What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Exactly. Pete Townsend--I don't know if he's a molester or not, but he had child porn. He's still a great musician. Plenty of others do drugs, etc--something I find unsavory and wrong on a moral level--I still like a lot of music--psychadelic even. You bring up Shockley--yeah, awful racist, doesn't bother me at all. Yeah, he may have been a horrible person, but that has not one iota of relevance to the good things he did, or transistors. I frankly find your musing that you might not have gone into computers had you known that utterly baffling.
There are plenty of murderers, racists, pedophiles, etc in the ranks of histories great. IMHO, You're doing yourself a great disservice if you hate everyone who did something you don't like, AND also hate everything they produced.
My point of view--Lots of people are bad people. Get over it.
Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Maybe it says more about your conception of the importance of opinions and what exactly a bigot is (and what the importance of labels like "bigot" are to you?) than anything else?
If it were a case of "Red vs. Blue", I'd agree with you. Take the product as a separate item and if it is enjoyable on its own, forget that you may hold a different worldview than the author.
When it comes down to someone being a step away from Fred Philips land, I draw the line.
I REALLY don't want to get into the issue of gay marriage, but, but you characterizing people who don't believe that gay marriage is valid, or real, or should be legal--which includes even the majority of people in a very liberal state like California--as a step away from Fred Philips (Fred Phelps?) land, is probably close to as biased as Orson Scott Card is when he claims married homosexuals are playing dress up!
And if gay marriage is a central issue to you (and seemingly others in this thread) you absolutely should stop buying Orson Scott Card books. At the same time it frustrates me when this story is tagged "wingnut" before there were any comments, followed by threads like this one are hard for me to fathom. I guess I just have never run across an artist, actor, author, whatever whose views I found so odious that it would affect my enjoyment of their art, etc. Thanks for explaining your POV though.
Re:Nope, sorry
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't really get it... I mean ok, even if you really think he is a mega-douche, why stop reading his books? Does that really do anything positive? Does somebody who has an opinion that you disagree with really offend/startle/upset/whatever you so much that you can't read anything they've written? I personally feel this is a big problem with our society today--somebody's political beliefs are enough to earn them boycotts, scorn, hate, risk their jobs, etc. Of course you as a free individual have every right to do whatever you want to do--including boycotting Orson Scott Card--but I just think our society should take a collective chill pill!
I can see not BUYING more of his books, though at this point he's got so much money he could never sell another book and be ok, so it's a somewhat futile action, but I guess that matters..
There are a ton of authors, actors, musicians, etc who I think are moronic halfwits when it comes to politics. I think the same thing about some of my friends and family too! I get past it. Douche though they may be, I couldn't care less what their political opinions are when it comes to listening to their music or reading their books. Why do you have to be in ideological lockstep with an author to enjoy their works?
Apologies if I'm somehow misinterpreting your post...?
Also, Case Western is (according to Wikipedia) ranked in the 40s by US News and report. Now, I'm not saying if that means anything, if the education there is any less or more valuable in terms of quality, etc etc etc, but the competitiveness factor is not at all the same as a top 10/top 20, which would be a big factor in cost and scholarship.
I would agree, though the only part that really seems egregious is not being allowed any video recording equipment at all. Then again, he's an idiot, and it's only one year.
what a lot of people here probably don't know is that the Ottoman Empire was one of the largest Empires in its time (chances are I am wrong--I'm open to criticism)
You're right. Empire that streched from Poland to Iraq to Yemen to the Sudan to Morocco? Yeah, that's pretty honking big.
Ok, I get where you're coming from, and I can buy most of your points:-)
I do agree that in some ways Win2K is a superior operating system. I still run w2k in parallels on macs instead of XP primarily because it is lighter weight than XP and can run the few business applications we need just as well. Mainly I think that as a home/non-business operating system--that is, as a replacement for the 95/98/ME line--XP is far superior. Over 2k, not so much.
I'm not that hopeful for Vista. I admittedly have not used Vista pre-SP1 and wasn't THAT horrified by SP1 but all-in-all it just sucks. Inconsistent UIs would be one of my biggest complaints. Another would be speed--doing things like uninstalling 2-3 programs at once (from the initial install I was playing with) made the computer crawl. I'm viewing Vista as the "ME" of the NT line.
No. Only if you compared it with Windows ME. Not even if compared it with Win98SE for some situations. It was a dissappointment.
How so? Stability. Hardware support. Stability. Better multitasking. NEtworking support. All vastly improved in XP over 98.
After SP2 it could be compared with Win2k in many situations so long as you had XP Pro. Things like the deliberate crippling of shared network drives still annoy me with XP.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here (I don't know much about home edition) butare you claiming that because one edition of XP had a feature that you don't like, it's not as good as 98? I don't get it. I'm not going to argue that everybody likes every new version--we still use OS9 occasionally, and I deal with one author who use WP5.1. He swears it's the best. Some people just don't like change. Pointing to ONE feature you don't like does not prove XP is not as good as its predecessors.
Windows XP (and 2k, NT, etc) DID include a dos emulator--it just wasn't great. If you remember, for awhile a really popular way of running DOS programs in XP was vdmsound (essentially more complete sound drivers for the builtin dos virtual machine). DOSBox went the extra step of being a whole machine.
Agree that Microsoft SHOULD have done a better job with backwards compatibility, but, you have to make the cut somewhere.
Yeah, XP lost some backwards compatibility. Well, to be precise, XP GAINED backwards compatibility over its predecessor--Windows 2000--but did lack the ability to run some 95/98/ME/DOS games. I don't think that's a fair measure to say XP is worse than ME.
I run a number of games in DOSBox, but I can't think off the top of my head of any 95/98 games that didn't work in XP. Not denying it, but what are some examples?
Yes, Blaster was a major PITA and a major worm. There have even been several since then that preyed on the same kind of vulnerabilities (Zotob and sasser spring to mind). Do you remember teardrop? That one even got linux. There were worms decades before XP, and I think it's hard to argue that the worm situation on Windows has gotten WORSE since pre-XP. Each release of windows (including Vista) has gotten better. Better is of course a relative term, but still.
Name it what you want, but the RESULT is what gives products their reputations, not the names of said products. The only saving grace of XP is how terrible Vista was received by the public, so in comparison, XP looked much better. And how interesting this is to me because I remember how terrible XP was in the beginning.
I think that's BS. Other than a small subset of people who were upset about activation, XP was pretty good from the get go. SP1 made it good without reservations. (and I don't mean this is a big linux vs Windows vs Mac flamefest) Most people switching to XP had been using 95/98/ME. XP--without reservation--is better than all of them. If you were coming from 2K, it was less of a jump, but still an improvement for most users (imho, I know some people debate this last point).
If you want to tolerate it then that's your right, but acting as though the search itself is some kind of benefit is a bit much.
The search is absolutely a benefit to me. If you've never worked in retail, you'd probably be surprised by just how much stock is lost to theft. Some employee, a lot through shoplifting. If I can do my little part to reduce shoplifting, I'll gladly do it. For one thing, it keeps prices down. Absolutely a short bag/cart check is worth it for my pocketbook, and ergo, worth it for me.
It would be totally awesome if it wasn't necessary, but until the day when people don't steal...
That's nice, except that it's something I can do by myself without having people treat me like a criminal just for shopping at their store.
You just made the simplest and easiest decision in the world--don't shop there. You're free, you can do whatever you want!
Me, I'll gladly suffer the horrifying indignity of a 15 second cart check to shop at Sam's. Absolutely worth it for me. (and it doesn't even make me feel like a criminal--can you believe that?)
I can understand that you are not a thief and don't like wasting your time, but anybody who has EVER worked in retail in any capacity knows that theft is a huge, huge problem and that it raises costs for everybody else.
What SHOULD the stores be doing to try to prevent theft?
Every public library I've ever been in and has the same kind of door monitor--should they be allowed to check for non-checked out books leaving the library?
That actually just happened to me (well, someone right in front of me in line) at a Sam's club yesterday. The people had a cart full of items, the person checking the receipt noticed that there was an extra item on the receipt that wasn't in their cart, and they got sent right to customer service for a refund. It was pretty impressive.
Last time I needed to check, the gcc version was two minor version releases behind. gfortran had not yet been ported properly. There was a bunch of other software also that was outdated in fink repos and the fellow I was helping had to compile the newer versions by hand.
Google "gfortran osx"... there you go. You are wrong (on both counts).
This is utter nonsense. I did two types of comparisons (6 months ago)
Ok, what did I say that was "nonsense." That would imply I said something incorrect--what did I say that was incorrect?
Since you're once again refusing to give any specifics, speaking in vague stories about something at some point in the past (while calling my references to the present "nonsense") humor me--go to Dell and Apple right now. Since you want to compare the lowest end laptop, we'll do that. The cheapest Apple is a 2.1ghz 13" for $999.
The cheapest equivalent Dell I could configure is an Inspiron 13. It has more memory (3gb vs 1gb) and a bigger harddisk (250gb vs 120gb). I also added 802.11n, bluetooth, and a camera to match Apple features. Final price $967. Yes--the apple is more expensive (and lighter!). 1.5x times more? No, that's just useless hyperbole.
Maybe because some of us use computers for a living, and not just checking email ? Try finding Ansys, mentor graphics, synopsys, etc. for a Mac. Add that to the outdated GNU software and you have a pretty barren offering for Mac. Its apps that make or break OS'es, not how pretty their toolbars are. This is also the reason why Windows still owns the office / enterprise desktop space.
Now you're just completely going from the sublime to the ridiculous. Great, so because OSX is not supported by several highly niche software packages, it's "barren?" Your point remains both elusive and ludicrous. My company still uses 1 remaining piece of DOS software. It doesn't run on linux--clearly linux is useless and barren. Your "outdated GNU software" point is as wrong as it has been every other time you've brought it up.
If you need these software packages that are Linux only, fantastic--OSX is not for you. There's nothing wrong with that. But claiming that a system used by millions and millions of people is useless and barren because it doesn't support a piece of obscure niche modeling software? Do you realize how insane that sounds?
Would you like me to bring up a list of OSX only apps that can't be run on linux?
Sounds more like product placement to me. Do you seriously take us to be idiots ?
No, you sound like a fairly young person who has probably not been to such events first-hand (if I'm wrong, I apologize).
Ideal for Steve Jobs no doubt, not for her. She is a geologist who often needs to run simulations (written for Linux) along with commercial software (see above) not available on a Mac. As I said, some of us actually need to use our machines for work, not ooh and aah at them or make fashion statements to friends.
I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. You can run Ubuntu on a mac. Ergo, instead of railing about how much you hate Steve Jobs while it collects dust, why don't you install Ubuntu on it? You already spent the money, are you REALLY getting that much pleasure out of rubbing it in to your girlfriend that she shouldn't have gotten a mac, when you could be using it with your OS du jour? THAT'S the point.
In other words, do not leverage existing knowledge for a platform (Android) that is going to be a massive success (its Google after all), but learn a platform, niche specific language / design workflow for a platform that has always had issues breaking out into the wild in a platform agnostic way. Smart. Like everything else you said:)
Ad hominems get you nowhere. Apple's are almost 20% of all smartphones. The app store is a huge success. You c
That means that OSX carries outdated versions of GNU software (through fink) that people like me use daily in their work. Until a year ago, Matlab used to run like molasses on it. Certain technical unix software (available for years on Sun and Linux) is not available on OSX.
Most of the OSX userland is BSD or next derived. I use Darwinports rather than fink when a native package isn't available (which it very frequently is). What software is "outdated"?
A platform isn't "barren" just because a particular program from a particular other platform doesn't run on it. By your standards above Windows is barren because it doesn't run all GNU software, and Linux is barren because it doesn't run all windows software. It's completely nonsensical argument.
The hardware might be separable from the OS, but why would I pay 1.5 times the cost for the same components ? Until Apple used PowerPC processors, there might have been an argument for a cost differential, but there is not one today. I have done this myself - looked at Dell machines with precisely the same specs and they are barely 60-70% of the cost of an apple. I have 10 year old dells (and some old pre-lenovo IBMs) sitting at work and at home, and they are still going strong. When it comes to adding more RAM, even apple fanboys admit that their company basically rips people off.
This has been debunked so many times, I don't even know what the point is. Yes, apple hardware is more expensive. Is it 1.5 times more expensive as you claim? absolutely not. I just specced a Dell notebook to compare to the Macbook Pro smallest edition. The dell does not have Firewire, infrared controller, backlit keyboard, multitouch mousepad, optical audio, and it has an inferior video card. It is also heavier, bulkier, and plastic. It came out to $1700, versus $2000 for the Apple.
I work in a publishing office which has G4 macs still in use. Sometimes they even run OS9 still. Apple is known for hardware that lasts a long time. I wish we had been as lucky with our dells--they don't tend to last more than 4-5 years on average. (bad mobo caps and horrible power supplies seems the most frequent problem)
Inferior software (and no, not everyone, or even a significant fraction of people in the world make movies / record albums for a living), unjustifiably more expensive hardware, for shiny covers and pretty graphics - what is not to like if you had an IQ below a certain level ?
Complete red herring and just...doesn't make any sense again! ALmost all the software I can run on FreeBSD/Linux, I can run on OSX. If you don't like mail.app (I do) run Thunderbird--no problem. Don't like Safari (I do!)--run Firefox, no problem. How can you possibly make an argument for "inferior software"?
Wannabe fratboys are found in every walk of life, since no one profession holds the copyright on stupidity.
I don't think I know what you're getting at...you're claiming "wannabe fratboy" is just a title that means you don't like them, as opposed to having an actual meaning?
Opensource people tend to target certain platforms. For most of them, that is primarily Linux, then Sun and then Apple (that OSX is not a high priority shows up in the outdated versions of software in fink repos).
You've already been suitably vague--where's all this vast list of software that is desperately needed on OSX but nobody can update? I would also strongly dispute your ordering of opensource platforms.
, a good number of that "good number" that you refer to probably use apple to test their apps for the niche market that apple covers.
No, that's not what I meant. Check out pictures from any Bofs/cons/lugs whatever. You will see a lot of apple laptops. End of story.
This is why my gf bought her mac. She has since found that she can't really do her real work with it, so he
As for spotlight, honestly I can't say I've ever felt a need for that kind of functionality. If I'm looking for a song, then I open amarok, which is actually tailored for searching music. In fact, linux has tools similar to spotlight, one being "Beagle" which comes with my distro, but I always uninstall it because it drives up my system load. That's an implementation-specific problem but I personally don't ever feel the need to search my entire system for something when there is a domain-specific application that I know already has information about it.
I never did either--until I used it for a time. I will say that I do frequently use spotlight for filename/contents searches rather than metadata, but all-in-all, spotlight has pretty much replaced a lot of my usage in Finder and file dialogues. Open file--no need to navigate anywhere else, just use spotlight. I don't even use bookmarks too frequently anymore (other than the browser bookmark bar) as I just save links to webpages and then spotlight a topic when I'm trying to remember something cool.
The basic functionality has been around for years if not decades, but spotlight is not a drag on performance, and gives results quickly.
... pay a crap load of money for this barren an OS (which is inseparable from the hardware)
Ok, so you for some unknown reason think OSX is "barren" -- if you feel like answering, what does that mean? The OS may be inseparable from the hardware, but the hardware is very separable from the OS.
Always thought apple users were status wh***s with a pathological desire to look hip to the frat boy/meaning of life empty-talk crowd with a complimentary membership of the Steve Jobs cult (while looking monumentally stupid to the technically proficient or even people with any common sense).
Wow...did an apple user hit your dog or something?
In any case, your suspect pseudo-psychological analysis of apple users aside, there are a very good number of BSD, opensource, etc devs who use apple laptops. Are they hip wannabe fratboys?
This is just more evidence.
What's more evidence? That a random poster to a random technical site claims he doesn't like itunes? Damn, way to indict those apple users.
Most of my material is.wav (or.flac) data either straight from my DAW or straight from my field recorder.
Oh I see--I just assumed since you were using itunes, you would be playing mp3s (since that's all it supports), and since flac support is nonexistent without a number of 3rd-party software packages.
Though come to think of it...last time I imported flac files into itunes, I'm 99% sure that their "Title" was just the filename. What's the problem?
I'm a musician/composer. I have a file of every take, every track, every time I pickup an instrument or sit down at the piano, every time my band rehearses or performs. Editing metadata is not something someone is going to spend the hours doing, especially at the pay rate ($0).
That's very interesting to me. With all the expressive metadata that can be VERY easily put into ID3/Vorbis/etc files, I would have thought that would be to your advantage. The publishing company where I am now uses metadata pretty amazingly well. Then again, I think OSX/Apple have consistently been ahead of the metadata curve, and that windows and linux users are really missing out. Spotlight is an example.
In any case... the original point I made stands--iTunes doesn't "strip" anything in your case, so I'm confused what the issue is.
It seems like that's always the way to do it with Apple products; their way, or not at all. Personally, I enjoy being to choose (and switch between) manual and automatic management of my music.
It's there in iTunes preferences, has been for years, and it's not even that confusingly labeled (hint: it has to do with "keep itunes music folder organized")
Slashdot Mirror
Yay, 3 replies for Godwin :-)
What is some great writer were a child-molester? Or a rapist? Or some other type of sicko? Are you to tell me you'd have absolutely no problem enjoying the writings or other creative works of such a monster?
Exactly. Pete Townsend--I don't know if he's a molester or not, but he had child porn. He's still a great musician. Plenty of others do drugs, etc--something I find unsavory and wrong on a moral level--I still like a lot of music--psychadelic even. You bring up Shockley--yeah, awful racist, doesn't bother me at all. Yeah, he may have been a horrible person, but that has not one iota of relevance to the good things he did, or transistors. I frankly find your musing that you might not have gone into computers had you known that utterly baffling.
There are plenty of murderers, racists, pedophiles, etc in the ranks of histories great. IMHO, You're doing yourself a great disservice if you hate everyone who did something you don't like, AND also hate everything they produced.
My point of view--Lots of people are bad people. Get over it.
Ender's Game and the related works are a direct product of a bigot. And considering the depths of philosophical import that is behind Xenocide, I still have a hard time reconciling the fact that a bigoted mind wrote that. For sure Card should clearly see how crazy his own views about gays are. Alas, it shall forever remain a paradox.
Maybe it says more about your conception of the importance of opinions and what exactly a bigot is (and what the importance of labels like "bigot" are to you?) than anything else?
Thanks for explaining your pov--pretty foreign to me, but I guess it makes sense.
If it were a case of "Red vs. Blue", I'd agree with you. Take the product as a separate item and if it is enjoyable on its own, forget that you may hold a different worldview than the author.
When it comes down to someone being a step away from Fred Philips land, I draw the line.
I REALLY don't want to get into the issue of gay marriage, but, but you characterizing people who don't believe that gay marriage is valid, or real, or should be legal--which includes even the majority of people in a very liberal state like California--as a step away from Fred Philips (Fred Phelps?) land, is probably close to as biased as Orson Scott Card is when he claims married homosexuals are playing dress up!
And if gay marriage is a central issue to you (and seemingly others in this thread) you absolutely should stop buying Orson Scott Card books. At the same time it frustrates me when this story is tagged "wingnut" before there were any comments, followed by threads like this one are hard for me to fathom. I guess I just have never run across an artist, actor, author, whatever whose views I found so odious that it would affect my enjoyment of their art, etc. Thanks for explaining your POV though.
I don't really get it... I mean ok, even if you really think he is a mega-douche, why stop reading his books? Does that really do anything positive? Does somebody who has an opinion that you disagree with really offend/startle/upset/whatever you so much that you can't read anything they've written? I personally feel this is a big problem with our society today--somebody's political beliefs are enough to earn them boycotts, scorn, hate, risk their jobs, etc. Of course you as a free individual have every right to do whatever you want to do--including boycotting Orson Scott Card--but I just think our society should take a collective chill pill!
I can see not BUYING more of his books, though at this point he's got so much money he could never sell another book and be ok, so it's a somewhat futile action, but I guess that matters..
There are a ton of authors, actors, musicians, etc who I think are moronic halfwits when it comes to politics. I think the same thing about some of my friends and family too! I get past it. Douche though they may be, I couldn't care less what their political opinions are when it comes to listening to their music or reading their books. Why do you have to be in ideological lockstep with an author to enjoy their works?
Apologies if I'm somehow misinterpreting your post...?
Also, Case Western is (according to Wikipedia) ranked in the 40s by US News and report. Now, I'm not saying if that means anything, if the education there is any less or more valuable in terms of quality, etc etc etc, but the competitiveness factor is not at all the same as a top 10/top 20, which would be a big factor in cost and scholarship.
I would agree, though the only part that really seems egregious is not being allowed any video recording equipment at all. Then again, he's an idiot, and it's only one year.
Also, what if a theater WANTS to let him in?
what a lot of people here probably don't know is that the Ottoman Empire was one of the largest Empires in its time (chances are I am wrong--I'm open to criticism)
You're right. Empire that streched from Poland to Iraq to Yemen to the Sudan to Morocco? Yeah, that's pretty honking big.
Ok, I get where you're coming from, and I can buy most of your points :-)
I do agree that in some ways Win2K is a superior operating system. I still run w2k in parallels on macs instead of XP primarily because it is lighter weight than XP and can run the few business applications we need just as well. Mainly I think that as a home/non-business operating system--that is, as a replacement for the 95/98/ME line--XP is far superior. Over 2k, not so much.
I'm not that hopeful for Vista. I admittedly have not used Vista pre-SP1 and wasn't THAT horrified by SP1 but all-in-all it just sucks. Inconsistent UIs would be one of my biggest complaints. Another would be speed--doing things like uninstalling 2-3 programs at once (from the initial install I was playing with) made the computer crawl. I'm viewing Vista as the "ME" of the NT line.
No. Only if you compared it with Windows ME. Not even if compared it with Win98SE for some situations. It was a dissappointment.
How so? Stability. Hardware support. Stability. Better multitasking. NEtworking support. All vastly improved in XP over 98.
After SP2 it could be compared with Win2k in many situations so long as you had XP Pro. Things like the deliberate crippling of shared network drives still annoy me with XP.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here (I don't know much about home edition) butare you claiming that because one edition of XP had a feature that you don't like, it's not as good as 98? I don't get it. I'm not going to argue that everybody likes every new version--we still use OS9 occasionally, and I deal with one author who use WP5.1. He swears it's the best. Some people just don't like change. Pointing to ONE feature you don't like does not prove XP is not as good as its predecessors.
Windows XP (and 2k, NT, etc) DID include a dos emulator--it just wasn't great. If you remember, for awhile a really popular way of running DOS programs in XP was vdmsound (essentially more complete sound drivers for the builtin dos virtual machine). DOSBox went the extra step of being a whole machine.
Agree that Microsoft SHOULD have done a better job with backwards compatibility, but, you have to make the cut somewhere.
Yeah, XP lost some backwards compatibility. Well, to be precise, XP GAINED backwards compatibility over its predecessor--Windows 2000--but did lack the ability to run some 95/98/ME/DOS games. I don't think that's a fair measure to say XP is worse than ME.
I run a number of games in DOSBox, but I can't think off the top of my head of any 95/98 games that didn't work in XP. Not denying it, but what are some examples?
Yes, Blaster was a major PITA and a major worm. There have even been several since then that preyed on the same kind of vulnerabilities (Zotob and sasser spring to mind). Do you remember teardrop? That one even got linux. There were worms decades before XP, and I think it's hard to argue that the worm situation on Windows has gotten WORSE since pre-XP. Each release of windows (including Vista) has gotten better. Better is of course a relative term, but still.
Name it what you want, but the RESULT is what gives products their reputations, not the names of said products. The only saving grace of XP is how terrible Vista was received by the public, so in comparison, XP looked much better. And how interesting this is to me because I remember how terrible XP was in the beginning.
I think that's BS. Other than a small subset of people who were upset about activation, XP was pretty good from the get go. SP1 made it good without reservations. (and I don't mean this is a big linux vs Windows vs Mac flamefest) Most people switching to XP had been using 95/98/ME. XP--without reservation--is better than all of them. If you were coming from 2K, it was less of a jump, but still an improvement for most users (imho, I know some people debate this last point).
If you want to tolerate it then that's your right, but acting as though the search itself is some kind of benefit is a bit much.
The search is absolutely a benefit to me. If you've never worked in retail, you'd probably be surprised by just how much stock is lost to theft. Some employee, a lot through shoplifting. If I can do my little part to reduce shoplifting, I'll gladly do it. For one thing, it keeps prices down. Absolutely a short bag/cart check is worth it for my pocketbook, and ergo, worth it for me.
It would be totally awesome if it wasn't necessary, but until the day when people don't steal...
That's nice, except that it's something I can do by myself without having people treat me like a criminal just for shopping at their store.
You just made the simplest and easiest decision in the world--don't shop there. You're free, you can do whatever you want!
Me, I'll gladly suffer the horrifying indignity of a 15 second cart check to shop at Sam's. Absolutely worth it for me. (and it doesn't even make me feel like a criminal--can you believe that?)
I can understand that you are not a thief and don't like wasting your time, but anybody who has EVER worked in retail in any capacity knows that theft is a huge, huge problem and that it raises costs for everybody else.
What SHOULD the stores be doing to try to prevent theft?
Every public library I've ever been in and has the same kind of door monitor--should they be allowed to check for non-checked out books leaving the library?
That actually just happened to me (well, someone right in front of me in line) at a Sam's club yesterday. The people had a cart full of items, the person checking the receipt noticed that there was an extra item on the receipt that wasn't in their cart, and they got sent right to customer service for a refund. It was pretty impressive.
Last time I needed to check, the gcc version was two minor version releases behind. gfortran had not yet been ported properly. There was a bunch of other software also that was outdated in fink repos and the fellow I was helping had to compile the newer versions by hand.
Google "gfortran osx" ... there you go. You are wrong (on both counts).
This is utter nonsense. I did two types of comparisons (6 months ago)
Ok, what did I say that was "nonsense." That would imply I said something incorrect--what did I say that was incorrect?
Since you're once again refusing to give any specifics, speaking in vague stories about something at some point in the past (while calling my references to the present "nonsense") humor me--go to Dell and Apple right now. Since you want to compare the lowest end laptop, we'll do that. The cheapest Apple is a 2.1ghz 13" for $999.
The cheapest equivalent Dell I could configure is an Inspiron 13. It has more memory (3gb vs 1gb) and a bigger harddisk (250gb vs 120gb). I also added 802.11n, bluetooth, and a camera to match Apple features. Final price $967. Yes--the apple is more expensive (and lighter!). 1.5x times more? No, that's just useless hyperbole.
Maybe because some of us use computers for a living, and not just checking email ? Try finding Ansys, mentor graphics, synopsys, etc. for a Mac. Add that to the outdated GNU software and you have a pretty barren offering for Mac. Its apps that make or break OS'es, not how pretty their toolbars are. This is also the reason why Windows still owns the office / enterprise desktop space.
Now you're just completely going from the sublime to the ridiculous. Great, so because OSX is not supported by several highly niche software packages, it's "barren?" Your point remains both elusive and ludicrous. My company still uses 1 remaining piece of DOS software. It doesn't run on linux--clearly linux is useless and barren. Your "outdated GNU software" point is as wrong as it has been every other time you've brought it up.
If you need these software packages that are Linux only, fantastic--OSX is not for you. There's nothing wrong with that. But claiming that a system used by millions and millions of people is useless and barren because it doesn't support a piece of obscure niche modeling software? Do you realize how insane that sounds?
Would you like me to bring up a list of OSX only apps that can't be run on linux?
Sounds more like product placement to me. Do you seriously take us to be idiots ?
No, you sound like a fairly young person who has probably not been to such events first-hand (if I'm wrong, I apologize).
Ideal for Steve Jobs no doubt, not for her. She is a geologist who often needs to run simulations (written for Linux) along with commercial software (see above) not available on a Mac. As I said, some of us actually need to use our machines for work, not ooh and aah at them or make fashion statements to friends.
I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. You can run Ubuntu on a mac. Ergo, instead of railing about how much you hate Steve Jobs while it collects dust, why don't you install Ubuntu on it? You already spent the money, are you REALLY getting that much pleasure out of rubbing it in to your girlfriend that she shouldn't have gotten a mac, when you could be using it with your OS du jour? THAT'S the point.
In other words, do not leverage existing knowledge for a platform (Android) that is going to be a massive success (its Google after all), but learn a platform, niche specific language / design workflow for a platform that has always had issues breaking out into the wild in a platform agnostic way. Smart. Like everything else you said :)
Ad hominems get you nowhere. Apple's are almost 20% of all smartphones. The app store is a huge success. You c
That means that OSX carries outdated versions of GNU software (through fink) that people like me use daily in their work. Until a year ago, Matlab used to run like molasses on it. Certain technical unix software (available for years on Sun and Linux) is not available on OSX.
Most of the OSX userland is BSD or next derived. I use Darwinports rather than fink when a native package isn't available (which it very frequently is). What software is "outdated"?
A platform isn't "barren" just because a particular program from a particular other platform doesn't run on it. By your standards above Windows is barren because it doesn't run all GNU software, and Linux is barren because it doesn't run all windows software. It's completely nonsensical argument.
The hardware might be separable from the OS, but why would I pay 1.5 times the cost for the same components ? Until Apple used PowerPC processors, there might have been an argument for a cost differential, but there is not one today. I have done this myself - looked at Dell machines with precisely the same specs and they are barely 60-70% of the cost of an apple. I have 10 year old dells (and some old pre-lenovo IBMs) sitting at work and at home, and they are still going strong. When it comes to adding more RAM, even apple fanboys admit that their company basically rips people off.
This has been debunked so many times, I don't even know what the point is. Yes, apple hardware is more expensive. Is it 1.5 times more expensive as you claim? absolutely not. I just specced a Dell notebook to compare to the Macbook Pro smallest edition. The dell does not have Firewire, infrared controller, backlit keyboard, multitouch mousepad, optical audio, and it has an inferior video card. It is also heavier, bulkier, and plastic. It came out to $1700, versus $2000 for the Apple.
I work in a publishing office which has G4 macs still in use. Sometimes they even run OS9 still. Apple is known for hardware that lasts a long time. I wish we had been as lucky with our dells--they don't tend to last more than 4-5 years on average. (bad mobo caps and horrible power supplies seems the most frequent problem)
Inferior software (and no, not everyone, or even a significant fraction of people in the world make movies / record albums for a living), unjustifiably more expensive hardware, for shiny covers and pretty graphics - what is not to like if you had an IQ below a certain level ?
Complete red herring and just...doesn't make any sense again! ALmost all the software I can run on FreeBSD/Linux, I can run on OSX. If you don't like mail.app (I do) run Thunderbird--no problem. Don't like Safari (I do!)--run Firefox, no problem. How can you possibly make an argument for "inferior software"?
Wannabe fratboys are found in every walk of life, since no one profession holds the copyright on stupidity.
I don't think I know what you're getting at...you're claiming "wannabe fratboy" is just a title that means you don't like them, as opposed to having an actual meaning?
Opensource people tend to target certain platforms. For most of them, that is primarily Linux, then Sun and then Apple (that OSX is not a high priority shows up in the outdated versions of software in fink repos).
You've already been suitably vague--where's all this vast list of software that is desperately needed on OSX but nobody can update? I would also strongly dispute your ordering of opensource platforms.
, a good number of that "good number" that you refer to probably use apple to test their apps for the niche market that apple covers.
No, that's not what I meant. Check out pictures from any Bofs/cons/lugs whatever. You will see a lot of apple laptops. End of story.
This is why my gf bought her mac. She has since found that she can't really do her real work with it, so he
Ahh, I see what you're saying. I actually agree--an "only full albums" option would be nice, though I doubt I would use it often if ever.
As for spotlight, honestly I can't say I've ever felt a need for that kind of functionality. If I'm looking for a song, then I open amarok, which is actually tailored for searching music. In fact, linux has tools similar to spotlight, one being "Beagle" which comes with my distro, but I always uninstall it because it drives up my system load. That's an implementation-specific problem but I personally don't ever feel the need to search my entire system for something when there is a domain-specific application that I know already has information about it.
I never did either--until I used it for a time. I will say that I do frequently use spotlight for filename/contents searches rather than metadata, but all-in-all, spotlight has pretty much replaced a lot of my usage in Finder and file dialogues. Open file--no need to navigate anywhere else, just use spotlight. I don't even use bookmarks too frequently anymore (other than the browser bookmark bar) as I just save links to webpages and then spotlight a topic when I'm trying to remember something cool.
The basic functionality has been around for years if not decades, but spotlight is not a drag on performance, and gives results quickly.
... pay a crap load of money for this barren an OS (which is inseparable from the hardware)
Ok, so you for some unknown reason think OSX is "barren" -- if you feel like answering, what does that mean? The OS may be inseparable from the hardware, but the hardware is very separable from the OS.
Always thought apple users were status wh***s with a pathological desire to look hip to the frat boy/meaning of life empty-talk crowd with a complimentary membership of the Steve Jobs cult (while looking monumentally stupid to the technically proficient or even people with any common sense).
Wow...did an apple user hit your dog or something?
In any case, your suspect pseudo-psychological analysis of apple users aside, there are a very good number of BSD, opensource, etc devs who use apple laptops. Are they hip wannabe fratboys?
This is just more evidence.
What's more evidence? That a random poster to a random technical site claims he doesn't like itunes? Damn, way to indict those apple users.
Most of my material is .wav (or .flac) data either straight from my DAW or straight from my field recorder.
Oh I see--I just assumed since you were using itunes, you would be playing mp3s (since that's all it supports), and since flac support is nonexistent without a number of 3rd-party software packages.
Though come to think of it...last time I imported flac files into itunes, I'm 99% sure that their "Title" was just the filename. What's the problem?
I'm a musician/composer. I have a file of every take, every track, every time I pickup an instrument or sit down at the piano, every time my band rehearses or performs. Editing metadata is not something someone is going to spend the hours doing, especially at the pay rate ($0).
That's very interesting to me. With all the expressive metadata that can be VERY easily put into ID3/Vorbis/etc files, I would have thought that would be to your advantage. The publishing company where I am now uses metadata pretty amazingly well. Then again, I think OSX/Apple have consistently been ahead of the metadata curve, and that windows and linux users are really missing out. Spotlight is an example.
In any case... the original point I made stands--iTunes doesn't "strip" anything in your case, so I'm confused what the issue is.
Damn, I replied to you earlier in earnest. Didn't mean to feed the troll.. sigh
It seems like that's always the way to do it with Apple products; their way, or not at all. Personally, I enjoy being to choose (and switch between) manual and automatic management of my music.
It's there in iTunes preferences, has been for years, and it's not even that confusingly labeled (hint: it has to do with "keep itunes music folder organized")