It writes decently, and you get a pack of twenty for $.99 if you shop around. I end up losing a lot of them, but it's OK, because at $.05 each I don't miss them.
I've had (and lost) $50.00 pens. The Bic seems to work just as well. And, when they don't, you can snap them in half and throw them away. Great stress relief.
"1. It's the fastest most powerful desktop computer in the world."
According to whom? The only benchmarks I've seen are from PC Magazine (not that reliable) and Apple. PC Magazine gave it a mediocre evaluation, and, Apple, well, it's their product.
Apple's SPEC scores don't impress me. When they start showing me numbers in the 1400s, I'll agree. Unfortunately, all that they have released are the GCC numbers which makes comparison with other computers difficult. Am I to trust that Apple's numbers for the Dell system aren't biased at all? What about Athlon 64?
SPEC works because companies compete to optimize their platform (compilers, operating system, and software) to produce the best results. There are regulations that the company must follow; these are voted upon by SPEC members. Apple has not submitted results to SPEC, nor are they benchmarking their platform with the best compiler. And if GCC is the best compiler for the G5, then they have a bigger problem.
"2. It's certainly the most usable and stable."
Also debatable. "Usable" depends on what you're used to. I have not seen usability studies involving XP vs. OS X. Is your "most usable" base on actual data or is it just your personal opinion?
"Stable" depends on what kind of configuration you're running, as well as a number of other factors. Windows can be surprisingly stable; many Windows systems have been up for years. Of course, if you install every spyware ridden screen saver, Windows will likely be unstable, but that's not Microsoft's fault. Is your "Stable" claim based on actual data, or is it another opinion?
"3. It has the beautiful Aqua UI."
I could debate this (beauty is in the eye of the beholder), but I won't. I like Aqua too. However, after a few months, most people stop caring.
"4. It's a superb Unix workstation."
So is Linux. Or Windows with Cygwin.
"5. It comes in a gorgeous aluminium case."
There are plenty of great looking aluminum ATX cases. The G5 "cheese grater" case is a little gaudy for my tastes, but, again, this is preference.
So, let's see:
1: Is it the fastest? We don't know. Show me some impressive SPEC numbers and we'll talk.
2: Is it the most usable and stable? Show me some studies that say so. Your opinion means little to me.
3: Aqua does look cool. But that's a preference, not a fact.
4: PC's with Linux make great UNIX workstations too.
5: There are plenty of cool looking aluminum PC cases.
Ever remember WebTV Plus? It existed in 1998, and it offered "interactive tv". You could access games, quiz shows, weather, and more. It even programmed your VCR for you.
UltimateTV offered the same, so did AOL TV; and so does DirecTV Interactive and Dish Interactive.
It's not that we're behind, quite the converse, we have had "interactive tv". It's just that no one ever saw it as more than a cheap gimmic. It turns out, most people *don't* want to play along with their favorite quiz show, and they *can* use the internet to lookup weather or movies or buy that item they saw on the shopping network.
"Interactive TV" has been vaunted as the future of television ever since the '70s. But we got it wrong. People watch TV because they don't *want* to interact with the content. Interactive games work better on a PC or a gaming console with a real controller and a real game disc (the STBs have at most 32MB of ram and no other storage).
"VISA coverage - like it or not, there is the min 10$ purchase in order to use a credit card"
"electronic bills: except for relatively few banks (which usually offer quite poor conditions) and some phone companies (e.g. Verizon) nobody really sends electronic bills."
Verizon, XCel Energy, CPUD (water), Sprint, DIRECTV, Comcast, and most of the other companies I do business with all let me view and pay my bill online.
Huh? I use my VISA to purchase things at Big City Burrito (usually about $6) and McDonalds (usually about $4) all the time.
"yes, it is available, many of those banks being European"
Hmmm... I don't think that "First Colorado Bank" is European. The fact is, nearly *every* bank offers internet banking. Sure, invariably many of them are European. But the majority of them are nto.
"checkbooks: how do you pay for your rent ?"
I actually own a house. But, regardless, my friend's landlord allows my friend to do EFT directly to his account.
"Did you try to re-new your driver's licence recently ? You might find out that you are required to bring some bill as proof of residence"
Yes, and I didn't have to bring any bills. I just brought my old license and my thumb.
"Re:I use a similar service already (Score:0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01, @11:20AM (#7104933) It's a pity you chose this arrogant defensive and typical US attitude. You missed one essential aspect: how frequently can such services be found ? - electronic bills: except for relatively few banks (which usually offer quite poor conditions) and some phone companies (e.g. Verizon) nobody really sends electronic bills. - internet banking: yes, it is available, many of those banks being European (e.g. ING Barings). - VISA coverage - like it or not, there is the min 10$ purchase in order to use a credit card. Perhaps you buy only in bulk and never had this happening to you... Not to mention a large number of small stores which simply don't take credit cards. Again, you're probably buying from majour retailers. - bus tickets with VISA - on select locations. How many are there ? - checkbooks: how do you pay for your rent ? Cash would be an option, of course. Credit card ? Some landlords accept them, but they're not waiting in line to switch to that. - electronic bills are not acceptable for anything but communication between you and the respective company. Did you try to re-new your driver's licence recently ? You might find out that you are required to bring some bill as proof of residence. Online bills are not acceptable. So, the US government is forcing one to use cheques and paper bills, at least once every 4 years (may vary on different states).
And, yes, European wireless is cheaper and GSM is virtually non-existent in US, while people are struggling with the much inferior CDMA (and those are the fortunate ones!)"
If by cheaper you mean more expensive, and by non-existant you mean three national providers with roaming agreements and decent coverage, and by "much inferior" you mean more users per cell, larger cells, beter data, no handoffs, lower radiation, and clearer calls, then, you're right.
Here's an example:
T-Mobile Baisc Plus (USA) $30 Do pay for incoming calls 300 Peak Unlimited Off-Peak/Weekend (9pm-6am) GPRS = $3 / mo for 1MB, $10 / mo for unlimited No Long Distance In USA No Roaming In USA, $.49 in North America, $.99 in Europe
T-Mobile Everyone 100 (UK) 21 GBP = $34.87 Don't pay for incoming calls 150 peak first year, 100 peak thereafter 0 Non-Peak GPRS 0.75UK = $1.24 *per kilobyte* No Long-Distance in UK No Roaming in UK, 0.69GBP = $1.14 USD in rest of Europe
Get off your "GSM is God" beliefs. The fact is, CDMA *is* a better technology. Why do you think that 3GSM uses CDMA as the radio layer.
Yet another misinformed European posting about how the US is "technically backwards". Tell that to my 2-tuner satellite TiVo, my 6mbit internet connection, my Danger Hiptop (GSM/GPRS cellphone), my friend's 3G cellphone, my 720p HDTV, or my computers with Intel and AMD processors, and NVIDIA graphics processors. Or tell that to the country with the most 3G coverage and the first EDGE deployment. Backwards. Right.
"My sister has to pay her rent using checks.
This is to a company. She can not pay using her Internet service because they don't support it.
Here in Norway EVERYBODY(!) with a bank account support it because it's basicaly the same deal. The bank doesn't differentiate between checks and Internet payments, and for the company it looks the same."
Here in the US, online transfer and checks are the same too. Your sister's company is probably too lazy to set up EFT. With my bank, it's just a web form. Heck, I pay the convenience store down the street over the internet (they also run a storage facility).
"It doesn't work when you drive trough a tunnel. It doesn't work on the BART. It doesn't work inside most buildings. It doesn't work on lots of places on the Interstate highway."
This is false. I live in Colorado, and my service works in tunnels, it works inside buildings, and it works everywhere on the Interstate. Perhaps you should reconsider having Pac Bell cellular service - perhaps it sucks. I can roam onto AT&T's and Cingular's and hundreds of smaller GSM networks without paying fees.
"Can't use my card on a gas pump because I have to enter my US zip code, for safety because they don't support using a pin code. I guess it would be really hard to find a persons zip code if you found a card on the street NOT."
Hmmm... I use my card to buy gas all the time. Every gas station I've been to uses my PIN code. Heck, even that little convenience store has a PIN pad.
"The cafe on Union Square didn't take my card when I visited last time. (They serve very good espresso, cakes and gelato by the way). If you're an cafe in Norway and don't take cards you will have a lot of upset customers."
That's, well, dumb. The local coffee houses around here take credit and check cards. Even foreign cards. Perhaps you shouldn't go to a cafe where your card isn't accepted?
"I can't buy chewing gum with my plastic card and not have to pay stupid minimum price or a huge card fee."
With credit, yes. With a bank card, no. There are minimums because VISA charges the store a fixed fee per transaction (approx $.25). Paying for $.25 gum with a card would result in a loss to the store. I severely doubt that you can buy gum with a credit card in Norway, and, if you can, I have to wonder what the store is thinking.
Why do you want to buy gum with a card anyway? It's quicker and easier to just hand them a stupid quarter. Sometimes, paper money is more convenient that cards. Pop machines come to mind, so does buying candy at a store.
"Now if we can convince our governments that if they lower taxes, the tax revenue will actually increase."
Yes, but only if it's done properly. Broad tax cuts (and, even worse, tax cuts for the wealthy) like Bush's aren't very expensive. The bulk of the money went to the upper middle and upper class individuals. Those individuals are likely to save the money instead of spending, which doesn't stiumlate the economy at all. Think about it: an upper middle class or upper class individual already has the money to buy an expensive car (or they already own one); an extra $3000 isn't going to mean anything (they already had a spare $3000, another spare $3000 isn't going to mean a bit of difference). Someone who's living paycheck-to-paycheck may not have the money to buy a car or computer; an extra $3000 makes them much more likely to do so.
So, yes, tax cuts do stimulate the economy, but only if they go to the people who will spend it.
Sidenote 2: The US cannot stand any more tax cuts. We actually need tax increases. With $6 trillion in debt, a huge defecit, increased spending, and trillions in Social Security debt, this country needs to start being responsible with money.
Sidenote 3: Much of Europe is in the same situation as the US, if not a worse situation. Social programs cost money, and with the ratio of retirees to workers increases, so will the defecit. France has already had problems with the EU for holding too much debt, and Italy has the lowest birth rate in the world.
Re:I use a similar service already
on
Snail Mail As E-Mail
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"The banks in Norway has been doing this for year already. With no or low cost, and no paper; the bills are electronic."
I get an electronic bill from most of the companies I do business with, but they also mail me a paper bill.
We have online bill paying, you know. And online banking. We've had this for years now. Few people still use checks (replaced by debit and credit cards) but they can still be extremely convenient when you want to pay someone who doesn't have a debit card machine (or don't want to pay the fees of services like PayPal). Frankly, though, I don't know why people use checks still; every store and every resturant takes debit cards and credit cards.
In the US, you can buy a bus ticket using a debit or credit card. In major cities they have machines where you can insert a card and get a ticket. In Washington DC, they have the Metro system, which is quite efficent.
So, why exactly do we need to get into the "modern age"? Your post cited these reasons:
- Electronic bills (US has this) - Internet banking (US has this) - VISA Coverage (US definately has this) - Bus ticket with VISA (Yep, got this) - No Checkbooks (No one's forcing you to use them) - No Bills (A paper trail doesn't vanish - online bills can)
So, why exactly does the US need to get into the "modern age". This sounds like one of those mis-informed "European wireless is cheaper and the US doesn't have GSM" posts.
- There are many fewer off-peak minutes per month. Unlimited is fewer?
- There are many fewer low cost/low volume plans. T-Mobile still offers a very nice $19.95 a month plan, plus there's prepaid.
- Bogus extra charges (like "regulatory fee service charges") have increased quickly. Get off of AT&T. I don't pay those bogus charges.
- Long term contracts are the norm One year is a small price to pay for a free camera phone.
- Contracts are much more restrictive to the customer. Huh? My contract just says that I will stay with T-Mobile for 12 months or pay a fee. Same as these contracts have always said.
"several CDMA phones when I lived in the states, and none of them was even nearly as good quality as any of the GSM phones I've had in Scandinavia."
That's funny, because we have the same GSM phones and the same GSM technology as you do, and CDMA is far clearer. Less garbling and less fuzz. I know that some GSM providers insert "comfort noise" to cover up the otherwise somewhat jarring shutoff in GSM (it doesn't bother me, but I know others who are driven crazy by it - heck, I know one guy who hates the sound GSM makes during a cell handoff).
"However, all over Europe prepaid plans are available."
We have that too; you can buy the cards in gas stations. Few people opt for prepaid, however, because we don't get incoming calls free (a bummer if you don't have many minutes) and you don't get as many minutes for your $ as a non-prepaid plan.
Cingular also offers an intersting option in the US - rollover. You can keep the minutes you don't use (for up to 12 months). They are slightly more expensive than the competition, however.
I have found that T-Mobile has the cheapest plans in the US; Verizon is the most expensive. Verizon also has the best coverage, however.
"By the sound of your post the US is indeed at least 10 years behind in uptake as the same argument was heard from the same type of people about then. These people have since learned that a) people really don't call them that much, and b) there's an 'off' button for the other occasions."
I wouldn't say 10 years. Remember, the first GSM network went up in 1992, and I doubt that 20% of Europeans had GSM phones by 1993.
We certainly don't have the cellular "culture", but it is becoming much more popular.
What's stopping uptake is the following:
- Monthly fee. With a landline, you get one for the family ($30) and you get unlimited calling. If you have a chatty teenager, you get a second line for $20. Local is free, long distance is.03 per minute. With wireless, it's either a high monthly fee for everyone (once the daughter gets a phone the whole family will want one), which can add up to $90 per month, or it's a plan with few minutes where you know your chatty teenager will run up a $80 bill. Alternately, if you go prepaid, your teenager will run out of minutes within days and will complain that they "need more minutes" for "safety". Right.
So, yes, it is the cost. Cellphones are expensive. The best solution that I've seen is Cricket, which offers unlimited calling for $30 a month (but it only works in your local area). Unfortunately, that's still $120 a month for a family of four. That's more than broadband internet, a wired phoneline, and satellite TV combined.
Also, uptake *is* picking up in the US. In 1997, there *was* no US cellular market. We had limited GSM service and a whole lot of awful AMPS service. In six years, we have gone from AMPS to 1xRTT. We had 3G data services before Europe (1x is technically 3G) and we will likely have true 3G services soon. In Europe, the market is saturated. GSM service is a commodity. But in the US, that 80% is still very much up for grabs - and the service with the most snazzy bells and whistles for the lowest price wins. US wireless providers realize that people aren't buying because it's too expensive. But lowering prices hurts your bottom line - so they "add value" by adding data. And those ringtones don't hurt their bottom line either.
Srpint and VZW had an easy path to 1xRTT - all of their equipment was compatible and they only needed to flash the firmware to "switch on" 1xRTT. EVDO won't be so easy; it needs new equipment.
GSM providers are playing catch-up. Cingular is the first provider in the world to roll out EDGE services, and they just started a few months ago.
"you can see their summary is flawed as hell when you look at the numerical results of those tests"
And Apple's isn't? They claim the "World's Fastest Personal Computer", yet they haven't even tested a 3.2Ghz P4 or a Athlon 64 FX-51. How can it be the world's fastest when they haven't even run the tests?
"The fact that Apple's G5 has a frontside bus [apple.com] that makes full use of the PowerPC G5's power is immaterial."
Right. So the fact that Pentium 4 has a plenty-fast 800mhz FSB (6.4gb/sec) that runs syncronously with the DDR (lowers latency) means nothing as well?
What about the fact that Athlon 64 has *no* FSB, meaning low memory latency and high bandwidth (6.4GB/sec). Plus, it also has a 6.4GB/sec HyperTransport link, bringing the total bandwidth to 12.8GB/sec.
Verizon is testing EVDO right now. Sprint and Verizon both have national 1xRTT (144kbps 3G CDMA) networks. You might say that the US is ahead of the game. Compared to Europe, that is, not compared to Japan or Korea.
"17.5% sales tax is what happens when political parties consistently tell their electors that they will be able to bring down income tax and still pay for more public services."
The US politicians do this too. The difference is, they do so not by raising sales tax, but by stealing money out of the Social Security "trust" fund. We have 5 trillion in "real" debt, and 40+ trillion in Social Security debt. That has grown several trillion in the last two years, thanks in part to Bush's $1.2 trillion tax cut and $400 billion war.
"If Deutsche Telecom can get it right in Germany, then why not in the US?"
Because the US is 4x the size of Western Europe and has less people.
"It's not like it's cheaper in the US, au contraire."
It actually is. At least when I looked into plans with major providers (Vodafone, T-Mobile) about a month ago, what we get in the US is far cheaper than what is offered in Europe.
For example:
T-Mobile Baisc Plus (USA) $30 Do pay for incoming calls 300 Peak Unlimited Off-Peak/Weekend (9pm-6am) GPRS = $3 / mo for 1MB, $10 / mo for unlimited No Long Distance In USA No Roaming In USA, $.49 in North America, $.99 in Europe
T-Mobile Everyone 100 (UK) 21 GBP = $34.87 Don't pay for incoming calls 150 peak first year, 100 peak thereafter 0 Non-Peak GPRS 0.75UK = $1.24 *per kilobyte* No Long-Distance in UK No Roaming in UK, 0.69GBP = $1.14 USD in rest of Europe
Let's recap US Plan Advantages: Cheaper 2x as many peak minutes Unlimited (vs. 0) non-peak minutes GPRS that's a lot cheaper No long distance in a larger area No roaming in a larger area Cheaper to use in Canada/Mexico (by far) and even Europe
UK Plan Advantages: Calling Party Pays
Frankly, I think that the US plan is a far better value. For $10 a month, you can even add unlimited calling *anytime* to other T-Mobile phones in the US (e.g. when I call my friends, it doesn't cost a thing).
I have found T-Mobile's coverage to be perfectly acceptable. I know that some experience signal issues, but, quite frankly, I have not had any problems. No, it's not universal, but it works damn well.
"why is it that i can go to the middle of nowhere in europe (scandinavia more precisely) with my t-mobile phone and get excellent coverage"
Ever been to Chimayo, NM? It's the middle of nowhere. Literally. There's 1 town within 20 miles. It has 900 people. And yet they have reliable T-Mobile GSM and GPRS service. This is not universal, but it's more common than you think.
One reason Sprint and Verizon phones get better converage is because of CDMA. CDMA *is* a better technology than GSM. It handles twice as many people per cell and the cells can be far larger (3x+). Add to that the faster data service and better call quality, and you begin to understand why CDMA is the preferred technology in the USA.
Post Summary: - Mobile service *isn't* more expensive in the US. From my experience, it's cheaper in the US. Please show me otherwise. - CPP is nice, but, quite frankly, it's becoming irrelivent in the US. From unlimited nights and weekends to the 600 peak minutes I get to the free calling to and from other T-Mobile phones, I have *never* run over my minute limit. And I call quite a bit. Also, in the US, calling a mobile phone is just like calling a local phone. It's free locally, and cheap long-distance ($.05/min). - We have unlimited GPRS. I have yet to see an unlimited GPRS plan in Europe. If you know of one, please show it to me. - We *do* have GSM. With SIM cards. 3 Providers. And GPRS. And 3G CDMA. The US has the largest 3G CDMA networks (Sprint and Verizon). 1XRTT may not be as fast as EVDO, but it *is* technically 3G.
So stop this line of "the US has primitive wireless". It hasn't been true for quite some time now.
"That's an overstatement, but still, most of the advanced functions on a graphing calculator are a damaging crutch until you have learned the stuff."
I disagree. Graphing calculators are largely harmless - they only give the approximate answer, after all. What teachers really need to be aware of are calculators with CAS. I had a TI-89 through algebra, and I still do now in calculus (they teach it in public high schools now). One of my biggest faults was that I never got great at factoring - after all, my TI-89 did it better and faster.
The "crutch" factor of a graphing calculator (or a calculator with a CAS) is solved by two words: show work. When it comes time for the test, the students who have relied on their calculators will not be able to demonstrate their knowledge.
Graphing calculators can be a powerful tool in a classroom, and calculators with a CAS can be even more so. I often use my 89 to prove things to myself. I trust the CAS in my 89; it has never given me a false answer. Not once. Sometimes it can't do the problem, sometimes it gives an answer in an obscure form, but it never gives the wrong answer. When I want to prove that, yes, (b^x)^y = b^(x+y), I turn to my 89. I figure out the answer; it just tells me if I'm right.
Slashdot Mirror
It writes decently, and you get a pack of twenty for $.99 if you shop around. I end up losing a lot of them, but it's OK, because at $.05 each I don't miss them.
I've had (and lost) $50.00 pens. The Bic seems to work just as well. And, when they don't, you can snap them in half and throw them away. Great stress relief.
"1. It's the fastest most powerful desktop computer in the world."
According to whom? The only benchmarks I've seen are from PC Magazine (not that reliable) and Apple. PC Magazine gave it a mediocre evaluation, and, Apple, well, it's their product.
Apple's SPEC scores don't impress me. When they start showing me numbers in the 1400s, I'll agree. Unfortunately, all that they have released are the GCC numbers which makes comparison with other computers difficult. Am I to trust that Apple's numbers for the Dell system aren't biased at all? What about Athlon 64?
SPEC works because companies compete to optimize their platform (compilers, operating system, and software) to produce the best results. There are regulations that the company must follow; these are voted upon by SPEC members. Apple has not submitted results to SPEC, nor are they benchmarking their platform with the best compiler. And if GCC is the best compiler for the G5, then they have a bigger problem.
"2. It's certainly the most usable and stable."
Also debatable. "Usable" depends on what you're used to. I have not seen usability studies involving XP vs. OS X. Is your "most usable" base on actual data or is it just your personal opinion?
"Stable" depends on what kind of configuration you're running, as well as a number of other factors. Windows can be surprisingly stable; many Windows systems have been up for years. Of course, if you install every spyware ridden screen saver, Windows will likely be unstable, but that's not Microsoft's fault. Is your "Stable" claim based on actual data, or is it another opinion?
"3. It has the beautiful Aqua UI."
I could debate this (beauty is in the eye of the beholder), but I won't. I like Aqua too. However, after a few months, most people stop caring.
"4. It's a superb Unix workstation."
So is Linux. Or Windows with Cygwin.
"5. It comes in a gorgeous aluminium case."
There are plenty of great looking aluminum ATX cases. The G5 "cheese grater" case is a little gaudy for my tastes, but, again, this is preference.
So, let's see:
1: Is it the fastest? We don't know. Show me some impressive SPEC numbers and we'll talk.
2: Is it the most usable and stable? Show me some studies that say so. Your opinion means little to me.
3: Aqua does look cool. But that's a preference, not a fact.
4: PC's with Linux make great UNIX workstations too.
5: There are plenty of cool looking aluminum PC cases.
Ever remember WebTV Plus? It existed in 1998, and it offered "interactive tv". You could access games, quiz shows, weather, and more. It even programmed your VCR for you.
UltimateTV offered the same, so did AOL TV; and so does DirecTV Interactive and Dish Interactive.
It's not that we're behind, quite the converse, we have had "interactive tv". It's just that no one ever saw it as more than a cheap gimmic. It turns out, most people *don't* want to play along with their favorite quiz show, and they *can* use the internet to lookup weather or movies or buy that item they saw on the shopping network.
"Interactive TV" has been vaunted as the future of television ever since the '70s. But we got it wrong. People watch TV because they don't *want* to interact with the content. Interactive games work better on a PC or a gaming console with a real controller and a real game disc (the STBs have at most 32MB of ram and no other storage).
"VISA coverage - like it or not, there is the min 10$ purchase in order to use a credit card"
"electronic bills: except for relatively few banks (which usually offer quite poor conditions) and some phone companies (e.g. Verizon) nobody really sends electronic bills."
Verizon, XCel Energy, CPUD (water), Sprint, DIRECTV, Comcast, and most of the other companies I do business with all let me view and pay my bill online.
Huh? I use my VISA to purchase things at Big City Burrito (usually about $6) and McDonalds (usually about $4) all the time.
"yes, it is available, many of those banks being European"
Hmmm... I don't think that "First Colorado Bank" is European. The fact is, nearly *every* bank offers internet banking. Sure, invariably many of them are European. But the majority of them are nto.
"checkbooks: how do you pay for your rent ?"
I actually own a house. But, regardless, my friend's landlord allows my friend to do EFT directly to his account.
"Did you try to re-new your driver's licence recently ? You might find out that you are required to bring some bill as proof of residence"
Yes, and I didn't have to bring any bills. I just brought my old license and my thumb.
"Re:I use a similar service already (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01, @11:20AM (#7104933)
It's a pity you chose this arrogant defensive and typical US attitude. You missed one essential aspect: how frequently can such services be found ?
- electronic bills: except for relatively few banks (which usually offer quite poor conditions) and some phone companies (e.g. Verizon) nobody really sends electronic bills.
- internet banking: yes, it is available, many of those banks being European (e.g. ING Barings).
- VISA coverage - like it or not, there is the min 10$ purchase in order to use a credit card. Perhaps you buy only in bulk and never had this happening to you... Not to mention a large number of small stores which simply don't take credit cards. Again, you're probably buying from majour retailers.
- bus tickets with VISA - on select locations. How many are there ?
- checkbooks: how do you pay for your rent ? Cash would be an option, of course. Credit card ? Some landlords accept them, but they're not waiting in line to switch to that.
- electronic bills are not acceptable for anything but communication between you and the respective company. Did you try to re-new your driver's licence recently ? You might find out that you are required to bring some bill as proof of residence. Online bills are not acceptable. So, the US government is forcing one to use cheques and paper bills, at least once every 4 years (may vary on different states).
And, yes, European wireless is cheaper and GSM is virtually non-existent in US, while people are struggling with the much inferior CDMA (and those are the fortunate ones!)"
If by cheaper you mean more expensive, and by non-existant you mean three national providers with roaming agreements and decent coverage, and by "much inferior" you mean more users per cell, larger cells, beter data, no handoffs, lower radiation, and clearer calls, then, you're right.
Here's an example:
T-Mobile Baisc Plus (USA)
$30
Do pay for incoming calls
300 Peak
Unlimited Off-Peak/Weekend (9pm-6am)
GPRS = $3 / mo for 1MB, $10 / mo for unlimited
No Long Distance In USA
No Roaming In USA, $.49 in North America, $.99 in Europe
T-Mobile Everyone 100 (UK)
21 GBP = $34.87
Don't pay for incoming calls
150 peak first year, 100 peak thereafter
0 Non-Peak
GPRS 0.75UK = $1.24 *per kilobyte*
No Long-Distance in UK
No Roaming in UK, 0.69GBP = $1.14 USD in rest of Europe
Get off your "GSM is God" beliefs. The fact is, CDMA *is* a better technology. Why do you think that 3GSM uses CDMA as the radio layer.
Yet another misinformed European posting about how the US is "technically backwards". Tell that to my 2-tuner satellite TiVo, my 6mbit internet connection, my Danger Hiptop (GSM/GPRS cellphone), my friend's 3G cellphone, my 720p HDTV, or my computers with Intel and AMD processors, and NVIDIA graphics processors. Or tell that to the country with the most 3G coverage and the first EDGE deployment. Backwards. Right.
"My sister has to pay her rent using checks.
This is to a company. She can not pay using her Internet service because they don't support it.
Here in Norway EVERYBODY(!) with a bank account support it because it's basicaly the same deal. The bank doesn't differentiate between checks and Internet payments, and for the company it looks the same."
Here in the US, online transfer and checks are the same too. Your sister's company is probably too lazy to set up EFT. With my bank, it's just a web form. Heck, I pay the convenience store down the street over the internet (they also run a storage facility).
"It doesn't work when you drive trough a tunnel.
It doesn't work on the BART.
It doesn't work inside most buildings.
It doesn't work on lots of places on the Interstate highway."
This is false. I live in Colorado, and my service works in tunnels, it works inside buildings, and it works everywhere on the Interstate. Perhaps you should reconsider having Pac Bell cellular service - perhaps it sucks. I can roam onto AT&T's and Cingular's and hundreds of smaller GSM networks without paying fees.
"Can't use my card on a gas pump because I have to enter my US zip code, for safety because they don't support using a pin code. I guess it would be really hard to find a persons zip code if you found a card on the street NOT."
Hmmm... I use my card to buy gas all the time. Every gas station I've been to uses my PIN code. Heck, even that little convenience store has a PIN pad.
"The cafe on Union Square didn't take my card when I visited last time. (They serve very good espresso, cakes and gelato by the way). If you're an cafe in Norway and don't take cards you will have a lot of upset customers."
That's, well, dumb. The local coffee houses around here take credit and check cards. Even foreign cards. Perhaps you shouldn't go to a cafe where your card isn't accepted?
"I can't buy chewing gum with my plastic card and not have to pay stupid minimum price or a huge card fee."
With credit, yes. With a bank card, no. There are minimums because VISA charges the store a fixed fee per transaction (approx $.25). Paying for $.25 gum with a card would result in a loss to the store. I severely doubt that you can buy gum with a credit card in Norway, and, if you can, I have to wonder what the store is thinking.
Why do you want to buy gum with a card anyway? It's quicker and easier to just hand them a stupid quarter. Sometimes, paper money is more convenient that cards. Pop machines come to mind, so does buying candy at a store.
"Now if we can convince our governments that if they lower taxes, the tax revenue will actually increase."
Yes, but only if it's done properly. Broad tax cuts (and, even worse, tax cuts for the wealthy) like Bush's aren't very expensive. The bulk of the money went to the upper middle and upper class individuals. Those individuals are likely to save the money instead of spending, which doesn't stiumlate the economy at all. Think about it: an upper middle class or upper class individual already has the money to buy an expensive car (or they already own one); an extra $3000 isn't going to mean anything (they already had a spare $3000, another spare $3000 isn't going to mean a bit of difference). Someone who's living paycheck-to-paycheck may not have the money to buy a car or computer; an extra $3000 makes them much more likely to do so.
So, yes, tax cuts do stimulate the economy, but only if they go to the people who will spend it.
Sidenote 2: The US cannot stand any more tax cuts. We actually need tax increases. With $6 trillion in debt, a huge defecit, increased spending, and trillions in Social Security debt, this country needs to start being responsible with money.
Sidenote 3: Much of Europe is in the same situation as the US, if not a worse situation. Social programs cost money, and with the ratio of retirees to workers increases, so will the defecit. France has already had problems with the EU for holding too much debt, and Italy has the lowest birth rate in the world.
"The banks in Norway has been doing this for year already. With no or low cost, and no paper; the bills are electronic."
I get an electronic bill from most of the companies I do business with, but they also mail me a paper bill.
We have online bill paying, you know. And online banking. We've had this for years now. Few people still use checks (replaced by debit and credit cards) but they can still be extremely convenient when you want to pay someone who doesn't have a debit card machine (or don't want to pay the fees of services like PayPal). Frankly, though, I don't know why people use checks still; every store and every resturant takes debit cards and credit cards.
In the US, you can buy a bus ticket using a debit or credit card. In major cities they have machines where you can insert a card and get a ticket. In Washington DC, they have the Metro system, which is quite efficent.
So, why exactly do we need to get into the "modern age"? Your post cited these reasons:
- Electronic bills (US has this)
- Internet banking (US has this)
- VISA Coverage (US definately has this)
- Bus ticket with VISA (Yep, got this)
- No Checkbooks (No one's forcing you to use them)
- No Bills (A paper trail doesn't vanish - online bills can)
So, why exactly does the US need to get into the "modern age". This sounds like one of those mis-informed "European wireless is cheaper and the US doesn't have GSM" posts.
- There are many fewer off-peak minutes per month.
Unlimited is fewer?
- There are many fewer low cost/low volume plans.
T-Mobile still offers a very nice $19.95 a month plan, plus there's prepaid.
- Bogus extra charges (like "regulatory fee service charges") have increased quickly.
Get off of AT&T. I don't pay those bogus charges.
- Long term contracts are the norm
One year is a small price to pay for a free camera phone.
- Contracts are much more restrictive to the customer.
Huh? My contract just says that I will stay with T-Mobile for 12 months or pay a fee. Same as these contracts have always said.
"several CDMA phones when I lived in the states, and none of them was even nearly as good quality as any of the GSM phones I've had in Scandinavia."
That's funny, because we have the same GSM phones and the same GSM technology as you do, and CDMA is far clearer. Less garbling and less fuzz. I know that some GSM providers insert "comfort noise" to cover up the otherwise somewhat jarring shutoff in GSM (it doesn't bother me, but I know others who are driven crazy by it - heck, I know one guy who hates the sound GSM makes during a cell handoff).
"However, all over Europe prepaid plans are available."
We have that too; you can buy the cards in gas stations. Few people opt for prepaid, however, because we don't get incoming calls free (a bummer if you don't have many minutes) and you don't get as many minutes for your $ as a non-prepaid plan.
Cingular also offers an intersting option in the US - rollover. You can keep the minutes you don't use (for up to 12 months). They are slightly more expensive than the competition, however.
I have found that T-Mobile has the cheapest plans in the US; Verizon is the most expensive. Verizon also has the best coverage, however.
"By the sound of your post the US is indeed at least 10 years behind in uptake as the same argument was heard from the same type of people about then. These people have since learned that a) people really don't call them that much, and b) there's an 'off' button for the other occasions."
.03 per minute. With wireless, it's either a high monthly fee for everyone (once the daughter gets a phone the whole family will want one), which can add up to $90 per month, or it's a plan with few minutes where you know your chatty teenager will run up a $80 bill. Alternately, if you go prepaid, your teenager will run out of minutes within days and will complain that they "need more minutes" for "safety". Right.
I wouldn't say 10 years. Remember, the first GSM network went up in 1992, and I doubt that 20% of Europeans had GSM phones by 1993.
We certainly don't have the cellular "culture", but it is becoming much more popular.
What's stopping uptake is the following:
- Monthly fee. With a landline, you get one for the family ($30) and you get unlimited calling. If you have a chatty teenager, you get a second line for $20. Local is free, long distance is
So, yes, it is the cost. Cellphones are expensive. The best solution that I've seen is Cricket, which offers unlimited calling for $30 a month (but it only works in your local area). Unfortunately, that's still $120 a month for a family of four. That's more than broadband internet, a wired phoneline, and satellite TV combined.
Also, uptake *is* picking up in the US. In 1997, there *was* no US cellular market. We had limited GSM service and a whole lot of awful AMPS service. In six years, we have gone from AMPS to 1xRTT. We had 3G data services before Europe (1x is technically 3G) and we will likely have true 3G services soon. In Europe, the market is saturated. GSM service is a commodity. But in the US, that 80% is still very much up for grabs - and the service with the most snazzy bells and whistles for the lowest price wins. US wireless providers realize that people aren't buying because it's too expensive. But lowering prices hurts your bottom line - so they "add value" by adding data. And those ringtones don't hurt their bottom line either.
Srpint and VZW had an easy path to 1xRTT - all of their equipment was compatible and they only needed to flash the firmware to "switch on" 1xRTT. EVDO won't be so easy; it needs new equipment.
GSM providers are playing catch-up. Cingular is the first provider in the world to roll out EDGE services, and they just started a few months ago.
"To have foreign nationals peering at the code that runs your military systems is just simply unnaceptable."
Oh, so you mean that the US Military shouldn't use Linux (or any other OSS OS)?
That leaves... proprietary software. But
"Proprietary operating systems are a national security risk and should be treated as such."
I see. So, basically, you don't want them to run non-proprietary software, yet it is a security risk. Interesting.
"you can see their summary is flawed as hell when you look at the numerical results of those tests"
And Apple's isn't? They claim the "World's Fastest Personal Computer", yet they haven't even tested a 3.2Ghz P4 or a Athlon 64 FX-51. How can it be the world's fastest when they haven't even run the tests?
"The fact that Apple's G5 has a frontside bus [apple.com] that makes full use of the PowerPC G5's power is immaterial."
Right. So the fact that Pentium 4 has a plenty-fast 800mhz FSB (6.4gb/sec) that runs syncronously with the DDR (lowers latency) means nothing as well?
What about the fact that Athlon 64 has *no* FSB, meaning low memory latency and high bandwidth (6.4GB/sec). Plus, it also has a 6.4GB/sec HyperTransport link, bringing the total bandwidth to 12.8GB/sec.
That means nothing?
Verizon is testing EVDO right now. Sprint and Verizon both have national 1xRTT (144kbps 3G CDMA) networks. You might say that the US is ahead of the game. Compared to Europe, that is, not compared to Japan or Korea.
"17.5% sales tax is what happens when political parties consistently tell their electors that they will be able to bring down income tax and still pay for more public services."
The US politicians do this too. The difference is, they do so not by raising sales tax, but by stealing money out of the Social Security "trust" fund. We have 5 trillion in "real" debt, and 40+ trillion in Social Security debt. That has grown several trillion in the last two years, thanks in part to Bush's $1.2 trillion tax cut and $400 billion war.
"Why not install key loggers or card reader loggers, come back later get your stash, or remote in if you can figure out how once you get it open?"
You don't need Microsoft software to do this. Hardware keyloggers are common and cheap. A PIC and a 9 volt battery would do the job.
"If Deutsche Telecom can get it right in Germany, then why not in the US?"
Because the US is 4x the size of Western Europe and has less people.
"It's not like it's cheaper in the US, au contraire."
It actually is. At least when I looked into plans with major providers (Vodafone, T-Mobile) about a month ago, what we get in the US is far cheaper than what is offered in Europe.
For example:
T-Mobile Baisc Plus (USA)
$30
Do pay for incoming calls
300 Peak
Unlimited Off-Peak/Weekend (9pm-6am)
GPRS = $3 / mo for 1MB, $10 / mo for unlimited
No Long Distance In USA
No Roaming In USA, $.49 in North America, $.99 in Europe
T-Mobile Everyone 100 (UK)
21 GBP = $34.87
Don't pay for incoming calls
150 peak first year, 100 peak thereafter
0 Non-Peak
GPRS 0.75UK = $1.24 *per kilobyte*
No Long-Distance in UK
No Roaming in UK, 0.69GBP = $1.14 USD in rest of Europe
Let's recap
US Plan Advantages:
Cheaper
2x as many peak minutes
Unlimited (vs. 0) non-peak minutes
GPRS that's a lot cheaper
No long distance in a larger area
No roaming in a larger area
Cheaper to use in Canada/Mexico (by far) and even Europe
UK Plan Advantages:
Calling Party Pays
Frankly, I think that the US plan is a far better value. For $10 a month, you can even add unlimited calling *anytime* to other T-Mobile phones in the US (e.g. when I call my friends, it doesn't cost a thing).
I have found T-Mobile's coverage to be perfectly acceptable. I know that some experience signal issues, but, quite frankly, I have not had any problems. No, it's not universal, but it works damn well.
"why is it that i can go to the middle of nowhere in europe (scandinavia more precisely) with my t-mobile phone and get excellent coverage"
Ever been to Chimayo, NM? It's the middle of nowhere. Literally. There's 1 town within 20 miles. It has 900 people. And yet they have reliable T-Mobile GSM and GPRS service. This is not universal, but it's more common than you think.
One reason Sprint and Verizon phones get better converage is because of CDMA. CDMA *is* a better technology than GSM. It handles twice as many people per cell and the cells can be far larger (3x+). Add to that the faster data service and better call quality, and you begin to understand why CDMA is the preferred technology in the USA.
Post Summary:
- Mobile service *isn't* more expensive in the US. From my experience, it's cheaper in the US. Please show me otherwise.
- CPP is nice, but, quite frankly, it's becoming irrelivent in the US. From unlimited nights and weekends to the 600 peak minutes I get to the free calling to and from other T-Mobile phones, I have *never* run over my minute limit. And I call quite a bit. Also, in the US, calling a mobile phone is just like calling a local phone. It's free locally, and cheap long-distance ($.05/min).
- We have unlimited GPRS. I have yet to see an unlimited GPRS plan in Europe. If you know of one, please show it to me.
- We *do* have GSM. With SIM cards. 3 Providers. And GPRS. And 3G CDMA. The US has the largest 3G CDMA networks (Sprint and Verizon). 1XRTT may not be as fast as EVDO, but it *is* technically 3G.
So stop this line of "the US has primitive wireless". It hasn't been true for quite some time now.
Solution: AMD Opteron/Athlon64 in 64-bit mode
Alternate Solution (Even Faster): Intel Itanium 2 with ICC/IFC compiled code
The P4 is fast if you have code that doesn't branch. That basically means 3D rendering and media encoding. Everything else is faster on Athlon 64.
There are *NO* smart tags in Microsoft IE 6. They were stripped from the beta because of public outcry.
Thus, that statement does absolutely nothing.
Thankfully, you can *turn the pixel shaders off*.
A Radeon 9600 would still be a better alternative for playing HL2 - but the're 2x the price of the GeForceFX 5200.
Or any PocketPC. They've had a 48GX/49G emulator for years now.
"That's an overstatement, but still, most of the advanced functions on a graphing calculator are a damaging crutch until you have learned the stuff."
I disagree. Graphing calculators are largely harmless - they only give the approximate answer, after all. What teachers really need to be aware of are calculators with CAS. I had a TI-89 through algebra, and I still do now in calculus (they teach it in public high schools now). One of my biggest faults was that I never got great at factoring - after all, my TI-89 did it better and faster.
The "crutch" factor of a graphing calculator (or a calculator with a CAS) is solved by two words: show work. When it comes time for the test, the students who have relied on their calculators will not be able to demonstrate their knowledge.
Graphing calculators can be a powerful tool in a classroom, and calculators with a CAS can be even more so. I often use my 89 to prove things to myself. I trust the CAS in my 89; it has never given me a false answer. Not once. Sometimes it can't do the problem, sometimes it gives an answer in an obscure form, but it never gives the wrong answer. When I want to prove that, yes, (b^x)^y = b^(x+y), I turn to my 89. I figure out the answer; it just tells me if I'm right.
The parent has been posted before, verbatim, by another Slashdot user.