serving up the "cheese fries in gravy" equivalent of information sustenance, whereas CNN is just "the truth" and "the facts"-- a well-balanced, healthy diet of Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper..... Maybe if CNN confirms YOUR bias, it can seem to you like just the "truth" and the "facts." But the idea that it is merely objective is, to put it mildly, absurd."
"There are lots of other silly things wrong with this book, such as when the author claims that the printing press ushered in the renaissance (a neat trick for Gutenberg to bring about Petrarch and Pico della Mirandola)..... Maybe it gets better after the first third. That's how much I could take before I decided to cut my losses and read something more nutritious."
It's been that way for a long, long time. FM Radio was not released in the 1930s because RCA had secured the patents on broadcasting, and they desired to protect their existing AM service. They even petitioned the government to provide monoplistic protection.
Pretty much. Free phone w/ expensive contract == not a good deal. I'd rather just buy a smartphone from VirginMobile for ~$100 and then get their cheaper month-to-month billing.
I was reading the Year's Best SF of 1992. The intro provides a summation of the state of the industry, and it said the publishing industry was "dying". A quick scan through the 1997, 2002, and 1987 editions had the same dire prediction of publishing going away: Magazines no longer existing and books ceasing to be published.
The only difference is today they blame amazon and "too cheap ebooks". Back in the 90s and 80s, they were blaming TV and movies for stealing-away audience. Whatever the cause it's always the same tired song-and-dance.
Ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf? After awhile people stopped believing the boy's claims of seeing a wolf. Well I view the publishing industry the same way. They've been crying wolf for 25 years. Instead of fighting technology, they should embrace it.
>>>The book publishers had no control whatsoever over the retail price. Combined with Amazon's weight, the publishers had no choice but to just "suck it up".
Awww. I feel as sorry for the publishers as I do for the Record and Hollywood companies declining song/movie prices (not). And the "collusion" part comes from the price-fixing by the publishers with one another. Perhaps you do not think that should be illegal, but it is under US Antitrust legislation..... as the record companies found out ~9 years ago when they were prosecuted for price-fixing CDs.
I guess in a year we'll see how this lawsuit turns out.
Well the DOJ is claiming the prise went up for the same reason discount CDs suddenly rose from $9.99 to $12.99 (during the 90s/early 2000s). The publishers were colluding with one another to set a high price.
Contrary to popular belief, there is nothing illegal about selling at a loss. Microsoft does it with Windows. Apple does it with OS X. Sony and Nintendo and Sega do/did it with their consoles. Shaver and razer makers do it with with their shavers/razers (and make money off the replacement parts like blades). Stores do it with "loss leaders" like $50 bluray players that cost $150, in order to attract customers to the building.
None of that is illegal, and neither is what amazon is doing with its low-priced kindles and ebooks.
If you think the D's are any better than the R's you've not paid attention these last 6 years (when the D's controlled the Congress and/or presidency). Right now I'm not really seeing any difference. No change.
And in defense of the Republicans, this isn't the first time the DOJ acted to sue a cartel. There was the CD cartel in 2002, the lawsuit levied against Paypal in 2003, the investigation of Toyota for engines that failed after only ~25,000 miles (started in 2005 and still ongoing), et cetera. All under a Republican administration.
It doesn't happen often but sometimes the e-edition is cheaper. One of my magazines, Fantasy & Science Fiction, is 1/3rd the cost through the electronic edition versus the paper edition. i.e. I save ~$24 per year.
Slashdot Mirror
It's certainly better support than Apple. XP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?
Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).
>>>in some ways currency needs to devalue, doing so stops people from sitting on vast piles
It has devalued by 95% since my grandfather was a young man. He earned about $10,000 a year and saved a lot of it, so that he had about $200,000 saved when he retired. Then he passed the money to his children. BUT today thanks to devaluation, it is nothing. An entire lifetime of work devalued to just 2-3 years of current labor.
I prefer the 1800s economy. Back then the U.S. dollar lost none of its value. A dollar in 1800 had just as much purchasing power in 1900. It was a stable currency and when you stored away your money, you knew it would still be there ~100 years later, rather than devalued to just 5%.
128 MB?
It's a lie. I have a laptop that, when I remove the RAM expansion, drops down to 128 and it thrashes the hard drive severely. Yeah sure it "runs" but you can't open a web browser or Word file.
As for Win 7, its minimum appears to be 256 MB, though it has the same hard drive thrashing problems.
P.S.
Is Apple any better? WinXP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?
Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).
>>>So you have millions of computers that will be unuseable because the OS manufacturer refuses to suport it
I doubt many XP machines will still be working two years from now. I know mine certainly won't (the hard drives are already generating errors). My laptop might still be operational but with only a Pentium 3 I doubt I'll want to continue using it.
Time to jump from XP to 7 which, now that they removed the bugs, is a decent OS. BTW: I doubt your Linux would fit inside my desktop or laptop: They're only 1/2 and 1/3rd gig respectively. Linux is almost as bad when it comes to memory bloat.
I can't help reading this and thinking, "Poor, poor Motorola." They used to have a processor that made them as dominant on the desktop as Intel. (They had Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, Apple Macintosh, and the Sega Genesis console.) Even when these systems jumped to PowerPC, Motorola still had a piece of the pie since they were part of the AIM alliance. They collected tons of money.
But now they have almost nothing, and are forced to act like patent trolls.
Digital currency just means the Central bank can wipe-out our savings more efficiently (by devaluing the dollar). You work and scrimp to save a million dollars for retirement. But by the time you're an old man, its purchasing power will be diminished to just 100,000 thanks to the actions of the rich bankers,
We're heading in the wrong direction. We should be looking for a STABLE currency that can not be devalued.
Uh..... no. I'm against patent and copy monopolies (except for very very short terms). Those government grants cause more harm than good.
Higher metabolism == shorter lifespan.
PAGE 2 of the FA
"Why Microsoft is such a target for bashing"
Microsoft is bashed so often (unfairly, in my opinion) because of past issues and the perceptions surrounding those issues, including:
â-Microsoft was embroiled in antitrust matters. That's old news for Microsoft, but it may be novel for Apple, which is coming under government scrutiny, not that you hear much about it.
â-Microsoft products are criticized for security holes -- that Vista filled in. Thanks to 10 years of its Trustworthy Computing effort, Microsoft is a leader in teaching the Secure Development Life Cycle methodology to other companies.
â-Microsoft was criticized for not being innovative -- although the Xbox and the Kinect are two of the many areas showing just the opposite.
â-Microsoft was criticized for being closed and guarded, and for not playing nice with other ecosystems -- despite, in recent years, the amazing amount of open information through MSDN blogs and an open source forum called Codeplex. The fact that Microsoft releases software for other platforms like Mac OS X and iOS should dispel this critique.
>>>Why are you willing to let Google get away with monopolistic behavior that Microsoft gets crucified for?
no idea.
But I definitely don't let them get away. They all suck. Google, Apple, etc might write better software than Microsoft but they still engage in similar behaviors I find objectionable. (And then I get modded down for saying it.)
BTW I thought this article was interesting - Why Google is not the most-used browser. " Microsoft on Sunday posted an analysis of the web-browser usage-share measurement, noting that StatCounter's metrics are seriously skewed because of pre-rendering and other factors. As a result, Microsoft claims, StatCounter can't be trusted as a reliable source of information." http://www.winsupersite.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/microsoft-chrome-number-reports-142638
>>>Microsoft was the could-do-no-wrong company
I don't remember that.
I've thought PCs and their MS-OS have sucked for as long as I remember. There was Commodore, Atari, Apple..... and then that boring beast called the IBM/Microsoft PC that everyone associated with work (slow, no music, almost no color, and definitely not cutting-edge).
In your OPINION I am a "troll", but you shouldn't be moderating based upon opinion or personal dislike.
BTW I don't watch FOX 'cause I don't have cable. I watch the freebie channels like RT, France24, NHK.
Most diets emphasize exercise, and studies now show exercise stimulates hunger. Thus people stay fat. Or they quit exercise but don't downsize their food intake (thus regaining what they lost).
For me the most effective diet was simply continuing my normal lifestyle but eating half as much. (But you can't sell a book with just one sentence.)
Seems pretty obvious to me -- don't waste your time consuming junk like FB/twitter posts. I usually do it once a day and focus the rest of my day more important stuff.
Quoting another review: "He proposes conscious consumption of information which is not about consuming less, but developing a balanced and healthy habit just like when you go on diet..... The method describe there is very similar to the Pomodoro techinque, and there are plenty of great books on how to manage your tasks and stay focused (GTD, Personal Kanban)."
Another negative review:
"the first irony is that the book is fat. Everything interesting here could be said in a magazine article. Too many empty calories, alas.
"The second problem, and one I would hope most readers would care about, though I have my doubts, is the painfully obvious bias the author exhibits when he divides up information into "health food" and "junk food." Kudos to the author for at least acknowledging that he's a liberal who has worked in Democratic politics for years, but that still doesn't excuse the exquisitely obvious way that he divides up the landscape. For pages, I literally dreaded his first mention of Fox News (a station, I must note, that I never watch), for I knew it was coming, and I knew exactly what he would say about it. I won't bore the reader with the details--if you're honest, you know exactly what the most predictable leftist take on conservative media would be. Yet when you have high hopes for a book, to cringe, literally, as it becomes obvious what kind of flatulent, flat-footed bias will be passed off as objectivity... well, it was disheartening.
"I could add that, while I don't like any television news stations, what made the predictable Fox-bashing seem more horrible was the way it was couched in a defense of CNN as "the facts." For you see, Fox (and later MSNBC, cynically following Roger Ailes' model) is serving up the "cheese fries in gravy" equivalent of information sustenance, whereas CNN is just "the truth" and "the facts"-- a well-balanced, healthy diet of Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper..... Maybe if CNN confirms YOUR bias, it can seem to you like just the "truth" and the "facts." But the idea that it is merely objective is, to put it mildly, absurd."
"There are lots of other silly things wrong with this book, such as when the author claims that the printing press ushered in the renaissance (a neat trick for Gutenberg to bring about Petrarch and Pico della Mirandola)..... Maybe it gets better after the first third. That's how much I could take before I decided to cut my losses and read something more nutritious."
>>>series of communications between the publishers in which they conspired to jointly raise the retail prices of e-books
Same thing the Record companies were caught doing 10 years ago. A cartel. These executives never learn.
It's been that way for a long, long time. FM Radio was not released in the 1930s because RCA had secured the patents on broadcasting, and they desired to protect their existing AM service. They even petitioned the government to provide monoplistic protection.
Pretty much. Free phone w/ expensive contract == not a good deal. I'd rather just buy a smartphone from VirginMobile for ~$100 and then get their cheaper month-to-month billing.
P.S.
I was reading the Year's Best SF of 1992. The intro provides a summation of the state of the industry, and it said the publishing industry was "dying". A quick scan through the 1997, 2002, and 1987 editions had the same dire prediction of publishing going away: Magazines no longer existing and books ceasing to be published.
The only difference is today they blame amazon and "too cheap ebooks". Back in the 90s and 80s, they were blaming TV and movies for stealing-away audience. Whatever the cause it's always the same tired song-and-dance.
Ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf? After awhile people stopped believing the boy's claims of seeing a wolf. Well I view the publishing industry the same way. They've been crying wolf for 25 years. Instead of fighting technology, they should embrace it.
>>>The book publishers had no control whatsoever over the retail price. Combined with Amazon's weight, the publishers had no choice but to just "suck it up".
Awww. I feel as sorry for the publishers as I do for the Record and Hollywood companies declining song/movie prices (not). And the "collusion" part comes from the price-fixing by the publishers with one another. Perhaps you do not think that should be illegal, but it is under US Antitrust legislation..... as the record companies found out ~9 years ago when they were prosecuted for price-fixing CDs.
I guess in a year we'll see how this lawsuit turns out.
Well the DOJ is claiming the prise went up for the same reason discount CDs suddenly rose from $9.99 to $12.99 (during the 90s/early 2000s). The publishers were colluding with one another to set a high price.
The oil cartel OPEC does not fall within EU or US juris diction. I thought that was bleedin' obvious.
Contrary to popular belief, there is nothing illegal about selling at a loss. Microsoft does it with Windows. Apple does it with OS X. Sony and Nintendo and Sega do/did it with their consoles. Shaver and razer makers do it with with their shavers/razers (and make money off the replacement parts like blades). Stores do it with "loss leaders" like $50 bluray players that cost $150, in order to attract customers to the building.
None of that is illegal, and neither is what amazon is doing with its low-priced kindles and ebooks.
If you think the D's are any better than the R's you've not paid attention these last 6 years (when the D's controlled the Congress and/or presidency). Right now I'm not really seeing any difference. No change.
And in defense of the Republicans, this isn't the first time the DOJ acted to sue a cartel. There was the CD cartel in 2002, the lawsuit levied against Paypal in 2003, the investigation of Toyota for engines that failed after only ~25,000 miles (started in 2005 and still ongoing), et cetera. All under a Republican administration.
It doesn't happen often but sometimes the e-edition is cheaper. One of my magazines, Fantasy & Science Fiction, is 1/3rd the cost through the electronic edition versus the paper edition. i.e. I save ~$24 per year.