1) That fanboys care what some judge thinks. I mean, I understand that many fanboys don't have anything that could even be remotely termed "perspective", but if this is the biggest problem in your life? You're doing fine.
2) A judge actually spent time thinking about this. I don't even know what to do with that piece of information.
3) Some DIPSHIT passed a restrictive trade agreement that can be circumvented by a stupid argument like this. For one thing, tariffs are foolish, and for another thing, dumb tariffs like this are extra foolish.
Meh. Back in MY day, you needed a computer upgrade for each Ultima game. I also remember working all night on my 286's CONFIG.SYS for the magic setup that would give me the cool extra animations in Wing Commander.
That was back when Ultima games were good. *sigh*
Doom III...'scuse me while I wait to see if they ship a GAME in the box, not just a shiny technology demonstrator/same old deathmatch rehash.
The article derided early FM early adopters as "stoners and hippies". What happens when XM early adopters get the same treatment?
More to the point, why should I give him the chance to charge me lots of money for the privilege?
Sure, maybe XM will enable people to be broken up into smaller niches. Maybe it'll even have broader playlists. Maybe I can get through 24 hours without hearing the same song twice.
But I, for one, am not going to be paying anybody to find out.
One guy's opinion, that's all. Fortunately, my opinion about how radio should be is going to be far less damaging than this Abrams guy's is.
Why is it in MS's interest to do this? What on earth would possess them to reverse five years of anti-free-software rhetoric to "Wow! This is great stuff! Buy it from us!"
The same guy who crashed FM into the ground is now driving XM. Only now, you get to pay an exorbitant fee every month to listen to what he wants you to listen to.
Why is this good?
Me, I'm taking my $10 and change a month, and going to Good Records, which if you live in Dallas is an oasis of non-shitty music.
Last time I bought hardware, I didn't see any lists of things that it wasn't "meant to" do. I bought the hardware. It's mine. If I find a button somwhere that makes it twice as fast, it's STILL mine.
How the hell could that possibly be illegal? I didn't coerce anybody...I didn't defraud anybody...I didn't deprive anybody of anything at all. So what could possibly be wrong with that?
That seems like such a DUMB point to make, though.
I mean, if NT were in any meaningful way based on a "separate" OS layer then he might have a case to make for changing the "separate" OS layer to something else. Of course, that's not the way things are, but then he's WRONG, not making a silly point.
If he actually thinks that the fact that NT has a command shell will make it any easier to port it to Linux, then he's a big stupid head.
So either he's really confused about how NT works, and thinking that there is a real command-prompt MS-DOS somewhere down there, or he's being absolutely ridiculous by saying that the presence of a command prompt indicates some useful platform that could be ported to or from.
Meh. Silly article either way. MS will go (real) Free Software shortly after Gates and Ballmer go down to take over management of Hell.
Win31, 95, 98, and ME were unstable as designed from the get-go, so they don't count.
NT3.5 (what happened to the first several versions, by the way?) was (in your anecdotal experience) pretty stable.
NT4 is, if you hold your mouth right, pretty stable.
XP is, in your anecdotal experience, pretty stable.
Where's this proven track record of reliability? I don't give a good goddamn if you think MS is better or worse than Linux/BSD/what the hell ever. That has nothing to do with my point, which was that MS does not have the experience or the track record of making reliable systems that I would look for before I let them get anywhere near a mission-critical application.
I'm not talking about mission critical "Gee, we might lose some money if our system blows up", I'm talking about mission critical "Lives depend on the reliable functioning of this system".
I also don't argue that lives depend on the successful functioning of iDrive, but I/DO/ believe that any system that's designed to be used while you're piloting a 4000lb missile should be pretty damn non-surprising.
You're right. Microsoft has turned over a new leaf with Windows CE.
Windows 3.1 was unstable Windows 95 was unstable Windows NT3 was unstable Windows NT4 was unstable Windows 98 was unstable Windows 2000 was sorta stable Windows ME was an enormous raft of crap Windows XP isn't totally unstable
But WinCE? You bet. I'm sure it's got industry leading stability, coming from that bastion of reliable software development, Microsoft.
Dude, it is not necessary to PROVE that Windows and their ilk are unstable. It is up to MS that they ARE stable...because their track record demonstrates otherwise.
Anybody who's not an MS apologist would get this immediately.
See, I'm trying to figure out how they're going to find it in the first place.
At movie theater:
Theater Flunky: "Sir, would you mind stepping over here?" Me: "What?" Theater Flunky: "Sir, we need to search you." Me: "What?" Theater Flunky: "We need to see if you're carrying a phone." Me: "If you are going to try to touch me, you better bring a lot of friends, because I'm going to kick your ass into the popcorn popper."
No, McDonalds' competitors were taking every opportunity they could to make pot-shots at the company.
It would be like Chevy doing commercials about exploding Pintos. In a just world, the horrible taste involved in using the injury and death of consumers as advertising fodder would earn the company a smack-down from the public.
Demonstrating, yet again, that no matter which T-Shirt they wear (one with a donkey or one with an elephant) THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU.
They don't care about your freedoms. They don't care about your rights. They only care about your money, and then only when it's not YOUR money anymore.
The ones with the donkey want to take away your money by legislative fiat, and the ones with an elephant want to take it away by unrestricted rampant commercialism.
You can argue as to which is a better way for them to take your money from you, but don't for a minute think that these people who rule us will allow you (or me) a voice.
I think the cost of their subscription is absurd. I feel like they should either give the boxes away with a service commitment, or make the subscription costs lower. As it stands, I pay a significant fraction of the box's cost each year in maintenance.
I don't feel that the work they do to compile a list of the shows on TV is worth $12/mo. Therefore, I won't patronize them.
I fully appreciate that other people feel differently than I do, and unlike many/. readers, that doesn't bother me even a little bit. But Tivo hasn't hit my price point yet, and therefore I won't buy one.
Fair enough. I've never played with plaster and lathe walls. I imagine they're a lot harder than drywall.
If I was renting, it certainly would be a different question. However, I don't think that many people have custom home-entertainment systems professionally installed in their rented apartments.
On the other hand, what non-geek would be buying a hard-drive based music player?
On the third hand, if you're REALLY a geek, you know how to pull Cat5. : ) Wireless is fine for laptops, but I don't understand why I'd want to use it for stationary boxen.
Obviously, you're one of those people who can't seem to understand that different people might have different opinions.
Example:
Not all Palestinians support suicide bombers.
Not all/. users hate MS and Apple and love Linux.
I understand how this might be difficult for you to get your brain around, but I recommend you make the effort. It will be worthwhile in your intellectual development.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, this pegs my "WTF?!" meter for three reasons.
1) That fanboys care what some judge thinks. I mean, I understand that many fanboys don't have anything that could even be remotely termed "perspective", but if this is the biggest problem in your life? You're doing fine.
2) A judge actually spent time thinking about this. I don't even know what to do with that piece of information.
3) Some DIPSHIT passed a restrictive trade agreement that can be circumvented by a stupid argument like this. For one thing, tariffs are foolish, and for another thing, dumb tariffs like this are extra foolish.
Jane, stop this crazy thing.
A fold-in BT antenna would be cool. As a matter of fact, the other day I saw an xJack antenna on an 802.11 card, which I thought was a GREAT idea.
I'm thinking that the slot connector would pull out of its solder joint before the card would snap. Snagging bad.
Problem is, then you have an antenna sticking out of a device that's supposed to fit into your pocket, ready to snag on something and break off.
SDIO bluetooth is no substitute for an integrated solution.
Meh. Back in MY day, you needed a computer upgrade for each Ultima game. I also remember working all night on my 286's CONFIG.SYS for the magic setup that would give me the cool extra animations in Wing Commander.
That was back when Ultima games were good. *sigh*
Doom III...'scuse me while I wait to see if they ship a GAME in the box, not just a shiny technology demonstrator/same old deathmatch rehash.
Thanks for the heads-up, but I've got class Thurs night. Much obliged!
The article derided early FM early adopters as "stoners and hippies". What happens when XM early adopters get the same treatment?
More to the point, why should I give him the chance to charge me lots of money for the privilege?
Sure, maybe XM will enable people to be broken up into smaller niches. Maybe it'll even have broader playlists. Maybe I can get through 24 hours without hearing the same song twice.
But I, for one, am not going to be paying anybody to find out.
One guy's opinion, that's all. Fortunately, my opinion about how radio should be is going to be far less damaging than this Abrams guy's is.
Fair enough. Let's talk about the PR aspects.
Why is it in MS's interest to do this? What on earth would possess them to reverse five years of anti-free-software rhetoric to "Wow! This is great stuff! Buy it from us!"
I don't understand.
The same guy who crashed FM into the ground is now driving XM. Only now, you get to pay an exorbitant fee every month to listen to what he wants you to listen to.
Why is this good?
Me, I'm taking my $10 and change a month, and going to Good Records, which if you live in Dallas is an oasis of non-shitty music.
Last time I bought hardware, I didn't see any lists of things that it wasn't "meant to" do. I bought the hardware. It's mine. If I find a button somwhere that makes it twice as fast, it's STILL mine.
How the hell could that possibly be illegal? I didn't coerce anybody...I didn't defraud anybody...I didn't deprive anybody of anything at all. So what could possibly be wrong with that?
That seems like such a DUMB point to make, though.
I mean, if NT were in any meaningful way based on a "separate" OS layer then he might have a case to make for changing the "separate" OS layer to something else. Of course, that's not the way things are, but then he's WRONG, not making a silly point.
If he actually thinks that the fact that NT has a command shell will make it any easier to port it to Linux, then he's a big stupid head.
So either he's really confused about how NT works, and thinking that there is a real command-prompt MS-DOS somewhere down there, or he's being absolutely ridiculous by saying that the presence of a command prompt indicates some useful platform that could be ported to or from.
Meh. Silly article either way. MS will go (real) Free Software shortly after Gates and Ballmer go down to take over management of Hell.
Ah. Let me see if I can summarize.
/DO/ believe that any system that's designed to be used while you're piloting a 4000lb missile should be pretty damn non-surprising.
Win31, 95, 98, and ME were unstable as designed from the get-go, so they don't count.
NT3.5 (what happened to the first several versions, by the way?) was (in your anecdotal experience) pretty stable.
NT4 is, if you hold your mouth right, pretty stable.
XP is, in your anecdotal experience, pretty stable.
Where's this proven track record of reliability? I don't give a good goddamn if you think MS is better or worse than Linux/BSD/what the hell ever. That has nothing to do with my point, which was that MS does not have the experience or the track record of making reliable systems that I would look for before I let them get anywhere near a mission-critical application.
I'm not talking about mission critical "Gee, we might lose some money if our system blows up", I'm talking about mission critical "Lives depend on the reliable functioning of this system".
I also don't argue that lives depend on the successful functioning of iDrive, but I
Bweah? What hardware exists on Earth that supports XP but not 98?
Weird...I'm seriously curious...
To crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and to hear the lamentations of de women.
You're right. Microsoft has turned over a new leaf with Windows CE.
Windows 3.1 was unstable
Windows 95 was unstable
Windows NT3 was unstable
Windows NT4 was unstable
Windows 98 was unstable
Windows 2000 was sorta stable
Windows ME was an enormous raft of crap
Windows XP isn't totally unstable
But WinCE? You bet. I'm sure it's got industry leading stability, coming from that bastion of reliable software development, Microsoft.
Dude, it is not necessary to PROVE that Windows and their ilk are unstable. It is up to MS that they ARE stable...because their track record demonstrates otherwise.
Anybody who's not an MS apologist would get this immediately.
See, I'm trying to figure out how they're going to find it in the first place.
At movie theater:
Theater Flunky: "Sir, would you mind stepping over here?"
Me: "What?"
Theater Flunky: "Sir, we need to search you."
Me: "What?"
Theater Flunky: "We need to see if you're carrying a phone."
Me: "If you are going to try to touch me, you better bring a lot of friends, because I'm going to kick your ass into the popcorn popper."
No, McDonalds' competitors were taking every opportunity they could to make pot-shots at the company.
It would be like Chevy doing commercials about exploding Pintos. In a just world, the horrible taste involved in using the injury and death of consumers as advertising fodder would earn the company a smack-down from the public.
But it's not a just world, is it?
Their business model is "soak customer on front end, AND soak customer on back end!"
No thanks. I disagree with your hair-splitting.
Demonstrating, yet again, that no matter which T-Shirt they wear (one with a donkey or one with an elephant) THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU.
They don't care about your freedoms.
They don't care about your rights.
They only care about your money, and then only when it's not YOUR money anymore.
The ones with the donkey want to take away your money by legislative fiat, and the ones with an elephant want to take it away by unrestricted rampant commercialism.
You can argue as to which is a better way for them to take your money from you, but don't for a minute think that these people who rule us will allow you (or me) a voice.
Bread and circuses.
I think the cost of their subscription is absurd. I feel like they should either give the boxes away with a service commitment, or make the subscription costs lower. As it stands, I pay a significant fraction of the box's cost each year in maintenance.
/. readers, that doesn't bother me even a little bit. But Tivo hasn't hit my price point yet, and therefore I won't buy one.
I don't feel that the work they do to compile a list of the shows on TV is worth $12/mo. Therefore, I won't patronize them.
I fully appreciate that other people feel differently than I do, and unlike many
Settle down, Beavis. Nobody's taking your Tivo away.
I like Tivo's system. I just don't like their business model.
Please tell me you're joking. I know the loathsome re-release did some horrible things, but this...this is too much.
Say it ain't so. Please. I'm beggin' ya.
Fair enough. I've never played with plaster and lathe walls. I imagine they're a lot harder than drywall.
If I was renting, it certainly would be a different question. However, I don't think that many people have custom home-entertainment systems professionally installed in their rented apartments.
: )
It's on the LAN. Run a cron job to back it up to...whatever. Not a tough problem to solve.
AND it has a second drive sled.
Reading article+creativity=answer to question.
On the other hand, what non-geek would be buying a hard-drive based music player?
On the third hand, if you're REALLY a geek, you know how to pull Cat5. : ) Wireless is fine for laptops, but I don't understand why I'd want to use it for stationary boxen.
Re: your sig.
/. users hate MS and Apple and love Linux.
Obviously, you're one of those people who can't seem to understand that different people might have different opinions.
Example:
Not all Palestinians support suicide bombers.
Not all
I understand how this might be difficult for you to get your brain around, but I recommend you make the effort. It will be worthwhile in your intellectual development.