Zune was superior to the iPod Classic in every way but 3rd party support (better UI, better PC software). At least for Windows users.
And WP7 is a really decent OS, hitting a happy medium between the fragmentation of Android and the "My way or the high way" of Steve Jobs's walled garden, one-size-fits-all iOS.
WP7 has a few major flaws, and all of them flow from the fact that it's about two years late to market. It certainly deserves to do better than it's doing.
I guess I couldn't disagree with you more. For me, Borderlands had more replay value than any other game I've played, save for maybe Fallout 3.
I played through with each character (very different play styles), and then did playthrough 2 with each character (actually, still have to complete one character). Not to mention the four DLCs (three of the four being outstanding).
I played through all of Playthrough 2 and three of the four DLCs with one character in co-op mode with a good friend. Had a BLAST. Laughed a lot too... it's just really fun, and even more fun co-op.
And I just love the collecting. I think it's the same area of the brain that "Diablo 2" tickled... loot!
Anyway, Borderlands is easily my favorite game ever, and I'm eagerly waiting for Borderlands 2.
Who cares? ALL my customers are on Windows. The tiny fragment of a market that can't run windows software is irrelevant to most people, especially those in the business of making money.
Even the largest of those tiny minorities (Mac users) can run.Net using bootcamp or parallels or some such.
And for the rest, there's Mono, which will run a subset of.Net stuff.
Really, this notion that EVERY program must be able to run on EVERY platform is just ridiculous B.S. It never has been true and never will be true.
And really, anyone that has to "buy new hardware" to run a.Net application has some pretty alien hardware to begin with. XP, Vista, and Win7 run on most things out there, and Win8 will add to the supported processors and form factors.
Your post is a lot of hot smoke and arrogant ignorance. There's a huge ecosystem around.Net, and it's a lucrative framework in which to develop. That's a simple fact that no amount of foot-stamping will erase.
They're clearly trying to accomplish getting an answer to Apple's iPad, with a truly tablet friendly OS and UI that is also as powerful as a desktop. They hope that differentiation helps make up for how late they're coming to the game.
They're also trying to unify the look and feel across their phones, tablets, and desktops... as well as providing a bridge between local computers and "the cloud" (sort of a half-step, as opposed to Google's Chromebook/ChromeOS).
We'll see if the strategy works.
Personally I think Win7 is a very good OS, and any time I have to go back and touch XP, I hate it more and more. Win7 is so much easier, so much more usable, so much powerful... I can't imagine why anyone with the hardware to run Win7 (which isn't that much) would still WANT to run XP.
Well dear lord... then EVERY movie and book is just the exact same and they should just top making them.
I mean they all have an introduction, rising action, a climax, and falling action.
(just shaking my head at some of these bizarre "criticisms")
It's a decent movie. It's fun. It's intense in parts. One good scare. A couple of annoyingly suspension-of-disbelief-breaking plot points. But over all, a decent summer action/suspense flick.
A first grade western grafted to a second-rate sci-fi flick, with some decent actors and direction. Given the story pretty much followed the plot of the comic, it's hard to complain about the story.
Best thing: It wasn't a sequel to anything, and doesn't seem to promise any sequels. It's just a good old-fashioned stand-alone movie.
I live in Texas now, and when I moved here (from great lakes area), one of the first things I noticed is that every school bus had a white roof on it.
It makes perfect sense of course.
Then I noticed that ALL buses around here had white roofs, as well as cabs.
However, the flat roofs of large buildings, warehouses, business complexes, and big box stores and retail are, for the most part, not white. I have no idea why not.
...and Obama was for mentioning that everyone should check their tire inflation. Properly inflated tires save gas, and cumulatively nationwide, would save a HELL OF A LOT of gas (and related imported oil). The mockery he received for such an obvious, and simple idea was ridiculous.
You should update your Vista boxes to Win7. It's a dramatic improvment, and upgrade-in-place is supported. Vista does support IE9, btw... or rather IE9 supports Vista.
As for XP, unless they're running on ancient boxes with less than 1GB of memory and no video card worth speaking of, they'd probably benefit from an upgrade to Win7 as well, though the need to reinstall everything is a drawback (as is the cost). But the security gains are real and significant, as is the usability.
Everyone should be encouraging everyone else to dump XP and IE6/7 as soon as is feasable.
No TRUE conservative is a corporate fascist. But all REPUBLICANS (at least elected ones, not necessarily voters) are. Republicans are not conservative. They're radical right-wing corporatists with a military fetishist. They're every bit the big-government people they rant against, they just think big governement should come in the form of a military policing bedrooms and wombs and invading scores of other countries.
No TRUE Conservative could stomach voting for a modern day Republican.
Conservatives today believe in limited government and states rights, at the base of the movement, not all "Republicans" are conservative, of course.
I'd say none of the elected Republicans or the GOP fit that description. They may pay lip-service to "limited government", but they don't believe it and certainly don't act on it. Never in the last 30 years has any Republican actually implemented more limited government, or anything even approaching fiscal responsibility. Quite the opposite. They say one thing (to get vote) and do another entirely. I would agree that most also stoke the fires of Confederacy, but we already fought a war over that, the Confederacy lost, and our modern Constitution is definitely and clearly a Federalist document.
And Pelosi didn't say that, for the record. And Food Stamps and Unemployment benefits do have significant stimulative effects on the economy, while tax cuts for the wealthy decidedly do not. Tax cuts don't create jobs. Demand does.
The Republican Party has really nothing to do with conservatism any more (they don't believe in "conserving" pretty much anything). They're radical right-wing extremists, and a welcoming home to racists, sexists, homophobes, and xenophobes, manipulating people via fear-mongering in order to increase their own wealth and power, putting party over country at every turn, and their own greed (refering to the people in the Party structure, not the common voters) above all.
Meanwhile, Democrats have allowed themselves to be so bullied and to become so spineless that they won't even stand up for basic facts, even when they're on their side.
The whole situation is pathetic, which is why Congress has the lowest approval ratings ever right now.
But looking at historical data, anyone who wants less intrusive government and more fiscal responsibility is a fool to vote Republican. Not that Democrats are ideal (far from it), but their actual track record is significantly better on both those issues.
Full disclosure: I live in Texas (Perry is an idiot), grew up in Ohio (what Kasich is doing there is criminal) and have lots of relatives in Wisconsin (Walker is even worse than Kasich).
No "liberal" I'm aware of does. At least none I know personally. I'm constantly amazed at all these things that conservatives say "liberals" support. Not all moms trying to "protect the children!" via RIAA and such are liberal. I wouldn't even say a majority were.
Well no. The entire GOP is wholely owned by corporate interests at this point. The buying of Democrats is a case-by-case basis (Banks own Dodd for example). It's a significant difference. The two parties are not (yet) equivalent.
It supports it to the level required by phones and their users, which means extremely fast app switching combined with the ability to do background music playing, downloads and network access, etc. It will appear as multitasking without consuming the CPU or battery like "real" multitasking will. The effect is certainly good enough, if not better. So yes, it supports it just fine, as far as any user will be able to tell... just with better battery life.
The version of WP7 that will ship with Nokia phones supports multitasking, at the same level as iOS. WP7 runs circles around RIM in most areas. And MS has embraced unlocking/jail-breaking as well, which will enable side-loading apps.
It's surprising to me because it's so insular and doesn't really "prove" anything. It doesn't say "Hey, here's why we use Java and reject C#" or anything else that's in any way useful, that I can see.
Again, I just don't see the point of this. I suppose it might have some meaning inside Google, but then why report on it like a story to anyone outside Google?
Not really. Sites can "fall back" to a different presentation if Silverlight isn't there, or simply put up a screen that says "click here to install Silverlight" and provide the link (at least on all platforms where silverlight is available, which is most of them save iOS and Android, and it should certainly be possible and feasable to provide it on the latter eventually, if MS wanted to). The download and install takes seconds, and it's completely unobtrusive. I'm not sure what all the hubub is about, to be honest. It's not like everyone is bending over to eliminate Flash support just because iOS can't do it. I can't count the number of pages my iPhone simply can't render or interact with due to Flash support. If sites don't care about that, why would they care about Silverlight?
Slashdot Mirror
XBOX 360 is great these days.
Zune was superior to the iPod Classic in every way but 3rd party support (better UI, better PC software). At least for Windows users.
And WP7 is a really decent OS, hitting a happy medium between the fragmentation of Android and the "My way or the high way" of Steve Jobs's walled garden, one-size-fits-all iOS.
WP7 has a few major flaws, and all of them flow from the fact that it's about two years late to market. It certainly deserves to do better than it's doing.
I guess I couldn't disagree with you more. For me, Borderlands had more replay value than any other game I've played, save for maybe Fallout 3.
I played through with each character (very different play styles), and then did playthrough 2 with each character (actually, still have to complete one character). Not to mention the four DLCs (three of the four being outstanding).
I played through all of Playthrough 2 and three of the four DLCs with one character in co-op mode with a good friend. Had a BLAST. Laughed a lot too... it's just really fun, and even more fun co-op.
And I just love the collecting. I think it's the same area of the brain that "Diablo 2" tickled... loot!
Anyway, Borderlands is easily my favorite game ever, and I'm eagerly waiting for Borderlands 2.
Who cares? ALL my customers are on Windows. The tiny fragment of a market that can't run windows software is irrelevant to most people, especially those in the business of making money.
Even the largest of those tiny minorities (Mac users) can run .Net using bootcamp or parallels or some such.
And for the rest, there's Mono, which will run a subset of .Net stuff.
Really, this notion that EVERY program must be able to run on EVERY platform is just ridiculous B.S. It never has been true and never will be true.
And really, anyone that has to "buy new hardware" to run a .Net application has some pretty alien hardware to begin with. XP, Vista, and Win7 run on most things out there, and Win8 will add to the supported processors and form factors.
Your post is a lot of hot smoke and arrogant ignorance. There's a huge ecosystem around .Net, and it's a lucrative framework in which to develop. That's a simple fact that no amount of foot-stamping will erase.
They're clearly trying to accomplish getting an answer to Apple's iPad, with a truly tablet friendly OS and UI that is also as powerful as a desktop. They hope that differentiation helps make up for how late they're coming to the game.
They're also trying to unify the look and feel across their phones, tablets, and desktops... as well as providing a bridge between local computers and "the cloud" (sort of a half-step, as opposed to Google's Chromebook/ChromeOS).
We'll see if the strategy works.
Personally I think Win7 is a very good OS, and any time I have to go back and touch XP, I hate it more and more. Win7 is so much easier, so much more usable, so much powerful... I can't imagine why anyone with the hardware to run Win7 (which isn't that much) would still WANT to run XP.
Well dear lord... then EVERY movie and book is just the exact same and they should just top making them.
I mean they all have an introduction, rising action, a climax, and falling action.
(just shaking my head at some of these bizarre "criticisms")
It's a decent movie. It's fun. It's intense in parts. One good scare. A couple of annoyingly suspension-of-disbelief-breaking plot points. But over all, a decent summer action/suspense flick.
A first grade western grafted to a second-rate sci-fi flick, with some decent actors and direction. Given the story pretty much followed the plot of the comic, it's hard to complain about the story.
Best thing: It wasn't a sequel to anything, and doesn't seem to promise any sequels. It's just a good old-fashioned stand-alone movie.
What's not to like?
I live in Texas now, and when I moved here (from great lakes area), one of the first things I noticed is that every school bus had a white roof on it.
It makes perfect sense of course.
Then I noticed that ALL buses around here had white roofs, as well as cabs.
However, the flat roofs of large buildings, warehouses, business complexes, and big box stores and retail are, for the most part, not white. I have no idea why not.
...and Obama was for mentioning that everyone should check their tire inflation. Properly inflated tires save gas, and cumulatively nationwide, would save a HELL OF A LOT of gas (and related imported oil). The mockery he received for such an obvious, and simple idea was ridiculous.
Stupid partisan politics.
When Windows 8 ships, it'll ship with IE10 not IE9.
IE 9 is a good browser. IE10 will surely be a better browser.
Okay... is there anything wrong with the 32bit version? Nobody is forced to use 64-bit IE9 that I'm aware of.
I'm betting it'll be released with Windows 8 in 2012 sometime.
You should update your Vista boxes to Win7. It's a dramatic improvment, and upgrade-in-place is supported. Vista does support IE9, btw... or rather IE9 supports Vista.
As for XP, unless they're running on ancient boxes with less than 1GB of memory and no video card worth speaking of, they'd probably benefit from an upgrade to Win7 as well, though the need to reinstall everything is a drawback (as is the cost). But the security gains are real and significant, as is the usability.
Everyone should be encouraging everyone else to dump XP and IE6/7 as soon as is feasable.
What's wrong with IE9's all new javascript engine?
What does IE7 have to do with IE9?
That's like hating on Windows 7 because you hated Windows Me. Kind of ridiculous.
No TRUE conservative is a corporate fascist. But all REPUBLICANS (at least elected ones, not necessarily voters) are. Republicans are not conservative. They're radical right-wing corporatists with a military fetishist. They're every bit the big-government people they rant against, they just think big governement should come in the form of a military policing bedrooms and wombs and invading scores of other countries.
No TRUE Conservative could stomach voting for a modern day Republican.
Conservatives today believe in limited government and states rights, at the base of the movement, not all "Republicans" are conservative, of course.
I'd say none of the elected Republicans or the GOP fit that description. They may pay lip-service to "limited government", but they don't believe it and certainly don't act on it. Never in the last 30 years has any Republican actually implemented more limited government, or anything even approaching fiscal responsibility. Quite the opposite. They say one thing (to get vote) and do another entirely. I would agree that most also stoke the fires of Confederacy, but we already fought a war over that, the Confederacy lost, and our modern Constitution is definitely and clearly a Federalist document.
And Pelosi didn't say that, for the record. And Food Stamps and Unemployment benefits do have significant stimulative effects on the economy, while tax cuts for the wealthy decidedly do not. Tax cuts don't create jobs. Demand does.
The Republican Party has really nothing to do with conservatism any more (they don't believe in "conserving" pretty much anything). They're radical right-wing extremists, and a welcoming home to racists, sexists, homophobes, and xenophobes, manipulating people via fear-mongering in order to increase their own wealth and power, putting party over country at every turn, and their own greed (refering to the people in the Party structure, not the common voters) above all.
Meanwhile, Democrats have allowed themselves to be so bullied and to become so spineless that they won't even stand up for basic facts, even when they're on their side.
The whole situation is pathetic, which is why Congress has the lowest approval ratings ever right now.
But looking at historical data, anyone who wants less intrusive government and more fiscal responsibility is a fool to vote Republican. Not that Democrats are ideal (far from it), but their actual track record is significantly better on both those issues.
Full disclosure: I live in Texas (Perry is an idiot), grew up in Ohio (what Kasich is doing there is criminal) and have lots of relatives in Wisconsin (Walker is even worse than Kasich).
No "liberal" I'm aware of does. At least none I know personally. I'm constantly amazed at all these things that conservatives say "liberals" support. Not all moms trying to "protect the children!" via RIAA and such are liberal. I wouldn't even say a majority were.
Well no. The entire GOP is wholely owned by corporate interests at this point. The buying of Democrats is a case-by-case basis (Banks own Dodd for example). It's a significant difference. The two parties are not (yet) equivalent.
This after Citizens United and several other recent decisions...
Man, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are three of the worst things to happen to the Supreme Court in recent memory. Ugh.
They DON'T call it "jailbreaking". I have no idea what they will call it. I just used an available analogous word from the iOS world.
It supports it to the level required by phones and their users, which means extremely fast app switching combined with the ability to do background music playing, downloads and network access, etc. It will appear as multitasking without consuming the CPU or battery like "real" multitasking will. The effect is certainly good enough, if not better. So yes, it supports it just fine, as far as any user will be able to tell... just with better battery life.
The version of WP7 that will ship with Nokia phones supports multitasking, at the same level as iOS. WP7 runs circles around RIM in most areas. And MS has embraced unlocking/jail-breaking as well, which will enable side-loading apps.
"...or for that matter, the courts completely scrapping the patent in public's interest."
This. Let's hope for this.
It's surprising to me because it's so insular and doesn't really "prove" anything. It doesn't say "Hey, here's why we use Java and reject C#" or anything else that's in any way useful, that I can see.
Again, I just don't see the point of this. I suppose it might have some meaning inside Google, but then why report on it like a story to anyone outside Google?
I see no evidence at all that they are "dropping support" for Silverlight. Do you?
Because rewriting SkyDrive to use HTML5 sure isn't it.
Not really. Sites can "fall back" to a different presentation if Silverlight isn't there, or simply put up a screen that says "click here to install Silverlight" and provide the link (at least on all platforms where silverlight is available, which is most of them save iOS and Android, and it should certainly be possible and feasable to provide it on the latter eventually, if MS wanted to). The download and install takes seconds, and it's completely unobtrusive. I'm not sure what all the hubub is about, to be honest. It's not like everyone is bending over to eliminate Flash support just because iOS can't do it. I can't count the number of pages my iPhone simply can't render or interact with due to Flash support. If sites don't care about that, why would they care about Silverlight?