Next time I see a commercial website that requires Flash, I'll call the vendor and explain why I can't use their website. Should help kill Flash once and for all.
You can mark this as flamebait or whatever, but this was clearly posted here because of the novelty of porting a modern, popular program to an obsolete OS.
Which means that the obsolete OS still has users -- so I think my question has some merit.
I've seen quite a few machines like this when I did computer repair. Most were major brands at the time -- Compaq, Packard Bell, etc -- and the GUI tended to be a knockoff of Windows 3.1.
Presumably this was to make users less afraid of changing their BIOS settings, although considering some of the users I dealt with, that might not have been such a good idea.
Not for a long time. Aside from all the video that have to be converted, browsers that support it need to see a widespread adoption before websites have a reason to use it.
More information doesn't make it easier to know what the truth is. Do you honestly expect everyone who reads any given news article to spend hours researching it?
You bring up some good points; carpooling and off-hour transit are perfectly good reasons to use a car. Personally I use a car sharing program for these reasons perhaps once or twice a month.
But these trips account for a relatively small amount of trips; aren't there more cars on the road during rush hour?
So if I read this correctly, the point of this article is we should get a time machine so we can go back to the 70's and impress people with our smartphones?
See the problem here is that they won't have wifi or 3G coverage. All we'll be able to do is show those people of the ancient past Angry Bird and maybe one of those "pull-my-finger" apps. It just won't be all that impressive.
Slashdot Mirror
...is that textbook publishers are greedy bastards.
Bill Gates is a communist? I have to admit, I never saw that one coming.
Thankfully, "Get off my lawn" is less than 140 characters.
It's just not the same playing those Dreamcast games without the awkward controller that makes your hands cramp up after 15 minutes.
But I thought platform independence was a good thing!
Or if you put it in your front jeans pocket, "Ow, my balls!"
So you're saying it will be something like this:
1. Some restaurant's website uses Flash
2. I call the restaurant to complain
3. They transfer me to their branch in Manila
Wow, I didn't know all my local business had overseas call centers. Thanks for the tip.
In other words, it's costing the company money and pissing people off.
Which is exactly what I'm trying to do.
Next time I see a commercial website that requires Flash, I'll call the vendor and explain why I can't use their website. Should help kill Flash once and for all.
"...eliminating the backlog of more than 400 million pages of classified records..."
Sounds like a job for FIRE!
Nailed 'em in the retina? Ow!
You can mark this as flamebait or whatever, but this was clearly posted here because of the novelty of porting a modern, popular program to an obsolete OS.
Which means that the obsolete OS still has users -- so I think my question has some merit.
People still use Amigas? Why?
I've seen quite a few machines like this when I did computer repair. Most were major brands at the time -- Compaq, Packard Bell, etc -- and the GUI tended to be a knockoff of Windows 3.1.
Presumably this was to make users less afraid of changing their BIOS settings, although considering some of the users I dealt with, that might not have been such a good idea.
I didn't see this coming.
Now HP will finally make money off all those v1@grA ads I keep getting.
...to save the news, Lois!
But unfortunately, Superman is out of work and living off food stamps these days.
"Independence" implies car ownership? So humans weren't truly independent until Henry Ford?
They need to do WAP instain mother>
Not for a long time. Aside from all the video that have to be converted, browsers that support it need to see a widespread adoption before websites have a reason to use it.
More information doesn't make it easier to know what the truth is. Do you honestly expect everyone who reads any given news article to spend hours researching it?
But they can also find the opposite. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it factual.
You bring up some good points; carpooling and off-hour transit are perfectly good reasons to use a car. Personally I use a car sharing program for these reasons perhaps once or twice a month.
But these trips account for a relatively small amount of trips; aren't there more cars on the road during rush hour?
BMW makes cars, which are not "green" by any standard. You want green, invest in buses, trains, bikes, etc. Not more cars.
This is pretty clearly a greenwashing attempt by BMW.
So if I read this correctly, the point of this article is we should get a time machine so we can go back to the 70's and impress people with our smartphones?
See the problem here is that they won't have wifi or 3G coverage. All we'll be able to do is show those people of the ancient past Angry Bird and maybe one of those "pull-my-finger" apps. It just won't be all that impressive.