I love when people lie and claim you have to pay "every year" even though new versions of OS X come out about every 2 to 3 years. Kudos for silently jacking up the price to $150 as well.
Erm, you aren't exactly 100% correct yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS_X. Forgetting 10.0->10.1 because it was a free update, they have released updates pretty much yearly since then. The major exception is Jaguar, which will have had almost two years (though, Tiger was moved forwards, so was less than a year after Panther). The current cost of the OS is $129 (and if wikipedia is right, has been since at least 10.1). So 2-3 years is pretty far off the mark.
P.S. I like active development of my software/OS and am very happy with my MBP.
In follow-up, I just want to make it clear that I'm in no way saying the above policy change will actually be an effective means of stopping incorrect information appearing on Wikipedia. It might be and it might not. I was just explaining the rationale behind it.
Actually, there were two cases mentioned. One was that an article was created with factually incorrect information that was inadequately checked after publication. The second was that an article was changed and this has led to problems. It is the former that has caused the change.
If I've read the article correctly, Wikipedia does a far better job of tracking changes than it does new articles. The second problem was noticed very quickly, reported and presumably corrected (after much comment on slashdot). The first problem stemmed from the fact that the article went unlinked and unedited for so long. All changes on Wikipedia appear to be tracked and checked by a number of people, so the article would have either been edited for correctness by a user or verified for correctness on each change. Because it got through the preliminary check (presumably by one person -- multiple people can register interest in an article after creation and will see changes, but I assume only one person verfies it initially).
The reason for the change is to increase the level of accountability. If an anonymous user changes an article and in some way "messes it up", someone checks that and can either undo it or correct it again. However, if an anonymous user creates a new article and somehow it gets through preliminary checks, then the incorrect information could be up for a long time (because there may be poor linkage) and there is no way for Wikipedia to track who made that anonymous article (remember, many people are on dynamic IPs that change regularly, so an IP is only valid for a short period). I assume that by registering, a valid email is required and therefore there is a semblance of control.
Are you actually aware of the current exchange rate? A quick glance at http://www.xe.com/ucc/ would tell you that the $299 price tag is more like £165.26. Therefore, £210 is a £45 ($81.41) difference.
For reference, as of today (17th Aug 2005) the exchange rate is 1 GBP = 1.80906 USD.
Not sure if this is the case in the US, but in the UK, you don't have to state all your qualifications. If you friend wants a job and feels his PhD would overqualify him, he could always leave it out.
I do realise of course that this leaves a large gap on the Resume/Curriculum Vitae where you did your PhD, but that can always be gotten around:)
I'm currently writing up my PhD thesis for intended submission at the end of September.
My experience seems to suggest that PhD isn't *generally* useful. What I mean by that is, it is not useful for just an average tech job (at least in the UK). That said, a number of prospective employers have suggested that I could start with a couple of K more cash than I would haev as a graduate, but that doesn't outweight the four years I've spent doing it.
It could well be useful if you want to get a job in the same field as the PhD. Specialisaion on something can be very handy. However, if your PhD is in something relatively esoteric or abstract, then it is probably not much use.
From what I know, the situation is better in the US, where PhDs are more respected. The company sponsoring my PhD is an American company, so some must like it:)
I don't know of anyone really getting turned down because of having a PhD, but in many cases it won't help. However, maybe others have more experience of this, as I haven't yet got my PhD:)
I don't entirely understand why it is a 36.7GB drive? By this I mean, why do SCSI drives usually go up in multiples of 9GB (i.e. 9, 18, 36, 72) whereas IDE hard drives tend to go up in 10's, etc. (at least recently)? And since this is IDE, why does it have a size more akin to that of a SCSI drive?
We can't just go trouncing around on our own moon without space-suits 'just because we found water-based ice
Erm, I think you kind of missed the point here. No one is saying they can just land on Mars and whip off their helmets. What they are saying is that a supply of oxygen would be available after processing the water. This means that oxygen supplies could be continually topped up. Only in their ship or colony, not that the whole planet would instantly have an atmosphere with enough oxygen in it to live (or enough pressure for that matter).
I don't know about most people, but I find it very difficult to read directly off my computer screen. I would much prefer a professionally presented PDF than HTML/XML (which is by its nature very imprecise at the moment), so that I can print it out. No matter what people say about CSS, XSL, etc. they can't compete with something like PDF for layout control.
The optometrist is bound to say this. They don't want people getting their eyes fixed and no longer needing to go to them for new glasses, etc.
The reason I believe this, is that many surgeons now use the treatment for themselves. There vision is extremely important to their profession and yet they trust it! Well, so do I, if this is the case. Glasses are inconvenient and contact lenses expensive (and easy to lose). No more cleaning my glasses and having them steam up, etc.
I'm looking into it and it doesn't seem too expensive either.
Slashdot Mirror
In follow-up, I just want to make it clear that I'm in no way saying the above policy change will actually be an effective means of stopping incorrect information appearing on Wikipedia. It might be and it might not. I was just explaining the rationale behind it.
Actually, there were two cases mentioned. One was that an article was created with factually incorrect information that was inadequately checked after publication. The second was that an article was changed and this has led to problems. It is the former that has caused the change.
If I've read the article correctly, Wikipedia does a far better job of tracking changes than it does new articles. The second problem was noticed very quickly, reported and presumably corrected (after much comment on slashdot). The first problem stemmed from the fact that the article went unlinked and unedited for so long. All changes on Wikipedia appear to be tracked and checked by a number of people, so the article would have either been edited for correctness by a user or verified for correctness on each change. Because it got through the preliminary check (presumably by one person -- multiple people can register interest in an article after creation and will see changes, but I assume only one person verfies it initially).
The reason for the change is to increase the level of accountability. If an anonymous user changes an article and in some way "messes it up", someone checks that and can either undo it or correct it again. However, if an anonymous user creates a new article and somehow it gets through preliminary checks, then the incorrect information could be up for a long time (because there may be poor linkage) and there is no way for Wikipedia to track who made that anonymous article (remember, many people are on dynamic IPs that change regularly, so an IP is only valid for a short period). I assume that by registering, a valid email is required and therefore there is a semblance of control.
Are you actually aware of the current exchange rate? A quick glance at http://www.xe.com/ucc/ would tell you that the $299 price tag is more like £165.26. Therefore, £210 is a £45 ($81.41) difference.
For reference, as of today (17th Aug 2005) the exchange rate is 1 GBP = 1.80906 USD.
Not sure if this is the case in the US, but in the UK, you don't have to state all your qualifications. If you friend wants a job and feels his PhD would overqualify him, he could always leave it out.
:)
I do realise of course that this leaves a large gap on the Resume/Curriculum Vitae where you did your PhD, but that can always be gotten around
Behlal
I'm currently writing up my PhD thesis for intended submission at the end of September.
:)
:)
My experience seems to suggest that PhD isn't *generally* useful. What I mean by that is, it is not useful for just an average tech job (at least in the UK). That said, a number of prospective employers have suggested that I could start with a couple of K more cash than I would haev as a graduate, but that doesn't outweight the four years I've spent doing it.
It could well be useful if you want to get a job in the same field as the PhD. Specialisaion on something can be very handy. However, if your PhD is in something relatively esoteric or abstract, then it is probably not much use.
From what I know, the situation is better in the US, where PhDs are more respected. The company sponsoring my PhD is an American company, so some must like it
I don't know of anyone really getting turned down because of having a PhD, but in many cases it won't help. However, maybe others have more experience of this, as I haven't yet got my PhD
Behlal
I don't entirely understand why it is a 36.7GB drive? By this I mean, why do SCSI drives usually go up in multiples of 9GB (i.e. 9, 18, 36, 72) whereas IDE hard drives tend to go up in 10's, etc. (at least recently)? And since this is IDE, why does it have a size more akin to that of a SCSI drive?
Thanks,
Behlal
Hi,
I don't know about most people, but I find it very difficult to read directly off my computer screen. I would much prefer a professionally presented PDF than HTML/XML (which is by its nature very imprecise at the moment), so that I can print it out. No matter what people say about CSS, XSL, etc. they can't compete with something like PDF for layout control.
The optometrist is bound to say this. They don't want people getting their eyes fixed and no longer needing to go to them for new glasses, etc.
The reason I believe this, is that many surgeons now use the treatment for themselves. There vision is extremely important to their profession and yet they trust it! Well, so do I, if this is the case. Glasses are inconvenient and contact lenses expensive (and easy to lose). No more cleaning my glasses and having them steam up, etc.
I'm looking into it and it doesn't seem too expensive either.