That was actually an idea I once had, only it involved being cryogenically frozen and having your body encapsulated and shot into space, hopefully with the intention of being picked up by technologically superior aliens at some point and brought back to life. Crashing into the moon seems counter-productive.
Yes, I have no religion. It was my only hope of living forever...
It's not a matter of willingness to learn, because I already tried once and gave up. It's a matter of available time to learn new thing Vs. actual required time necessary to learn new thing. The time it takes me to learn Linux is obviously more than I have available, since I already tried it once and couldn't even get the bloody thing to install right. If Linux had a lower time investment for learning it, by making it simpler or whatever, and I could easily make a dual boot until I can get everything I need on Linux, I'd be all over it. =P
Maybe, but like I said originally, I don't have time right now to spend hours learning and installing Linux (that includes reading a bunch of manuals.)
Yeah, but when I got my first computer, it was a Windows computer. A Windows95 machine. Before that, I'd just used Apples and stuff at school, ancient ones, and briefly used a 3.1. No one had to show me how to do it, I figured stuff out on my own. I'm not talking about programming stuff, just casual use.
I've taught myself almost everything I know by trial and error and just intuitively figuring things out, but I sure can't make heads or tails of installing Linux and keeping in running properly without physically having someone around to help when I screw stuff up or can't get something to work or install properly.
If you're talking about me, I installed Windows/attempted to install Linux with it. My computer was custom built (with a ton of help obviously), not one of the deals from like Best Buy or anywhere.
Well I installed Win2K on a partition and had another partition for Mandrake, I have multiple hard drives in my machine but I wanted to run both OSes off one drive since I use the others for backup and storage. My ex-bf had the exact same setup on his computer with no problems, but for whatever reason, even with them talking me through it, I couldn't do it on my own. No, I'm not that stupid... I just don't think it should be that hard to figure out.
Thanks, but I'm quite happy with my current writer. I don't usually do wishlists but it's only until I move to make sure I can keep doing my comics (as in I'll have the stuff I need and still money for rent). I don't know many people that "whore themselves out" for basic handtools and a toaster. Don't be a butt. =(
President Bush has a lot of money to use in his re-election campaign. It pales in comparison to what MS makes in a month. If they wanted, they could completely fund campains for every government position in the US right now.
So do a lot of companies. So why single out MS?
I don't use IE, either, I hate it. I have used Mozilla exclusively for quite a long time now, so stop making assumptions.
Adobe Photoshop, Image Ready, Office, the accounting program I use (I've tried a ton of them and only found one I like, and they don't have a Linux version), some software for organizing mailing lists and printing envelopes... but even if I could get all the programs over on Linux, that doesn't really do anything about the usability issue of Linux in general. When I used Linux, it was always just for generic day to day stuff. I use Mozilla no matter what, so KMail or whatever it is, and Gnome was always enough for me to do writing or updating and stuff. But I need the image software and Gimp is just not enough for how much images I edit and handle on a daily basis.
That's so true... I guess my main point was that I see a lot of comments on this site that amount to the public being apathetic towards alternatives, or not caring, that almost seem contemptuous of the majority of not terribly technical users (like myself). You don't blame the problem on the victim, the problem being the MS monopoly, and the victim being people that never even have the chance to know why they should use something else, or have a good alternative that's suited to their technical skills.
If you want more people to use Linux, the best tool by far will be to make it usable by the general public, as easy and understandable as Windows is. I'd switch in a heartbeat if I didn't have so many problems with it before, and could get the programs I need to run my business.
Well, I'm probably much closer to "average consumer" or general public than a lot of posters here are... I know about this stuff because I have an interest in computer and tech, but I'm not really involved in it...
Then again, there have been such attempts made on various scales, yet on the whole, apathy seems to be the victor.
Is it really apathy? You need to find a way to make ordinary people understand why it matters what they run on their PC at home to check their email and surf the web, when they have to take their kids to the Dr, remember to pick up dog food on the way home, call their mother to talk about getting the family together for the weekend, pay bills... and so on and so on.
I really would love to use Linux on my home PC, and I did my best to make myself a dual boot system but I couldn't get it running on my own. There are a lot of programs I have to have that are only on Windows, so Windows it was. But I work my butt off and don't really have time to devote hours learning a new operating system, when I already know my way around Windows, and on the list of Important Things Demanding Attention in my life, it's a pretty low priority. I used Mandrake on my ex-boyfriend's computer when I was staying with him, but he was always around to fix it when something went wrong. When Windows goes nuts, I can usually manage to get things working again on my own, at least.
The main obstacles to Linux, or any alternative OS, in my opinion are making it easy to use and configure right out of the box for someone with little to know computer knowledge, like me, and not only educating people about the alternatives to the monopoly, but why they should care when there are so many other important things to worry about.
The smartest reader of all suggested that companies be taxed on their market share so that a company like Microsoft with 90 percent share would pay a 90 percent tax rate. The nice part about this idea is that it actually would encourage competition as well as industry alliances. The naive part is that it assumes legislative resolve that does not exist and also assumes Microsoft actually pays taxes which, for the most part, it doesn't. Still, the idea is clever.
What? That's the silliest thing I ever heard. I'm as anti big-business as most moderately anti big-business people are, but taxing businesses according to market share seems stupid and doesn't give them much incentive to want to grow, as least how I see it. If you want to go after corporations, start cracking down on tax shelters and loopholes that get them out of paying anything at all.
I know MS sucks donkey balls, but changing the entire tax structure and the market just to take care of them seems a little excessive. Hell, I'm using Windows but I still have Apple and Real products on my PC. Is it really that bad?
I love it. They put so much in the trailers now, that if you're shrewd you can usually tell which trailers actually represent the movie, and which are a collection of nothing but the best 2 minutes of the entire movie and the rest is downhill from there.
But I've never cared about spoilers. I read at least two or three reviews for almost any movie before I see it, to make sure I want to spend the $15 it costs now just for a ticket, popcorn and a drink plus two hours of my time not including all the adverts at the beginning... Anyway, I've never had a trailer or even a review ruin a movie for me, even when I know the ending in advance.
Can anyone explain this to me about um... "traditional" train sound, because I've always wondered: Why are they so loud at night? I know trains run through the city here regularly, and I can't hear the train whistles where I live during the day, even though I know they still toot them, but at night I can here the trains that have got to be at least ten miles from here. Why is that?
I would be curious if the sound of these kinds of trains carried in the same way. Normal train whistles aren't really unpleasant, but I wouldn't want to be listening to screeching noises from several miles away while I was trying to sleep. (The fact that I usually sleep during the day is irrelevant. =P)
I have at least seen one video collection of nothing but topless scenes from assorted movies, pasted all together on one tape, for sale on late night network television.
Haven't seen anything for explosions yet, but that could be good if they get the right classic symphony orchestrated to go along with it.
Yeah... good, wholesome classics they'd never be exposed to stuff like language or sexuality, like 1001 Arabian Nights, or The Adventures of Huck Finn.
Maybe if parents would actually just talk to their kids about things so they understood them, instead of trying to shelter them from anything not kid-proofed, none of this would be necessary. Hell, I read practically every book Steven King had ever written by that point in the second and third grade, and I haven't grown up to go on any mass murdering sprees and don't have any serious mental disorders.
Slashdot Mirror
That was actually an idea I once had, only it involved being cryogenically frozen and having your body encapsulated and shot into space, hopefully with the intention of being picked up by technologically superior aliens at some point and brought back to life. Crashing into the moon seems counter-productive.
Yes, I have no religion. It was my only hope of living forever...
It's not a matter of willingness to learn, because I already tried once and gave up. It's a matter of available time to learn new thing Vs. actual required time necessary to learn new thing. The time it takes me to learn Linux is obviously more than I have available, since I already tried it once and couldn't even get the bloody thing to install right. If Linux had a lower time investment for learning it, by making it simpler or whatever, and I could easily make a dual boot until I can get everything I need on Linux, I'd be all over it. =P
Yeah... I have been posting here since... very end of 1999, or 2000... I think. I'm not sure but it was years ago. And thanks!
Maybe, but like I said originally, I don't have time right now to spend hours learning and installing Linux (that includes reading a bunch of manuals.)
Thanks, that is exactly what I was trying to say.
Yeah, but when I got my first computer, it was a Windows computer. A Windows95 machine. Before that, I'd just used Apples and stuff at school, ancient ones, and briefly used a 3.1. No one had to show me how to do it, I figured stuff out on my own. I'm not talking about programming stuff, just casual use.
I've taught myself almost everything I know by trial and error and just intuitively figuring things out, but I sure can't make heads or tails of installing Linux and keeping in running properly without physically having someone around to help when I screw stuff up or can't get something to work or install properly.
If you're talking about me, I installed Windows/attempted to install Linux with it. My computer was custom built (with a ton of help obviously), not one of the deals from like Best Buy or anywhere.
Well I installed Win2K on a partition and had another partition for Mandrake, I have multiple hard drives in my machine but I wanted to run both OSes off one drive since I use the others for backup and storage. My ex-bf had the exact same setup on his computer with no problems, but for whatever reason, even with them talking me through it, I couldn't do it on my own. No, I'm not that stupid... I just don't think it should be that hard to figure out.
Thanks, but I'm quite happy with my current writer. I don't usually do wishlists but it's only until I move to make sure I can keep doing my comics (as in I'll have the stuff I need and still money for rent). I don't know many people that "whore themselves out" for basic handtools and a toaster. Don't be a butt. =(
President Bush has a lot of money to use in his re-election campaign. It pales in comparison to what MS makes in a month. If they wanted, they could completely fund campains for every government position in the US right now.
So do a lot of companies. So why single out MS?
I don't use IE, either, I hate it. I have used Mozilla exclusively for quite a long time now, so stop making assumptions.
Adobe Photoshop, Image Ready, Office, the accounting program I use (I've tried a ton of them and only found one I like, and they don't have a Linux version), some software for organizing mailing lists and printing envelopes... but even if I could get all the programs over on Linux, that doesn't really do anything about the usability issue of Linux in general. When I used Linux, it was always just for generic day to day stuff. I use Mozilla no matter what, so KMail or whatever it is, and Gnome was always enough for me to do writing or updating and stuff. But I need the image software and Gimp is just not enough for how much images I edit and handle on a daily basis.
That's so true... I guess my main point was that I see a lot of comments on this site that amount to the public being apathetic towards alternatives, or not caring, that almost seem contemptuous of the majority of not terribly technical users (like myself). You don't blame the problem on the victim, the problem being the MS monopoly, and the victim being people that never even have the chance to know why they should use something else, or have a good alternative that's suited to their technical skills.
If you want more people to use Linux, the best tool by far will be to make it usable by the general public, as easy and understandable as Windows is. I'd switch in a heartbeat if I didn't have so many problems with it before, and could get the programs I need to run my business.
Well, I'm probably much closer to "average consumer" or general public than a lot of posters here are... I know about this stuff because I have an interest in computer and tech, but I'm not really involved in it...
Then again, there have been such attempts made on various scales, yet on the whole, apathy seems to be the victor.
Is it really apathy? You need to find a way to make ordinary people understand why it matters what they run on their PC at home to check their email and surf the web, when they have to take their kids to the Dr, remember to pick up dog food on the way home, call their mother to talk about getting the family together for the weekend, pay bills... and so on and so on.
I really would love to use Linux on my home PC, and I did my best to make myself a dual boot system but I couldn't get it running on my own. There are a lot of programs I have to have that are only on Windows, so Windows it was. But I work my butt off and don't really have time to devote hours learning a new operating system, when I already know my way around Windows, and on the list of Important Things Demanding Attention in my life, it's a pretty low priority. I used Mandrake on my ex-boyfriend's computer when I was staying with him, but he was always around to fix it when something went wrong. When Windows goes nuts, I can usually manage to get things working again on my own, at least.
The main obstacles to Linux, or any alternative OS, in my opinion are making it easy to use and configure right out of the box for someone with little to know computer knowledge, like me, and not only educating people about the alternatives to the monopoly, but why they should care when there are so many other important things to worry about.
The smartest reader of all suggested that companies be taxed on their market share so that a company like Microsoft with 90 percent share would pay a 90 percent tax rate. The nice part about this idea is that it actually would encourage competition as well as industry alliances. The naive part is that it assumes legislative resolve that does not exist and also assumes Microsoft actually pays taxes which, for the most part, it doesn't. Still, the idea is clever.
What? That's the silliest thing I ever heard. I'm as anti big-business as most moderately anti big-business people are, but taxing businesses according to market share seems stupid and doesn't give them much incentive to want to grow, as least how I see it. If you want to go after corporations, start cracking down on tax shelters and loopholes that get them out of paying anything at all.
I know MS sucks donkey balls, but changing the entire tax structure and the market just to take care of them seems a little excessive. Hell, I'm using Windows but I still have Apple and Real products on my PC. Is it really that bad?
"It wasn't ball lighting or Venus, sir, that was a massive bunch of flying cellphones and balloons..."
Yeah, right. Let the conspiracy theories abound!
Don't forget the band "Art of Noise." =)
was that Big Mouth Billy Bass someone modded a long time ago to say "Pork!
It's not just you, I like the sound, I just wondered if there was a reason it seemed to travel a lot louder and farther at night. =)
Just crayons and pencils. =(
I love it. They put so much in the trailers now, that if you're shrewd you can usually tell which trailers actually represent the movie, and which are a collection of nothing but the best 2 minutes of the entire movie and the rest is downhill from there.
But I've never cared about spoilers. I read at least two or three reviews for almost any movie before I see it, to make sure I want to spend the $15 it costs now just for a ticket, popcorn and a drink plus two hours of my time not including all the adverts at the beginning... Anyway, I've never had a trailer or even a review ruin a movie for me, even when I know the ending in advance.
I don't know. I thought the X-Men movie was really good, and I liked the second one better than the first. =P
Interesting...!
I always thought perhaps there was some peculiar quality of train whistles, since I don't hear far away car horns at night, or things like that...
Can anyone explain this to me about um... "traditional" train sound, because I've always wondered: Why are they so loud at night? I know trains run through the city here regularly, and I can't hear the train whistles where I live during the day, even though I know they still toot them, but at night I can here the trains that have got to be at least ten miles from here. Why is that?
I would be curious if the sound of these kinds of trains carried in the same way. Normal train whistles aren't really unpleasant, but I wouldn't want to be listening to screeching noises from several miles away while I was trying to sleep. (The fact that I usually sleep during the day is irrelevant. =P)
I have at least seen one video collection of nothing but topless scenes from assorted movies, pasted all together on one tape, for sale on late night network television.
Haven't seen anything for explosions yet, but that could be good if they get the right classic symphony orchestrated to go along with it.
Heck, buy them books instead.
Yeah... good, wholesome classics they'd never be exposed to stuff like language or sexuality, like 1001 Arabian Nights, or The Adventures of Huck Finn.
Maybe if parents would actually just talk to their kids about things so they understood them, instead of trying to shelter them from anything not kid-proofed, none of this would be necessary. Hell, I read practically every book Steven King had ever written by that point in the second and third grade, and I haven't grown up to go on any mass murdering sprees and don't have any serious mental disorders.