Here's a tip for all you virginal geeks out there... this is a pretty fun bar discussion. Good at getting geeky chicks to talk without having to resort to discussion IO speeds vs seek rates of SCSI vs. IDE.
Hey, I back up my audios! I keep all of 'em nice in safe in a couple of Sony jukeboxes in the house, and the ones that go in the car are copies, because they all get scratched to fuck in the car. Otherwise, I'd be buying a lot of CD's just to replace ones I'd already bought.
But, still, I agree with you, that "trading" copies with family & friends is theft.
I'm not bitching about their lower overhead. Rent, power, advertising, etc. is all part of running a retail business (I own my own shop). But taxes are a *huge* burden, and it's not righ that they haven't been doing their part to collect and pay sales tax. But since you say it's just because they're "set up" differently, maybe I should "set up" my corporation in Bermuda, huh?
No, I actually paid $0 for my copy of Solaris 8. Don't remember how or why, but I did. Actually got a bunch of abuot 6 CD's with a bunch of stuff on 'em, like Open Office, etc.
"Too difficult"? A simple piece of software would do it for them. I forked over a good chunk of change on a couple of accounting packages, with part of the purpose to track the sales tax that's due the gov't. It's just a cost of doing business. With online retailers already having tremendously reduced costs by virtue of their business model, I see no reason that they can't collect and pay state sales taxes like everybody else.
You're absolutely right. Only idiots compete on price alone. So no, price isn't my selling point, but at the same time, even if I take the bare minimum markup, my products are automatically 6.5% more expensive than the same product bought online. Hell, people can shop here, ask me questions, look at the products, etc. then buy online for less because they don't have to pay sales tax.
If e-tailers can't make it on their own, so be it. There's no advantage to the community overall in having e-tailers. Actually, they're a huge disadvantage. They encourage people to keep their fat, lazy asses at home, they employ far, far fewer employees than a real store, they generally don't contribute nearly as much as "real" stores do. And, you know, there *are* still small stores out there. Not every store is a fucking Wal-Mart. I own a successful small shop, and I'm forced to compete with a bunch of yahoos drop shipping everything from car tires to baby formula from their living rooms, contributing absolutely nothing to the economy, including tax.
To be a REAL retailer with inventory, rent to pay, etc. and have to compete with 12 year olds with online stores that don't have to pay sales tax. Why, exactly shouldn't online retailers be taxed like everybody else?
You missed the boat. Version 8 was absolutely free for x86. That's the catch. This isn't good news, this is bad news, since it used to be free, and now it's not.
And who is this 5%? Don't you think that banks know who those people are? I can imagine the profile of the average OSS zealot: college kid with $1000 in the bank. Quite honestly, it costs banks more to service this person than they make from them, so of course they don't care about 'em. It's like that in every business. You don't server *everybody*. There's no possible way to make *everybody* happy, and you don't want to. I run a store, and I have set hours. I'm sure that 5% of my customers would love it if I stayed open to midnight. That, however, does not make it a good idea. It's actually a piss poor idea, because I'd spend mroe on labor to service those 5% then I'd make.
Business is about profit, not market share. We're waaaay past the dot-com days when companies did whatever they could to get every last customer (free shipping! products selling at below wholesale!). If the competitors can make those 5% happy, that's great. Their business structure is obviously very different. Run a business yourself. Try to please 100% of the people 100% of the time. I can guarantee that those 5% on the fringe (hell, in some businesses, it's more like 10-20%) will drive you into the fucking ground.
They do design to standards, they design to IE. But that's beside the point.
What is one good reason that banks should spend an extra manhour of time developing for multiple browsers? Is there a single financial reason to do it? Are they mising a large customer base?
No. Anybody who knows the first thing about business would look at this scenario and say, "don't bother". The risk (support and development time & money) isn't worth the reward (getting a few open source zealots' $100 checking accounts, which, incidentally, cost them more money than they make).
It's a fucking stupid business decision to buck the trend. It's especially fucking stupid for a bank to do anything that's remotely not mainstream.
Welcome to Earth! On this planet, IE *IS* the standard. With genral usage at right about 95%, it has been the standard for several years. Ford and Chevy can't be compared, because neither is dominant in any market. If one of them had 95% market share, then yes, they would be standard.
I'm so tired of the same old "W3C is the standard" horseshit. Get over it. The W3C is irrelevant. It has been for years. Scream until you're blue in the face, but until you can convince billions of people to follow that arbitrary "standard", you're just wasting oxygen. IE is the standard. Deal with it. Move on with life. It isn't that important.
I completely agree, except on one point... SP3. I haven't had a single problem with SP2 since it came out. I have POS machines (Point of Sale, not Piece of Shit machines, though the hardware is shit) that haven't been rebooted in months. Not a single hiccup. But, W2K SP3 and XP SP1 don't play nice with a few important apps, like QB and the relatively new QBPOS. I've steered clear of 'em for now. But that being said, a friend who plays games had a problem with XP on a few games, then a "compatibility package" cleared the problems right up. I'm not willing to try SP3 at work because SP2 is workign flawlessly.
I love it... another article that's a troll: "instability". By checking out the links, it doesn't look like they have anything at all to do with stability. On top of that, anyone's who's been awake in the past 2-3 years knows that W2K is incredibly stable.
Bad articles are one things, but blatant trolls are another. Who keeps approving these things?
You're expecting somebody else to take their own time to convert something because you don't want to take 30 seconds to install QT? Go take a flying leap.
I've never heard of a game being released on *all three* consoles before. Is this new? And, do they really have the leverage to tell the console makers that they don't get an exclusive lock on the game? This seems pretty strange to me.
All that being said, I'm looking forward to GTA4 on Oct 29 much more:)
And, why do you believe that there's some kind of right to broadband? There isn't. I'd like to have a Ferrari for $10K, but that ain't gonna happen. All they're doing is raising their prices. That's all. And BTW, I'm a very heavy Net user who is still happy using dialup. Not everybody wants broadband, driving prices even higher.
I suppose you donate 1/500th of your assets, you cock? It's charity. He doesn't have to give a fucking dime. Post how much you have, and how much you donate towards fighting malaria.
No, that's not why they do it. They do it because every cellphone is constantly broadcasting a signal to a tower saying, "I'm here! " and the tower transmits one that says "I'm available for calls!". When you're at 30,000 feet, and moving at 600 MPH, you're broadcasting to many towers at the same time. That makes a significant load on the network compared to a user on the ground. It's more expensive for cell phone companies to handle calls to/from aircraft.
Well, in all actuality, it's just burstable bandwidth for most sites... so what I'm wondering, is every Slashdotted site served off of somebody's cable modem at home? *Any* decent pipe should be able to handle a few thousand new users a second. If my server did this, you can be damn sure I'd be asking for a refund.
You're exactly right. It's that way with *any* web server. That's what I'm saying... you can't be much a "guru" of any kind if you can't tweak a web server/database server to take a serious load.
Earlier this week it was a supposed "hardware guru" website that had an article about high performance web servers, and now it's "linuxguru" that gets Slashdotted. I can personally say that if you can't set up a server to take a Slashdotting, I put no stake whatsoever in what they have to say. If you can't set up a server to handle a spike in traffic, then you really don't know what in the hell you're talking about when it comes to server hardware/software.
Whether or not it's a good choice is irrelevant. Right now, there's not a single car on the market that I'd be interested in buying. No good choices. That in no way means that my "freedom" is being restricted.
And, last I checked, free speech has nothing to do with trading copyrighted materials.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a tip for all you virginal geeks out there... this is a pretty fun bar discussion. Good at getting geeky chicks to talk without having to resort to discussion IO speeds vs seek rates of SCSI vs. IDE.
Hey, I back up my audios! I keep all of 'em nice in safe in a couple of Sony jukeboxes in the house, and the ones that go in the car are copies, because they all get scratched to fuck in the car. Otherwise, I'd be buying a lot of CD's just to replace ones I'd already bought.
But, still, I agree with you, that "trading" copies with family & friends is theft.
I'm not bitching about their lower overhead. Rent, power, advertising, etc. is all part of running a retail business (I own my own shop). But taxes are a *huge* burden, and it's not righ that they haven't been doing their part to collect and pay sales tax. But since you say it's just because they're "set up" differently, maybe I should "set up" my corporation in Bermuda, huh?
No, I actually paid $0 for my copy of Solaris 8. Don't remember how or why, but I did. Actually got a bunch of abuot 6 CD's with a bunch of stuff on 'em, like Open Office, etc.
"Too difficult"? A simple piece of software would do it for them. I forked over a good chunk of change on a couple of accounting packages, with part of the purpose to track the sales tax that's due the gov't. It's just a cost of doing business. With online retailers already having tremendously reduced costs by virtue of their business model, I see no reason that they can't collect and pay state sales taxes like everybody else.
You're absolutely right. Only idiots compete on price alone. So no, price isn't my selling point, but at the same time, even if I take the bare minimum markup, my products are automatically 6.5% more expensive than the same product bought online. Hell, people can shop here, ask me questions, look at the products, etc. then buy online for less because they don't have to pay sales tax.
If e-tailers can't make it on their own, so be it. There's no advantage to the community overall in having e-tailers. Actually, they're a huge disadvantage. They encourage people to keep their fat, lazy asses at home, they employ far, far fewer employees than a real store, they generally don't contribute nearly as much as "real" stores do. And, you know, there *are* still small stores out there. Not every store is a fucking Wal-Mart. I own a successful small shop, and I'm forced to compete with a bunch of yahoos drop shipping everything from car tires to baby formula from their living rooms, contributing absolutely nothing to the economy, including tax.
To be a REAL retailer with inventory, rent to pay, etc. and have to compete with 12 year olds with online stores that don't have to pay sales tax. Why, exactly shouldn't online retailers be taxed like everybody else?
That's a beast of a system. By it not being "snappy" on that machine, yes, I'd call it "slow" in the world of real computers.
You missed the boat. Version 8 was absolutely free for x86. That's the catch. This isn't good news, this is bad news, since it used to be free, and now it's not.
And who is this 5%? Don't you think that banks know who those people are? I can imagine the profile of the average OSS zealot: college kid with $1000 in the bank. Quite honestly, it costs banks more to service this person than they make from them, so of course they don't care about 'em. It's like that in every business. You don't server *everybody*. There's no possible way to make *everybody* happy, and you don't want to. I run a store, and I have set hours. I'm sure that 5% of my customers would love it if I stayed open to midnight. That, however, does not make it a good idea. It's actually a piss poor idea, because I'd spend mroe on labor to service those 5% then I'd make.
Business is about profit, not market share. We're waaaay past the dot-com days when companies did whatever they could to get every last customer (free shipping! products selling at below wholesale!). If the competitors can make those 5% happy, that's great. Their business structure is obviously very different. Run a business yourself. Try to please 100% of the people 100% of the time. I can guarantee that those 5% on the fringe (hell, in some businesses, it's more like 10-20%) will drive you into the fucking ground.
They do design to standards, they design to IE. But that's beside the point.
What is one good reason that banks should spend an extra manhour of time developing for multiple browsers? Is there a single financial reason to do it? Are they mising a large customer base?
No. Anybody who knows the first thing about business would look at this scenario and say, "don't bother". The risk (support and development time & money) isn't worth the reward (getting a few open source zealots' $100 checking accounts, which, incidentally, cost them more money than they make).
It's a fucking stupid business decision to buck the trend. It's especially fucking stupid for a bank to do anything that's remotely not mainstream.
Welcome to Earth! On this planet, IE *IS* the standard. With genral usage at right about 95%, it has been the standard for several years. Ford and Chevy can't be compared, because neither is dominant in any market. If one of them had 95% market share, then yes, they would be standard.
I'm so tired of the same old "W3C is the standard" horseshit. Get over it. The W3C is irrelevant. It has been for years. Scream until you're blue in the face, but until you can convince billions of people to follow that arbitrary "standard", you're just wasting oxygen. IE is the standard. Deal with it. Move on with life. It isn't that important.
I completely agree, except on one point... SP3. I haven't had a single problem with SP2 since it came out. I have POS machines (Point of Sale, not Piece of Shit machines, though the hardware is shit) that haven't been rebooted in months. Not a single hiccup. But, W2K SP3 and XP SP1 don't play nice with a few important apps, like QB and the relatively new QBPOS. I've steered clear of 'em for now. But that being said, a friend who plays games had a problem with XP on a few games, then a "compatibility package" cleared the problems right up. I'm not willing to try SP3 at work because SP2 is workign flawlessly.
I love it... another article that's a troll: "instability". By checking out the links, it doesn't look like they have anything at all to do with stability. On top of that, anyone's who's been awake in the past 2-3 years knows that W2K is incredibly stable.
Bad articles are one things, but blatant trolls are another. Who keeps approving these things?
You're expecting somebody else to take their own time to convert something because you don't want to take 30 seconds to install QT? Go take a flying leap.
I've never heard of a game being released on *all three* consoles before. Is this new? And, do they really have the leverage to tell the console makers that they don't get an exclusive lock on the game? This seems pretty strange to me.
:)
All that being said, I'm looking forward to GTA4 on Oct 29 much more
And, why do you believe that there's some kind of right to broadband? There isn't. I'd like to have a Ferrari for $10K, but that ain't gonna happen. All they're doing is raising their prices. That's all. And BTW, I'm a very heavy Net user who is still happy using dialup. Not everybody wants broadband, driving prices even higher.
I suppose you donate 1/500th of your assets, you cock? It's charity. He doesn't have to give a fucking dime. Post how much you have, and how much you donate towards fighting malaria.
No, that's not why they do it. They do it because every cellphone is constantly broadcasting a signal to a tower saying, "I'm here! " and the tower transmits one that says "I'm available for calls!". When you're at 30,000 feet, and moving at 600 MPH, you're broadcasting to many towers at the same time. That makes a significant load on the network compared to a user on the ground. It's more expensive for cell phone companies to handle calls to/from aircraft.
This post is an *excellent* example of what watching too much super-fast cutting TV (like MTV) can do to you.
Well, in all actuality, it's just burstable bandwidth for most sites... so what I'm wondering, is every Slashdotted site served off of somebody's cable modem at home? *Any* decent pipe should be able to handle a few thousand new users a second. If my server did this, you can be damn sure I'd be asking for a refund.
You're exactly right. It's that way with *any* web server. That's what I'm saying... you can't be much a "guru" of any kind if you can't tweak a web server/database server to take a serious load.
Earlier this week it was a supposed "hardware guru" website that had an article about high performance web servers, and now it's "linuxguru" that gets Slashdotted. I can personally say that if you can't set up a server to take a Slashdotting, I put no stake whatsoever in what they have to say. If you can't set up a server to handle a spike in traffic, then you really don't know what in the hell you're talking about when it comes to server hardware/software.
Whether or not it's a good choice is irrelevant. Right now, there's not a single car on the market that I'd be interested in buying. No good choices. That in no way means that my "freedom" is being restricted.
And, last I checked, free speech has nothing to do with trading copyrighted materials.