(1) 850 meg sounds like a memory hog to me, especially since my laptop is only 384 meg. FF was supposed to be a lean version of the all-in-one Seamonkey/Communicator, and now it isn't.
(2) You could start by storing-away the tabs you're not currently using in the bookmarks. Then when you decide you want to check twitter or whatever, go to the bookmark. There's no reason to need over 300 webpages open. (It reminds me of a friend who used to lay dozens of CDs all over his desk, rather than store them away.)
This is why Firefox now has LTS. It sits at version 10 for about two years, and then upgrades to 18. That way you can have a stable browser and not worry about broken plugins. In this respect FF is better than Chrome.
>>>Silent and forced updating like Chrome does really is the best way to keep the web moving forward
You like programs that update without telling you? Not me. Too many times things break after an update. How many times have we read on/. about an antivirus program or browser updating, and suddenly the program never loads. Or worse: The PC won't boot because it's hosed. NOT telling the user about an update is the obnoxious part.
I hate Chrome. Every time I open a tab, it open 1 or 2 more processes. Pretty soon all these processes are fighting with one another to get HDD access, and the whole think freezes up 1 minute each time.
Firefox runs better. And yes it's annoying that Firefox (and IE) is trying to copy chome UI. Firefox (and IE) should have its own personality, not clone somebody else.
By embedding someone else's video to Vidster, they are sucking someone else's bandwidth & increasing their hosting costs. I'm surprised the other host didn't just block vidster.com
>>>I remember a time when people used to say DOS is the gaming platform of choice.
Not anyone I ever met except those who were unfortunate enough to be stuck with 16-color PCs that went "beep". The true gaming platforms of the 80s and early 90s were: Atari 800 Commodore 64 Commodore Amiga -or- Atari ST - These machines blew-away anything the PCs of the day could do. Of course nowadays there's very little difference in graphics or sound, so people just pick the defacto standard (the OS that has 88% desktop penetration).
Yes. People forget that Jobs has not been "missing" for long, and that what Apple is doing now originated during Jobs' tenure. We are witnessing his own decisions being processed.
It's similar to how a new president still operates under the old president's fiscal budget for several months (through October).
>>>Desktop computers when they first appeared were indeed a kind of BYOD, although obviously people didn't actually carry them around with them.
Well then it's not really "your" device is it? In the 80s (not end of the century as you first falsely-claimed), the PCs were purchased-and-owned by the company. Just like typewriters & telephones were purchased-and-owned by the company.
And yes I remember that time. Secretaries, accountants, engineers didn't go out, buy Wangs or Apples or PCs, and then carry them in via their car. The office bought and supplied and owned them. So it was NOT bring "your" own device.
You are providing false history. And insulting people who disagree. Troll.
>>>System admins need to wipe off the OEM stuff and install their Enterprise License stuff on new kit.
What about the other option of "use open hardware with open software"? The website thinkpenguin.com sells i7 PCs with 80GB hard drives for as low as $948.
Same with these. 1 dollar today equals about 4 cents back in 1920. (For calculators that only go to 2010, I backed it off to 1918 so the span of years is the same.)
This value is only going to get worse with the Fed doing QE1, 2, and 3. By 2020 today's dollar will likely have the purchasing power of just 3 cents one century earlier. Contrast that with the 1800s when the dollar was tied to gold and therefore lost almost no value.
You must be doing something wrong then because when I type 0.043 into the calculator I got $1.00. In other words 1 dollar today only has the buying power of approximately 4 cents in 1920 thanks to the Fed's devaluation of our currency.
>>>I don't think it ever matched the popularity that the Apple ][+ achieved in the early 1980's
They meant the TRS-80 was the "most popular of the 70s". It was not the most popular after it had become old & replaced by newer machines. (See my other post.)
You missed the important step of the VIC-20 in 1980. I always felt the PET was not really a consumer computer (more for business), but the VIC-20 certainly was. The only computer in 1980-81 which had more sales was the Atari 800. (Due to brand recognition from the #1 selling Atari console.)
>>>visicalc- and elevated Apple from being insignificant to being the dominant selling machine.
Interesting revisionist history. Here are the top selling ("dominant") consumer machines according to ars technica: 1977 TRS-80 1978 TRS-80 1979 TRS-80 1980 Atari 800 1981 Atari 800 1982 Atari 800 1983 Commodore 64 ... 1987 Commodore 64 1988 IBM PC + clones and so on.
Now do you see any place where Apple II was dominant? No. It was always 3rd place behind the other brands. (Mainly because the pricetag on the Apples and Macs was too high for average people.)
>>>the streaming is such poor, compressed quality....don't you feel you're cheating yourself of getting the most
I used to care about video quality w/ a 4.1 surround sound hooked to my TV. Then Babylon 5 and DS9 and X-Files ended, and there were no other shows as good as those, so I stopped caring about the quality. I haven't turned-on my surround sound in a decade. I just don't care anymore.
And yes the streams look like VHS over my 700k internet connection, but who cares? I'm watching mediocre stuff like Supernatural or Vampire Diaries or Warehouse13, and it's completely free. $Free is better than $80/month
>>> They had a few awful episodes during the 7th season, and I tuned out and never came back. I have seen only a few DS9 and Voyager episodes. Meh.
That's a shame. The 90s was like a golden era for television. If you think DS9 is "meh" you probably wouldn't like Babylon 5 either, but both were and still are the best Sci-fi produced for television. Like "novels for TV" with an overarching plot that provided far more depth than TNG had.
I also enjoyed Hercules and Xena for laughs. The X-Files to be scared (similar to how the Twilight Zone used to scare me when I was a kid). And lesser shows like seaQuest, Earth, Seinfeld, Quantum Leap, et cetera.
I agree with you on the movies though. Today they are mostly junk. I download hundreds of movies for free, and find just 2 or 3 that I truly liked.
After losing a job during the dot-com era and being completely unprepared, and nearly going bankrupt, I made up my mind never to buy anything again unless it's something I really need. Like a new PC. Or desire. Like Seasons 1-5 of B5 and DS9 (the best scifi TV produced to date). The amount of items I own are quite small.
It's even easier to say "no" since so many things are free online. Free magazine websites, free music through youtube, free TV shows on hulu. The result is that advertising has zero effect on me. Just because they splash Levis or Coke on the screen doesn't mean I will go buy it (any jeans costing more than $19 are too much).
And I could care less about the latest fashions. When my 15-year-old shirt wears out, I will buy another. Probably identical (plain flat color, suitable for the office). I was tempted to buy an iPhone but I eventually decided I don't need to pay a $30 bill every month. So I said "nyet" to that idea. It's called willpower. Something many people don't have.
>>> In terms of 1920 dollars, we must divide by 10.9
(1) I used the best number I could find. (2) Not even close to accurate. It's a common mistake for people to underestimate how much value our paper currency has lost over the last century.
According to the inflation calculator I found on google, today's 1 dollar bill has the same purchasing power as 4 cents in 1920 thanks to the Fed running the printing press like mad & devaluing the dollar. (I had estimated 3 cents.) So: take 14,527 billion and multiply by 0.04 == 581 billion. That's only 6 times the growth in real GDP, not 15.
Slashdot Mirror
301k??? That's really impressive. I could run that on my Commodore Amiga!
I thought NTFS was supposed to eliminate the need to defrag a drive.
(1) 850 meg sounds like a memory hog to me, especially since my laptop is only 384 meg. FF was supposed to be a lean version of the all-in-one Seamonkey/Communicator, and now it isn't.
(2) You could start by storing-away the tabs you're not currently using in the bookmarks. Then when you decide you want to check twitter or whatever, go to the bookmark. There's no reason to need over 300 webpages open. (It reminds me of a friend who used to lay dozens of CDs all over his desk, rather than store them away.)
This is why Firefox now has LTS. It sits at version 10 for about two years, and then upgrades to 18. That way you can have a stable browser and not worry about broken plugins. In this respect FF is better than Chrome.
>>>Silent and forced updating like Chrome does really is the best way to keep the web moving forward
You like programs that update without telling you? Not me. Too many times things break after an update. How many times have we read on /. about an antivirus program or browser updating, and suddenly the program never loads. Or worse: The PC won't boot because it's hosed. NOT telling the user about an update is the obnoxious part.
I hate Chrome. Every time I open a tab, it open 1 or 2 more processes. Pretty soon all these processes are fighting with one another to get HDD access, and the whole think freezes up 1 minute each time.
Firefox runs better.
And yes it's annoying that Firefox (and IE) is trying to copy chome UI. Firefox (and IE) should have its own personality, not clone somebody else.
Yes.
I don't recall anything major happening in U.S. 1820, so I guess that shoots his "50 year cycle" theory. Or 1720.
By embedding someone else's video to Vidster, they are sucking someone else's bandwidth & increasing their hosting costs. I'm surprised the other host didn't just block vidster.com
>>>I remember a time when people used to say DOS is the gaming platform of choice.
Not anyone I ever met except those who were unfortunate enough to be stuck with 16-color PCs that went "beep". The true gaming platforms of the 80s and early 90s were:
Atari 800
Commodore 64
Commodore Amiga -or- Atari ST
- These machines blew-away anything the PCs of the day could do. Of course nowadays there's very little difference in graphics or sound, so people just pick the defacto standard (the OS that has 88% desktop penetration).
Yes. People forget that Jobs has not been "missing" for long, and that what Apple is doing now originated during Jobs' tenure. We are witnessing his own decisions being processed.
It's similar to how a new president still operates under the old president's fiscal budget for several months (through October).
Except the Holy Jobs lied to us. They DO do market research. I'm so disillusioned.
>>>Desktop computers when they first appeared were indeed a kind of BYOD, although obviously people didn't actually carry them around with them.
Well then it's not really "your" device is it? In the 80s (not end of the century as you first falsely-claimed), the PCs were purchased-and-owned by the company. Just like typewriters & telephones were purchased-and-owned by the company.
And yes I remember that time. Secretaries, accountants, engineers didn't go out, buy Wangs or Apples or PCs, and then carry them in via their car. The office bought and supplied and owned them. So it was NOT bring "your" own device.
You are providing false history.
And insulting people who disagree.
Troll.
>>>System admins need to wipe off the OEM stuff and install their Enterprise License stuff on new kit.
What about the other option of "use open hardware with open software"? The website thinkpenguin.com sells i7 PCs with 80GB hard drives for as low as $948.
What about the other option of "use an open hardware with open software"? thinkpenguinpc.com sells i7 PCs with 80GB hard drives for as low as $948.
>>>Guess what? This story is not about you, or your attention-seeking behaviour. Please go die in a fire. (Or at least grow the fuck up.)
You first. Demonstrate how a grown-up acts, rather than lashing out like an immature college kid.
Same with these. 1 dollar today equals about 4 cents back in 1920. (For calculators that only go to 2010, I backed it off to 1918 so the span of years is the same.)
This value is only going to get worse with the Fed doing QE1, 2, and 3. By 2020 today's dollar will likely have the purchasing power of just 3 cents one century earlier. Contrast that with the 1800s when the dollar was tied to gold and therefore lost almost no value.
You must be doing something wrong then because when I type 0.043 into the calculator I got $1.00. In other words 1 dollar today only has the buying power of approximately 4 cents in 1920 thanks to the Fed's devaluation of our currency.
>>>in 1980 Apple's turnover was $200 million, Radio Shacks was $175 million and Commodore's was $40 million.
Well Lexus also has higher turnover then Honda or Dodge. That's how luxury models operate: Few sales made but a higher price & higher profits.
>>>I don't think it ever matched the popularity that the Apple ][+ achieved in the early 1980's
They meant the TRS-80 was the "most popular of the 70s". It was not the most popular after it had become old & replaced by newer machines. (See my other post.)
You missed the important step of the VIC-20 in 1980. I always felt the PET was not really a consumer computer (more for business), but the VIC-20 certainly was. The only computer in 1980-81 which had more sales was the Atari 800. (Due to brand recognition from the #1 selling Atari console.)
>>>visicalc- and elevated Apple from being insignificant to being the dominant selling machine.
Interesting revisionist history. Here are the top selling ("dominant") consumer machines according to ars technica:
...
1977 TRS-80
1978 TRS-80
1979 TRS-80
1980 Atari 800
1981 Atari 800
1982 Atari 800
1983 Commodore 64
1987 Commodore 64
1988 IBM PC + clones
and so on.
Now do you see any place where Apple II was dominant? No. It was always 3rd place behind the other brands. (Mainly because the pricetag on the Apples and Macs was too high for average people.)
>>>the streaming is such poor, compressed quality....don't you feel you're cheating yourself of getting the most
I used to care about video quality w/ a 4.1 surround sound hooked to my TV.
Then Babylon 5 and DS9 and X-Files ended, and there were no other shows as good as those, so I stopped caring about the quality. I haven't turned-on my surround sound in a decade. I just don't care anymore.
And yes the streams look like VHS over my 700k internet connection, but who cares? I'm watching mediocre stuff like Supernatural or Vampire Diaries or Warehouse13, and it's completely free. $Free is better than $80/month
>>> They had a few awful episodes during the 7th season, and I tuned out and never came back. I have seen only a few DS9 and Voyager episodes. Meh.
That's a shame. The 90s was like a golden era for television. If you think DS9 is "meh" you probably wouldn't like Babylon 5 either, but both were and still are the best Sci-fi produced for television. Like "novels for TV" with an overarching plot that provided far more depth than TNG had.
I also enjoyed Hercules and Xena for laughs. The X-Files to be scared (similar to how the Twilight Zone used to scare me when I was a kid). And lesser shows like seaQuest, Earth, Seinfeld, Quantum Leap, et cetera.
I agree with you on the movies though. Today they are mostly junk. I download hundreds of movies for free, and find just 2 or 3 that I truly liked.
After losing a job during the dot-com era and being completely unprepared, and nearly going bankrupt, I made up my mind never to buy anything again unless it's something I really need. Like a new PC. Or desire. Like Seasons 1-5 of B5 and DS9 (the best scifi TV produced to date). The amount of items I own are quite small.
It's even easier to say "no" since so many things are free online. Free magazine websites, free music through youtube, free TV shows on hulu. The result is that advertising has zero effect on me. Just because they splash Levis or Coke on the screen doesn't mean I will go buy it (any jeans costing more than $19 are too much).
And I could care less about the latest fashions. When my 15-year-old shirt wears out, I will buy another. Probably identical (plain flat color, suitable for the office). I was tempted to buy an iPhone but I eventually decided I don't need to pay a $30 bill every month. So I said "nyet" to that idea. It's called willpower. Something many people don't have.
>>> In terms of 1920 dollars, we must divide by 10.9
(1) I used the best number I could find. (2) Not even close to accurate. It's a common mistake for people to underestimate how much value our paper currency has lost over the last century.
According to the inflation calculator I found on google, today's 1 dollar bill has the same purchasing power as 4 cents in 1920 thanks to the Fed running the printing press like mad & devaluing the dollar. (I had estimated 3 cents.) So: take 14,527 billion and multiply by 0.04 == 581 billion. That's only 6 times the growth in real GDP, not 15.