I enjoy some of the specialized sets, as long as they don't contain the large, one-trick-pony parts. For example I would rather build a castle wall from multiple pieces than have a single piece that is a few inches square. I realize that the difference will probably show itself in the cost, but that's fine with me.
That said, I was encouraged this year to see a few 'generic' builder sets in the local Fred Meyer's. They were geared towards things -- one was geared towards vehicles, I believe, but it wasn't a single model. I'm also happy to see this trend come back. The one thing I would be sad to see go is the more complicated Star Wars sets.
I'm 30 years old, and I still like to build things with my Lego bricks.
This gives me *all* the features of TiVo (except season passes, big whoop), plus a whole lot more. And I don't pay a monthly service charge.
IMO, the season pass is the single biggest reason to HAVE a TiVo. I don't know what time most of my shows are on, and I don't really care. I know that CSI is on Thursday, so after Thursday I can watch it. Sure, I could watch it live, but I don't HAVE to. And I don't have to know, or care, what time the show is on. Perfect. Plus, I only pay an extra $5 a month for the service -- well worth it, IMO.
How about this -- your favorite shows get bumped for time around the Oscars, the SuperBowl, etc. If you've got your VCR or PVR set for 10:00, you're out of luck. With TiVo, it doesn't matter.
Which brings me to my question: isn't TiVo just a niche product that really should only be used by folks with an antenna feed or analog cable feed who don't have the savvy to set up a PC next to their TV? Isn't its current success due largely to clever marketing and a small window of market opportunity that they've now artificially prolonged? That is, I think there was an argument for TiVo back when it was introduced, but isn't that argument substantially weaker today?
I don't think it's just for people who don't know how to set up their computer to do the same thing. It's for people who don't *want* to have to mess with it.
TiVo is slow as a dog sometimes, no doubt. But is truly a consumer-level device, something that doesn't require me to do ANYthing to keep it running. If I want to mess with a computer, I'll do so. But if my computer causes me to miss CSI, I don't want anything to do with it. That's really the key. Your computer software will get in your way from time to time -- that is the nature of software on a personal computer. Whether it's bugs, upgrades, configuration... whatever. The goal of a consumer-level device/service is to be as invisible as possible.
I think that, if anything, the TiVo is more relevant today than it was a few years ago. Everyone wants a PVR these days. Dish Network, Comcast and DirecTV all offer their customers a PVR option. A few years ago, they were just for the nerds and early-adopters. Now they're for my mom and your grandpa.
There is no reason you have to purchase every song that is on your iPod via the iTunes Music Store (though you'd be Apple's best buddy if you did). I have a very full 10GB iPod, and most of the music on it (all but about 80 songs) are from CDs that I own.
The benefit is that you CAN play music that you purchased via iTMS, which is the most reasonable music service yet, IMO.
The US military has a lot of weapons that other countries/groups do not have. Can't always be afraid of things like that or we'd still be using muskets.
<speculation>If there is a possibility of the weapon being used against them, they are probably also working on ways to harden their own systems against similar attacks.</speculation>
This whole discussion is sort of like the Wine argument. I'd prefer that people develop native *NIX applications and port them, as opposed to building native Windows applications and porting them, the difference being a dependency on the server instead of the client side).
I would also prefer Unix-based solutions, since it is RARE that MS-based servers have Mac- or Unix-compatible clients. However, it's just not going to happen, at least at my location.
Well, as a Unix admin/programmer in a Windows-based workplace, I can't help but applaud Ximian for releasing the Connector. I've started the ball rolling on trying to get approval for this, or at least permission to use it myself. I can understand why you're a little mad, but we don't have the option of switching 20k+ users to a Unix based setup. This product, free or not, will make using Exchange much better - I may be able to get rid of the PC under my desk (used mostly for Outlook) altogether!:)
I was shown, at the time I upgraded my account from the 'standard' account, the fees and such that would be charged.
Personally I don't mind. The convenience of being able to make and accept payments electronically is worth it. Take a look at what Visa or MC charge - a private citizen cannot do business with them without lots of hassle.
Is this really such a hot idea? Compatability is cool, but wouldn't developers' time be better spent improving or coding for OpenGL?
It doesn't really matter - games are already coded with DirectX, and OpenGL already exists. If it is not the best thing (or, rather, the MS thing) the majority will code to DirectX. If you want their games, you have to use the API they use. I don't they will switch to OpenGL even if there are some improvements, because DirectX will always be tied in to Windows more closely than any third-party API.
Based on this, it seems that a more logical remedy would be to require PVR makers and broadcasters (cable/DSS) to include some sort of technology that would disallow you to skip commercials.
Personally, given the choice between losing my Tivo (which I only received yesterday and already am giddy about it) and being forced to watch commercials, I say "bring it on, IGEA!"
Other comments in this thread have mentioned that the OSX GUI isn't X. That Microsoft used a subset of the MAC GUI to port Office to OSX. I'm sure that required a bit of work and not a little expenditure of capitol.
Mac OS X has three environments under which programs can be developed. The first is Classic, which is just the legacy Mac OS. The other two, Carbon and Cocoa, both enable programs to run in Mac OS X without having to run Classic. If you want to get technical, there is also the BSD layer, but that's not really Mac OS programming. This is why many unix/linux programs can be easily ported to the Mac.
MS Office X is a Carbon application. This means that they partially rewrote the application to comply with the Carbon APIs, rather than the Classic APIs. In comparison to what it would take to rewrite Office in Cocoa, this is no effort at all. Apple claims that converting an application from Classic to Carbon requires changing less than 10% of the code, depending on how 'correctly' the application was written.
Cocoa is an entirely different API that shares nothing with the Classic environment. "Converting" to a Cocoa application isn't possible - the app must be rewritten from scratch. On the other hand, Cocoa is a fully object-oriented API based on NeXT's tech.
So the point of this whole thing is that MS would not have had to write or port any GUI code except what they themselves wrote (MS is notorious for not always sticking to the standard GUI widgets). Since they already had MS Office 2001, a Classic application, they only needed to change that 10% of their code to make it a Carbon app. Of course, they changed/added features, as well...
It's not even so much just being able to distinguish between reality and a game. It is the idea that the anti-social behavior is slowly making its way to the 'harmless' stage - even though there is nothing harmless about carjacking, renting prostitutes, etc. Contrary to popular opinion, being smart is not all there is to making good decisions. I have a nephew that is off-the-charts smart, but he still gets into loads of trouble, because he is young. Experience counts for a lot. I sound like a geezer, though I'm not. I just think there's a difference between making obviously fictional games that are violent (blowing up aliens, shooting zombies, and kicking people in shorts and kimonos on the top of an erupting volcano) and trying to make a game out of all-to-real violence.
I'm talking in circles, and I apologize. Some won't agree with me, and that's fine. I just wanted to share another (hopefully coherent) view on the thing.
The sad thing, to me, is not the ban or the fact that the video game exists, but the fact that people want a game like this enough for a *third* iteration. I'm not going to sit here and say that, if you want to play such a game, that there should be a law against it, but I will say that any parent that lets their kid play a game like this is being irresponsible. If you're an adult, it's your choice, but the fact that some parents will buy these games for their kids is just unconscionable. (boy, I'm sure to get flamed for that!)
Now before you flame me, I play so-called "violent" video games - I am a huge fan of UT, Soul Calibur, Halo and others, but I am old enough to make decisions like that for myself and separate the game from reality and any emotional problems I may have (and let's face it, the kids that shoot each other in school have something out of whack). I am old enough to be responsible for my actions if a game makes me wig out and do something drastic - not that I subscribe to that theory, either. I believe that people are responsible for their own actions, and blaming things on video games or rock music is just an attempt to pass the blame. Anyway, I'm getting off-topic.
Exactly. I believe that this is why it is a very good thing that the US is a republic and not a 'true' democracy. Can you imagine how long it would take to make decisions if every person could vote on every issue? Representative democracy, for all it's problems, is much better, IMO, and the Internet (specifically the Web) proves this. Most people are either apathetic or uninformed about the issues - it is impossible to be completely knowledgable about everything.
As the major network news outlets (both televised and on the Web) demonstrate, having a prominent media outlet does not mean that you have something worthwhile to say.
Well duh, it only took you a day to get your service back on.
Oops... I had intended (when I posted) to make some statement or other about how my area must have been an anomaly, since so many others were still without service.
I was surprised that it came back so quickly - I had just spent the previous day wrestling with my wireless base station to make it use Earthlink (an account I keep for my parents) while getting the NAT (which was also on a VPN) to the new settings... big fat waste of time, it turns out, because somehow I got lucky.
I wasn't trying to rub anyone's nose in anything, just sharing my experience with the transition.:)
I have found QuickTime to be every bit as stable as Real, and much more stable than WMP. I have had movies played through the plug-in crash the browser, but the browser will also crash for no reason on its own, as well. Plus, in the short time that I actually tried to use Real's browser plug-in, it never worked.
Sure, QuickTime isn't perfect, but it's the best alternative, IMO.
I had thought that AT&T made a good switch - I was only out of service for Saturday, and Sunday morning I received a recorded call that told me to "reboot my computer and launch my browser" and the AT&T Broadband Internet page would come up with instructions for the new service.
Not being someone who keeps (or even installs) the standard software suite from the ISP, I set my network to use DHCP and kicked it - and got a new IP from the new DHCP server, and (once I realized I was still using the old DNS servers and reset them) everything has been fine.
There are only two problems:
1) the new service is limited to 1.5mbps (download) rather than 3mbps. This is supposedly "to ensure good quality of service for everyone."
2) my static IP is no longer static, or at least the DHCP lease says it is only good for about 5 days. I don't run public servers, but I like to be able to ssh to my box and get files if I need them.
Beyond these things, everything is back to working as normal. The added benefit is that, after using a modem for 24 hours, I appreciate having a high-bandwidth connection more than ever.:)
Man, this thing is blown WAY out of proportion. The so-called "bug" isn't a bug at all. If anything, it is a poor choice for a default Helper App configuration, not cause for a big fat alarm. You should be cautious when downloading applications in any case. What happens here is that the Helper App for.bin and.hqx (Stuffit Expander by default on my machine) is launched when those files are downloaded.
This is not a software bug or a security hole in the grand sense. This is a stupid decision by someone who configured the defaults. I suggest that maybe it's not a universal thing, since most reports here do not duplicate the "bug".
I kind of expected the first reported security holes in Mac OS X to be something, well, at least seemingly legitimate.
Primarily from a PR perspective this may be a hard sell to the average Joe. Most people, particularly the WWII and Baby Boomer generations, have been taught that radiation is bad and anything associated with the "atom bomb" is gonna kill you or rot out your innards.
I consider myself to be an early adopter when it comes to new tech, but I have to admit to a certain amount of hesitation when it comes to strapping anything with the word "half-life" associated with it on my body.
I will be keeping tabs on this technology, though, as it shows tremendous promise.
I personally have my mail checked every five minutes. I don't always look at it when it comes in, but I like to be notified that there's something there. After having this setup for a while, I was able to note, but ignore, the 'new mail' sound and continue working on whatever I was doing at the time. Then, when I get a break, I can switch to my mail, if there is any. If not, I just continue.
It can be distracting if you can't tune it out, but I prefer that to longer intervals. I agree that the context switch has consequences, but I don't switch until I would have been doing so anyhow, and then slip some email checking in between.;)
Mr. Sharumpe
Re:trying to be objective
on
Mac Rants
·
· Score: 1
[Quote]
The real issue is that Apple has NO direct COMPETITION! Apple makes a TON of money on their hardware.
[/Quote]
I seriously doubt that this is true, but even if it is, that is the name of the game. They are not cheating anyone - there is obviously an option for people who don't want to buy a Mac.
[Quote]
I bet I could have gotten a new G4 for around $1,300.00. Competition is a wonderfull thing.
[/Quote]
I'm not advocating monopolies here, but an industry where the only thing that matters is price is not a good place to make money. Apple charges the price that it thinks is going to sell computers and make money. First off, regardless of MHz or bus speeds, the only worthwhile benchmark of a computer is how it 'feels' to the prospective buyer. In this arena, comparing MacOS and Windows is comparing apples and oranges (sorry). Lowering prices on an apple because someone else is doing so for an orange is not necessarily good business.
Some people just like apples better than oranges, will pay more to get them, and are more than happy to do so.
It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It has to do with the fact that the school, which is a private school and therefore a business of sorts, has the right to refuse to do business with anyone at their discretion. I am sure that, if we asked, the students and/or their parents signed some sort of contract that included the rules (ie no defamation of the school) that the students must agree to in order to attend the school.
If the students violated that contract (through the 'other' Web site, not the one with the quotes) then the school has every right to choose not to do business with them any longer. If this was a public school, I would be outraged, but it isn't, and this is fully within the rights of a private school (or any business for that matter).
The fact that one of them had a police file started on him because of the programming flub is ridiculous, though. I wonder if the cops were serious, or if there was some sort of funky law requiring them to do it without any sort of human judgement involved in it...
Slashdot Mirror
No *new* episodes will be made. SciFi is only playing the episodes that already exist.
I enjoy some of the specialized sets, as long as they don't contain the large, one-trick-pony parts. For example I would rather build a castle wall from multiple pieces than have a single piece that is a few inches square. I realize that the difference will probably show itself in the cost, but that's fine with me.
That said, I was encouraged this year to see a few 'generic' builder sets in the local Fred Meyer's. They were geared towards things -- one was geared towards vehicles, I believe, but it wasn't a single model. I'm also happy to see this trend come back. The one thing I would be sad to see go is the more complicated Star Wars sets.
I'm 30 years old, and I still like to build things with my Lego bricks.
Mr. Sharumpe
This gives me *all* the features of TiVo (except season passes, big whoop), plus a whole lot more. And I don't pay a monthly service charge.
IMO, the season pass is the single biggest reason to HAVE a TiVo. I don't know what time most of my shows are on, and I don't really care. I know that CSI is on Thursday, so after Thursday I can watch it. Sure, I could watch it live, but I don't HAVE to. And I don't have to know, or care, what time the show is on. Perfect. Plus, I only pay an extra $5 a month for the service -- well worth it, IMO.
How about this -- your favorite shows get bumped for time around the Oscars, the SuperBowl, etc. If you've got your VCR or PVR set for 10:00, you're out of luck. With TiVo, it doesn't matter.
Which brings me to my question: isn't TiVo just a niche product that really should only be used by folks with an antenna feed or analog cable feed who don't have the savvy to set up a PC next to their TV? Isn't its current success due largely to clever marketing and a small window of market opportunity that they've now artificially prolonged? That is, I think there was an argument for TiVo back when it was introduced, but isn't that argument substantially weaker today?
I don't think it's just for people who don't know how to set up their computer to do the same thing. It's for people who don't *want* to have to mess with it.
TiVo is slow as a dog sometimes, no doubt. But is truly a consumer-level device, something that doesn't require me to do ANYthing to keep it running. If I want to mess with a computer, I'll do so. But if my computer causes me to miss CSI, I don't want anything to do with it. That's really the key. Your computer software will get in your way from time to time -- that is the nature of software on a personal computer. Whether it's bugs, upgrades, configuration... whatever. The goal of a consumer-level device/service is to be as invisible as possible.
I think that, if anything, the TiVo is more relevant today than it was a few years ago. Everyone wants a PVR these days. Dish Network, Comcast and DirecTV all offer their customers a PVR option. A few years ago, they were just for the nerds and early-adopters. Now they're for my mom and your grandpa.
Mr. Sharumpe
There is no reason you have to purchase every song that is on your iPod via the iTunes Music Store (though you'd be Apple's best buddy if you did). I have a very full 10GB iPod, and most of the music on it (all but about 80 songs) are from CDs that I own.
The benefit is that you CAN play music that you purchased via iTMS, which is the most reasonable music service yet, IMO.
Mr. Sharumpe
The US military has a lot of weapons that other countries/groups do not have. Can't always be afraid of things like that or we'd still be using muskets.
<speculation>If there is a possibility of the weapon being used against them, they are probably also working on ways to harden their own systems against similar attacks.</speculation>
This whole discussion is sort of like the Wine argument. I'd prefer that people develop native *NIX applications and port them, as opposed to building native Windows applications and porting them, the difference being a dependency on the server instead of the client side).
I would also prefer Unix-based solutions, since it is RARE that MS-based servers have Mac- or Unix-compatible clients. However, it's just not going to happen, at least at my location.
:)
Mr. Sharumpe
Well, as a Unix admin/programmer in a Windows-based workplace, I can't help but applaud Ximian for releasing the Connector. I've started the ball rolling on trying to get approval for this, or at least permission to use it myself. I can understand why you're a little mad, but we don't have the option of switching 20k+ users to a Unix based setup. This product, free or not, will make using Exchange much better - I may be able to get rid of the PC under my desk (used mostly for Outlook) altogether! :)
Mr. Sharumpe
I was shown, at the time I upgraded my account from the 'standard' account, the fees and such that would be charged.
Personally I don't mind. The convenience of being able to make and accept payments electronically is worth it. Take a look at what Visa or MC charge - a private citizen cannot do business with them without lots of hassle.
Mr. Sharumpe
Is this really such a hot idea? Compatability is cool, but wouldn't developers' time be better spent improving or coding for OpenGL?
It doesn't really matter - games are already coded with DirectX, and OpenGL already exists. If it is not the best thing (or, rather, the MS thing) the majority will code to DirectX. If you want their games, you have to use the API they use. I don't they will switch to OpenGL even if there are some improvements, because DirectX will always be tied in to Windows more closely than any third-party API.
Mr. Sharumpe
Based on this, it seems that a more logical remedy would be to require PVR makers and broadcasters (cable/DSS) to include some sort of technology that would disallow you to skip commercials.
Personally, given the choice between losing my Tivo (which I only received yesterday and already am giddy about it) and being forced to watch commercials, I say "bring it on, IGEA!"
Mr. Sharumpe
Other comments in this thread have mentioned that the OSX GUI isn't X. That Microsoft used a subset of the MAC GUI to port Office to OSX. I'm sure that required a bit of work and not a little expenditure of capitol.
Mac OS X has three environments under which programs can be developed. The first is Classic, which is just the legacy Mac OS. The other two, Carbon and Cocoa, both enable programs to run in Mac OS X without having to run Classic. If you want to get technical, there is also the BSD layer, but that's not really Mac OS programming. This is why many unix/linux programs can be easily ported to the Mac.
MS Office X is a Carbon application. This means that they partially rewrote the application to comply with the Carbon APIs, rather than the Classic APIs. In comparison to what it would take to rewrite Office in Cocoa, this is no effort at all. Apple claims that converting an application from Classic to Carbon requires changing less than 10% of the code, depending on how 'correctly' the application was written.
Cocoa is an entirely different API that shares nothing with the Classic environment. "Converting" to a Cocoa application isn't possible - the app must be rewritten from scratch. On the other hand, Cocoa is a fully object-oriented API based on NeXT's tech.
So the point of this whole thing is that MS would not have had to write or port any GUI code except what they themselves wrote (MS is notorious for not always sticking to the standard GUI widgets). Since they already had MS Office 2001, a Classic application, they only needed to change that 10% of their code to make it a Carbon app. Of course, they changed/added features, as well...
Mr. Sharumpe
It's not even so much just being able to distinguish between reality and a game. It is the idea that the anti-social behavior is slowly making its way to the 'harmless' stage - even though there is nothing harmless about carjacking, renting prostitutes, etc. Contrary to popular opinion, being smart is not all there is to making good decisions. I have a nephew that is off-the-charts smart, but he still gets into loads of trouble, because he is young. Experience counts for a lot. I sound like a geezer, though I'm not. I just think there's a difference between making obviously fictional games that are violent (blowing up aliens, shooting zombies, and kicking people in shorts and kimonos on the top of an erupting volcano) and trying to make a game out of all-to-real violence.
I'm talking in circles, and I apologize. Some won't agree with me, and that's fine. I just wanted to share another (hopefully coherent) view on the thing.
Mr. Sharumpe
The sad thing, to me, is not the ban or the fact that the video game exists, but the fact that people want a game like this enough for a *third* iteration. I'm not going to sit here and say that, if you want to play such a game, that there should be a law against it, but I will say that any parent that lets their kid play a game like this is being irresponsible. If you're an adult, it's your choice, but the fact that some parents will buy these games for their kids is just unconscionable. (boy, I'm sure to get flamed for that!)
Now before you flame me, I play so-called "violent" video games - I am a huge fan of UT, Soul Calibur, Halo and others, but I am old enough to make decisions like that for myself and separate the game from reality and any emotional problems I may have (and let's face it, the kids that shoot each other in school have something out of whack). I am old enough to be responsible for my actions if a game makes me wig out and do something drastic - not that I subscribe to that theory, either. I believe that people are responsible for their own actions, and blaming things on video games or rock music is just an attempt to pass the blame. Anyway, I'm getting off-topic.
Flame away...
Mr. Sharumpe
Exactly. I believe that this is why it is a very good thing that the US is a republic and not a 'true' democracy. Can you imagine how long it would take to make decisions if every person could vote on every issue? Representative democracy, for all it's problems, is much better, IMO, and the Internet (specifically the Web) proves this. Most people are either apathetic or uninformed about the issues - it is impossible to be completely knowledgable about everything.
As the major network news outlets (both televised and on the Web) demonstrate, having a prominent media outlet does not mean that you have something worthwhile to say.
Mr. Sharumpe
Well duh, it only took you a day to get your service back on.
:)
Oops... I had intended (when I posted) to make some statement or other about how my area must have been an anomaly, since so many others were still without service.
I was surprised that it came back so quickly - I had just spent the previous day wrestling with my wireless base station to make it use Earthlink (an account I keep for my parents) while getting the NAT (which was also on a VPN) to the new settings... big fat waste of time, it turns out, because somehow I got lucky.
I wasn't trying to rub anyone's nose in anything, just sharing my experience with the transition.
Mr. Sharumpe
I have found QuickTime to be every bit as stable as Real, and much more stable than WMP. I have had movies played through the plug-in crash the browser, but the browser will also crash for no reason on its own, as well. Plus, in the short time that I actually tried to use Real's browser plug-in, it never worked.
Sure, QuickTime isn't perfect, but it's the best alternative, IMO.
Mr. Sharumpe
I had thought that AT&T made a good switch - I was only out of service for Saturday, and Sunday morning I received a recorded call that told me to "reboot my computer and launch my browser" and the AT&T Broadband Internet page would come up with instructions for the new service.
:)
Not being someone who keeps (or even installs) the standard software suite from the ISP, I set my network to use DHCP and kicked it - and got a new IP from the new DHCP server, and (once I realized I was still using the old DNS servers and reset them) everything has been fine.
There are only two problems:
1) the new service is limited to 1.5mbps (download) rather than 3mbps. This is supposedly "to ensure good quality of service for everyone."
2) my static IP is no longer static, or at least the DHCP lease says it is only good for about 5 days. I don't run public servers, but I like to be able to ssh to my box and get files if I need them.
Beyond these things, everything is back to working as normal. The added benefit is that, after using a modem for 24 hours, I appreciate having a high-bandwidth connection more than ever.
Mr. Sharumpe
Ummm... the product has been around since 1998 or 1999, when the original iBook was introduced.
They did a commercial to that effect, though I can't find a link to it.
Mr. Sharumpe
(haha, couldn't resist)
The planes would be lighter on takeoff (relative to their un-fueled weight). Should allow for shorter runways, right?
:)
Mr. Sharumpe
Man, this thing is blown WAY out of proportion. The so-called "bug" isn't a bug at all. If anything, it is a poor choice for a default Helper App configuration, not cause for a big fat alarm. You should be cautious when downloading applications in any case. What happens here is that the Helper App for .bin and .hqx (Stuffit Expander by default on my machine) is launched when those files are downloaded.
This is not a software bug or a security hole in the grand sense. This is a stupid decision by someone who configured the defaults. I suggest that maybe it's not a universal thing, since most reports here do not duplicate the "bug".
I kind of expected the first reported security holes in Mac OS X to be something, well, at least seemingly legitimate.
Mr. Sharumpe
Primarily from a PR perspective this may be a hard sell to the average Joe. Most people, particularly the WWII and Baby Boomer generations, have been taught that radiation is bad and anything associated with the "atom bomb" is gonna kill you or rot out your innards.
I consider myself to be an early adopter when it comes to new tech, but I have to admit to a certain amount of hesitation when it comes to strapping anything with the word "half-life" associated with it on my body.
I will be keeping tabs on this technology, though, as it shows tremendous promise.
Mr. Sharumpe
Registering DVD movies has been tried - it was called DIVX and it bombed spectacularly.
:)
Mr. Sharumpe
I personally have my mail checked every five minutes. I don't always look at it when it comes in, but I like to be notified that there's something there. After having this setup for a while, I was able to note, but ignore, the 'new mail' sound and continue working on whatever I was doing at the time. Then, when I get a break, I can switch to my mail, if there is any. If not, I just continue.
;)
It can be distracting if you can't tune it out, but I prefer that to longer intervals. I agree that the context switch has consequences, but I don't switch until I would have been doing so anyhow, and then slip some email checking in between.
Mr. Sharumpe
[Quote]
The real issue is that Apple has NO direct COMPETITION! Apple makes a TON of money on their hardware.
[/Quote]
I seriously doubt that this is true, but even if it is, that is the name of the game. They are not cheating anyone - there is obviously an option for people who don't want to buy a Mac.
[Quote]
I bet I could have gotten a new G4 for around $1,300.00. Competition is a wonderfull thing.
[/Quote]
I'm not advocating monopolies here, but an industry where the only thing that matters is price is not a good place to make money. Apple charges the price that it thinks is going to sell computers and make money. First off, regardless of MHz or bus speeds, the only worthwhile benchmark of a computer is how it 'feels' to the prospective buyer. In this arena, comparing MacOS and Windows is comparing apples and oranges (sorry). Lowering prices on an apple because someone else is doing so for an orange is not necessarily good business.
Some people just like apples better than oranges, will pay more to get them, and are more than happy to do so.
Mr. Sharumpe
Insert Important-Sounding Title Here
It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It has to do with the fact that the school, which is a private school and therefore a business of sorts, has the right to refuse to do business with anyone at their discretion. I am sure that, if we asked, the students and/or their parents signed some sort of contract that included the rules (ie no defamation of the school) that the students must agree to in order to attend the school.
If the students violated that contract (through the 'other' Web site, not the one with the quotes) then the school has every right to choose not to do business with them any longer. If this was a public school, I would be outraged, but it isn't, and this is fully within the rights of a private school (or any business for that matter).
The fact that one of them had a police file started on him because of the programming flub is ridiculous, though. I wonder if the cops were serious, or if there was some sort of funky law requiring them to do it without any sort of human judgement involved in it...