I've had two of the things... Microsoft wireless desktops. The last one was a Wireless Desktop Elite or some such. Nice mouse, and nice feeling keyboard. The problem was the stupid dialogs which would occasionally pop up. "Your wireless device has a low signal strength. You should check the batteries."
I finally trashed them and bought a new mouse and keyboard which had a wire. Logitech something keyboard, and a G5 gaming mouse. The G5 is nice, the cable is covered in cloth and is very flexible.
I do use a MS Wireless Notebook Laser Mouse 6000 on my laptops, and it works ok. But maybe it has to do with the USB dongle thingy being only a foot away from the mouse, rather than the 2 feet or so my desktop wireless receiver was at home.
First, the market is not granular enough. The consumer will never be given the choice of DRM'd CDs vs. DRMless CDs. The options are decided by marketing teams, and they will give consumers choices such as DRM'd CDs or nothing.
Obviously written by someone who does not know where the word DIVX originated from.
I didn't much care for TFA, as I thought he was as simplistic as the people he complained about.
You're right, people who propose that Open Source is the secret to all problems, without really understanding what the problem is and have no answer as to how Open Source could solve that, are problems.
The same is true of any technology. Obviously the reason why a new technology was created because somebody perceived a problem with the old technology. Why do we use XML rather than comma-delimited files? Because XML includes definition of the data, rather than having to also ship a seperate document which describes what's in the CSV file.
However, the other truth is that new technologies introduce new problems. It may be slower to parse an XML file than a CSV file, the XML file may take up much more space on disk, etc. Are these problems show stoppers for your implementation? That depends.
That's the key. It all depends.
I think what TFA was really complaining about, when he gave the example of the using XML for configuration, is that there was no detail as to why. Why was XML chosen instead of other methods?
All technologies suffer from this, and the problem with zealots is that they fail to address those issues.
I keep following the Ruby on Rails discussions here on/. and elsewhere trying to understand what it does for me. Thus far I'm not impressed. Much of what the zealots point to as strengths, I already have using VS.NET wizards with ASP.NET 2.0. I can drop a data connection on a page, and I can have it automatically implement the CRUD functions when I attach the connection to an editable grid view, etc.
The wizards work great when you are tossing together a sample, or a very simple application. Where they fall down is because most apps aren't that simple, and you start having to do joins and manipulation of the data and such, which is why we build our own custom data layer.
What I haven't seen from the zealot's discussion is evidence that they've gone beyond the simple applications yet.
The same is true of the marketers. If you go through an ASP.NET training webcast, they'll show you the wizards too. They want you to think how easy this all is... woo hoo. buy it now. The reality is a bit more complicated, but there are aspects of the easy stuff you can use, like binding a grid to a dataset or better yet a collection of business objects. It just isn't as easy to demo and market.
I'm open to any new technology, but I'm going to think through it's ramifications. While I don't like people who advocate a hammer for ever screw... I also don't care for people who argue for the devil we know and lose track of the benefits of the new devil.
They may be saying that had the advertiser known that this mechanism was worthless sooner, they would have advertised elsewhere which would have brought in additional sales.
so they're seeking damages on lost sales opportunity, which may very well be much more than advertising costs.
The evil you know is often more tolerable than the one you don't.
Bush isn't evil. Merely incompetent.
but I think the problems in the White House really stem from Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld.
So obviously it would have been better to bring in a new team.
Obstructionism has crippled our Legislature, allowing the Executive to run amok in some ways.
Good. I haven't seen a single idea pass congress in the past 5 years that was worth implementing. Get back to me when they have a FUCKING CLUE and some good ideas. I'd rather have NOTHING done than a bunch of BAD somethings.
I don't vote blindly one way or the other.
This explains the lockstep Republican talking points spewing from your keyboard.
In our political system, you must be a party member to participate in the primaries, which shape the slate of candidates presented in the general election.
Not in my state.
I'm a fiscal conservative but a social moderate.
Which usually would make you a Democrat. But apparently you just vote for Republicans and spew their talking points because I don't know... getting kicked in the head feels good or something.
Republicans have abandoned fiscal conservatism.
They haven't believed in it since they realized calling for spending cuts loses you elections. i.e. sometime in the 50's or 60's. Ocassionally they trout out the dead horse and beat it a little, but it's always about something irrelevant like eliminating some $20 million program from a $2.4 trillion budget. But it's good radio and television to complain about National Endowment for the Arts.
They want to be popular, yet still pander to their left-wing extremist base.
Right, that left-wing extremist base which is demanding fiscal responsibility. Right.
You've got no clue what you are even fucking talking about. That's why you come on here, spew Republican talking points and then accuse everybody who points out differently of being a Democratic shill.
What's the worst that could possibly happen from voting for a Democrat? That they'd oppose the Bush agenda? Good. That they'd pass some horrific law that you don't like? Well, being the opposition party Bush would probably veto it right? Yet, how many horrific laws passed by the Republican Congress has he vetoed?
None.
The only thing he's vetoed thus far was a bipartisan bill with strong backing that was opposed by his Right-wing Extremist supporters. Hmm. Which party is pandering again? Really? You still think it's the Democrats who are beholden?
The problem with politics today is people such as yourself who are ignorant of their choices.
Modern Republicans are no different than Mao, Stalin, Hitler, any dictator.
If you oppose their agenda, you are an enemy of the state.
Though I admit I'd most like to see Jesse Ventura in the White House. He rocked as a Governor and is free from all that political party (the poison of politics) crap.
Yeah, but he was a pussy and let people get to him.
I won't consider registering Democratic or voting for most Democrats. If the Democratic party would propose and deliver a coherent, workable agenda, instead of attempting to cripple our government through obstructionism and presenting themselves simply as the "we're not Bush" party
THAT's fucking hilarious.
Crippling the government through obstructionism and presenting themselves as the "We're not Bush" party IS THEIR FUCKING JOB! That's why they are called the OPPOSITION PARTY!
Gingrich shut down the government in 1995. Have the Democrats done anything even approaching opposition such as you claim? NO. So why all of your whining?
Embracing centrist views is the only way Democrats will garner enough votes to get elected in force. Bill and Hillary and a handul of others understand this, why don't the rest of you? I'm not pleased with where this country is going, but I simply don't see anyone offering viable alternatives.
Right. That's how Republicans got elected by being more centrist. Give me a break.
If given the choice between a Republican and a Republican, the voter is going to vote Republican every time.
You don't win voters over by becoming more like the opposition party. You win voters over by showing that you have different ideas, and explaining why they are better. With the complete and utter failure of Conservate ideology, one would hope that Democrats can do that.
Get people tuned into the real problems in the country...
I think it's funny to hear a complaint like that from someone with this line in their.sig:
Gerrymandering has turned Congress into a cartel of power.
It amazes me when I hear people complaining about Gerrymandering as being the source of a problem, when it is nothing but a symptom of several problems.
The source of the problems of Congress has largely to do with the fixed number of Representatives we now have, as set by a law in 1911 when the country had less than 1/3rd the present population.
For a wide variety of reasons.
It suggests to me that those complaining of Gerrymandering aren't interested in solving the problems plaguing our Representative body of government, and just want to complain for the sake of complaining.
Well, at least that explains why you don't know what you're talking about. You talk about Republicans not knowing their heads from their asses and then start spouting off on a situation about which you haven't the vaguest understanding. Now that is a typical Democrat.
Yeah, but you have to admit. Republicans don't know their heads from their asses. I still find the first post amazing, complaining about too much regulation, and then blaming the problem on the regulators. It certainly exemplifies the Republican mindset, desperately grasping for straws to build an argument with no consistency.
And what's amazing about this, is I'm a libertarian and I don't much like regulation as I've found it serves a broader purpose of preventing competition rather than protecting rights. But that's not what the guy complained about, did he?
Your little tirades here have just added more evidence to the argument of not knowing which side is up, haven't they?
You complain about California politics, but refuse to do anything about it. You refuse to move, preferring instead to whine endlessly on the Internet about this horrific Socialism, which apparently has provided you with a state that you prefer living in instead of say Alabama. You defend the corrupt Republican machine because you think the Democratic machine is more corrupt.(yet strangely can provide no evidence to substantiate this) You support initiatives that simply make the situation worse, because you perceive that they may help Republicans, and then are depressed when you find out they don't and just make things worse.
Which begs the question... Are Republicans stupid, or are they just insane?
Anyway, we're done here. I can't stomach any more whining for the week.
Why should I move? The old media doesn't have control of the narrative like they used to, and when people realize just how corrupt the people in power are this state is gonna turn as red as they get. It'll take some time, but it's already starting to happen.
Right. The usual... Democrats=bad, Republicans=good. Sigh, can't you guys come up with anything original?
Yet Duke Cunningham and Jerry Lewis, last I checked weren't Democrats.
We'll shut up as soon as you stop screwing up our state.
Me? Why you blaming me? I don't live in California and got nothing to do with your stupid politics.
I asked you to quit whining, but apparently that's the only thing you know how to do.
If you don't like California. If you don't like America, the door is always open and your welcome to leave.
Aye. In the real world you fuck something up bad enough you get fired.
In the Republican world, they give you a promotion and a bonus check.
No wonder they're such failures when it comes to business that they have to resort to lobbying for government handouts, instead of spending the money improving their product and production efficiency.
You are so ignorant it's funny. How people on the left can think they're "reality-based" without actually knowing anything has always amazed me. The governor in California is a virtual figurehead - except during emergencies (like the LA riots) his actual power is almost nil.
I don't know what's funnier, being lectured on government by a you, or having a you call me names.
The Executive branch can't create legislation. Never could. But it sure as hell can influence Legislation by pushing the Legislature to do something.
And if the Legislature isn't listening, that's what the bully-pulpit is for. That's what Ahnuld promised to do when he got into office. Instead he's been running around calling nurses names. That was a smooth move, pander to your special interests instead of working for the betterment of the entire state and then WHINE when you're called to the mat for it.
If you're so damned convinced that the Governor can't do anything, why did you guys spend all your time and money trying to recall Davis? Why do you spend all of your money campaigning for the Governator? Give me a fucking break.
Who do you mean by "we"? Moonbats on slashdot? Believe me, you get all the consideration you're due. You must be a student or a failure. Anybody who's happy about how this state's been driven into the ground by the most corrupt legislature in memory just isn't paying taxes. You people have fucked up a state that used to be a really nice place to live. Thanks again.
If you don't like California, MOVE ALREADY. Sheesh, is it that hard? U-Haul still rents trucks in California, don't they?
I can't stand whiney ass wankers. I don't knwo when the Republican party became filled with them, but God help me if they don't shut up already.
You really would have to be a Democrat to come up with California's phoney "deregulation" scam, and they were.
Except it was Pete Wilson, which last I checked was a Republican.
This is another sad problem with Republicans. They come along, create a clusterfuck, and then have the audacity to blame it on someone else rather than take responsibility and propose to fix the problem.
What has Schwarzenegger done to solve this problem? Anything? Why not? Seems like a wonderful opportunity to actually do something useful. Nope, instead he chasing down nurses and calling them names.
I don't live in California, but your fucked up politics have been effecting the rest of us for years.
Grow the fuck up and stop whining. We're sick of it already.
Not only does this bode poorly for Slashdot's credibility as having important and accurate information, but what does this say about journalism in general, when this passes for a good article. Oh, wait, it's not even an article! It's a blog posting! Do we even know who this Max Fomitchev is? I've never heard of him. This place is slowly becoming a rumor mill full of dupes.
Yeah, but you know... It's a refreshing change from the 8 years of "Linux will rule the world! Any day now... just you wait... it's right around the corner... Micro$oft is d00med!" posts.
Corrupt Republicans aren't a problem, because you know, the Democrats we elect to replace them might also be corrupt. So we should just look the other way and mind our own business./sarcasm
Then again, there are us reasonable sorts who upon seeing corruption vote the bums out, regardless of party.
I'm not quite sure where Enron fits in there but certainly they were not the only companies messing with the market, and in the end it was the regulators' fault for allowing the market to be messed with in the first place.
I think it's funny how you start off your argument claiming the problem was not enough deregulation, and then you end it by blaming the regulators for not regulating enough.
You sound like a Republican... can't tell the difference between his head and his ass.
The problem with dialogs is not the specific instances, but rather the global pervasiveness. They become an annoyance. "Are you sure?" when you want to delete something, whatever. It trains the user to just click it to get it out of the way.
The point is, while it seems reasonable, it's not a form of security. It's more of a CYA, that the OS warned you and you did it anyhow.
Providing a dialogue that is a confirmation, not a choice is a usability and security flaw. OS X does not do this. What is does is when you run a program for the first time, it tells you it is a program and then asks if you want to run that program or not run that program.
Which is the same thing Windows does.
You are not given the option of clicking "ok" like on Windows, which with a ridiculous number of said, useless dialogues trains everyone to reflexively click "ok."
Umm, obviously you're just looking for some way to criticize Microsoft without actually knowing what you are talking about.
Whether it says 'OK' or 'RUN', a dialog is a dialog. The fact is, people don't read them after they've popped up a handful of times.
Please, if you are going to comment and sound credible, at least know what you are talking about.
It took days because the tubes were clogged. If you supported his Netocracy bill, then you'd be able to send your internet over the Marie Antionette Memorial Super Information Highway at a cost of 10 cents per interbit and it would arrive in minutes rather than days.
*There used to be a time once when Republicans were the fiscally responsible party. Seriously.
That ended when Ronald Reagan came to realize people love tax cuts, and hate spending cuts... and it's a lot easier politically to rack up a huge deficit than try to be responsible.
So you can blame Reagan.
But really the fault lies with the stupidity of the electorate for falling for his rhetoric.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey! That's not true. The war in Iraq really is going very very well.
It's just the news keeps reporting on the 1500 people killed each week, instead of all the bridges which are being built to nowhere.
We use VMWare heavily at my company.
Disaster recovery, ability to move virtuals to new hardware... these are great positives.
The negatives are performance, performance and performance.
I've had two of the things... Microsoft wireless desktops. The last one was a Wireless Desktop Elite or some such. Nice mouse, and nice feeling keyboard. The problem was the stupid dialogs which would occasionally pop up. "Your wireless device has a low signal strength. You should check the batteries."
I finally trashed them and bought a new mouse and keyboard which had a wire. Logitech something keyboard, and a G5 gaming mouse. The G5 is nice, the cable is covered in cloth and is very flexible.
I do use a MS Wireless Notebook Laser Mouse 6000 on my laptops, and it works ok. But maybe it has to do with the USB dongle thingy being only a foot away from the mouse, rather than the 2 feet or so my desktop wireless receiver was at home.
Nope, I don't mind wires.
Obviously written by someone who does not know where the word DIVX originated from.
I'm curious.
This "Fact" you say exists... What evidence do you have to support this fact?
Are you sure it's not merely your opinion?
I didn't much care for TFA, as I thought he was as simplistic as the people he complained about.
/. and elsewhere trying to understand what it does for me. Thus far I'm not impressed. Much of what the zealots point to as strengths, I already have using VS.NET wizards with ASP.NET 2.0. I can drop a data connection on a page, and I can have it automatically implement the CRUD functions when I attach the connection to an editable grid view, etc.
You're right, people who propose that Open Source is the secret to all problems, without really understanding what the problem is and have no answer as to how Open Source could solve that, are problems.
The same is true of any technology. Obviously the reason why a new technology was created because somebody perceived a problem with the old technology. Why do we use XML rather than comma-delimited files? Because XML includes definition of the data, rather than having to also ship a seperate document which describes what's in the CSV file.
However, the other truth is that new technologies introduce new problems. It may be slower to parse an XML file than a CSV file, the XML file may take up much more space on disk, etc. Are these problems show stoppers for your implementation? That depends.
That's the key. It all depends.
I think what TFA was really complaining about, when he gave the example of the using XML for configuration, is that there was no detail as to why. Why was XML chosen instead of other methods?
All technologies suffer from this, and the problem with zealots is that they fail to address those issues.
I keep following the Ruby on Rails discussions here on
The wizards work great when you are tossing together a sample, or a very simple application. Where they fall down is because most apps aren't that simple, and you start having to do joins and manipulation of the data and such, which is why we build our own custom data layer.
What I haven't seen from the zealot's discussion is evidence that they've gone beyond the simple applications yet.
The same is true of the marketers. If you go through an ASP.NET training webcast, they'll show you the wizards too. They want you to think how easy this all is... woo hoo. buy it now. The reality is a bit more complicated, but there are aspects of the easy stuff you can use, like binding a grid to a dataset or better yet a collection of business objects. It just isn't as easy to demo and market.
I'm open to any new technology, but I'm going to think through it's ramifications. While I don't like people who advocate a hammer for ever screw... I also don't care for people who argue for the devil we know and lose track of the benefits of the new devil.
They may be saying that had the advertiser known that this mechanism was worthless sooner, they would have advertised elsewhere which would have brought in additional sales.
so they're seeking damages on lost sales opportunity, which may very well be much more than advertising costs.
The evil you know is often more tolerable than the one you don't.
Bush isn't evil. Merely incompetent.
but I think the problems in the White House really stem from Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld.
So obviously it would have been better to bring in a new team.
Obstructionism has crippled our Legislature, allowing the Executive to run amok in some ways.
Good. I haven't seen a single idea pass congress in the past 5 years that was worth implementing. Get back to me when they have a FUCKING CLUE and some good ideas. I'd rather have NOTHING done than a bunch of BAD somethings.
I don't vote blindly one way or the other.
This explains the lockstep Republican talking points spewing from your keyboard.
In our political system, you must be a party member to participate in the primaries, which shape the slate of candidates presented in the general election.
Not in my state.
I'm a fiscal conservative but a social moderate.
Which usually would make you a Democrat. But apparently you just vote for Republicans and spew their talking points because I don't know... getting kicked in the head feels good or something.
Republicans have abandoned fiscal conservatism.
They haven't believed in it since they realized calling for spending cuts loses you elections. i.e. sometime in the 50's or 60's. Ocassionally they trout out the dead horse and beat it a little, but it's always about something irrelevant like eliminating some $20 million program from a $2.4 trillion budget. But it's good radio and television to complain about National Endowment for the Arts.
They want to be popular, yet still pander to their left-wing extremist base.
Right, that left-wing extremist base which is demanding fiscal responsibility. Right.
You've got no clue what you are even fucking talking about. That's why you come on here, spew Republican talking points and then accuse everybody who points out differently of being a Democratic shill.
What's the worst that could possibly happen from voting for a Democrat? That they'd oppose the Bush agenda? Good. That they'd pass some horrific law that you don't like? Well, being the opposition party Bush would probably veto it right? Yet, how many horrific laws passed by the Republican Congress has he vetoed?
None.
The only thing he's vetoed thus far was a bipartisan bill with strong backing that was opposed by his Right-wing Extremist supporters. Hmm. Which party is pandering again? Really? You still think it's the Democrats who are beholden?
The problem with politics today is people such as yourself who are ignorant of their choices.
Modern Republicans are no different than Mao, Stalin, Hitler, any dictator.
If you oppose their agenda, you are an enemy of the state.
Though I admit I'd most like to see Jesse Ventura in the White House. He rocked as a Governor and is free from all that political party (the poison of politics) crap.
Yeah, but he was a pussy and let people get to him.
I won't consider registering Democratic or voting for most Democrats. If the Democratic party would propose and deliver a coherent, workable agenda, instead of attempting to cripple our government through obstructionism and presenting themselves simply as the "we're not Bush" party
THAT's fucking hilarious.
Crippling the government through obstructionism and presenting themselves as the "We're not Bush" party IS THEIR FUCKING JOB! That's why they are called the OPPOSITION PARTY!
Gingrich shut down the government in 1995. Have the Democrats done anything even approaching opposition such as you claim? NO. So why all of your whining?
Embracing centrist views is the only way Democrats will garner enough votes to get elected in force. Bill and Hillary and a handul of others understand this, why don't the rest of you? I'm not pleased with where this country is going, but I simply don't see anyone offering viable alternatives.
Right. That's how Republicans got elected by being more centrist. Give me a break.
If given the choice between a Republican and a Republican, the voter is going to vote Republican every time.
You don't win voters over by becoming more like the opposition party. You win voters over by showing that you have different ideas, and explaining why they are better. With the complete and utter failure of Conservate ideology, one would hope that Democrats can do that.
Get people tuned into the real problems in the country...
.sig:
I think it's funny to hear a complaint like that from someone with this line in their
Gerrymandering has turned Congress into a cartel of power.
It amazes me when I hear people complaining about Gerrymandering as being the source of a problem, when it is nothing but a symptom of several problems.
The source of the problems of Congress has largely to do with the fixed number of Representatives we now have, as set by a law in 1911 when the country had less than 1/3rd the present population.
For a wide variety of reasons.
It suggests to me that those complaining of Gerrymandering aren't interested in solving the problems plaguing our Representative body of government, and just want to complain for the sake of complaining.
Yeah, but you have to admit. Republicans don't know their heads from their asses. I still find the first post amazing, complaining about too much regulation, and then blaming the problem on the regulators. It certainly exemplifies the Republican mindset, desperately grasping for straws to build an argument with no consistency.
And what's amazing about this, is I'm a libertarian and I don't much like regulation as I've found it serves a broader purpose of preventing competition rather than protecting rights. But that's not what the guy complained about, did he?
Your little tirades here have just added more evidence to the argument of not knowing which side is up, haven't they?
You complain about California politics, but refuse to do anything about it. You refuse to move, preferring instead to whine endlessly on the Internet about this horrific Socialism, which apparently has provided you with a state that you prefer living in instead of say Alabama. You defend the corrupt Republican machine because you think the Democratic machine is more corrupt.(yet strangely can provide no evidence to substantiate this) You support initiatives that simply make the situation worse, because you perceive that they may help Republicans, and then are depressed when you find out they don't and just make things worse.
Which begs the question... Are Republicans stupid, or are they just insane?
Anyway, we're done here. I can't stomach any more whining for the week.
Right. The usual... Democrats=bad, Republicans=good. Sigh, can't you guys come up with anything original?
Yet Duke Cunningham and Jerry Lewis, last I checked weren't Democrats.
Me? Why you blaming me? I don't live in California and got nothing to do with your stupid politics.
I asked you to quit whining, but apparently that's the only thing you know how to do.
If you don't like California. If you don't like America, the door is always open and your welcome to leave.
Aye. In the real world you fuck something up bad enough you get fired.
In the Republican world, they give you a promotion and a bonus check.
No wonder they're such failures when it comes to business that they have to resort to lobbying for government handouts, instead of spending the money improving their product and production efficiency.
You are so ignorant it's funny. How people on the left can think they're "reality-based" without actually knowing anything has always amazed me. The governor in California is a virtual figurehead - except during emergencies (like the LA riots) his actual power is almost nil.
I don't know what's funnier, being lectured on government by a you, or having a you call me names.
The Executive branch can't create legislation. Never could. But it sure as hell can influence Legislation by pushing the Legislature to do something.
And if the Legislature isn't listening, that's what the bully-pulpit is for. That's what Ahnuld promised to do when he got into office. Instead he's been running around calling nurses names. That was a smooth move, pander to your special interests instead of working for the betterment of the entire state and then WHINE when you're called to the mat for it.
If you're so damned convinced that the Governor can't do anything, why did you guys spend all your time and money trying to recall Davis? Why do you spend all of your money campaigning for the Governator? Give me a fucking break.
Who do you mean by "we"? Moonbats on slashdot? Believe me, you get all the consideration you're due. You must be a student or a failure. Anybody who's happy about how this state's been driven into the ground by the most corrupt legislature in memory just isn't paying taxes. You people have fucked up a state that used to be a really nice place to live. Thanks again.
If you don't like California, MOVE ALREADY. Sheesh, is it that hard? U-Haul still rents trucks in California, don't they?
I can't stand whiney ass wankers. I don't knwo when the Republican party became filled with them, but God help me if they don't shut up already.
You really would have to be a Democrat to come up with California's phoney "deregulation" scam, and they were.
Except it was Pete Wilson, which last I checked was a Republican.
This is another sad problem with Republicans. They come along, create a clusterfuck, and then have the audacity to blame it on someone else rather than take responsibility and propose to fix the problem.
What has Schwarzenegger done to solve this problem? Anything? Why not? Seems like a wonderful opportunity to actually do something useful. Nope, instead he chasing down nurses and calling them names.
I don't live in California, but your fucked up politics have been effecting the rest of us for years.
Grow the fuck up and stop whining. We're sick of it already.
Not only does this bode poorly for Slashdot's credibility as having important and accurate information, but what does this say about journalism in general, when this passes for a good article. Oh, wait, it's not even an article! It's a blog posting! Do we even know who this Max Fomitchev is? I've never heard of him. This place is slowly becoming a rumor mill full of dupes.
Yeah, but you know... It's a refreshing change from the 8 years of "Linux will rule the world! Any day now... just you wait... it's right around the corner... Micro$oft is d00med!" posts.
Oh my God! You're so right.
/sarcasm
Corrupt Republicans aren't a problem, because you know, the Democrats we elect to replace them might also be corrupt. So we should just look the other way and mind our own business.
Then again, there are us reasonable sorts who upon seeing corruption vote the bums out, regardless of party.
Umm...
I'm not quite sure where Enron fits in there but certainly they were not the only companies messing with the market, and in the end it was the regulators' fault for allowing the market to be messed with in the first place.
LOL!
Where do the Enron Traders who were taped by the Snohomish Public Utility fit into this?
I think it's funny how you start off your argument claiming the problem was not enough deregulation, and then you end it by blaming the regulators for not regulating enough.
You sound like a Republican... can't tell the difference between his head and his ass.
Again, pretty much the same with Windows.
The problem with dialogs is not the specific instances, but rather the global pervasiveness. They become an annoyance. "Are you sure?" when you want to delete something, whatever. It trains the user to just click it to get it out of the way.
The point is, while it seems reasonable, it's not a form of security. It's more of a CYA, that the OS warned you and you did it anyhow.
Providing a dialogue that is a confirmation, not a choice is a usability and security flaw. OS X does not do this. What is does is when you run a program for the first time, it tells you it is a program and then asks if you want to run that program or not run that program.
Which is the same thing Windows does.
You are not given the option of clicking "ok" like on Windows, which with a ridiculous number of said, useless dialogues trains everyone to reflexively click "ok."
Umm, obviously you're just looking for some way to criticize Microsoft without actually knowing what you are talking about.
Whether it says 'OK' or 'RUN', a dialog is a dialog. The fact is, people don't read them after they've popped up a handful of times.
Please, if you are going to comment and sound credible, at least know what you are talking about.
Now every frickin time I want to run some executable I have to click "Yeah, ok, fine, do it".
Do you think I read the stupid dialogs? Nope. Not a chance.
Confirmation prompts are not security. They're just a CYA so you can tell the user "Well, we warned you".
It took days because the tubes were clogged. If you supported his Netocracy bill, then you'd be able to send your internet over the Marie Antionette Memorial Super Information Highway at a cost of 10 cents per interbit and it would arrive in minutes rather than days.
*There used to be a time once when Republicans were the fiscally responsible party. Seriously.
That ended when Ronald Reagan came to realize people love tax cuts, and hate spending cuts... and it's a lot easier politically to rack up a huge deficit than try to be responsible.
So you can blame Reagan.
But really the fault lies with the stupidity of the electorate for falling for his rhetoric.
You don't understand how politics works.
"Bridge to Nowhere" isn't even a good criticism of this project, you fell for that hook, line, and sinker like everyone else who parrots the same.
"Bridge to Nowhere" is a lot better criticism than, some 30 sentence rant which I am too bored to read.