In that case, it would take 24 months to break even. Adding in the 25GB of Google Drive cloud storage (at $2.49 a month) only adds 2 more months of equivalent Adobe cloud pricing.
So modifying the GP post:
26 months of Creative Cloud with 20 GB of cloud storage: $1,299.74 Infinity months of Creative Suite 6 plus 26 months of 25 GB Google Drive storage: $1,264.74
I'd also add that, with the $35 in savings, you could keep your 25GB Google Drive storage going for another 14 months.
There's also a $75 one-month-access fee that you can pay if you need the software every so often. So it looks like the people who upgrade constantly will win out, the people who only use it once every year will win out (not needing to lay out hundreds of dollars for a few uses), but the people who buy one version and use it for years won't.
So they claim that their cloud offering will save money because you won't need to spend money on a separate cloud storage service? Ok, let's suppose you were going to pay for a cloud storage service. I'll pick the one I use: Google Drive. (I'm guessing other providers will be competitive in pricing.) I use their free offering, but let's say I wanted 20GB. 25GB of Google Drive storage costs $2.49 a month. (Source.) Their $49.99 monthly fee could buy you 20 months of 25GB Google Drive.
Suppose you had an extra $49.99 that you were going to spend anyway. How much Google Drive could you get (instead of renting Adobe's software+20GB)? 1TB.
So, depending on how you look at it, Adobe's offering is either 20 times more expensive or 50 times more expensive than Google Drive. How is this saving the customer money again, Adobe??!!!
Just to clarify, Autism/Asperger's has nothing to do with "mental illness." It's a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. Autistic folks aren't usually violent and when they are, it's usually self-inflicted violence. My son has been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. He's nine, but has the social skills of a four year old and the intellect of a eleven or twelve year old. (You can imagine how hard it is to teach someone like that!) Mental illnesses are things like schizophrenia, depression, bipolar disease, etc. Autism Spectrum Disorder isn't in that category.
Actually, he'll be classified as "High Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder." This is where many Aspies (myself included) are up in arms about the new DSM. While we recognize that Asperger's Syndrome is part of the Autism Spectrum, calling it "high functioning" makes it sound like you don't need any help. Just like when you say a child is "gifted" and people assume that means he or she will get straight A's with no effort whatsoever. My son (a Aspie) needs a lot of help with social situations. He doesn't understand them the way neurotypical people do and it makes him nervous. When he gets nervous, his anxieties flare and he acts out (talking nonstop, writing on himself, running around, making inappropriate remarks). He can have a series of good days where you might not even realize that he's on the spectrum and then BAM! a horrible day happens. We need teacher/school staff support to help him make it through his days without disrupting his and everyone else's education. Calling him "high functioning" might make it sound like he doesn't need any help at all and might make it harder to obtain that help from school districts eager to trim their budgets by reducing supports for special needs children.
The good is the additional options (not explained in the summary). $75 per month to rent the software is nice if you just need it for a quick project but don't want the buy the whole thing. $10 a month is reasonable for one of the programs assuming you usually buy the latest version. In fact, the $50 a month is probably a great deal if you usually buy the latest version anyway.
However, this destroys is the ability to invest in a product for a one-time fee and then get as much use out of that project as you can. For example, suppose you purchased Photoshop CS4 for $700 when it was released (October 2008) and found that it suited your needs just fine. As the upgrades came, you evaluated them and didn't think you needed any of the new features. So you kept using your Photoshop CS4 license as CS5 and 6 came out.
For 4 1/2 years, you haven't needed to budget money every month for an upgrade to the software. With the subscription-only model, though, it would rapidly need to become a line item on anyone's budget. If too many software products did this, it would limit how many programs people would buy. Spending $$$ for software once every few years is something people can manage. (Use the older version longer if times are lean, upgrade if money is flowing nicely.) Spending $50 a month for each piece of software you use would quickly become a huge financial burden on most people.
It's fine as long as it stays in the diaper. However, beware of the explosive poops. My oldest had these and was able to rocket his (semi)solid waste about six feet away. I would've been impressed had I not been diving out of the way.
Honestly, we weren't really sure that the private school would be the best fit for our oldest to begin with. Once they brought out the $16,000 price tag, though, any chance of sending him there went out the window. Instead, we worked through the public school system to improve our son's educational experience.
Sadly, I'm not even that optimistic. If we don't successfully push back against anti-science, it'll just spread to other states. And then, when they have enough representatives in their pockets, they'll go federal. If they can get enough people in Congress, they can affect how laws are written and what scientific research is performed. (See Lamar Smith's recent declaration that all scientific research needs to be politically approved first.) If they can control the Presidency at just the right time, they can appoint some anti-science Supreme Court members as well. Given enough power, they can banish science and get us "back to our Christian roots." They see America as having once been a theocracy and their ultimate goal is to reestablish that again. And once we're ruled by Christian principals, god will smile on us and make us super-prosperous. (In what, I don't know, because all of the scientists and technology folks would have fled to countries more receptive to science.)
I'm in a similar situation, albeit in upstate New York not Louisiana. We looked into sending our kids to a private school and it would have cost $16,000 a year. There's no way we could afford that at all. (There was financial assistance, but that involved having the school look into your finances and constantly pester you about what you spent money on X, Y, and Z when that money could have gone to the school.) We could move to a better school district, but that would mean spending a lot of money to fix our house up, buying a new house, spending money to move, disrupting our lives for awhile, and hoping our old house sold.
So we're stuck where we are in public schools. If we have a problem with our school district (such as the ridiculous state tests that are being administered to kids here), we try to work within the district to solve it. Moving just isn't an option.
I can't remember a single science or math class where spiritual healers came up even once.
Exactly. The Louisiana bill wouldn't have made it illegal to go to a faith healer, just to try to teach faith healing as an alternative to the modern theory of medicine in biology class. If, after learning about how doctors diagnose illnesses and treat diseases, you decide to go to a semi-clothed man who scatters chicken bones on the ground to tell you what ails you, then go right ahead. (Just don't expect it to work, except possibly via placebo effect.)
I read that too and could only picture John Stewart reading it on The Daily Show or Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report. It's like that guy said to himself: "What can I say that would give politicians the most laughs?" If that's what he was going for, then mission accomplished!
Yes, mom bears the brunt of the recovery, but that doesn't mean dad can't pitch in. In fact, it is all the more reason for dad to stay home and help out. After our first child was born, I stayed home for a week so I could help take care of things around the house, take care of our newborn, and do anything else I could to help my wife recover post-birth.
Women who chose to go to work soon after giving birth, but who still want to breastfeed can pump and store their milk to be given to the child by someone else (such as the dad). My wife did this so, at times, I could feed our son or we could leave him with relatives for a short while and he could still eat if he got hungry.
Yes, it requires offices providing space for the women to pump, but that's not so hard. (And, no, said space shouldn't be the restroom.)
You see this reflected in sitcoms too. The dad is the idiot who couldn't be trusted to look after the kid if the mom set everything up beforehand and just needed an adult to keep the child from climbing on the counter and getting to the knives. The mom is the all-knowing, ever-right parent who suffers through the dad's antics and who could keep the children occupied (safely, mind you) if all she had on hand was a crayon stub and a diaper.
Back in real-life, I've heard of dads harassed because they were taking pictures of their kids in public because a man taking a photo of a kid = pervert but a woman taking a photo of a kid = loving mother. Dads will be patronized about being "babysitters" for their kids (what I'm doing is PARENTING, not BABYSITTING). Stay at home dads are still looked at as being "less than" for not going to the office to work.
In general, dads are considered minor parenting figures. It's alright if they're around, but the mom is the official parent and knows much more by virtue of being female. The irony is, if dads were given more respect as parents, more would take on more parenting responsibilities, more would stay home with their kids, and staying home with the kids would finally cease to be viewed as "women's work." In other words, increasing dads' rights and respect helps dads and moms.
Mentioning "changing diapers" still brings up flashbacks to what my wife and I call The Infamous Seven Diaper Diaper Change. *shudders* The horror! The horror!
She already had her child back in September. This led to a big controversy. She had her baby, worked from home for awhile, and then (in February) decided that no other employee should be allowed to work from home.
Would that be the diapers that smell less? Diapers don't typically stink until the baby starts eating solid food. This happens at around the 4 to 6 month mark. So if dads got 16 weeks of paternity time, they would head back to work just when the diapers began to smell.
Yes, I'm a dad (two wonderful boys) and yes I changed my fair share of diapers when they were younger. (However, I'm glad that we're out of the diaper phase for good now!) Unfortunately, I didn't even get 8 weeks of paternity leave. I took a week off when my first son was born (out of my own vacation days) and then took a couple of days off when my second was born. I would have loved to have spent 8 weeks pampering my wife and helping her with our newborn.
Css has been around for 16 years and it still lacks the ability to easily declare a completely separate layout based on display height or width, something like "If width is less than _x_, use this css, else this" or "set width equal to - 30". If you want those things now, you have to use javascript, and it's sometimes pretty awkward - like calculating the width of an element filled with content prior to displaying it.
Actually, you can do that. I do it all the time when I use responsive web design. Here's some sample CSS code:
@media screen and (min-width: 501px) and (max-width: 750px) {/* Put styles in here to reformat the page for larger tablets or small desktop resolutions */ }
@media screen and (max-width: 500px) {/* Put styles in here to reformat the page for mobile devices and small tablets */ }
@media print {/* Put all of your styles in here to format the page for printing. */ }
There is no JavaScript at work here. If you loaded a page utilizing this code in Chrome or FireFox (or IE10), disabled JavaScript, and resized the browser to make it smaller, you'd see the page slowly transform from a desktop version to a tablet version to a mobile version. (A good example of this is the Boston Globe's website: http://www.bostonglobe.com/ ). I can set styles for HTML elements and override them if certain conditions are met (max-width is between 2 values, screen resolution is a certain amount, print vs screen, etc). It might not be "if-then" statements, but it has the same effect.
CSS isn't a nasty hack, it's a necessity. Take a look at CSSZenGarden.com. Every time you switch to a different theme, the HTML remains the same. All that changes is the CSS file (and the images that it references). To do that with plain HTML and no CSS, you would need tags or attributes to represent each display style. This would mean changing the look of a page would require completely recoding it instead of simply updating the stylesheet. If you wanted to, for example, make all links red instead of blue you would need to edit every link instance on your website. This would take a lot more time than loading the CSS file and changing a { color: #00F; } to a { color: #F00; }. It would also make things like WordPress themes nearly impossible.
CSS makes modern web programming possible. Could it be improved? Definitely, but I couldn't imagine trying to create or update websites without it.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case, it would take 24 months to break even. Adding in the 25GB of Google Drive cloud storage (at $2.49 a month) only adds 2 more months of equivalent Adobe cloud pricing.
So modifying the GP post:
26 months of Creative Cloud with 20 GB of cloud storage: $1,299.74
Infinity months of Creative Suite 6 plus 26 months of 25 GB Google Drive storage: $1,264.74
I'd also add that, with the $35 in savings, you could keep your 25GB Google Drive storage going for another 14 months.
There's also a $75 one-month-access fee that you can pay if you need the software every so often. So it looks like the people who upgrade constantly will win out, the people who only use it once every year will win out (not needing to lay out hundreds of dollars for a few uses), but the people who buy one version and use it for years won't.
So they claim that their cloud offering will save money because you won't need to spend money on a separate cloud storage service? Ok, let's suppose you were going to pay for a cloud storage service. I'll pick the one I use: Google Drive. (I'm guessing other providers will be competitive in pricing.) I use their free offering, but let's say I wanted 20GB. 25GB of Google Drive storage costs $2.49 a month. (Source.) Their $49.99 monthly fee could buy you 20 months of 25GB Google Drive.
Suppose you had an extra $49.99 that you were going to spend anyway. How much Google Drive could you get (instead of renting Adobe's software+20GB)? 1TB.
So, depending on how you look at it, Adobe's offering is either 20 times more expensive or 50 times more expensive than Google Drive. How is this saving the customer money again, Adobe??!!!
There was one reference made by an Anonymous Coward: http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3722799&cid=43651227
The Hebrew word for mother is "Ema". Interesting to see a Finnish-Hebrew link in words.
Just to clarify, Autism/Asperger's has nothing to do with "mental illness." It's a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. Autistic folks aren't usually violent and when they are, it's usually self-inflicted violence. My son has been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. He's nine, but has the social skills of a four year old and the intellect of a eleven or twelve year old. (You can imagine how hard it is to teach someone like that!) Mental illnesses are things like schizophrenia, depression, bipolar disease, etc. Autism Spectrum Disorder isn't in that category.
Actually, he'll be classified as "High Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder." This is where many Aspies (myself included) are up in arms about the new DSM. While we recognize that Asperger's Syndrome is part of the Autism Spectrum, calling it "high functioning" makes it sound like you don't need any help. Just like when you say a child is "gifted" and people assume that means he or she will get straight A's with no effort whatsoever. My son (a Aspie) needs a lot of help with social situations. He doesn't understand them the way neurotypical people do and it makes him nervous. When he gets nervous, his anxieties flare and he acts out (talking nonstop, writing on himself, running around, making inappropriate remarks). He can have a series of good days where you might not even realize that he's on the spectrum and then BAM! a horrible day happens. We need teacher/school staff support to help him make it through his days without disrupting his and everyone else's education. Calling him "high functioning" might make it sound like he doesn't need any help at all and might make it harder to obtain that help from school districts eager to trim their budgets by reducing supports for special needs children.
The good is the additional options (not explained in the summary). $75 per month to rent the software is nice if you just need it for a quick project but don't want the buy the whole thing. $10 a month is reasonable for one of the programs assuming you usually buy the latest version. In fact, the $50 a month is probably a great deal if you usually buy the latest version anyway.
However, this destroys is the ability to invest in a product for a one-time fee and then get as much use out of that project as you can. For example, suppose you purchased Photoshop CS4 for $700 when it was released (October 2008) and found that it suited your needs just fine. As the upgrades came, you evaluated them and didn't think you needed any of the new features. So you kept using your Photoshop CS4 license as CS5 and 6 came out.
For 4 1/2 years, you haven't needed to budget money every month for an upgrade to the software. With the subscription-only model, though, it would rapidly need to become a line item on anyone's budget. If too many software products did this, it would limit how many programs people would buy. Spending $$$ for software once every few years is something people can manage. (Use the older version longer if times are lean, upgrade if money is flowing nicely.) Spending $50 a month for each piece of software you use would quickly become a huge financial burden on most people.
Getting into your car will require a TSA scanning.
It's fine as long as it stays in the diaper. However, beware of the explosive poops. My oldest had these and was able to rocket his (semi)solid waste about six feet away. I would've been impressed had I not been diving out of the way.
Honestly, we weren't really sure that the private school would be the best fit for our oldest to begin with. Once they brought out the $16,000 price tag, though, any chance of sending him there went out the window. Instead, we worked through the public school system to improve our son's educational experience.
Sadly, I'm not even that optimistic. If we don't successfully push back against anti-science, it'll just spread to other states. And then, when they have enough representatives in their pockets, they'll go federal. If they can get enough people in Congress, they can affect how laws are written and what scientific research is performed. (See Lamar Smith's recent declaration that all scientific research needs to be politically approved first.) If they can control the Presidency at just the right time, they can appoint some anti-science Supreme Court members as well. Given enough power, they can banish science and get us "back to our Christian roots." They see America as having once been a theocracy and their ultimate goal is to reestablish that again. And once we're ruled by Christian principals, god will smile on us and make us super-prosperous. (In what, I don't know, because all of the scientists and technology folks would have fled to countries more receptive to science.)
I'm in a similar situation, albeit in upstate New York not Louisiana. We looked into sending our kids to a private school and it would have cost $16,000 a year. There's no way we could afford that at all. (There was financial assistance, but that involved having the school look into your finances and constantly pester you about what you spent money on X, Y, and Z when that money could have gone to the school.) We could move to a better school district, but that would mean spending a lot of money to fix our house up, buying a new house, spending money to move, disrupting our lives for awhile, and hoping our old house sold.
So we're stuck where we are in public schools. If we have a problem with our school district (such as the ridiculous state tests that are being administered to kids here), we try to work within the district to solve it. Moving just isn't an option.
GPS works by tapping into the quantum noodle field which enables the Flying Spaghetti Monster to tell you where your destination is.
Exactly. The Louisiana bill wouldn't have made it illegal to go to a faith healer, just to try to teach faith healing as an alternative to the modern theory of medicine in biology class. If, after learning about how doctors diagnose illnesses and treat diseases, you decide to go to a semi-clothed man who scatters chicken bones on the ground to tell you what ails you, then go right ahead. (Just don't expect it to work, except possibly via placebo effect.)
I read that too and could only picture John Stewart reading it on The Daily Show or Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report. It's like that guy said to himself: "What can I say that would give politicians the most laughs?" If that's what he was going for, then mission accomplished!
I figured that the title alone would give people enough of an idea of what it entailed without bringing up the disgusting details.
Yes, mom bears the brunt of the recovery, but that doesn't mean dad can't pitch in. In fact, it is all the more reason for dad to stay home and help out. After our first child was born, I stayed home for a week so I could help take care of things around the house, take care of our newborn, and do anything else I could to help my wife recover post-birth.
Women who chose to go to work soon after giving birth, but who still want to breastfeed can pump and store their milk to be given to the child by someone else (such as the dad). My wife did this so, at times, I could feed our son or we could leave him with relatives for a short while and he could still eat if he got hungry.
Yes, it requires offices providing space for the women to pump, but that's not so hard. (And, no, said space shouldn't be the restroom.)
You see this reflected in sitcoms too. The dad is the idiot who couldn't be trusted to look after the kid if the mom set everything up beforehand and just needed an adult to keep the child from climbing on the counter and getting to the knives. The mom is the all-knowing, ever-right parent who suffers through the dad's antics and who could keep the children occupied (safely, mind you) if all she had on hand was a crayon stub and a diaper.
Back in real-life, I've heard of dads harassed because they were taking pictures of their kids in public because a man taking a photo of a kid = pervert but a woman taking a photo of a kid = loving mother. Dads will be patronized about being "babysitters" for their kids (what I'm doing is PARENTING, not BABYSITTING). Stay at home dads are still looked at as being "less than" for not going to the office to work.
In general, dads are considered minor parenting figures. It's alright if they're around, but the mom is the official parent and knows much more by virtue of being female. The irony is, if dads were given more respect as parents, more would take on more parenting responsibilities, more would stay home with their kids, and staying home with the kids would finally cease to be viewed as "women's work." In other words, increasing dads' rights and respect helps dads and moms.
Mentioning "changing diapers" still brings up flashbacks to what my wife and I call The Infamous Seven Diaper Diaper Change. *shudders* The horror! The horror!
She already had her child back in September. This led to a big controversy. She had her baby, worked from home for awhile, and then (in February) decided that no other employee should be allowed to work from home.
Would that be the diapers that smell less? Diapers don't typically stink until the baby starts eating solid food. This happens at around the 4 to 6 month mark. So if dads got 16 weeks of paternity time, they would head back to work just when the diapers began to smell.
Yes, I'm a dad (two wonderful boys) and yes I changed my fair share of diapers when they were younger. (However, I'm glad that we're out of the diaper phase for good now!) Unfortunately, I didn't even get 8 weeks of paternity leave. I took a week off when my first son was born (out of my own vacation days) and then took a couple of days off when my second was born. I would have loved to have spent 8 weeks pampering my wife and helping her with our newborn.
Actually, you can do that. I do it all the time when I use responsive web design. Here's some sample CSS code:
@media screen and (min-width: 501px) and (max-width: 750px) { /* Put styles in here to reformat the page for larger tablets or small desktop resolutions */
}
@media screen and (max-width: 500px) { /* Put styles in here to reformat the page for mobile devices and small tablets */
}
@media print { /* Put all of your styles in here to format the page for printing. */
}
There is no JavaScript at work here. If you loaded a page utilizing this code in Chrome or FireFox (or IE10), disabled JavaScript, and resized the browser to make it smaller, you'd see the page slowly transform from a desktop version to a tablet version to a mobile version. (A good example of this is the Boston Globe's website: http://www.bostonglobe.com/ ). I can set styles for HTML elements and override them if certain conditions are met (max-width is between 2 values, screen resolution is a certain amount, print vs screen, etc). It might not be "if-then" statements, but it has the same effect.
CSS isn't a nasty hack, it's a necessity. Take a look at CSSZenGarden.com. Every time you switch to a different theme, the HTML remains the same. All that changes is the CSS file (and the images that it references). To do that with plain HTML and no CSS, you would need tags or attributes to represent each display style. This would mean changing the look of a page would require completely recoding it instead of simply updating the stylesheet. If you wanted to, for example, make all links red instead of blue you would need to edit every link instance on your website. This would take a lot more time than loading the CSS file and changing a { color: #00F; } to a { color: #F00; }. It would also make things like WordPress themes nearly impossible.
CSS makes modern web programming possible. Could it be improved? Definitely, but I couldn't imagine trying to create or update websites without it.