Don't be ridiculous. The language of technology in India is ENGLISH. India will pass China in population within a few years (if they didn't jus t do it).
Add to that the fact that English is the official language of business, and of Air Traffic (pilots and air traffic controllers) and you have English as the world language.
This might mean English with an Indian accent, or British spelling, and perhaps some Germanic sentence structure but it is English none the less.
Why should we vote for someone that can't even get his face out in the public's view. This media bias stuff is garbage, if he had something interesting to say Brown could be all over the web. His people could push onto public access cable if need be. How about going to different Universities and talking to people like Nader is doing.
Anonymous Coward you are wrong.
First of all, I know they sell the excess power but they rarely run all the generators. I'm suggesting additional generators to create additional power to sell.
Second, it is much easier to change... I doubt it. Hoover dam takes generators off line all the time. During a specific day they will go from three generators in the morning to seven at peak hours. Same water flowing through, just change the number of generators. That's easier than either nuclear or power so your second argument is flawed.
I've visted a few dams in my time. Hoover for example has the run off tunnels that were used during construction. They are ready to be reopened without touching the water in the reservoir, without taking the plant offline. You need new construction in the run-off tunnels to put the generators in, then you open the valves and let some water flow through. Instant power.
I'm talking scale here. If you loaded a dozen new generators into the run-off valves at Hoover that are currently unused you could elminate the need for any other power plants in the Southwest.
Of course there are problems with all the eggs in one basket, but the issues you mentioned are not the problem. Lack of long range, strategic thinking, and state-to-state bickering is the problem.
All of these have been gone awhile. Jobs tried to bring Apple over to non-proprietary hardware to cut the costs. This is a good move but you probably hold that against Apple as well. Shifting hardware standards or some other crap.
Corporations often shift strategy. For god sakes Apple was dieing. Sending conflicting messages to the customers very well may have been one of the reasons why.
Instead of increasing our nuclear power plants why don't we add more generators to the existing hydro plants and run them 24/7.
Currently they only run 'em all during peak hours. We should turn on the non-hyro plants only during peak hours.
We've already screwed up the environment around the dam sites, lets at least squeeze more power out of them. You could probably power the SouthWest out of Hoover and the NorthWest out of Grand Coolie Dam.
With deregulation they could even sell the power and make a profit.
The Mac platform is not to flakey, you're running on old news there. It's far more solid than windows.
The platform is not to restrictive for power users either. You can open up the G4 box and add pretty much anything. The whole box outside of the CPU is made of PC standard parts.
I have not had a crash in a long time. Browsers are generally solid, or core dump without taking the system down when something goes wrong. Only Microsofts special brand of java will lock everything up.
Single-tasking paradigm I can't defend it except to mention the vaporus osX and to mention that to 95% of the computing world it doesn't matter.
10 year old models as examples? Really dug down deep to back up that frequently crippling the hardware statement didn't you. I'll let the comment stand purely because the G3 to G4 thing was so ugly.
Processor design has next to no R&D? What are you talking about? MOtorola and IBM are putting lots of R&D into the processor design. They just don't spend a dime to market the processor.
Check your facts, your rant is the tired old beleagured Apple computer rant from 4 years ago. There is a lot to complain about Apple (osX being very late for example) but your facts are outdated so your argument died before you typed it.
I don't think Apple computers are intended for the more technical users. For nearly a decade computer companies have tried to break out of the tech segment and sell to the moms, dads, grandparents and other non-computer users out there.
Apple got the artsie types, but couldn't get to the real non-computer users until the iMac.
What everyone complains as overly cute is non-threatening. Not just the all-in-one or the colors (ask Dell and Gateway about that) but the MacOS is generally easier for a newbie to use and the case of the iMac and the cube look friendly.
Look at the numbers of iMac users who have never owned a computer and you will understand Apple's resurrections. They are finally selling to the lost (and largest) market segment.
The computer industry will never truly understand the iMac (and Apple in general) because the industry is filled with technical users who could never really appreciate the appeal of a harmless, non-threatening computer.
Redfine communism all you want, you're still wrong.
Capitalism is not bad. Capitalism often doesn't work because people are lazy and not informed in their purchasing decisions. The system is sound, the people are flawed.
Marxist/Lennonist Communism was and is a joke. A brutal dictatorship with liberal apologists spreading propoganda for them.
Your neo-hippie communism is an LSD dream with no economic viability. Just because the Federation made it work doesn't mean it will work in reality.
An object or job is worth only what people will pay for it. Communists never figured this out and their system failed.
The initial theme of the movie was What is it to be human. Unlike the books What is human. A subtle twist that added texture instead of simply filming the book.
Deckard broods and drinks and mostly wastes away. He doesn't want to hunt the replicants, he doesn't want to do much of anything.
The Replicants try to live life to the fullest (pay particular attention to Rutger's speech at the end).
I felt the original movie theme was a lot stronger.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be ridiculous. The language of technology in India is ENGLISH. India will pass China in population within a few years (if they didn't jus t do it).
Add to that the fact that English is the official language of business, and of Air Traffic (pilots and air traffic controllers) and you have English as the world language.
This might mean English with an Indian accent, or British spelling, and perhaps some Germanic sentence structure but it is English none the less.
Why should we vote for someone that can't even get his face out in the public's view. This media bias stuff is garbage, if he had something interesting to say Brown could be all over the web. His people could push onto public access cable if need be. How about going to different Universities and talking to people like Nader is doing.
At least Nader is trying.
Anonymous Coward you are wrong. First of all, I know they sell the excess power but they rarely run all the generators. I'm suggesting additional generators to create additional power to sell.
Second, it is much easier to change... I doubt it. Hoover dam takes generators off line all the time. During a specific day they will go from three generators in the morning to seven at peak hours. Same water flowing through, just change the number of generators. That's easier than either nuclear or power so your second argument is flawed.
I've visted a few dams in my time. Hoover for example has the run off tunnels that were used during construction. They are ready to be reopened without touching the water in the reservoir, without taking the plant offline. You need new construction in the run-off tunnels to put the generators in, then you open the valves and let some water flow through. Instant power.
I'm talking scale here. If you loaded a dozen new generators into the run-off valves at Hoover that are currently unused you could elminate the need for any other power plants in the Southwest.
Of course there are problems with all the eggs in one basket, but the issues you mentioned are not the problem. Lack of long range, strategic thinking, and state-to-state bickering is the problem.
"Try ADB, Localtalk, NuBus"
All of these have been gone awhile. Jobs tried to bring Apple over to non-proprietary hardware to cut the costs. This is a good move but you probably hold that against Apple as well. Shifting hardware standards or some other crap.
Corporations often shift strategy. For god sakes Apple was dieing. Sending conflicting messages to the customers very well may have been one of the reasons why.
Instead of increasing our nuclear power plants why don't we add more generators to the existing hydro plants and run them 24/7.
Currently they only run 'em all during peak hours. We should turn on the non-hyro plants only during peak hours.
We've already screwed up the environment around the dam sites, lets at least squeeze more power out of them. You could probably power the SouthWest out of Hoover and the NorthWest out of Grand Coolie Dam.
With deregulation they could even sell the power and make a profit.
Since over half of the people buying iMacs are new users. Apple is catering to the new-user market so they are concerned with ease-of-use.
It's little details like determining how to cater to new users that saved Apple's ass.
I hope they come out with a multi-button version by the time osX ships preinstalled.
MacOS may be built for one button but Unix isnt.
The Mac platform is not to flakey, you're running on old news there. It's far more solid than windows.
The platform is not to restrictive for power users either. You can open up the G4 box and add pretty much anything. The whole box outside of the CPU is made of PC standard parts.
I have not had a crash in a long time. Browsers are generally solid, or core dump without taking the system down when something goes wrong. Only Microsofts special brand of java will lock everything up.
Single-tasking paradigm I can't defend it except to mention the vaporus osX and to mention that to 95% of the computing world it doesn't matter.
10 year old models as examples? Really dug down deep to back up that frequently crippling the hardware statement didn't you. I'll let the comment stand purely because the G3 to G4 thing was so ugly.
Processor design has next to no R&D? What are you talking about? MOtorola and IBM are putting lots of R&D into the processor design. They just don't spend a dime to market the processor.
Check your facts, your rant is the tired old beleagured Apple computer rant from 4 years ago. There is a lot to complain about Apple (osX being very late for example) but your facts are outdated so your argument died before you typed it.
I don't think Apple computers are intended for the more technical users. For nearly a decade computer companies have tried to break out of the tech segment and sell to the moms, dads, grandparents and other non-computer users out there.
Apple got the artsie types, but couldn't get to the real non-computer users until the iMac.
What everyone complains as overly cute is non-threatening. Not just the all-in-one or the colors (ask Dell and Gateway about that) but the MacOS is generally easier for a newbie to use and the case of the iMac and the cube look friendly.
Look at the numbers of iMac users who have never owned a computer and you will understand Apple's resurrections. They are finally selling to the lost (and largest) market segment.
The computer industry will never truly understand the iMac (and Apple in general) because the industry is filled with technical users who could never really appreciate the appeal of a harmless, non-threatening computer.
Redfine communism all you want, you're still wrong.
Capitalism is not bad. Capitalism often doesn't work because people are lazy and not informed in their purchasing decisions. The system is sound, the people are flawed.
Marxist/Lennonist Communism was and is a joke. A brutal dictatorship with liberal apologists spreading propoganda for them.
Your neo-hippie communism is an LSD dream with no economic viability. Just because the Federation made it work doesn't mean it will work in reality.
An object or job is worth only what people will pay for it. Communists never figured this out and their system failed.
The initial theme of the movie was What is it to be human. Unlike the books What is human. A subtle twist that added texture instead of simply filming the book.
Deckard broods and drinks and mostly wastes away. He doesn't want to hunt the replicants, he doesn't want to do much of anything.
The Replicants try to live life to the fullest (pay particular attention to Rutger's speech at the end).
I felt the original movie theme was a lot stronger.
And there were no computer graphics, just models.
This movie will be associated with a certain cult and will cause drastic drops in membership.