Except that a lot of the people that consist of the Apple "Grass Roots" are power users who are likely to balk at such a setup.
Bull. They'll make excuses like they always do.
It costs less to the Manufacturer. (packaging/shipping costs) It cuts the middleman out. (don't need to give Best Buy or other non-apple on-line/retail stores a cut) It provides quick availability. (as fast as their servers and your pipe can handle) It provides a remote backup for customers. (a + for non-technically savvy customers)
This I just do not understand. Not to talk trash about Kubuntu (I personally know some good people who work on it), but I've always seen Ubuntu's polishing of the Gnome desktop as the main selling point of the distro. If you're not using Ubuntu for that, what's the appeal? What makes Kubuntu better than (insert distro of choice here)?
They surely can, if you're enough of an idiot to give all your information to somebody else who doesn't give a shit about you. That's what I've been saying this whole time.
I was merely tempering your statement that it was "forced" onto the users.
That actually wasn't me, but anyway.
Your language might even be acceptable as hyperbole if the "Classic Desktop" option was hidden, or if that option was some sort of second-class citizen in the ecosystem. But it isn't.
Yes it is. It's a get-me-by for the next release until they dump it.
Are there alternatives equally accessible and equally supported? Yes.
Equally supported? That's just absolutely not true. There is a temporary crutch that is slated for demise in six months.
It's okay that it's broken! You don't have to use it! It's only a default!
These things are marginally acceptable when you're talking about Fedora or Arch, but I was under the impression that Ubuntu held itself to a different standard.
This must be some kind of corollary to Godwin's Law. "As any given Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of a militant atheist bringing up religion in a completely unrelated discussion approaches one."
In some cases the government or other law enforcement agencies can just ask for the information.... This whole thread was about people supposedly losing their "freedoms" and I still don't see any evidence to support this.
How you can put those two sentences in the same paragraph without collapsing in self-ridicule, I have no idea.
Retrieving information from any Internet provider still requires a warrant
It most assuredly does not. It merely requires that service provider's permission. It does not require yours. If you have a Facebook account, you agreed, in writing (or the digital equivalent as the case may be) that everything you put on Facebook is property of Facebook. Facebook has no reason to respect your "privacy" if they are solicited for information on you by law enforcement. They can hand everything over without ever informing you. You already said they could.
If Facebook chooses not to hand over that information, then a warrant is, in some cases, required.
Slashdot Mirror
As for the applications menu, I reverted to the classic.
Have you tried Lancelot? I quite like it. Although really, I tend to access my programs and stuff mostly through Krunner these days.
It definitely will not run on older computers
I dunno man, I'm running 4.6 on a Pentium D with Intel graphics and 2 Gb of RAM, and I'm doing fine. Desktop effects and the whole shebang.
Anyone who uses the phrase "conspiracy theory" is trying to dismiss things that they are uncomfortable confronting. It's a cop out.
Except that a lot of the people that consist of the Apple "Grass Roots" are power users who are likely to balk at such a setup.
Bull. They'll make excuses like they always do.
It costs less to the Manufacturer. (packaging/shipping costs)
It cuts the middleman out. (don't need to give Best Buy or other non-apple on-line/retail stores a cut)
It provides quick availability. (as fast as their servers and your pipe can handle)
It provides a remote backup for customers. (a + for non-technically savvy customers)
Oh look, you're starting early.
So you have a Thinkpad? Me too!
This I just do not understand. Not to talk trash about Kubuntu (I personally know some good people who work on it), but I've always seen Ubuntu's polishing of the Gnome desktop as the main selling point of the distro. If you're not using Ubuntu for that, what's the appeal? What makes Kubuntu better than (insert distro of choice here)?
You are incorrect. This discussion is about people giving their rights away.
You are also extremely rude.
They surely can, if you're enough of an idiot to give all your information to somebody else who doesn't give a shit about you. That's what I've been saying this whole time.
No problem.
I was merely tempering your statement that it was "forced" onto the users.
That actually wasn't me, but anyway.
Your language might even be acceptable as hyperbole if the "Classic Desktop" option was hidden, or if that option was some sort of second-class citizen in the ecosystem. But it isn't.
Yes it is. It's a get-me-by for the next release until they dump it.
Are there alternatives equally accessible and equally supported? Yes.
Equally supported? That's just absolutely not true. There is a temporary crutch that is slated for demise in six months.
We invaded several countries with ground forces. Yes, war required.
That's great. Some of us still use actual computers.
It's okay that it's broken! You don't have to use it! It's only a default!
These things are marginally acceptable when you're talking about Fedora or Arch, but I was under the impression that Ubuntu held itself to a different standard.
You are talking about newbies, so they don't have expectations.
I'm sure they expect it to look like a computer.
Would you say the same when they move to OSX?
OS X kind of looks like a computer. A Playskool computer, but a computer.
I think moving from Windows to Unity is similar to moving to OS X or Gnome2.
Not even close. It's like moving from a computer to a phone.
Ubuntu is the most popular Linux distro, it's the one people brand new to Linux try most of the time.
Other distros have filled that niche in the past, and will again.
Yes, it's equally stupid on OS X.
This must be some kind of corollary to Godwin's Law. "As any given Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of a militant atheist bringing up religion in a completely unrelated discussion approaches one."
In some cases the government or other law enforcement agencies can just ask for the information. ...
This whole thread was about people supposedly losing their "freedoms" and I still don't see any evidence to support this.
How you can put those two sentences in the same paragraph without collapsing in self-ridicule, I have no idea.
I already posted, but somebody ought to mod this up.
You don't want your phone number released? Don't give it to them. They don't go hoovering that kind of stuff up.
The hell they don't.
Retrieving information from any Internet provider still requires a warrant
It most assuredly does not. It merely requires that service provider's permission. It does not require yours. If you have a Facebook account, you agreed, in writing (or the digital equivalent as the case may be) that everything you put on Facebook is property of Facebook. Facebook has no reason to respect your "privacy" if they are solicited for information on you by law enforcement. They can hand everything over without ever informing you. You already said they could.
If Facebook chooses not to hand over that information, then a warrant is, in some cases, required.
a lot of the same could be said about telephones
The last time I checked, my speed dial was not public knowledge.
Bush diverted most of our military to a pointless fight in Iraq, and unsurprisingly we never caught Bin Laden
True.
Obama set finding Bin Laden as our top goal in the region
Not true.
they'll just swiftboat him.
You don't know what that means.
Aw shit. And I just commented and can't mod this up. I lold though.