Re:The more suckers the better !!
on
Free IMAP On Gmail
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Right. The Post office archives all postcards for later access, any time, any place,... for ever and ever. But then it goes one further - it opens my, I had assumed because I knew no better, 1st class mail (or any kind for that matter), and DOES THE SAME TO IT.
Standard cleartext email, the kind of stuff that all email clients send by default, is basically a plain text file. There is no encapsulation or encryption at all. There is nothing preventing anyone and everyone along the way from reading it - much like a post card.
If you don't want anyone reading your email you can use any number of encryption tools to make it harder for unintended recipients to read it - but not impossible.
And if you're worried about Google retaining a copy of every email... Well, so can every single mail server that touches that message. As it gets relayed from one server to the next there is absolutely no guarantee that your message is not retained. There may very well be servers out there retaining copies for all of eternity...backing them up to tape...printing them out...
Quite simply, if you are concerned about security and/or privacy, email is the last way you want to communicate with anyone.
oh grow up. it probably took you longer to whine in that post than it did to reactivate. I've installed tons of drivers and this has never happened to me. more slashdot linux bullshit fud against Microsoft.
It depends on the day, but (re)activating Windows can be a very tedious process.
Sure, the first activation usually goes pretty quick... You can usually do it over the Internet with just a click or two of the mouse - done! No hassle at all.
After that first activation though, things get a little more troublesome... I work at a shop that does entirely too much work on Windows machines, and I've had to (re)activate dozens of Windows installs. After the first activation the automatic Internet activation generally won't work - so you have to call Microsoft up.
They've got a nice automated system that lets you key in the numbers...which isn't the quickest thing... The problem is that this automated system ties into the exact same database that the automatic Internet activation uses, so you're pretty much guaranteed to get rejected. Then you get put on hold for a few minutes to talk with a live human being.
You can wind up waiting a little while if the call center is busy - my record is 30 minutes. Not as bad as your average call to Dell, but not inconsequential. Now you get to explain to a real human being why you want to (re)activate Windows. Normally they don't pay much attention and just give you the activation code...but sometimes they get curious. I don't know if their database spits out a warning after a certain number of activations or what, but I've been quizzed by the activation techs more than once.
I've had them ask me the make and model of the computer, how many times it has been (re)activated, whether this OS has been used on any other computers, what happened to require the (re)activation, etc. I don't think I've ever had them refuse to give me an activation key though.
The end result is that it can easily take 30+ minutes to (re)activate Windows, and I have on occasion wasted well over an hour on the process.
but overally, many people have not had many problems with Windows. While Vista may suck, previous versions of Windows haven't been that bad.
You're kidding me, right?
Yeah, sure, there are millions of people all over the world who are using Windows instead of MacOS or Linux - so it must not be that bad, right? It couldn't possibly be because that's what their machine came loaded with, or because they don't even know there's an alternative, or because it's what their business uses, or because it's the only thing that'll run their software...
Windows is a pretty bad OS. Sure, properly maintained, it will run your computer relatively well. I use Windows myself for work, and at home for my gaming. But it requires constant maintenance. Better keep it well firewalled, keep your antivirus/antispyware up to date, get your updates from microsoft, be careful what you click on. We constantly see people at our shop who are just buying new computers because it is cheaper/easier to do that than clean out the old ones that are now unusable due to spyware and viruses.
OK, it's been six months or so since I've tried Linux, but I've been trying it every six months to a year since 2000, each time someone has told me it had improved enough to not give me troubles - no go so far). I've tried MacOS, same result, except it isn't free.
You don't mention what the problem is that's keeping you from using either of those OSes, but I have a hard time believing it's actually a flaw in the OS itself. Both of them are far more stable and secure than Windows. Both of them offer hardware support that's damn-near as good as Windows, if not better in some cases. Both of them offer nice, friendly, modern GUIs. Both of them ship with a pile of standard software at least as good as what Windows ships with.
Obviously there'll be some learning to do... The buttons look different, and are in different locations... But that's to be expected with any new system, even just going from 2000 to XP to Vista will see huge changes in the interface. So that can't be the deal-breaker.
I would guess it's probably an issue with software support... There's plenty of Windows-only software out there. I keep a Windows partition around simply so that I can play my games. If that's the case then I can certainly sympathize with you - but that's hardly a failing of the OS itself, and it certainly doesn't make Windows a better OS.
The only place ebooks have a decent chance of success is to replace the two tons of textbooks most schools require their students to carry. Otherwise it's hard to beat the convenience of Dead Tree Format.
See, for me, the exact opposite is true. I have precious little time for recreational reading these days... But back in college I was a voracious reader. I carried around a Palm PDA loaded up with literally dozens of eBooks. It was terrific to be able to carry around a dozen books in a form factor that was smaller than a single novel. At the time, battery life was an issue...but that has supposedly changed. It was very convenient for me to have a wide selection of books to chose from, and to have another one available as soon as I'd finished the last. I definitely prefer the convenience of an eBook to Dead Tree Format for recreational reading.
For educational texts, I actually prefer Dead Tree Format. It's generally helpful to be able to highlight things, add notes, underline, whatever. I'm sure those things are available to varying degrees with eBooks, but it never worked terribly well for me on my old Palm.
The problem is that MS is under the gun. Sometimes they release too soon, and blam it bites them in the butt.
Nope, that's not the problem. The problem is with transparency.
I can accept that not all code is perfect and that in a beast of an OS like Windows it is entirely possible that an update will break something. That's fine. That's OK. And when I decide to install an update I am aware that I may need to fix something after the fact. I don't have a problem with this.
What I do have a problem with is Microsoft not telling me what their updates are doing. Yes, generally speaking, there is some indication of what the update is supposed to address. The patch notes will reference a hotfix or KB number or something like that. A lot of the time you can tell what is likely to be affected. But not always. Microsoft has repeatedly released updates with incredibly vague or downright misleading patch notes. And then there was the recent stealth update.
I've got Automatic Updates disabled on just about all of our production systems. I can't have some update showing up in the middle of the night and hosing a server or a couple dozen workstations. I always read through the patch notes before applying updates and, to the best of my ability, check with software support to make sure nothing is going to break.
But if an update claims the only thing it does is fix a bug in IE when in fact it messes around half a dozen low-level network components then I have little if any ability to predict what is going to be broken by that update.
I wouldn't mind seeing them make Halo into what they wanted it to be before Microsoft picked them up and it got retooled into a console shooter.
That has always been one of my biggest complaints about the whole Microsoft/Bungie thing. Back in the day, Bungie used to make predominantly Macintosh games. A lot of their titles were Macintosh only.
I remember seeing the original magazine articles about Halo and it looked very little like what actually came out on the Xbox. The original concept looked more like Team Fortress... Very multiplayer-oriented, with two distinct teams fighting for control of the planet. There was talk of having different classes much like in Team Fortress. At the time, Tribes (or was it Tribes 2?) was huge and comparisons were constantly made.
Instead... We got a decent, though not outstanding, console shooter. Multiplayer was just the usual deathmatch/ctf/whatever... No real distinct teams or classes... Nothing even remotely resembling Tribes or Team Fortress.
Personally, I would love to see Bungie (finally) create a non-Halo title. They make good games, it'd be nice to see a good game that isn't a moderate evolution of a previous one. Enough with the sequels.
If you've played any of Bungie's older titles you'll know that they've got a history of turning out good games. The Marathon series was fantastic, and while Myth was never my cup of tea it was very popular at the time. Even Oni was decent. It'll be good to see Bungie get back to their independent roots... Maybe see them turn out some more cross-platform titles now that they aren't tied to Microsoft.
However, I'm not sure I want to see them stop making Halo games. Sure, the gameplay itself is basically the same as any other shooter...but the setting is very interesting. I wouldn't mind seeing more games set in the Halo universe.
These people were not being gouged by geeks. They were being gouged by assholes.
Personally, I wonder how much of this was gouging at all, and how much was flat-out incompetence.
There are a lot of people out there who've successfully loaded Ubuntu on a PC, or managed to program a wireless router with WEP, or took a year of basic computer literacy classes and suddenly think they're qualified to be doing repairs on anything and everything computer-related. We've got a couple competing businesses here in town that are like that - someone thinks they know what they're doing and rents a storefront. We've also got a bunch of clients who don't like to pay our prices so they call in somebody's highschool or college kid who "knows computers". The end result is usually that by the time the computer shows up at our shop, the problem is worse than it originally was.
We aren't immune though... Whenever we advertise a job position we'll get a bunch of idiots applying, and we've actually wound up with a few of them on payroll. I've had technicians hot plug a PS2 keyboard and then tell me the motherboard is shot when the keyboard doesn't work. I've had technicians reformat and reload a computer several times over before declaring that the processor is toast, when in fact it wass a bad stick of RAM. I even had one technician tell me a Cisco PIX was dead because he couldn't pass traffic through it...when the bandwidth was plugged into the console port instead of the WAN port.
I'm not saying that there aren't assholes out there who'll gouge you - there most certainly are. You find them in just about any industry. I'm sure there are also geeks out there that see an easy target and bill them for a few extra parts on purpose - they can't all be good guys. But I also know for a fact that there are a lot of absolute idiots out there who think they can repair computers.
...I had a dell OEM copy running on a homemade white box for a year...
Some of the older Dell discs do not even ask for activation. On the newer discs there is nothing preventing you from typing in the license key on the sticker attached to your Dell box...or someone else's Dell box...or looking up a valid license key online...or bypassing WGA entirely... But none of that makes it legal. OEM licensing is supposed to be tied to the hardware.
Just try to use a Dell recovery DVD on a homebuilt box. The EULA forbids the OS transfer and the recovery DVD program won't recover to another machine.
I'm not sure what recovery DVD you're referring to... Perhaps something for Vista, or Media Center Edition? All of the Dells I've seen in the last year or two come with a recovery CD that works just fine on any machine. It's basically a regular WinXP install CD with a Dell label on it.
We've got a bunch of these Dell recovery CDs floating around the office (Win2k, WinXP Home, WinXP Pro) that we use when we don't have recovery media for a machine (like the wonderful HPs with the recovery partition - hose the HDD and lose your recovery media too!).
Obviously the licensing is tied to the machine. You can't transfer an OEM license from one computer to another. What you need to do is enter the OEM license from the sticker on the PC you're reloading. Generally speaking, it will activate online just fine. If it doesn't, just call Microsoft and tell them what happened. They don't generally ask a whole lot of questions, especially now that Vista is the hot item to have.
You didn't specify what you do. But if you do anything other than low level help desk...
We're a relatively small IT company providing technical support to an assortment of local businesses. I manage our own internal network (6 Windows servers, 2 Linux servers, web & email hosting for several clients, an assortment of workstations and laptops) as well as taking care of whatever issues our clients can come up with on a day-to-day basis. On a very slow day I might be running virus scans and installing a new workstation, but generally speaking we've got other folks to do that. Normally I'm working on our clients' servers - generally Windows, but some folks have Linux servers. Some are small businesses with 3 or 4 workstations...but we also support a couple larger medical offices with 20-30 workstations. We also do networking...slinging cable and programming Ciscos...but that's usually a one-off thing - we don't normally have to constantly monitor/fix/upgrade/tweak the network.
...then you are severely underpaid.
Yeah, I kind of figured I was when my predecessor got a job with a local hospital for roughly $50,000 a year and basically the same responsibilities I now have - but without all the running around to different clients on a daily basis.
I hope you're hourly at that low of a wage because if you are coming in evenings and weekends for emergencies then you better be getting paid for that.
No, I'm not. I'm salaried, and don't get paid any extra for all my overtime. It is theoretically tracked and is available as "comp time"... But the tracking is not very accurate, my boss does not respond favorably when I point out errors in the tracking, and I have a hard time taking any time off at all.
Maybe it's just me, a lefty liberal socialist Brit, but I don't really understand the mentality behind the 'humourous' tagline here. Selling stuff on eBay means you're earning money. Why shouldn't it be taxed like any other income? Ok, someone selling a couple of DVDs isn't really going to make any dent in the government's revenue, but there are powersellers on eBay with a turnover to rival a large highstreet store, all tax free if you're a bit underhand about it. That's not a good thing. That's a few more potholes in the road, one less nurse looking after you in hospital, a few less books in the school library. Tax evaders aren't Robin Hood*, they're plain old criminals.
Agreed. Income is income. No, I don't really think the government should be going after every kid with a lemonade stand...but some of these eBay sellers are huge. I actually support one of them...they sell DVDs and CDs on eBay... They've got four servers set up to automate the whole process, chattering away with eBay all day long, looking up pricing and ordering from their suppliers. The whole thing is a pretty slick operation. They've got a half-dozen employees and someone in Hawaii writing custom code for them. They're obviously making money - why shouldn't it be taxed?
If you give a damn about the quality of your community you probably ought to welcome Uncle Sam getting ideas along the same lines.
The problem is really how that money is going to be spent... It really doesn't seem like Uncle Sam does a very good job of allocating funds these days. An awfully large part of it will likely go to fight a war that folks don't want...another good chunk will be awarded to rebuilding contractors with ties to government officials...and only a very small portion of it will affect the quality of my community.
In other words, the Canada Revenue Agency is doing its job (this concept may be unfamiliar to Americans when relating to governmental agencies)
Yes, it is a little unusual. Around here (the USA) the government usually sits around not doing much and charging us an awful lot for it, while blustering around trying to look busy. When the government actually does do something it's usually incorrect, wrong, over-reaching, or just plain stupid. And, of course, if anyone actually criticizes the government they're branded as some kind of dissident or terrorist.
So...yeah...the idea of the government actually doing what it is supposed to seems a little unusual to me...
"But at least Windows doesn't require you to go to the terminal and type cryptic and scary commands just to fix little problems..." - oft-heard criticism of Linux
Yeah... At least with Linux you know you're probably going to be messing around at the command prompt. I don't know how many times I've had a Windows machine do something odd, gone looking through the GUI for the magic checkbox that will fix things, only to eventually discover (through technical support or a KB article) that there's a command-line fix that isn't documented anywhere.
Frankly... These days I'm using the command prompt on my Windows machine just as often as I do on my Linux machine.
People so easily forget that these tools are put in place to catch criminals/terrorists. They are not aimed at incriminating random innocent civilians, if anything, it can be used to prove your innocence if you're caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I don't think anyone has forgotten that the stated intent is to catch criminals and terrorists. And you're right, it certainly could be used to prove your innocence instead of guilt.
I am aware that this technology can be used by corrupt authorities to target the wrong person.
My concern isn't really one of corruption, but rather incompetence. DNA testing these days is generally done in a laboratory, in nearly cleanroom conditions, by trained scientists who do this kind of thing all day long who have little if any vested interest in the results of the test. This briefcase tester claims to be able to do the job in as little as 25 minutes and appears to be marketed towards local police departments. How much training would be given to the officers? What kind of protocols will be in place to prevent contamination? I'm just wondering how accurate the test results are going to be. I don't want to see innocent people jailed because some bit of dust got into the sample, nor do I want to see the guilty walking the streets.
Should we discard any new technology that assists in removing criminal off the streets because there's a chance that it might violate our personal space?
I guess this would depend on how exactly the technology is used...but I have to admit that I'm leaning towards a "yes" answer. If this device is used responsibly in serious criminal cases then I guess I don't have much of a problem with it... But if it becomes standard procedure to grab a DNA sample with every traffic ticket you write then I've got serious issues. The US Government has already stated that it would like DNA records on everyone inside its borders...the easier we make it, the more likely that is to happen.
why do this before building large scale solar and wind plants? Is it really going to be cheaper than (say) paving large areas of desert with ever-cheaper solar cells? Or building the really large wind-farm projects in the many available on/off shore locations?
It's not a matter of doing one instead of the other. This isn't some 4X game where you choose to develop one technology at the expense of another. These are privately owned businesses doing what they think will earn them a buck.
So there's a big nuke plant being built in Texas - good! More electricity produced without coal or oil. Yeah, you've got to do something with the nuclear waste...but I can't believe it's any worse than what coal and oil come up with.
Up around where I live we've got two large wind parks under construction. Two competing companies both discovered the area and there are windmills going up all over the place.
If someone else decides they want to put in solar collectors in the desert or floating windmills in the ocean they are free to do so - nobody is going to stop them just because there's already a nuclear power plant in Texas.
Ironically, (unreasonably) high wage demands typically have more to do with the non-tangible compensation that a job offers than the actual amount of money employees make. That is, when people are happy with their job, when they enjoy the social contacts, when they get to work in a nice environment and, above all, when they have a sense of purpose, then they make reasonable wage demands. When the job sucks, they spend 8 hours a day thinking "I don't get paid enough for this shit." In that case, no wage will be high enough.
I think this has an awful lot to do with it. Granted, I'd love to be getting paid more than $23,000 a year, but the real reason I complain is because I'm not really getting paid for the hours I work. I'm paid for 40 hours a week... But I routinely work 9+ hour days and frequently get called in for evening or weekend emergencies. Realistically, I'm working more like 50 hours a week. Plus, we're busy enough and understaffed enough that I have a hard time actually taking the one week of vacation I'm allowed every year.
The end result is that I always feel overworked, stressed, tired - and underpaid.
If that $200 will actually harm you financially, you shouldn't have bought a $600 gadget in the first place.
Agreed. $600 for a phone is excessive, as is $400. If you're spending that kind of money on a phone then you probably don't need to worry too much about an extra $200. Sure, it'd be nice to save the money... But it was obviously worth the money at the time.
While it is certainly true that some people would be in for an unpleasant surprise the first time they bought a computer without an OS, brought it home, turned it on, and were greeted with "System Disk Not Found" - that's really no reason to continue bundling.
How many DVD players out there come with a movie? How many consoles come with a game? How many televisions come with cable or satellite service? People are used to having to buy software for their computers anyway... They're buying games and productivity software already... Why not make them buy the OS separately?
Stores could offer installation, just like they currently install larger appliances. They could provide mail-in coupons and rebates on various OSes. There's be real competition out there... Microsoft couldn't count on being the OS installed on every computer anymore, they'd have to give people a reason to install their OS instead of someone else's.
Installation, while it is currently fairly easy, would become even easier. Drivers would become more universal and easier to locate. Software manufacturers would also have an incentive to start developing for multiple OSes.
Granted, it wouldn't happen over night. Most people would keep going with Microsoft just because it is what they're used to. But eventually folks will notice that they're paying several hundred dollars to make their computer "just work" when there are cheaper/better alternatives out there.
As long as Windows is the OS installed out of the box there will be not chance for real competition. Most people don't even understand that Windows is a separate program that is installed on their computer. They don't realize that they are paying for it. They don't understand that it could be removed, and something else put in-place. And until that knowledge is there, people aren't going to consider any alternatives.
It makes sense for Linux to fork into two branches: one, a conservative one, aimed at upkeeping what already works, and the second, a wild-ass anarchist, aimed at forging new and innovative technologies.
So... Something like Debian and Ubuntu?
Or Red Hat and Fedora?
We already have the two branches you suggest, as well as a whole variety of different flavors between the two extremes.
Nobody is saying that you can't fork the kernel, nor that you shouldn't...only that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
The argument appears to be that desktop performance currently suffers because Linus likes servers better. The suggestion is that by forking the kernel into something more desktop-specific you could get better performance.
The problem with this suggestion is that it really doesn't seem to be necessary to create a desktop-specific fork in order to accomplish that goal. You can already compile your own kernel with all sorts of performance enhancing options turned on/off as you like. There are already plenty of desktop-centric distributions out there.
I guess what I'm wondering is really what changes would be made to the kernel to make it more desktop friendly. What would be left out? What would be optimized? What would be included that isn't currently available?
A server is a relly different beast than a desktop and having this "all-in-one" kernel means that the operating system gets bloated with a) desktop specific features when using a server and b) Server specific features when installing a desktop.
But it isn't really an "all-in-one" kernel. As many other people have pointed out, with Linux you have the choice of what gets compiled into your kernel. You can disable all sorts of stuff, set flags, statically link modules... You can create an optimized kernel for virtually any task.
This isn't Windows. It isn't blackbox software. There is no arbitrary limitation on how many processors you can use. Nobody is going to make you buy the $1,000 box instead of the $100 box just because you've got too much RAM.
Look around at some of the distributions out there. There are already distributions that are customized for home desktop users, business desktop users, servers, embedded devices... Why should you fork the kernel and hard-code changes specific to the desktop, when you can already dynamically pick and choose what best meets your needs?
I grew up about 15 minutes away from the nearest town, on a lake, in a heavily wooded area. We had neighbors and all...but much of the light was filtered out by trees/underbrush/whatever. The night skies were absolutely beautiful - stars everywhere.
These days I live about a minute outside of the town... There's a big ol' streetlamp right at the end of my driveway, and plenty more of them following the road for several miles. There are houses all around me, and plenty of city lights not far away. I'm lucky if I can pick out a dozen stars in a night.
I really don't know anything about astronomy, and I have no idea what the Bortle ranking is... But even someone as oblivious as I am can see the difference. It saddens me that there are so many people around the world who will literally never see a night sky like I did when I was growing up. Almost like a part of the world has died.
Unfortunately, I have a hard time believing that much will be done about this. The world is steadily working towards daylight 24x7. People come home from work in the evenings, and want to be able to shop/play/whatever - light facilitates this. Employers want to keep their places open all night long - light facilitates this. Folks talk about safety on the roads, or for people walking the streets - light facilitates this. I really wouldn't be surprised if someone proposed putting orbital mirrors/lights up to genuinely extend daylight to 24 hours.
I certainly can't see folks turning off or restricting the usage of lights... Regardless of how much sense it makes.
Slashdot Mirror
Standard cleartext email, the kind of stuff that all email clients send by default, is basically a plain text file. There is no encapsulation or encryption at all. There is nothing preventing anyone and everyone along the way from reading it - much like a post card.
If you don't want anyone reading your email you can use any number of encryption tools to make it harder for unintended recipients to read it - but not impossible.
And if you're worried about Google retaining a copy of every email... Well, so can every single mail server that touches that message. As it gets relayed from one server to the next there is absolutely no guarantee that your message is not retained. There may very well be servers out there retaining copies for all of eternity...backing them up to tape...printing them out...
Quite simply, if you are concerned about security and/or privacy, email is the last way you want to communicate with anyone.
It depends on the day, but (re)activating Windows can be a very tedious process.
Sure, the first activation usually goes pretty quick... You can usually do it over the Internet with just a click or two of the mouse - done! No hassle at all.
After that first activation though, things get a little more troublesome... I work at a shop that does entirely too much work on Windows machines, and I've had to (re)activate dozens of Windows installs. After the first activation the automatic Internet activation generally won't work - so you have to call Microsoft up.
They've got a nice automated system that lets you key in the numbers...which isn't the quickest thing... The problem is that this automated system ties into the exact same database that the automatic Internet activation uses, so you're pretty much guaranteed to get rejected. Then you get put on hold for a few minutes to talk with a live human being.
You can wind up waiting a little while if the call center is busy - my record is 30 minutes. Not as bad as your average call to Dell, but not inconsequential. Now you get to explain to a real human being why you want to (re)activate Windows. Normally they don't pay much attention and just give you the activation code...but sometimes they get curious. I don't know if their database spits out a warning after a certain number of activations or what, but I've been quizzed by the activation techs more than once.
I've had them ask me the make and model of the computer, how many times it has been (re)activated, whether this OS has been used on any other computers, what happened to require the (re)activation, etc. I don't think I've ever had them refuse to give me an activation key though.
The end result is that it can easily take 30+ minutes to (re)activate Windows, and I have on occasion wasted well over an hour on the process.
You're kidding me, right?
Yeah, sure, there are millions of people all over the world who are using Windows instead of MacOS or Linux - so it must not be that bad, right? It couldn't possibly be because that's what their machine came loaded with, or because they don't even know there's an alternative, or because it's what their business uses, or because it's the only thing that'll run their software...
Windows is a pretty bad OS. Sure, properly maintained, it will run your computer relatively well. I use Windows myself for work, and at home for my gaming. But it requires constant maintenance. Better keep it well firewalled, keep your antivirus/antispyware up to date, get your updates from microsoft, be careful what you click on. We constantly see people at our shop who are just buying new computers because it is cheaper/easier to do that than clean out the old ones that are now unusable due to spyware and viruses.
You don't mention what the problem is that's keeping you from using either of those OSes, but I have a hard time believing it's actually a flaw in the OS itself. Both of them are far more stable and secure than Windows. Both of them offer hardware support that's damn-near as good as Windows, if not better in some cases. Both of them offer nice, friendly, modern GUIs. Both of them ship with a pile of standard software at least as good as what Windows ships with.
Obviously there'll be some learning to do... The buttons look different, and are in different locations... But that's to be expected with any new system, even just going from 2000 to XP to Vista will see huge changes in the interface. So that can't be the deal-breaker.
I would guess it's probably an issue with software support... There's plenty of Windows-only software out there. I keep a Windows partition around simply so that I can play my games. If that's the case then I can certainly sympathize with you - but that's hardly a failing of the OS itself, and it certainly doesn't make Windows a better OS.
For educational texts, I actually prefer Dead Tree Format. It's generally helpful to be able to highlight things, add notes, underline, whatever. I'm sure those things are available to varying degrees with eBooks, but it never worked terribly well for me on my old Palm.
Nope, that's not the problem. The problem is with transparency.
I can accept that not all code is perfect and that in a beast of an OS like Windows it is entirely possible that an update will break something. That's fine. That's OK. And when I decide to install an update I am aware that I may need to fix something after the fact. I don't have a problem with this.
What I do have a problem with is Microsoft not telling me what their updates are doing. Yes, generally speaking, there is some indication of what the update is supposed to address. The patch notes will reference a hotfix or KB number or something like that. A lot of the time you can tell what is likely to be affected. But not always. Microsoft has repeatedly released updates with incredibly vague or downright misleading patch notes. And then there was the recent stealth update.
I've got Automatic Updates disabled on just about all of our production systems. I can't have some update showing up in the middle of the night and hosing a server or a couple dozen workstations. I always read through the patch notes before applying updates and, to the best of my ability, check with software support to make sure nothing is going to break.
But if an update claims the only thing it does is fix a bug in IE when in fact it messes around half a dozen low-level network components then I have little if any ability to predict what is going to be broken by that update.
That has always been one of my biggest complaints about the whole Microsoft/Bungie thing. Back in the day, Bungie used to make predominantly Macintosh games. A lot of their titles were Macintosh only.
I remember seeing the original magazine articles about Halo and it looked very little like what actually came out on the Xbox. The original concept looked more like Team Fortress... Very multiplayer-oriented, with two distinct teams fighting for control of the planet. There was talk of having different classes much like in Team Fortress. At the time, Tribes (or was it Tribes 2?) was huge and comparisons were constantly made.
Instead... We got a decent, though not outstanding, console shooter. Multiplayer was just the usual deathmatch/ctf/whatever... No real distinct teams or classes... Nothing even remotely resembling Tribes or Team Fortress.
If you've played any of Bungie's older titles you'll know that they've got a history of turning out good games. The Marathon series was fantastic, and while Myth was never my cup of tea it was very popular at the time. Even Oni was decent. It'll be good to see Bungie get back to their independent roots... Maybe see them turn out some more cross-platform titles now that they aren't tied to Microsoft.
However, I'm not sure I want to see them stop making Halo games. Sure, the gameplay itself is basically the same as any other shooter...but the setting is very interesting. I wouldn't mind seeing more games set in the Halo universe.
Personally, I wonder how much of this was gouging at all, and how much was flat-out incompetence.
There are a lot of people out there who've successfully loaded Ubuntu on a PC, or managed to program a wireless router with WEP, or took a year of basic computer literacy classes and suddenly think they're qualified to be doing repairs on anything and everything computer-related. We've got a couple competing businesses here in town that are like that - someone thinks they know what they're doing and rents a storefront. We've also got a bunch of clients who don't like to pay our prices so they call in somebody's highschool or college kid who "knows computers". The end result is usually that by the time the computer shows up at our shop, the problem is worse than it originally was.
We aren't immune though... Whenever we advertise a job position we'll get a bunch of idiots applying, and we've actually wound up with a few of them on payroll. I've had technicians hot plug a PS2 keyboard and then tell me the motherboard is shot when the keyboard doesn't work. I've had technicians reformat and reload a computer several times over before declaring that the processor is toast, when in fact it wass a bad stick of RAM. I even had one technician tell me a Cisco PIX was dead because he couldn't pass traffic through it...when the bandwidth was plugged into the console port instead of the WAN port.
I'm not saying that there aren't assholes out there who'll gouge you - there most certainly are. You find them in just about any industry. I'm sure there are also geeks out there that see an easy target and bill them for a few extra parts on purpose - they can't all be good guys. But I also know for a fact that there are a lot of absolute idiots out there who think they can repair computers.
You are correct, I did miss the point.
If you're moving to a new home made whitebox then you cannot move your licensing. OEM licensing is tied to the hardware itself.
I'm not sure what recovery DVD you're referring to... Perhaps something for Vista, or Media Center Edition? All of the Dells I've seen in the last year or two come with a recovery CD that works just fine on any machine. It's basically a regular WinXP install CD with a Dell label on it.
We've got a bunch of these Dell recovery CDs floating around the office (Win2k, WinXP Home, WinXP Pro) that we use when we don't have recovery media for a machine (like the wonderful HPs with the recovery partition - hose the HDD and lose your recovery media too!).
Obviously the licensing is tied to the machine. You can't transfer an OEM license from one computer to another. What you need to do is enter the OEM license from the sticker on the PC you're reloading. Generally speaking, it will activate online just fine. If it doesn't, just call Microsoft and tell them what happened. They don't generally ask a whole lot of questions, especially now that Vista is the hot item to have.
Yes, it is a little unusual. Around here (the USA) the government usually sits around not doing much and charging us an awful lot for it, while blustering around trying to look busy. When the government actually does do something it's usually incorrect, wrong, over-reaching, or just plain stupid. And, of course, if anyone actually criticizes the government they're branded as some kind of dissident or terrorist.
So...yeah...the idea of the government actually doing what it is supposed to seems a little unusual to me...
Yeah... At least with Linux you know you're probably going to be messing around at the command prompt. I don't know how many times I've had a Windows machine do something odd, gone looking through the GUI for the magic checkbox that will fix things, only to eventually discover (through technical support or a KB article) that there's a command-line fix that isn't documented anywhere.
Frankly... These days I'm using the command prompt on my Windows machine just as often as I do on my Linux machine.
It's not a matter of doing one instead of the other. This isn't some 4X game where you choose to develop one technology at the expense of another. These are privately owned businesses doing what they think will earn them a buck.
So there's a big nuke plant being built in Texas - good! More electricity produced without coal or oil. Yeah, you've got to do something with the nuclear waste...but I can't believe it's any worse than what coal and oil come up with.
Up around where I live we've got two large wind parks under construction. Two competing companies both discovered the area and there are windmills going up all over the place.
If someone else decides they want to put in solar collectors in the desert or floating windmills in the ocean they are free to do so - nobody is going to stop them just because there's already a nuclear power plant in Texas.
I think this has an awful lot to do with it. Granted, I'd love to be getting paid more than $23,000 a year, but the real reason I complain is because I'm not really getting paid for the hours I work. I'm paid for 40 hours a week... But I routinely work 9+ hour days and frequently get called in for evening or weekend emergencies. Realistically, I'm working more like 50 hours a week. Plus, we're busy enough and understaffed enough that I have a hard time actually taking the one week of vacation I'm allowed every year.
The end result is that I always feel overworked, stressed, tired - and underpaid.
Agreed. $600 for a phone is excessive, as is $400. If you're spending that kind of money on a phone then you probably don't need to worry too much about an extra $200. Sure, it'd be nice to save the money... But it was obviously worth the money at the time.
While it is certainly true that some people would be in for an unpleasant surprise the first time they bought a computer without an OS, brought it home, turned it on, and were greeted with "System Disk Not Found" - that's really no reason to continue bundling.
How many DVD players out there come with a movie? How many consoles come with a game? How many televisions come with cable or satellite service? People are used to having to buy software for their computers anyway... They're buying games and productivity software already... Why not make them buy the OS separately?
Stores could offer installation, just like they currently install larger appliances. They could provide mail-in coupons and rebates on various OSes. There's be real competition out there... Microsoft couldn't count on being the OS installed on every computer anymore, they'd have to give people a reason to install their OS instead of someone else's.
Installation, while it is currently fairly easy, would become even easier. Drivers would become more universal and easier to locate. Software manufacturers would also have an incentive to start developing for multiple OSes.
Granted, it wouldn't happen over night. Most people would keep going with Microsoft just because it is what they're used to. But eventually folks will notice that they're paying several hundred dollars to make their computer "just work" when there are cheaper/better alternatives out there.
As long as Windows is the OS installed out of the box there will be not chance for real competition. Most people don't even understand that Windows is a separate program that is installed on their computer. They don't realize that they are paying for it. They don't understand that it could be removed, and something else put in-place. And until that knowledge is there, people aren't going to consider any alternatives.
So... Something like Debian and Ubuntu?
Or Red Hat and Fedora?
We already have the two branches you suggest, as well as a whole variety of different flavors between the two extremes.
Nobody is saying that you can't fork the kernel, nor that you shouldn't...only that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
The argument appears to be that desktop performance currently suffers because Linus likes servers better. The suggestion is that by forking the kernel into something more desktop-specific you could get better performance.
The problem with this suggestion is that it really doesn't seem to be necessary to create a desktop-specific fork in order to accomplish that goal. You can already compile your own kernel with all sorts of performance enhancing options turned on/off as you like. There are already plenty of desktop-centric distributions out there.
I guess what I'm wondering is really what changes would be made to the kernel to make it more desktop friendly. What would be left out? What would be optimized? What would be included that isn't currently available?
But it isn't really an "all-in-one" kernel. As many other people have pointed out, with Linux you have the choice of what gets compiled into your kernel. You can disable all sorts of stuff, set flags, statically link modules... You can create an optimized kernel for virtually any task.
This isn't Windows. It isn't blackbox software. There is no arbitrary limitation on how many processors you can use. Nobody is going to make you buy the $1,000 box instead of the $100 box just because you've got too much RAM.
Look around at some of the distributions out there. There are already distributions that are customized for home desktop users, business desktop users, servers, embedded devices... Why should you fork the kernel and hard-code changes specific to the desktop, when you can already dynamically pick and choose what best meets your needs?
It sounds for all the world like some kind of tiny electromagnetic abacus.
I grew up about 15 minutes away from the nearest town, on a lake, in a heavily wooded area. We had neighbors and all...but much of the light was filtered out by trees/underbrush/whatever. The night skies were absolutely beautiful - stars everywhere.
These days I live about a minute outside of the town... There's a big ol' streetlamp right at the end of my driveway, and plenty more of them following the road for several miles. There are houses all around me, and plenty of city lights not far away. I'm lucky if I can pick out a dozen stars in a night.
I really don't know anything about astronomy, and I have no idea what the Bortle ranking is... But even someone as oblivious as I am can see the difference. It saddens me that there are so many people around the world who will literally never see a night sky like I did when I was growing up. Almost like a part of the world has died.
Unfortunately, I have a hard time believing that much will be done about this. The world is steadily working towards daylight 24x7. People come home from work in the evenings, and want to be able to shop/play/whatever - light facilitates this. Employers want to keep their places open all night long - light facilitates this. Folks talk about safety on the roads, or for people walking the streets - light facilitates this. I really wouldn't be surprised if someone proposed putting orbital mirrors/lights up to genuinely extend daylight to 24 hours.
I certainly can't see folks turning off or restricting the usage of lights... Regardless of how much sense it makes.