Ok, so they are angels, or cloned angels which wear armor and seem to have very many electrical components (the pods, human-angel interface, etc.) Not to mention they run on batteries (again, it's not totally clear, but batteries seem necessary). So no, they're not robots in the PUREST sense, but I think the definition fits. Besides, I didn't want it to be a spoiler.
ok, so there were a HUGE number of biblical and kaballic references (lillith, angels, spear of longinus, crosses, various other symbols throughout, the 3 magi, and plenty of others I'm forgetting)... great... That doesn't make it intellectual. Great it told a story in a s.f. setting, again, great, that neither makes it intellectual OR unique. (Disclaimer: as I've said for the third time now, I *LIKED* Eva, I'm not trying to dis it)
On a side note, I HATE it when people make comparisons of anime -> american tv. "Anime is this, american is this" etc. That's foolish. Anime is not any one thing, neither is american tv. Some anime like Cowboy bebop isn't very "animeish" (ie, what one typically things of as anime artistic style (big eyes, flashing fight backgrounds, etc etc)). Some anime is giant robotcs, some is rpgish, some is comedy, some is drama, some is romance, some is porn...ok, there's not ONE common thing other than that they are all animation, and all from japan. American TV is equally diverse. If you want an intellectual TV show, try Law & Order as one example. There are PLENTY of others (such as non-entertainment tv).
Just because it isn't weighed down by the personality quirks of real actors doesn't make the story any less compelling
No it doesn't, but you could also say "just because real people movies aren't weighed down by the personality quirks of artists doesn't make the story.... etc." Besides, I even said I really enjoyed Eva...my point wasn't to insult anime as a form.
Yeah, not nearly as intellectual as red pills and blue pills.
I wouldn't call the Matrix particularly intellectual either...most of TV and hollywood isn't about intellect it's about action and entertainment. Again, I'm _not_ saying this as a bad thing, just that calling a show that much of the plot revolves around giant 'robots' fighting angels intellectual isn't exactly right:P
Intellectual?? Come now...it's still a cartoon that has big robots fighting each other:P Not to diss it, I really enjoyed it, but saying it's intellectual etc, is just kinda stupid.
I think it's fair to say that ActiveX is a superior thing to netscape style plugins. for one, you don't haev to download and install, they just work. That's good for 99% of MS's customers. Netscape is pretty much irrelevant at this point anyway.
Because you can write a plugin/ActiveX control today and have anyone who uses a compatible browser download it (in a small download) tomorrow. It takes a lot longer to roll a new release of a browser, and a lot of people won't upgrade.
What a narrowminded and stupid thing to say. You will never update a browser that removes standard features? So in otherwords, you want your browser (/OS/all other programs etc) to be a collection of legacy junk which can never be changed for fear of alienating you? Changes sometimes need to happen, and given that by the time the change to 6.0 happened there was no plugin that I ever ran into that didn't have an ActiveX version, there's no reason for your ranting.
you can talk all you want, but as they say, the proof's in the pudding..Many software vendors have been _HUGELY_ succesful for other platforms. We have yet to see a single linux company be really succesful. Mind you, I'm not saying it won't or can't happen...but it hasn't yet.
I don't think your example is quite right. Standard Oil got its monopoly because of technology that vastly lowered the price of oil, thus making prices much lower (consumers = happy). It's true that at one time 90% of the market was controlled by Standard, but even by the time the government got around to actually mobilizing anti-trust against Standard Oil, they were down to 60% of the market. A huge decrease. (See Book: Healing Our World).
Having said that, I do believe that Anti-trust is necessary. Microsoft probably is a prime example of what it should stop. btw, my favorite monopolies are AT&T before the breakup and the USPost office.
Bah, that's a total and seemingly deliberate misinterpration/misunderstanding of simple legal theory.
If you consumed alcohol IN those countries, it would be illegal. Just like if you sell software IN america that breaks laws, it would be illegal. Very, very simple concept.
What's the point...I don't understand. You clearly attacked my argument in a way that avoided my point, and in fact agreed with me (I made a PARTICULAR exception for people like you...running linux on old and slow macs). So instead you call me an ass. Thanks for the intelligent conversation.
I don't believe it's an inane question, because I STILL don't understand the answer.
>1. Macintosh users are getting just as tired of >Apple's corporate crap as Intel users are of >Microsoft's. Despite Apple's warm and fuzzy PR >persona, the only difference between it and >Microsoft is annual revenue. Steve Jobs would >trade places with Bill Gates in a heartbeat.
Translation: Politics affect ease of use. Ok...
>2. Large and important chunks of OS X are, and >forever will be, proprietary, which means that >end-users are, and forever will be, dependent on >Apple for key OS functionality (or the lack >thereof).
A partially valid criticism..on the other hand, Linux hardware support isn't nearly as good as windows (in terms of the x86 platform), so why not go to windows if what you want is the ultimate in compatibility?
>3. OS X is still a dog, albeit with fewer fleas. > >4. More than one of something is a good thing. > >5. Freedom from choice isn't really freedom.
I'm somehow translating seemingly noble philosophical ideals into computer software.
>6. Assuming that there are indeed things that OS >X can do that Linux can't, those things aren't >of sufficent value to end-users to justify the >incremental cost and loss of control.
Such as QuarkXPress, Itunes, Photoshop, Digital camera integration, best user interface, CONSISTENT user interface, higher game availability, etc.
>7. On a personal note, I got tired of waiting a >decade for a new OS from Apple, only to be >milked for two hundred bones for a retread that >wasn't, and still isn't, ready for prime-time.
That seems somewhat churlish of you...I don't really see how it's not ready for primetime either.
My point is, when buying a mac, Apple's argument has always been that you're buy a package...software and hardware and design all molded together in one package...thus the higher price. If you take away the OS, you're taking away a HUGE part of that...so if you want to run linux, why not spend 1/2 as much and get a much faster x86 machine?
So why not go X86 then? The hardware's cheaper, and by not using the OS for which the mac hardware is intended, you're losing out. Apple's argument has always been that by paying the premium for apple computers, you're paying for the package...by getting rid of the OSX, you're castrating the package.
Note: I'm not denying your argument...choice is a good thing...but why mac hardware over pc hardware, given price/performance differences is my question.
Yes. Yes you can. It's called Darwin. Thanks for trolling!
Besides, source code for source code's sake isn't a good reason in my book. It may be in yours, de gustibus non est disputandem though. I prefer functionality and form over politics and open-source advocacy.
I really don't get the appeal of Linux on Mac (or PPC more generally). Sure, I can understand running linux on older macs, but for any OSX capable computer, what's the point? I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.
I think you forget that for most companies (ours is a prime example) the Internet is not necessary. Occasional web browsing might be necessary, e-mail is important, but web browsing is neither vital nor a god given right.
and it's not any different from other unproductivity problems, but one can websurf and LOOK productive at the same time.
Nope, the logs were the final straw. She outright lied when confronted. She had no issues with management, she had worked for several years happily, and the problems started the second she was able to start web browsing.
Look, I really think you're missing the most point. I think 99% of companies could care less if you browse the web a bit and check email, etc. But it can get out of control. One place I have experience at is a great example. One employee's productivity had been dropping since we allowed internet access on all terminals. Eventually we checked IP masq usage, and it turns out that she was browsing the web for hours a day...she was doing more browsing than working. Now that IS a problem. I hope you agree.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Never-never Land
2) The Moon
3) Communist China
Out of curiosity, where do you live that has so much a less intrusive govt? Sounds great if as advertised..
[spoiler]
Ok, so they are angels, or cloned angels which wear armor and seem to have very many electrical components (the pods, human-angel interface, etc.) Not to mention they run on batteries (again, it's not totally clear, but batteries seem necessary). So no, they're not robots in the PUREST sense, but I think the definition fits. Besides, I didn't want it to be a spoiler.
ok, so there were a HUGE number of biblical and kaballic references (lillith, angels, spear of longinus, crosses, various other symbols throughout, the 3 magi, and plenty of others I'm forgetting) ... great ... That doesn't make it intellectual. Great it told a story in a s.f. setting, again, great, that neither makes it intellectual OR unique. (Disclaimer: as I've said for the third time now, I *LIKED* Eva, I'm not trying to dis it)
On a side note, I HATE it when people make comparisons of anime -> american tv. "Anime is this, american is this" etc. That's foolish. Anime is not any one thing, neither is american tv. Some anime like Cowboy bebop isn't very "animeish" (ie, what one typically things of as anime artistic style (big eyes, flashing fight backgrounds, etc etc)). Some anime is giant robotcs, some is rpgish, some is comedy, some is drama, some is romance, some is porn...ok, there's not ONE common thing other than that they are all animation, and all from japan. American TV is equally diverse. If you want an intellectual TV show, try Law & Order as one example. There are PLENTY of others (such as non-entertainment tv).
thanks
Just because it isn't weighed down by the personality quirks of real actors doesn't make the story any less compelling
No it doesn't, but you could also say "just because real people movies aren't weighed down by the personality quirks of artists doesn't make the story .... etc." Besides, I even said I really enjoyed Eva...my point wasn't to insult anime as a form.
Yeah, not nearly as intellectual as red pills and blue pills.
I wouldn't call the Matrix particularly intellectual either...most of TV and hollywood isn't about intellect it's about action and entertainment. Again, I'm _not_ saying this as a bad thing, just that calling a show that much of the plot revolves around giant 'robots' fighting angels intellectual isn't exactly right :P
Intellectual?? Come now...it's still a cartoon that has big robots fighting each other :P Not to diss it, I really enjoyed it, but saying it's intellectual etc, is just kinda stupid.
It's clearly to move all the garbage the station will invariably produce to the trash compactor :)
What an inane comment. Did you bother to read the article OR the post to which you replied??
I think it's fair to say that ActiveX is a superior thing to netscape style plugins. for one, you don't haev to download and install, they just work. That's good for 99% of MS's customers. Netscape is pretty much irrelevant at this point anyway.
Because you can write a plugin/ActiveX control today and have anyone who uses a compatible browser download it (in a small download) tomorrow. It takes a lot longer to roll a new release of a browser, and a lot of people won't upgrade.
What a narrowminded and stupid thing to say. You will never update a browser that removes standard features? So in otherwords, you want your browser (/OS/all other programs etc) to be a collection of legacy junk which can never be changed for fear of alienating you? Changes sometimes need to happen, and given that by the time the change to 6.0 happened there was no plugin that I ever ran into that didn't have an ActiveX version, there's no reason for your ranting.
you can talk all you want, but as they say, the proof's in the pudding..Many software vendors have been _HUGELY_ succesful for other platforms. We have yet to see a single linux company be really succesful. Mind you, I'm not saying it won't or can't happen...but it hasn't yet.
I don't think your example is quite right. Standard Oil got its monopoly because of technology that vastly lowered the price of oil, thus making prices much lower (consumers = happy). It's true that at one time 90% of the market was controlled by Standard, but even by the time the government got around to actually mobilizing anti-trust against Standard Oil, they were down to 60% of the market. A huge decrease. (See Book: Healing Our World).
Having said that, I do believe that Anti-trust is necessary. Microsoft probably is a prime example of what it should stop. btw, my favorite monopolies are AT&T before the breakup and the USPost office.
Bah, that's a total and seemingly deliberate misinterpration/misunderstanding of simple legal theory.
If you consumed alcohol IN those countries, it would be illegal. Just like if you sell software IN america that breaks laws, it would be illegal. Very, very simple concept.
What's the point...I don't understand. You clearly attacked my argument in a way that avoided my point, and in fact agreed with me (I made a PARTICULAR exception for people like you...running linux on old and slow macs). So instead you call me an ass. Thanks for the intelligent conversation.
I don't believe it's an inane question, because I STILL don't understand the answer.
>1. Macintosh users are getting just as tired of >Apple's corporate crap as Intel users are of >Microsoft's. Despite Apple's warm and fuzzy PR >persona, the only difference between it and >Microsoft is annual revenue. Steve Jobs would >trade places with Bill Gates in a heartbeat.
Translation: Politics affect ease of use. Ok...
>2. Large and important chunks of OS X are, and >forever will be, proprietary, which means that >end-users are, and forever will be, dependent on >Apple for key OS functionality (or the lack >thereof).
A partially valid criticism..on the other hand, Linux hardware support isn't nearly as good as windows (in terms of the x86 platform), so why not go to windows if what you want is the ultimate in compatibility?
>3. OS X is still a dog, albeit with fewer fleas.
>
>4. More than one of something is a good thing.
>
>5. Freedom from choice isn't really freedom.
I'm somehow translating seemingly noble philosophical ideals into computer software.
>6. Assuming that there are indeed things that OS >X can do that Linux can't, those things aren't >of sufficent value to end-users to justify the >incremental cost and loss of control.
Such as QuarkXPress, Itunes, Photoshop, Digital camera integration, best user interface, CONSISTENT user interface, higher game availability, etc.
>7. On a personal note, I got tired of waiting a >decade for a new OS from Apple, only to be >milked for two hundred bones for a retread that >wasn't, and still isn't, ready for prime-time.
That seems somewhat churlish of you...I don't really see how it's not ready for primetime either.
My point is, when buying a mac, Apple's argument has always been that you're buy a package...software and hardware and design all molded together in one package...thus the higher price. If you take away the OS, you're taking away a HUGE part of that...so if you want to run linux, why not spend 1/2 as much and get a much faster x86 machine?
I clearly said any OSX capable computer...thanks for reading my post.
So why not go X86 then? The hardware's cheaper, and by not using the OS for which the mac hardware is intended, you're losing out. Apple's argument has always been that by paying the premium for apple computers, you're paying for the package...by getting rid of the OSX, you're castrating the package.
Note: I'm not denying your argument...choice is a good thing...but why mac hardware over pc hardware, given price/performance differences is my question.
Yes. Yes you can. It's called Darwin. Thanks for trolling!
Besides, source code for source code's sake isn't a good reason in my book. It may be in yours, de gustibus non est disputandem though. I prefer functionality and form over politics and open-source advocacy.
I really don't get the appeal of Linux on Mac (or PPC more generally). Sure, I can understand running linux on older macs, but for any OSX capable computer, what's the point? I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.
Black Cauldron is freely released! It's on Al Lowe's website, http://www.allowe.com/
Scott
I think you forget that for most companies (ours is a prime example) the Internet is not necessary. Occasional web browsing might be necessary, e-mail is important, but web browsing is neither vital nor a god given right.
and it's not any different from other unproductivity problems, but one can websurf and LOOK productive at the same time.
Nope, the logs were the final straw. She outright lied when confronted. She had no issues with management, she had worked for several years happily, and the problems started the second she was able to start web browsing.
Look, I really think you're missing the most point. I think 99% of companies could care less if you browse the web a bit and check email, etc. But it can get out of control. One place I have experience at is a great example. One employee's productivity had been dropping since we allowed internet access on all terminals. Eventually we checked IP masq usage, and it turns out that she was browsing the web for hours a day...she was doing more browsing than working. Now that IS a problem. I hope you agree.