right on! you've got it in a nutshell. i do mac IT work and am familiar with NT and linux and i'd take the mac OS any day of the week. the "mysticism" argument -- that's the best formuation of the arguement i've ever heard. go with what gets you there the fastest.
if this "internet is the future" thing really is to happen, someone's gotta make getting on the web as easy for my mother as it is for me.
that's the promise of technology, isn't it -- letting it make our lives easier? how in the world can "http://www.whatever.com/blah/etc/yadda.shtml" be considered better than "yadda from whatever"...
see my point? no matter how logically the sites are organized (and i'm all for that), the jargon still gets in the way.
no, i'm a baptist, but even handing over control to muslim organizations wouldn't bother me.
it's silly to assume that religious organizations automatically won't be even-handed in how they hand out assistance, and more than it's silly to assume that non-religious organizations will do the same thing.
there is much more room for people of faith (and the organizations they run) in government. "secular" organizations need all the help they can get, and true christians don't want to convert the world forcefully, as you seem to assume they will.
1. NASA does NOT need a budget increase that large.
2. there is nothing wrong, or even unconstitutional, with private religious organizations helping out government in the ways GWB recommends. this "wall between church and state" is a highly specious line of argument, one totally out of touch with what the framers intended (freedom from state-sponsored religion).
i do agree that we are only being given these candidates by the media, but at the same please keep in mind what you are advocating.
absolutely cannot argue with this, but only to add: journalism on the web, if it doesn't come from a legit or semi-legit news source, sucks.
most people cannot write. legit media helps us filter these people out. but anyone (hey, even me) can just post something to a web site hungry for submissions.
i don't read/. for journalism, i read it for interesting tidbits and to see how people are reacting to news. in that, it works rather well.
couldn't be more correct. linux has a LONG way to go before it can surpass windows or mac OS. i run an all-mac ad agency -- even our servers are ASIP. what you lose in OS strength you more than make up for in ease of use.
i'm trying to get a linuxppc box to be my dhcp server. what a freaking nightmare -- linux forces me to master more than i should have to master to make things work easily.
i scrolled down the list of comments until i saw a thread that was likely to be critical of katz. sure enough, i wasn't disappointed.
what in the world do some of you have against this man? he's a reporter in the classical sense, he writes succintly, he writes for longtime computer users AND relative newbies like me... in short, he does what a good journalist does. i know. i used to be one (a journalist, not a good journalist). and a good journalist tells a good story so that all sorts of people understand it.
i, for one, look forward to his next story. please be a little more open-minded. this attitude is why people's eyes glaze over when they see the word linux -- you're worse than mac users sometimes.
i'm the IT guy for an all-mac shop (stop your snickering) and decided to give mklinux a try. the install wasn't that hard, but then again, computers don't scare this former philosophy major. but getting the damn box to do what i wanted it to do was impossible.
the column's author had it right: it's just a crapshoot. maybe GUI's have spoiled me too much.
Slashdot Mirror
the point here: use whichever OS makes you the most productive. ...
i can't help it if sexy women think the mac OS makes me more desirable
right on! you've got it in a nutshell. i do mac IT work and am familiar with NT and linux and i'd take the mac OS any day of the week.
the "mysticism" argument -- that's the best formuation of the arguement i've ever heard.
go with what gets you there the fastest.
if this "internet is the future" thing really is to happen, someone's gotta make getting on the web as easy for my mother as it is for me.
...
that's the promise of technology, isn't it -- letting it make our lives easier? how in the world can "http://www.whatever.com/blah/etc/yadda.shtml" be considered better than "yadda from whatever"
see my point? no matter how logically the sites are organized (and i'm all for that), the jargon still gets in the way.
no, i'm a baptist, but even handing over control to muslim organizations wouldn't bother me.
it's silly to assume that religious organizations automatically won't be even-handed in how they hand out assistance, and more than it's silly to assume that non-religious organizations will do the same thing.
there is much more room for people of faith (and the organizations they run) in government. "secular" organizations need all the help they can get, and true christians don't want to convert the world forcefully, as you seem to assume they will.
1. NASA does NOT need a budget increase that large.
2. there is nothing wrong, or even unconstitutional, with private religious organizations helping out government in the ways GWB recommends. this "wall between church and state" is a highly specious line of argument, one totally out of touch with what the framers intended (freedom from state-sponsored religion).
i do agree that we are only being given these candidates by the media, but at the same please keep in mind what you are advocating.
absolutely cannot argue with this, but only to add: journalism on the web, if it doesn't come from a legit or semi-legit news source, sucks.
/. for journalism, i read it for interesting tidbits and to see how people are reacting to news. in that, it works rather well.
most people cannot write. legit media helps us filter these people out. but anyone (hey, even me) can just post something to a web site hungry for submissions.
i don't read
couldn't be more correct. linux has a LONG way to go before it can surpass windows or mac OS. i run an all-mac ad agency -- even our servers are ASIP. what you lose in OS strength you more than make up for in ease of use.
...
i'm trying to get a linuxppc box to be my dhcp server. what a freaking nightmare -- linux forces me to master more than i should have to master to make things work easily.
i don't get the "linux rules" thing
i scrolled down the list of comments until i saw a thread that was likely to be critical of katz. sure enough, i wasn't disappointed.
... in short, he does what a good journalist does. i know. i used to be one (a journalist, not a good journalist). and a good journalist tells a good story so that all sorts of people understand it.
what in the world do some of you have against this man? he's a reporter in the classical sense, he writes succintly, he writes for longtime computer users AND relative newbies like me
i, for one, look forward to his next story. please be a little more open-minded. this attitude is why people's eyes glaze over when they see the word linux -- you're worse than mac users sometimes.
amen, brother.
i'm the IT guy for an all-mac shop (stop your snickering) and decided to give mklinux a try. the install wasn't that hard, but then again, computers don't scare this former philosophy major. but getting the damn box to do what i wanted it to do was impossible.
the column's author had it right: it's just a crapshoot. maybe GUI's have spoiled me too much.
dude:
please. calm down. lay off the coffee. take a pill or something. katz is fine. you, however, are overblown in your criticism of him.
thou dost protest too much, methinks.