From the article: "A lot of my friends are starting to have children now..."
Implication: he doesn't yet have kids.
"...and they're all trying not to use words like "fuck" and "shit" within baby's hearing, lest baby start using these words too. But these words are part of the language, and adults use them all the time. So parents are giving their kids an inaccurate idea of the language by not using them. Why do they do this? Because they don't think it's fitting that kids should use the whole language. We like children to seem innocent. [7]"
Nonsense. There's a saying I know from a film, don't know if it has any other derivation, "rules are for the obeyance of fools and the guidance of the wise". In this context, the children are (figuratively) the 'fools' - they haven't yet gained enough wisdom to know the implications of what they're saying. If they have, well then they're old enough to use the words. If they haven't...they're still the children being referred to.
I have two children, one just months but the other coming up to her second birthday and with her use of language exploding all over the place. She doesn't yet know enough to check herself, has little conception of context - if she starting using swear words now honestly, would I have done that kid a favour? At some point in her life she's going to start swearing, but at two? No. She'll do so when she learns about them, at first way too much and then later with a bit more understanding of context. And that's why the parents are self-censoring themselves - to help their children, not to molly-coddle them from reality.
From the article: Let's start with a test: Do you have any opinions that you would be reluctant to express in front of a group of your peers?...If the answer is no, you might want to stop and think about that. If everything you believe is something you're supposed to believe, could that possibly be a coincidence? Odds are it isn't. Odds are you just think whatever you're told.
Nope. Odds are I'm picky about who I consider my peers. Just picking age group and occupation just doesn't cut it.
When a mainstream site makes an assertion about this sort of thing Apple is usually within days of release.
Job's keynote speech is January 6th.
If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.
Pure guess on my part, but I'd suggest in order to shift stock of their high-margin existing players. Happy to hear better ideas though if someone has them.
Since last night I installed a battery update, then the 10.3.2 update, and then finally these updates too. All within the space of about ten hours, and each a separate installation.
Would it not have been possible to make all these available at the same time, thus saving the multiple update madness that I'm going through at present? Would seem a tad more rational.
I think I interned there a few years back in the IT dept of a check center. Does the bank name start with a D?
Nope. A J. These are the London investment bank offices, rather than a branch. I have no idea what the branches of this bank run - they don't actually have any in the UK.
I'm not at all surprised you ran across the same combination though. Most banks seems to have that, though some run Outlook instead of Notes.
I'd be a tad concerned if my bank was running on an unsupported operating system
The majority of banks I know both here in the City of London and also in New York use NT4. Some have recently moved to 2000. There are vague rumours of XP upgrades here, but nothing definite.
It's worth bearing in mind that when you're the size these banks are, you don't just get the standard consumer deal. I've seen Microsoft engineers dragged in behind me to look at why an SQL Server installation was running so slowly, and patches came out for the product specifically to address the issues they found.
First of all, like has been mentioned numerous times on/., the functionality in Office 97 is sufficient for most users.
Indeed. Here I sit in an Office of one of the worlds largest banks and what is my client box? NT 4, Lotus Notes, Exceed and Office 97.
Though I'm no fan of Notes, the above is perfectly sufficent for me to do all the work required. You could switch it all to Linux underneath me and I'd barely notice.
While we cannot do so, our analyses would not have mattered to the court anyway.
Not certain I agree - IBM have already quoted Groklaw in their court submissions. Should others discover yet more relevant facts, I'm sure IBM would waste no time in quoting those people either. So yes, outside opinions can matter to the court.
Seriously. I'm trying to get rid of stuff, not collect it. This is no sanctimonious moral lecture on the virtues of abstinence, it's a genuine reaction to having cluttered up my house.
I've made a start. Fortunately(!), my midi-tower PC died. Normally I'd just take the bits still working and build another, but this time I'm eBaying them all off. This still leaves me with one desktop PC - a Shuttle small form factor, so that's not so bad.
Next up are the laptops. I have four in the house, although 'only' three of them are mine - another is from work. One I've given away to my wife, one I'm keeping for me...hmm. Another ebay target then.
Now let's open my study's cupboard. Oh no - howmany universal power adapters? How many now pointless cables? How much RAM for older motherboard standards? Nope - off to Ebay we go.
Now lets have a look round the desk. Hmm. When's the last time I used that HP 620LX clamshell CE device? About three years? Well, you know where that's going then. And what about that Creative Labs 5.1 sound thingy, with the non-optical SPDIF that now nothing will connect to? Time for a replacement there methinks. Off you go then.
Now let's look in the next room. My god! Look at all the pointless music keyboards that are now entirely outclassed. Hmm....quite like one of them (a Roland D20). The rest? Well, have a guess. Go on. I dare you...
I think a large percentage of people object to cloning because of the moral (read religious) ideas of a soul and other such nonsense.
Please do not equate moral viewpoints with religious viewpoints. It's quite possible to have morals without subscribing to any religion, and as has been seen over centuries it's equally possibly to subscribe to a religion without having any morals.
I remember the glory days of NS, back before IE was even a player on the market.
So do I. I remember people talking about them being "the next Microsoft", and not in a flattering sense. I remember the incompatible tags they introduced. I remember the appalling mess of Netscape 4 and CSS.
And then there was the <blink> tag...
I can remember distinctly when I switched to IE, and at the time it was because IE was better, not because Microsoft forced me to. I can also remember switching back to Mozilla (and then Firebird), again because the browser was better.
I would argue that the glory days of Netscape stopped at Netscpe 3, took a break and restarted in the present time due to Mozilla. I'm not certain now what percentage of Mozilla developers are ex-Netscape, but I imagine it's still high enough to be called Netscape-in-another-form.
Dumbass, The world already has moved way past you. We are talking about GUI stuff for the masses NOT the Unix Phil, BIG difference.
Apple would disagree with you. Apple's approach is to separate out the address book, calendar and mail applications - they all interoperate, but they're all different applications. So far, the only slight glitch in this is the lack of import of birthdays between address book and calendar. Other than that, the approach works really well.
I'd argue that Apple are rather more geared to the consumer than they are to Unix Phil, but they've shown that you don't need to abandon one in order to please the other.
If the evidence shows that things are changing I don't give a rat's ass who was responsible. I do want to know what the most reasonable estimates are on the results and it would even be nice if they started thinking on how to correct things.
This statement presumes that the change is an error, and is subject to correction. That already means you've taken a side in the argument.
They will ignore the fact that by law, when they send something in the mail, it becomes the property of the recipient.
OK - I know I'm replying in a humourless fashion to a joke but...
You know, I'd never thought of that angle before. Does this mean if I buy software mail-order, when it arrives it's legally mine and not some license-restricted thing? That is to say, because it came in the post I can do whatever I want with it, including copying it to multiple machines etc.?
I don't believe the above is true by the way, but I can't put my finger on exactly why not.
But does it have God's perfect theme tune, which is what the original was? A superb piece of music, as stirring in Battlestar Galactica as it was in Revenge of the Mutant Camels...
At least the Windows users on the other end don't have to download any additional program, they can just continue to use what they did before...
Yes, and this I find to be iChat AV's big weakness. If I can't connect to the vast majority of computer users, I can't really make use of it.
Ideally, I'd like to see iChat AV start working with NetMeeting and also Messenger. It's an unavoidable fact of computing life that most of the people you'll be dealing with are going to be running Windows on the client.
'Open source developers often scratch the same itch'
So, err, remind me - how many closed-source word processors can I go out and by? How many web design packages? How many commercial IDEs? How many instance messenging networks can I join? Wouldn't they be scratching the same itch too?
...and 'Open Source developers love a good feud.'
'They', whoever the amorphous they actually are, probably do. So do the closed source lot as well. The particular feuds they have tend to be called 'lawsuits', and they leave even the most bitter open source feud looking like a kindergarten spat.
The comment you're replying to says the voters were senior advertising execs. I understand that many of these people have, on occasion, used the internet.
These happy internet-using execs were then said to have voted the brand the most recognisable in the world. And that's simply cobblers. No matter who voted for it, they are wrong.
- Google recently blew minds in the advertisng scene by being voted the most recognized brand in the WORLD -- over Coke, GM, BMW, FedEx, IBM, Microsoft, you name it.
That survey must have been complete nonsense. There is a very large world population that has never received so much as a single packet from the internet. I'll bet quite a few of them have drunk some Coke though.
GM, BMW, FedEX and the computer lot - yep, can understand that (though not agree). But Coke? Utter nonsense - Coke penetrates both high and low tech markets, something Google simply cannot do.
I'd be interested to see the nature of this survey - do you have a link?
Slashdot Mirror
Implication: he doesn't yet have kids.
"...and they're all trying not to use words like "fuck" and "shit" within baby's hearing, lest baby start using these words too. But these words are part of the language, and adults use them all the time. So parents are giving their kids an inaccurate idea of the language by not using them. Why do they do this? Because they don't think it's fitting that kids should use the whole language. We like children to seem innocent. [7]"
Nonsense. There's a saying I know from a film, don't know if it has any other derivation, "rules are for the obeyance of fools and the guidance of the wise". In this context, the children are (figuratively) the 'fools' - they haven't yet gained enough wisdom to know the implications of what they're saying. If they have, well then they're old enough to use the words. If they haven't...they're still the children being referred to.
I have two children, one just months but the other coming up to her second birthday and with her use of language exploding all over the place. She doesn't yet know enough to check herself, has little conception of context - if she starting using swear words now honestly, would I have done that kid a favour? At some point in her life she's going to start swearing, but at two? No. She'll do so when she learns about them, at first way too much and then later with a bit more understanding of context. And that's why the parents are self-censoring themselves - to help their children, not to molly-coddle them from reality.
Cheers,
Ian
Nope. Odds are I'm picky about who I consider my peers. Just picking age group and occupation just doesn't cut it.
Cheers,
Ian
Job's keynote speech is January 6th.
If that were the case, why not launch before christmas.
Pure guess on my part, but I'd suggest in order to shift stock of their high-margin existing players. Happy to hear better ideas though if someone has them.
Cheers,
Ian
Since last night I installed a battery update, then the 10.3.2 update, and then finally these updates too. All within the space of about ten hours, and each a separate installation.
Would it not have been possible to make all these available at the same time, thus saving the multiple update madness that I'm going through at present? Would seem a tad more rational.
Cheers,
Ian
One bank only as far as I'm aware - Swiss Bank, now merged into UBS. Might have been used elsewhere - I'm not certain to be honest.
Cheers,
Ian
Nope. A J. These are the London investment bank offices, rather than a branch. I have no idea what the branches of this bank run - they don't actually have any in the UK.
I'm not at all surprised you ran across the same combination though. Most banks seems to have that, though some run Outlook instead of Notes.
Cheers,
Ian
The majority of banks I know both here in the City of London and also in New York use NT4. Some have recently moved to 2000. There are vague rumours of XP upgrades here, but nothing definite.
It's worth bearing in mind that when you're the size these banks are, you don't just get the standard consumer deal. I've seen Microsoft engineers dragged in behind me to look at why an SQL Server installation was running so slowly, and patches came out for the product specifically to address the issues they found.
Cheers,
Ian
Indeed. Here I sit in an Office of one of the worlds largest banks and what is my client box? NT 4, Lotus Notes, Exceed and Office 97.
Though I'm no fan of Notes, the above is perfectly sufficent for me to do all the work required. You could switch it all to Linux underneath me and I'd barely notice.
Cheers,
Ian
Remember Apple's Publish and Subscribe? Now think about OLE, which came out later...
Cheers,
Ian
Not certain I agree - IBM have already quoted Groklaw in their court submissions. Should others discover yet more relevant facts, I'm sure IBM would waste no time in quoting those people either. So yes, outside opinions can matter to the court.
Cheers,
Ian
All of them. However, I'm UK-based - are we both in the same country?
Cheers,
Ian
I've made a start. Fortunately(!), my midi-tower PC died. Normally I'd just take the bits still working and build another, but this time I'm eBaying them all off. This still leaves me with one desktop PC - a Shuttle small form factor, so that's not so bad.
Next up are the laptops. I have four in the house, although 'only' three of them are mine - another is from work. One I've given away to my wife, one I'm keeping for me...hmm. Another ebay target then.
Now let's open my study's cupboard. Oh no - howmany universal power adapters? How many now pointless cables? How much RAM for older motherboard standards? Nope - off to Ebay we go.
Now lets have a look round the desk. Hmm. When's the last time I used that HP 620LX clamshell CE device? About three years? Well, you know where that's going then. And what about that Creative Labs 5.1 sound thingy, with the non-optical SPDIF that now nothing will connect to? Time for a replacement there methinks. Off you go then.
Now let's look in the next room. My god! Look at all the pointless music keyboards that are now entirely outclassed. Hmm....quite like one of them (a Roland D20). The rest? Well, have a guess. Go on. I dare you...
Cheers,
Ian
Please do not equate moral viewpoints with religious viewpoints. It's quite possible to have morals without subscribing to any religion, and as has been seen over centuries it's equally possibly to subscribe to a religion without having any morals.
Cheers,
Ian
So do I. I remember people talking about them being "the next Microsoft", and not in a flattering sense. I remember the incompatible tags they introduced. I remember the appalling mess of Netscape 4 and CSS.
And then there was the <blink> tag...
I can remember distinctly when I switched to IE, and at the time it was because IE was better, not because Microsoft forced me to. I can also remember switching back to Mozilla (and then Firebird), again because the browser was better.
I would argue that the glory days of Netscape stopped at Netscpe 3, took a break and restarted in the present time due to Mozilla. I'm not certain now what percentage of Mozilla developers are ex-Netscape, but I imagine it's still high enough to be called Netscape-in-another-form.
Cheers,
Ian
Apple would disagree with you. Apple's approach is to separate out the address book, calendar and mail applications - they all interoperate, but they're all different applications. So far, the only slight glitch in this is the lack of import of birthdays between address book and calendar. Other than that, the approach works really well.
I'd argue that Apple are rather more geared to the consumer than they are to Unix Phil, but they've shown that you don't need to abandon one in order to please the other.
Cheers,
Ian
I agree. G5s all round then. :-)
Cheers,
Ian
This statement presumes that the change is an error, and is subject to correction. That already means you've taken a side in the argument.
Cheers,
Ian
OK - I know I'm replying in a humourless fashion to a joke but...
You know, I'd never thought of that angle before. Does this mean if I buy software mail-order, when it arrives it's legally mine and not some license-restricted thing? That is to say, because it came in the post I can do whatever I want with it, including copying it to multiple machines etc.?
I don't believe the above is true by the way, but I can't put my finger on exactly why not.
Cheers,
Ian
The main theme yes, but the high score music was Battlestar Galactica's.
Cheers,
Ian
Cheers,
Ian
Yes, and this I find to be iChat AV's big weakness. If I can't connect to the vast majority of computer users, I can't really make use of it.
Ideally, I'd like to see iChat AV start working with NetMeeting and also Messenger. It's an unavoidable fact of computing life that most of the people you'll be dealing with are going to be running Windows on the client.
Cheers,
Ian
So, err, remind me - how many closed-source word processors can I go out and by? How many web design packages? How many commercial IDEs? How many instance messenging networks can I join? Wouldn't they be scratching the same itch too?
'They', whoever the amorphous they actually are, probably do. So do the closed source lot as well. The particular feuds they have tend to be called 'lawsuits', and they leave even the most bitter open source feud looking like a kindergarten spat.
Cheers,
Ian
These happy internet-using execs were then said to have voted the brand the most recognisable in the world. And that's simply cobblers. No matter who voted for it, they are wrong.
Cheers,
Ian
That survey must have been complete nonsense. There is a very large world population that has never received so much as a single packet from the internet. I'll bet quite a few of them have drunk some Coke though.
GM, BMW, FedEX and the computer lot - yep, can understand that (though not agree). But Coke? Utter nonsense - Coke penetrates both high and low tech markets, something Google simply cannot do.
I'd be interested to see the nature of this survey - do you have a link?
Cheers,
Ian
Cheers,
Ian