Well, if they are that concerned about robots, why don't they start with animals (which have a lot more intelligence, feeling and what not compared to robots of today, and will probably be so compared to the robots for the next several years, if not decades).
How about treating animals with dignity? Not treating them with cruelty, given that they have a nervous system and can feel emotions (fear, anger, happiness, sadness).
Until such time that a robot begins having human-level intellect and sentience, their point is moot.
Start with animals, if you will before jumping on to some fictional far-fetched scenario.
But see, that's my point - negatives are way harder to prove than positives.
You make the claim of the inexistence of god, therefore the onus is upon you to prove the inexistence (which, like you said, is hard) without sufficient evidence.
The other side makes a claim of the existence of god without sufficient evidence.
So, you both make claims without evidence. Ergo, you are both alike. Maybe not necessarily the same, but definitely alike.
Yup, it's called Zero Point Energy and it is a characteristic of all quantum mechanical systems.
However, whether or not such energy is usable is an entirely different question altogether - although that's not stopped sci-fi from using the concept.
Oh, some manufacturers do provide drivers (for instance, I use the Intel GMA which has drivers from intel) but even with the right drivers there are conflicts with other parts of the system that take time and effort to find and solve.
Yes, Windows' support for Indic IMEs off the box is quite sucky, but it can be fixed without reasonable hassle (in terms of time required to find and fix a problem).
My point is simple - Linux off the box takes time and effort to be up to the mark of a Windows install on the same box. It may be the fault of the manufacturers or it may be the fault of Santa Claus, but as an end user my needs are not met.
And as a technology agnost, I would choose whatever fits my bill perfectly with the least effort (for some people, money constitutes effort, for some people time does).
All I'm saying is that today, Linux isn't yet at that stage where everything will work out of the box the way things do for Windows - is it because most boxes come with customized OEM installs etc? To an extent, yes, but even outside of that I have found Windows to be a lot easier to install and maintain than Linux.
That's my experience (and opinion), and yours may vary. And I would hold that opinion until such time that I can install Linux on a box and have everything working perfectly out of the box.
You weren't offering help - you were offering excuses.
Complaining to manufacturers is not a bad answer, it just does not solve my immediate problem. My immediate problem is getting something to work and your answer does nothing for that. So, as a frustrated user, you do nothing for my problem. Hence, the answer is pointless.
And about using other people's work - as long as they are duly credited, I do not see the problem? Secondly, what is wrong is using materials by others for a talk - what matters during the talk is how you handle the material and the hands on demo. The supporting material came from elsewhere - so what?
Because college professors make slides that are totally their own right? Borrowing someone's ideas, especially for some things such as talks, is not a bad thing.
Re:Who the hell is this end user that edits DVDs?
on
30 Days With Ubuntu Linux
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
> For one, getting X to work at a good resolution was hard (I've a widescreen notebook). > In fact, until a recent upgrade, I could only get it to work at a much lower resolution.
Please, go and bitch at the manufacturers. They are the only ones with the specs. Without the specs, all the driver developer can do is guess.
Umm, the manufacturers (Intel) have drivers - the install still expects customization from the user end (and I am not talking point-and-click customization, either).
> Secondly, getting the WiFi to work wasn't a cakewalk, either.
> And during the whole messing around with install process, I had to restart the system at least a few times.
Let's be clear on a couple of things - upgrading a kernel will require a reboot. Upgrading X will require a restart of X. What can be avoided under Linux is the situation where you upgrade one driver, reboot, upgrade another driver, reboot, ad infinitum.
Really? I'd never have guessed. Psst - I've given talks on writing Linux device drivers, I'm not totally ignorant of what is needed. Obviously I was talking about the need to unnecessarily restart X or reboot the box. For instance, there was a clash between xorg and libgl libraries which took me forever to figure out, and had the system go totally unresponsive (could not even go to the CUIs - frozen stiff). A hard reboot was the solution, which happened enough times to annoy me.
> And oh, I've had hell trying to get files on a USB thumb drive -- > for whatever reason, the files are simply not accessible from a Windows box.
That's the fault of Linux? Did you format the drive correctly? Try mounting it on a different Windows box?
Obviously, it is something that works well on Windows. All I wanted to do was transfer two files on the USB drive for a friend - and after struggling for about fifteen minutes, I gave up. And oh, treating someone complaining about the problems like an idiot is a great way to get things done.
> And I still can't get my printer and scanner to play nicely with Linux.
Again, please bitch to the manufacturers.
Oh, sure. Nice answer.
> Half the time, the box ends going bonkers.
Details?
Where do you want me to begin? The fact that Firefox magically stopped going to https websites after I upgraded? Or the fact that Gnome would refuse to restart every once in a while, and I'd have to manually do a killall of the gnome-panel process? No, you'll end up coming with an excuse for every point rather than admitting that the system is unstable.
> Its support for other things (e.g. Indic language support, accessibility etc.) is also nowhere near Windows.
Really? The why do I still have to buy two separate versions of Windows if I want both English and Japanese versions? Why do some apps on Windows insist that they cannot be installed on anything except {English|Japanese} Windows? You can switch Ubuntu between dozens of languages in minutes.
So what? I'll pay for Ubuntu if I get the level of Indic support that Windows gives. And FYI - Indic language support is free in Windows (http://www.bhashaindia.com/).
> And the reason it is hell to install is because you have to go hunting for drivers, appropriate fixes etc.
And you don't have to do the same thing with Windows? Then why do I have to go trawling through half a dozen websites looking for the right drivers for my chipset/network card/sound card? All those come with the default distribution in Linux.
When did you last use Windows?
The last time I went hunting for something in Windows was i
Re:Who the hell is this end user that edits DVDs?
on
30 Days With Ubuntu Linux
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
One of my biggest problems with Linux is - believe it or not - stability.
For one, getting X to work at a good resolution was hard (I've a widescreen notebook). In fact, until a recent upgrade, I could only get it to work at a much lower resolution. Secondly, getting the WiFi to work wasn't a cakewalk, either. And during the whole messing around with install process, I had to restart the system at least a few times (Linux, meet Windows - one and the same). Now, I've also had problems with the GUI in getting things done - sure, I finally end up resorting to opening a terminal and doing what I wanted, which defeats the purpose, I think. I won't even go into the number of times I've had to restart X. And oh, I've had hell trying to get files on a USB thumb drive -- for whatever reason, the files are simply not accessible from a Windows box. Tried every damn thing, and finally booted into Windows and did what I wanted. And I still can't get my printer and scanner to play nicely with Linux. Half the time, the box ends going bonkers. I finally upgraded to Edgy Eft and things seemed a little better, but not much better (I did get Beryl working though!).
And I won't even go into such things as DVD burners and the like - half the time, I just use Windows than go through all the trouble of getting something to work.
Linux is great, but it still is not as usable nor intuitive as Windows is for a lot of things (spare me the "you're used to Windows" crap - I've been using *nix for at least 10 years). Its support for other things (e.g. Indic language support, accessibility etc.) is also nowhere near Windows.
And the thing is, as Linux becomes more usable, its stability is going down the drain.
There is also the problem with drivers - yes, I am aware that folks don't always make everything with Linux in mind or do not release the appropriate drivers (although many are starting to). But this is a chicken and egg problem - the reason they are not is because Linux isn't picking up, and the reason Linux is not picking up is because it is hell to install. And the reason it is hell to install is because you have to go hunting for drivers, appropriate fixes etc.
Secondly, the amount of free (as in beer) apps in Linux maybe more than in Windows, but they are nowhere as stable or usable. For instance, compare Paint.NET with, say, GIMP - the former while low on features is infinitely more usable (and in my experience, stable) than GIMP. The fact that the MS Paint replacement is faster and more stable than the (supposed) Photoshop replacement is a little spooky.
Personally, I think that despite what Slashdotters may believe, Linux has at least another 5-10 years to catch up to Windows in terms of accessibility, usability and stability.
The day I can get my box up and working without having to go through the trouble of hunting around the net and spending a few weeks in fixing it will be the day Linux will be comparable to Windows on the desktop.
Linux is only free if your time is not money - and for some of us, our time is money.
The thing is, absolute positives and negatives are hard to prove - it is almost next to impossible for me to prove that there is no Santa Claus just as it is to prove that there is a Santa Claus. Although, to be fair, negatives are harder than positives.
Similarly, proving or disproving the existence of God conclusively is quite impossible (at least given science as we know it today).
Therefore, we will have to settle for probabilities - it is very unlikely that there is a Santa Claus, just as how it is very unlikely that there is a God (as conventional religion believes anyway).
Atheims says probability is zero (without sufficient evidence, naturally) and religion says that probability is one (again, without sufficient evidence). Agnosts believe that there is not enough information to make a judgement.
To me, atheists and religious people belong to the same group - stating something without evidence.
Well, if SUV's are banned, maybe the next person who thinks its a good idea to crank out 8 kids will recognize the impracticality of needing four cars, and will consider contraception instead. And we'll all be better for it.
Just sayin.
Heh. Right look at the left. Left, look at the right. One and the same.
(and to be serious, I don't support banning them outright, I'm more on the side of taxing them heavily)
Why?
So, the guy who uses the SUV sparingly is taxed more than the hybrid loving person who makes more trips - how does that work?
If you must, tax gasoline, not the vehicle. Or tax by distance. There are several genuine uses for bigger vehicles that people here just don't care about.
And honestly, I'm against blanket tax just to support a particular cause. If you really do want environmental friendly vehicles, how about taxing petroleum companies for not taking initiatives towards alternate fuel research? Or how about punishing car companies for not making more hybrid vehicles (than the ones that look stupid)?
Hell, when I drive on dirt-roads or snow, I'd rather drive an SUV or a truck or a jeep than most other things.
I own an SUV, but live in downtown - I walk to work and the only time I take my car out is if I am going outdoors (I do a lot of outdoor stuff) or driving long distance with family and pets. And my fiancée's family lives in the middle-of-nowhere, Oklahoma with a dirt road - goodluck trying to take a regular vehicle up there.
But do not bother trying to convince the Slashdot audience of your needs, because like everyone else, all they care about is the stereotype and bashing that "evil" stereotype that they have in mind.
In fact you are probably using less gas than someone driving a "hybrid" - but quite obviously the crowd here isn't going to care.
Firstly, it is something I am used on notebooks, and the fact that Apple is making you learn something new is fundamentally against the basic precepts of usability.
Secondly, it is something that is commonly used and a common functionality.
Thirdly, it is all fine and dandy if you are using it for regular purposes, but it goes to hell when you are gaming.
Fourthly, it is something that someone might be willing to learn on OSX, but not on Windows or Linux, especially when you are so used to a certain functionality (not to mention the fact that it becomes awkward when you move to another machine).
I could go on and on, but I think that this is a very basic feature/functionality that Apple refuses to acknowledge. Can I find ways *around* it? Sure, of course I could - but as an end user, I should not have to, especially when almost every other piece of hardware out there is not crippled thus.
It is not the fact that I can accomplish a task differently and without something, it is the fact that I have to learn something new just to use Apple's hardware, and the fact that this also is a hindrance against doing some things on other platforms/tasks that I am used to (e.g. Windows, Excel, gaming etc). Now, if Apple gave me a choice in the matter (i.e. you can choose between two button and one button trackpads), then great. But they do not, and therein lies my bone.
If Microsoft and Dell were to do this, folks would have flamed them to hell about how stupid they are. So why is Apple being treated differently?
Ummm, because I am comfortable sitting on my bed or on my couch? Because I have just one computer and that is my notebook? Because I travel a lot on business and do not have, oh, the space or the real estate to put down a mouse and start gaming? Because the times I am gaming I am doing something like waiting at an airport, or flying on a plane or waiting at a client's place?
FYI - for some of us, gaming does not entail the use of expensive, specialized hardware and the space to sit and setup a million pieces of equipment. It's about using what we have to have a _good_ time.
And oh, give me a call when I can install the game of my choice on a Mac or on Linux without jumping through hoops.
Oh, my apologies if the rest of us folks have other uses for our Windows installs for such things as - you know - gaming, which require extensive use of the mouse/trackpad.
Like I said, it feels unnatural to me and every other notebook out there has another button on the trackpad for right-click.
I find it annoying having to learn another thing (and especially since I have a muscle-memory of using mouse + keyboard combinations).
If IBM took off a button, I'd move to Dell and if Dell did, I'd move to HP. So, why should I treat Apple any differently for not having a feature that is very common (not to mention desirable and widespread in use)? It's not like people haven't asked for this before.
It is the fact that there is something that I am used to in an input device that is not available on Apple products, and that it makes me feel extremely crippled - sure, I could learn to live with it by finding alternative means to achieve what is commonly in use elsewhere, or I could buy from another manufacturer who has what the majority of the customers want.
I know that you can use control + button for right click, but everytime I've used that combination, it has felt unnatural (I agree, it is probably a matter of what I am used to, but Apple is still asking me to unlearn a muscle memory).
And if I decide to run Windows and/or Linux on my Apple notebook, it would be worse since using an UI where I am used to the right mouse button without it would be hard.
I understand the original reasoning behind a single button, but context-menus and two mouse-buttons are now commonplace and Apple is just being a tad stubborn (and inconsiderate of user needs, I feel) in not introducing a second button. I was extremely close to buying a Macbook Pro, and the only reason I did not is because of the mouse.
On Macs alone, it might be a different thing - but when you dual boot, I just need that second mouse button. Until the day Apple changes and introduces that - at the very least as an option - I am not buying an Apple notebook.
Re:The site was Dugg last night
on
Yahoo Pipes
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Well, you forget the fact that a lot of folks come here for the news.
While the site maybe down, I would not have known about it had Slashdot not posted the story.
Sure, the link is down now, but that does not mean that you can't check it out later. When the site is back up, a lot of folks will have a look at it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if they are that concerned about robots, why don't they start with animals (which have a lot more intelligence, feeling and what not compared to robots of today, and will probably be so compared to the robots for the next several years, if not decades).
How about treating animals with dignity? Not treating them with cruelty, given that they have a nervous system and can feel emotions (fear, anger, happiness, sadness).
Until such time that a robot begins having human-level intellect and sentience, their point is moot.
Start with animals, if you will before jumping on to some fictional far-fetched scenario.
But see, that's my point - negatives are way harder to prove than positives.
You make the claim of the inexistence of god, therefore the onus is upon you to prove the inexistence (which, like you said, is hard) without sufficient evidence.
The other side makes a claim of the existence of god without sufficient evidence.
So, you both make claims without evidence. Ergo, you are both alike. Maybe not necessarily the same, but definitely alike.
Yup, it's called Zero Point Energy and it is a characteristic of all quantum mechanical systems.
However, whether or not such energy is usable is an entirely different question altogether - although that's not stopped sci-fi from using the concept.
Oh, some manufacturers do provide drivers (for instance, I use the Intel GMA which has drivers from intel) but even with the right drivers there are conflicts with other parts of the system that take time and effort to find and solve.
Yes, Windows' support for Indic IMEs off the box is quite sucky, but it can be fixed without reasonable hassle (in terms of time required to find and fix a problem).
My point is simple - Linux off the box takes time and effort to be up to the mark of a Windows install on the same box. It may be the fault of the manufacturers or it may be the fault of Santa Claus, but as an end user my needs are not met.
And as a technology agnost, I would choose whatever fits my bill perfectly with the least effort (for some people, money constitutes effort, for some people time does).
All I'm saying is that today, Linux isn't yet at that stage where everything will work out of the box the way things do for Windows - is it because most boxes come with customized OEM installs etc? To an extent, yes, but even outside of that I have found Windows to be a lot easier to install and maintain than Linux.
That's my experience (and opinion), and yours may vary. And I would hold that opinion until such time that I can install Linux on a box and have everything working perfectly out of the box.
You weren't offering help - you were offering excuses.
Complaining to manufacturers is not a bad answer, it just does not solve my immediate problem. My immediate problem is getting something to work and your answer does nothing for that. So, as a frustrated user, you do nothing for my problem. Hence, the answer is pointless.
And about using other people's work - as long as they are duly credited, I do not see the problem? Secondly, what is wrong is using materials by others for a talk - what matters during the talk is how you handle the material and the hands on demo. The supporting material came from elsewhere - so what?
Because college professors make slides that are totally their own right? Borrowing someone's ideas, especially for some things such as talks, is not a bad thing.
> For one, getting X to work at a good resolution was hard (I've a widescreen notebook).
> In fact, until a recent upgrade, I could only get it to work at a much lower resolution.
Please, go and bitch at the manufacturers. They are the only ones with the specs. Without the specs, all the driver developer can do is guess.
Umm, the manufacturers (Intel) have drivers - the install still expects customization from the user end (and I am not talking point-and-click customization, either).
> Secondly, getting the WiFi to work wasn't a cakewalk, either.
Details? Driver problems, installation problems, configuration problems, connectivity problems?
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=25683 - there, knock yourself out.
> And during the whole messing around with install process, I had to restart the system at least a few times.
Let's be clear on a couple of things - upgrading a kernel will require a reboot. Upgrading X will require a restart of X. What can be avoided under Linux is the situation where you upgrade one driver, reboot, upgrade another driver, reboot, ad infinitum.
Really? I'd never have guessed. Psst - I've given talks on writing Linux device drivers, I'm not totally ignorant of what is needed. Obviously I was talking about the need to unnecessarily restart X or reboot the box. For instance, there was a clash between xorg and libgl libraries which took me forever to figure out, and had the system go totally unresponsive (could not even go to the CUIs - frozen stiff). A hard reboot was the solution, which happened enough times to annoy me.
> And oh, I've had hell trying to get files on a USB thumb drive --
> for whatever reason, the files are simply not accessible from a Windows box.
That's the fault of Linux? Did you format the drive correctly? Try mounting it on a different Windows box?
Obviously, it is something that works well on Windows. All I wanted to do was transfer two files on the USB drive for a friend - and after struggling for about fifteen minutes, I gave up. And oh, treating someone complaining about the problems like an idiot is a great way to get things done.
> And I still can't get my printer and scanner to play nicely with Linux.
Again, please bitch to the manufacturers.
Oh, sure. Nice answer.
> Half the time, the box ends going bonkers.
Details?
Where do you want me to begin? The fact that Firefox magically stopped going to https websites after I upgraded? Or the fact that Gnome would refuse to restart every once in a while, and I'd have to manually do a killall of the gnome-panel process? No, you'll end up coming with an excuse for every point rather than admitting that the system is unstable.
> Its support for other things (e.g. Indic language support, accessibility etc.) is also nowhere near Windows.
Really? The why do I still have to buy two separate versions of Windows if I want both English and Japanese versions? Why do some apps on Windows insist that they cannot be installed on anything except {English|Japanese} Windows? You can switch Ubuntu between dozens of languages in minutes.
So what? I'll pay for Ubuntu if I get the level of Indic support that Windows gives. And FYI - Indic language support is free in Windows (http://www.bhashaindia.com/).
> And the reason it is hell to install is because you have to go hunting for drivers, appropriate fixes etc.
And you don't have to do the same thing with Windows? Then why do I have to go trawling through half a dozen websites looking for the right drivers for my chipset/network card/sound card? All those come with the default distribution in Linux.
When did you last use Windows?
The last time I went hunting for something in Windows was i
One of my biggest problems with Linux is - believe it or not - stability.
.NET with, say, GIMP - the former while low on features is infinitely more usable (and in my experience, stable) than GIMP. The fact that the MS Paint replacement is faster and more stable than the (supposed) Photoshop replacement is a little spooky.
For one, getting X to work at a good resolution was hard (I've a widescreen notebook). In fact, until a recent upgrade, I could only get it to work at a much lower resolution. Secondly, getting the WiFi to work wasn't a cakewalk, either. And during the whole messing around with install process, I had to restart the system at least a few times (Linux, meet Windows - one and the same). Now, I've also had problems with the GUI in getting things done - sure, I finally end up resorting to opening a terminal and doing what I wanted, which defeats the purpose, I think. I won't even go into the number of times I've had to restart X. And oh, I've had hell trying to get files on a USB thumb drive -- for whatever reason, the files are simply not accessible from a Windows box. Tried every damn thing, and finally booted into Windows and did what I wanted. And I still can't get my printer and scanner to play nicely with Linux. Half the time, the box ends going bonkers. I finally upgraded to Edgy Eft and things seemed a little better, but not much better (I did get Beryl working though!).
And I won't even go into such things as DVD burners and the like - half the time, I just use Windows than go through all the trouble of getting something to work.
Linux is great, but it still is not as usable nor intuitive as Windows is for a lot of things (spare me the "you're used to Windows" crap - I've been using *nix for at least 10 years). Its support for other things (e.g. Indic language support, accessibility etc.) is also nowhere near Windows.
And the thing is, as Linux becomes more usable, its stability is going down the drain.
There is also the problem with drivers - yes, I am aware that folks don't always make everything with Linux in mind or do not release the appropriate drivers (although many are starting to). But this is a chicken and egg problem - the reason they are not is because Linux isn't picking up, and the reason Linux is not picking up is because it is hell to install. And the reason it is hell to install is because you have to go hunting for drivers, appropriate fixes etc.
Secondly, the amount of free (as in beer) apps in Linux maybe more than in Windows, but they are nowhere as stable or usable. For instance, compare Paint
Personally, I think that despite what Slashdotters may believe, Linux has at least another 5-10 years to catch up to Windows in terms of accessibility, usability and stability.
The day I can get my box up and working without having to go through the trouble of hunting around the net and spending a few weeks in fixing it will be the day Linux will be comparable to Windows on the desktop.
Linux is only free if your time is not money - and for some of us, our time is money.
The thing is, absolute positives and negatives are hard to prove - it is almost next to impossible for me to prove that there is no Santa Claus just as it is to prove that there is a Santa Claus. Although, to be fair, negatives are harder than positives.
Similarly, proving or disproving the existence of God conclusively is quite impossible (at least given science as we know it today).
Therefore, we will have to settle for probabilities - it is very unlikely that there is a Santa Claus, just as how it is very unlikely that there is a God (as conventional religion believes anyway).
Atheims says probability is zero (without sufficient evidence, naturally) and religion says that probability is one (again, without sufficient evidence). Agnosts believe that there is not enough information to make a judgement.
To me, atheists and religious people belong to the same group - stating something without evidence.
You forgot "virgin". =)
Just because her reproductive organs are on the inside and not on the outside doesn't mean you make a blow up doll out of her! How dare you!
Spot on.
That's exactly the thing that came to my mind. Dystopia, here I come. Oh, sorry. Dystopia, here I am.
Geeks need love too, dammit!
Moderators, the Thetans are strong in this one.
Why?
So, the guy who uses the SUV sparingly is taxed more than the hybrid loving person who makes more trips - how does that work?
If you must, tax gasoline, not the vehicle. Or tax by distance. There are several genuine uses for bigger vehicles that people here just don't care about.
And honestly, I'm against blanket tax just to support a particular cause. If you really do want environmental friendly vehicles, how about taxing petroleum companies for not taking initiatives towards alternate fuel research? Or how about punishing car companies for not making more hybrid vehicles (than the ones that look stupid)?
Hell, when I drive on dirt-roads or snow, I'd rather drive an SUV or a truck or a jeep than most other things.
I agree.
I own an SUV, but live in downtown - I walk to work and the only time I take my car out is if I am going outdoors (I do a lot of outdoor stuff) or driving long distance with family and pets. And my fiancée's family lives in the middle-of-nowhere, Oklahoma with a dirt road - goodluck trying to take a regular vehicle up there.
But do not bother trying to convince the Slashdot audience of your needs, because like everyone else, all they care about is the stereotype and bashing that "evil" stereotype that they have in mind.
In fact you are probably using less gas than someone driving a "hybrid" - but quite obviously the crowd here isn't going to care.
And ground up. In the fridge. =)
I agree, your wife's orgasms are definitely real. =)
If you can't find a solution, redefine the problem. :)
I could go on and on, but I think that this is a very basic feature/functionality that Apple refuses to acknowledge. Can I find ways *around* it? Sure, of course I could - but as an end user, I should not have to, especially when almost every other piece of hardware out there is not crippled thus.
It is not the fact that I can accomplish a task differently and without something, it is the fact that I have to learn something new just to use Apple's hardware, and the fact that this also is a hindrance against doing some things on other platforms/tasks that I am used to (e.g. Windows, Excel, gaming etc). Now, if Apple gave me a choice in the matter (i.e. you can choose between two button and one button trackpads), then great. But they do not, and therein lies my bone.
If Microsoft and Dell were to do this, folks would have flamed them to hell about how stupid they are. So why is Apple being treated differently?
Ummm, because I am comfortable sitting on my bed or on my couch? Because I have just one computer and that is my notebook? Because I travel a lot on business and do not have, oh, the space or the real estate to put down a mouse and start gaming? Because the times I am gaming I am doing something like waiting at an airport, or flying on a plane or waiting at a client's place?
FYI - for some of us, gaming does not entail the use of expensive, specialized hardware and the space to sit and setup a million pieces of equipment. It's about using what we have to have a _good_ time.
And oh, give me a call when I can install the game of my choice on a Mac or on Linux without jumping through hoops.
Oh, my apologies if the rest of us folks have other uses for our Windows installs for such things as - you know - gaming, which require extensive use of the mouse/trackpad.
Like I said, it feels unnatural to me and every other notebook out there has another button on the trackpad for right-click.
I find it annoying having to learn another thing (and especially since I have a muscle-memory of using mouse + keyboard combinations).
If IBM took off a button, I'd move to Dell and if Dell did, I'd move to HP. So, why should I treat Apple any differently for not having a feature that is very common (not to mention desirable and widespread in use)? It's not like people haven't asked for this before.
It is the fact that there is something that I am used to in an input device that is not available on Apple products, and that it makes me feel extremely crippled - sure, I could learn to live with it by finding alternative means to achieve what is commonly in use elsewhere, or I could buy from another manufacturer who has what the majority of the customers want.
I'd buy one if it had another mouse button.
I know that you can use control + button for right click, but everytime I've used that combination, it has felt unnatural (I agree, it is probably a matter of what I am used to, but Apple is still asking me to unlearn a muscle memory).
And if I decide to run Windows and/or Linux on my Apple notebook, it would be worse since using an UI where I am used to the right mouse button without it would be hard.
I understand the original reasoning behind a single button, but context-menus and two mouse-buttons are now commonplace and Apple is just being a tad stubborn (and inconsiderate of user needs, I feel) in not introducing a second button. I was extremely close to buying a Macbook Pro, and the only reason I did not is because of the mouse.
On Macs alone, it might be a different thing - but when you dual boot, I just need that second mouse button. Until the day Apple changes and introduces that - at the very least as an option - I am not buying an Apple notebook.
Well, you forget the fact that a lot of folks come here for the news.
While the site maybe down, I would not have known about it had Slashdot not posted the story.
Sure, the link is down now, but that does not mean that you can't check it out later. When the site is back up, a lot of folks will have a look at it.
Well, mostly because St. Steven of Jobs is like, totally cool.
:(
:-\
And let's face it Bill Gates is a geek. Nobody likes the geek.
Yeah, I should have stopped at five beers.