In a way, he does get free access to it. His country maintains and could use that stockpile in the interests of the country. As a citizen of that country, they would be freely using it to protect the country. He just doesn't have the authority to order the use of it.
Although, the idea of some drunk guy tooling around the British countryside in a tank is a rather funny image.:)
Residential is residential. You want to further all the problems that discrimination/reverse-discrimination, racial hand-outs, welfare, and other poorly thought out programs caused.
If I decide I want to live in a rural area, then I find a way to do it. If I want to live in a city, then it's the same. If someone can't find a way to make something of their life, I *will not* pay them for the effort.
You have some very "interesting" ideas there. It isn't racist because a white family moved out of an integrated neighborhood. Maybe they just didn't want to live in a city. Some people like quite and trees and the lack of traffic.
Your idea means that we're not equal. I don't get to live where *I* want, but you get to live where you do. You remove freedom. We do have freedom of opportunity. The world is what you make of it, not what hand-outs you can get. It's personal effort, force of will, and a bit of luck.
You're wrong on many points in your essay, too. Most towns have quarter acre zoning. The reason zoning like that happens is because the VOTERS decided to accept having the law like that. They probably wanted the law like that, and petitioned and campaigned for it. This is the whole point of how government is supposed to work in the US.
Poor residents are no more expensive to take care of; if anything they are less demanding on the local government than wealthy residents. Welfare receiving residents are more expensive to take care of. There is a difference. Much of the US is populated by poor residents, for example, those on SS are often considered poor.
You seem to want to force all the people that managed to make it in life to pay for all the people that didn't. You want the States and Federal to remove all power that Local governments hold. This is not good and where it has happened it has always been bad for us.
I apologize for not getting past the second paragraph, but if you want a complete criticism then cool, but I would like to do it in email instead of this little annoying text box.
I agree that there isn't any problem with sports. The problem that I have is using education dollars to pay for it. Do it outside of school entirely and you still have sports, but you aren't dropping a huge amount of money into a non-educational expense.
PE might be gone, but how many schools killed their extracurricular sports programs? Most still maintain a significant percentage of their budget to pay for those teams.
PE is a good use of money. It attempts to show children how exercise is supposed to be done, and why it is important. Sports teams are an outside of school activity. They should be done by the community, like Little League is. They are not a good use of school money.
A better suggestion would be to kill the sports teams, bring back PE, and make it about exercise instead of dodge ball or whatever.
That edit is a lot more difficult that you may think. Get a copy of your school system's budget sometime. Try to figure out what they're spending money on, and what isn't necessary. Schools account for roughly 50% of the budget for many towns.
Responsibility and respect don't cost money. Even a school in a budget crisis can afford to do something about those.
Don't be too dismissive of those ideas being possible. You say that parents wouldn't stand for it, and things would never be allowed in school. Those very things *were* in school and were the norm, and not that long ago.
What we have now is an education based on the concept of entitlement. You're entitled to a good job, to government handouts, to good grades, a college education, a high school diploma, etc. We teach kids this from the first day of school. Parents are convinced that this is the way things should be. They all seem to forget that when they were in school, the world wasn't like that. When they were getting started in the real world, as adults, the world wasn't like that.
Now that the majority is convinced that the world works in ways which it does not, it will be very difficult to go back to reality. However, we did education right once upon a time, and we can make it be done right again. It's just going to be a lot of work.
Longhorn is definitely not vaporware, but the features statement isn't completely untrue. They've dropped most of the *publicized* features, but certainly not all the changes they were making. Odds are that if was a hyped feature, Longhorn isn't shipping with it.
Your explaination of the single binary makes a lot more sense. We've had string tables for a long time, so I'm not sure why it's as much a big deal. You could patch the binary around the table without troubling over potential internationalization. It doesn't really make anything worse, so if they want to do it that way, that's their prerogative.
I get amused seeing MS pull back all the "innovative" changes they made to their OS. They went from the nice NT microkernel to the nearly monolithic nighmare of today, and now they're "innovating" by backing it all out. Most of the unfortunate NT changes happened in the mid 90's with the release of NT4, and then steadily devolved as time and releases went on. Considering that we had Pentiums, and very shortly had PPro and P2 machines, there weren't really hardware limitations to get around. They hacked in all their ring 0 and direct application access to the kernel for DirectX. Now they have to undo it all as a result of the security implications.
I'm sure I could turn off all the graphics effects, too. I get a bit annoyed that I have to do so much disabling of things when I install XP, but at least I can make a custom install CD that has it all done. I'm sure that will also be possible in Longhorn. I feel it's just such a waste of effort to put all the eye candy in that only results in making the system harder to use. At least make it useful or neutral eye candy, rather than distracting.:)
I'm curious to play with the coming version of D3D, because it is nifty, even if I don't like DirectX. I would've just preferred that MS didn't ignore yet another standard, and then proceed to make things harder for everyone not on Windows. They could've at least used an OpenGL comptabile syntax and rewrote the backend and extended the API to be capable of what they do now.
It's been known for quite some time that they dropped WinFS. They dropped just about everything they were tauting as "a big deal in Longhorn". They might have been fixing and tweaking a lot under the hood, but it's just an incremental update, a patch if you will.
The vector display tech seems to be the only real change that they're making. We'll see if it ends up in the release.
Amusing enough, XP was supposed to get multiuser that works, LUA that works, better standards support, and improved search. Instead all we got was a stupid dog.
That half of the features on modern UIs actually decrease productivity.
I'm not really an OSX user, so I can't comment on too much. I remember only the annoying icon zoom junk that makes it harder to use.
On Windows, we get all sorts of things to slow us down. The ridiculous Start Menu, crowded with trash and now featuring multiple columns. Inconsistent UIs (Office and WMP, among others). The horror of "smooth scrolling" to make us wait even longer to scroll through things. The need to randomly right click or middle click for things. Maybe the scroll wheel will work, maybe not. Do I have that program? Let me find out... Start, All Programs, nope... wait... click silly double arrow, "Sort by name", silly double arrow, oh there it is. There's the control panel that you now have to worry about two modes it might be in. Parts of windows that aren't really parts of the window (HTML view in Explorer).
There are plenty of useful UI eye candy and things that either don't matter or increase productivity. It's just that there are *so* many that hurt, and they're all on by default.
On Windows using an nVidia card, or with some 3rd party software, you will get the same thing. It *is* a really useful feature and I was happy when Windows got around to having window transparency.
With the nVidia way you can also hotkey transparencies so you don't have to bother with messing about with the mouse. That saves a lot more time as you didn't have to stop, move to the mouse, move the window, read/see what you need, then move back to the keyboard.
UI is the only thing that matters to end users. That UI is total garbage! The window borders are very distracting and the transparency makes it hard to read menus and window titles. You have splashes of random color all over the screen. They added all sorts of random crap to clutter everything up. Look at that copy dialog. It's a simple operation, but they screwed it up with that "more options" silliness. And the tab bar above the menu... what is that trash? Now they have yet another program that departs from the rest of the UI. So we get to have Office, IE, and WMP that break all the rules.
It shows that their UIs are an afterthought. There is always something that isn't quite right or that ticks off the majority of the users. There's always things that make so many users say "Why do I have to go there for that? They contradict!". They add more UI decisions that make it harder to troubleshoot and support the system. The UI should be decided in the beginning, along with the feature list. When you are near the end, having started your beta cycle, you should damn well be feature complete. That's tweak and bugfix territory, and doing otherwise makes for instability and weak products.
As for D3D vs OpenGL, Microsoft could have just used the well established 3D standard instead of trying to clone it badly. It took *SIX* versions of DirectX before it was useful. And they still ended up having to support OpenGL. They have to deal with both because they were arrogant pricks about the whole thing.
The driver failure handling and FS filter improvements are welcome. They should've been there years ago, but none the less, it's good to have. As for componentizing everything, they could've just not screwed up the original NT design. Everything did used to be that way, before they pushed it all into the kernel.
The single binary doesn't really matter. It just adds more and more overhead and abstraction to an already ridiculously heavy platform. It won't do anything more for the world than Java did, as far as universal applications. Where are our fast, responsive, platform independant applications? Written in C/C++ and compiled targetted at the individual platforms, that's where.
The added hardware support is irrelevent as a feature. MS always tries to add hardware support for the common hardware out during development. What do mic arrays or light sensors or any of that mean to 99%+ of the people using the system? Absolutely nothing.
The only thing that has been talked about in Longhorn that seems cool/useful is the display size independence. I want to be able to size my screen to anything and have all the elements adjust nicely. The rest of the "features" amount of CPU gobbling annoyance in the UI and elsewhere, and piles of stuff to fix things they broke.
HP has been in this one too, with their SuperDome servers. You also could choose a SunFire. Either will run Linux. Either will work better if you run the vendor OS (HP-UX or Solaris).
HP SuperDome will go up to 128 Itanium-2 processors and does full partitioning. You can't go a single partition of 128 on MS software though, you'd have to run HP-UX.
The big SunFires are on UltraSPARC IV, and scale up to 72 processors. The small ones are on Opterons, but only up to 4 dual core processors.
Big systems are going to be on other architectures until/unless x86 stops being junk hardware for serious I/O. When SGI started selling Visual Workstations, they re-engineered the backplane and I/O hardware to get good performance from the platform. x86 has caught up a bit, but still lacks heavily. x86 software has caught up less to things like HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, IRIX, etc. They have features like ACLs, LVM, etc, but they can't match the reliability.
Were you on workstations or servers? Their servers are pretty badass. Highly reliable, impressive I/O capabilities, and hot swappable everything. Even today, the older 240MHz machines put up a damn good show. There are also a lot of things in HP-UX that don't have real equivalents on other platforms, or didn't until the last few years. It's had integrated LVM for years, full ACL support, supports lots of memory and CPUs, and is security rated, among other things.
I enjoyed working on PA-RISC systems and with HP-UX. Very nice change from the consumer oriented crap that we usually have. I hate running servers on x86 just becuase of the poor I/O performance and unrefined OS's. It's more manageable for single user systems (workstations), but I've still had better experiences on non-x86 platforms. It's hard to compare Linux to what you *can* do with the likes of HP-UX, Solaris, and AIX, especially on the server side, but fairly equivelant on the workstation side.
I do agree that I always hated the monitors.:)
Re:Microsoft Innovates like Enron did - with BS.
on
Ballmer on Innovation
·
· Score: 1
Actually, there was the Apple Newton which did full handwriting recognition. The reasons the Newton flopped were its size and price tag.
The next time pen computing was really visible was with Palm, eventually followed by the MS version. The only reason the MS version came out at all was because Palm just took the market and made good profits.
I still think the Newton interface was much easier than Graffiti, and both are by far superior to Windows CE.
You shouldn't *have* to do that. You are no longer in control of the vehicle at the point that it changes your vehicle's behaviour. This will just clog up courts with stupid revenue based cases, and lock the country down for no good reason. This isn't going to save anyone or prevent any accidents, it will just make more tickets.
It really isn't the place of the government to babysit it's "free" populace by force, anyway.
In many states you will have broken several laws doing what you do. Unlawful use of the passing lane, obstructing the flow of traffic, unsafe driving, etc. You don't get to decide anything about this. If you want to do so, join the police. Otherwise drive more safely and stop trying to encourage others to drive unsafely.
PS: You certainly can pick what rules you want to obey. Just because a law exists does not make it just or Constitutional. Your stance just makes you sound like a PC prick with a poor idea of history and an odd similarity to sheep.
You do realise that they aren't limited to the left lane largely because people doing 66mph that spend the next five minutes trying to pass the guy doing 64mph *are*? You end up with people swerving through traffic doing significantly over the speed limit becuase you get self-righteous fools and outright idiots blocking all the lanes. There isn't very good reason for a 40mi stretch of straight highway to have a 70mph limit. You get it anyway, and you still get the lane guru assholes in the way for no reason.
I tend to wait and give people a chance to get out of the way. It isn't worth endangering people rather than slowing down 5 or 10mph for a few seconds. I still end up stuck behind some shit ever day doing 70mph in the left lane on the interstate for no reason, and I end up passing on the right. At the same time, so many other random people are doing the same kind of thing that if you leave half a car length in front of you, you will get cut off because of some other shit doing 70mph in another lane. You are still safer getting closer to the car in front of you than letting someone cut you off. You maintain more control over your situation that way.
Basically, people drive like crap, there is no real training, and driver test are a joke. I have no problem with speed when compared to unobservant drivers and lack of turn signals.
Great job jeopardising everyone around you. Now if he's that ass driving the 6 ton SUV you have a good chance that you just killed two or three people. I'll agree that doing 100mpg in traffic isn't safe, you slowing down to be 35mph under him is idiotic.
You know what though, I generally have no problem with doing 85mph. It's about where I feel safe driving on interstate highways. Then some completely asshole pulls out in front of you either because they decide you're driving too fast, or because they didn't even bother to look behind them. Now you get to slam on your brakes and hope the guy behind you is as perceptive as you are. Who was the problem? The ass going slower than you, or the ass not paying attention.
So clearly, doing 85mph or 100mph isn't a problem if you're driving that speed allowing for response time and conditions. The problem is incompetent drivers not doing the same.
Perhaps you will learn not to be one of these assholes and drive like you don't want to die. I've had to deal with people who decide they know best far too often. You know what usually happens to them right afterward I encounter them? Me and the next 20 cars fly past them giving them the finger. What did they accomplish? Pissing off 21 cars and making the road significantly less safe.
You can always spot the jerk that decided to make a point about the speed limit. They're the one up front that everyone behind them is trying to cut around. They're the cause of half the traffic out there.
Looks like a company to never do business with. The article implies that they had a new computer system and didn't train their employees. Uncertainty in the new program caused an incorrect purchase, resulting in their loss. Rather than fix the problem by educating their employee(s), they fire the employee that made a typo.
Sucks that such a costly mistake was made. Next time maybe they should ensure that their employees know what they're doing before putting them live on trades.
There needs to be a definite and hard set maximum, and that needs to be a short duration. Inifite copyright will result in what we already have, even if it is very expensive. Then the useless cruft will drift into public domain, but anything actually innovate and useful will continue to be copyrighted.
There is no benefit to society to maintain a copyright for very long. It uses force of government to protect profit. The Constitution allowed for that becuase there was, and still is, a need to protect new works from immediate duplication. Used in this way it can accomplish the original pupose of encouraging innovation and new works.
Ultimately, the fees for copyrigth and patent hinder the little guy and do nothing to big business. We could always fix many problems in the USPTO by removing the requirement for sulf-sufficient operation.
Very interesting, yet not unexpected, to see how so many changes to the Constitution resulted in terrible things. The copyright and patent laws, the 16th, 17th, and 18th(repealed by 21st) amendments, as examples. Yet we don't fix things that do need improvement, like the commerce or public welfare clauses.
Slashdot Mirror
In a way, he does get free access to it. His country maintains and could use that stockpile in the interests of the country. As a citizen of that country, they would be freely using it to protect the country. He just doesn't have the authority to order the use of it.
:)
Although, the idea of some drunk guy tooling around the British countryside in a tank is a rather funny image.
Residential is residential. You want to further all the problems that discrimination/reverse-discrimination, racial hand-outs, welfare, and other poorly thought out programs caused.
If I decide I want to live in a rural area, then I find a way to do it. If I want to live in a city, then it's the same. If someone can't find a way to make something of their life, I *will not* pay them for the effort.
You have some very "interesting" ideas there. It isn't racist because a white family moved out of an integrated neighborhood. Maybe they just didn't want to live in a city. Some people like quite and trees and the lack of traffic.
Your idea means that we're not equal. I don't get to live where *I* want, but you get to live where you do. You remove freedom. We do have freedom of opportunity. The world is what you make of it, not what hand-outs you can get. It's personal effort, force of will, and a bit of luck.
You're wrong on many points in your essay, too. Most towns have quarter acre zoning. The reason zoning like that happens is because the VOTERS decided to accept having the law like that. They probably wanted the law like that, and petitioned and campaigned for it. This is the whole point of how government is supposed to work in the US.
Poor residents are no more expensive to take care of; if anything they are less demanding on the local government than wealthy residents. Welfare receiving residents are more expensive to take care of. There is a difference. Much of the US is populated by poor residents, for example, those on SS are often considered poor.
You seem to want to force all the people that managed to make it in life to pay for all the people that didn't. You want the States and Federal to remove all power that Local governments hold. This is not good and where it has happened it has always been bad for us.
I apologize for not getting past the second paragraph, but if you want a complete criticism then cool, but I would like to do it in email instead of this little annoying text box.
I agree that there isn't any problem with sports. The problem that I have is using education dollars to pay for it. Do it outside of school entirely and you still have sports, but you aren't dropping a huge amount of money into a non-educational expense.
PE might be gone, but how many schools killed their extracurricular sports programs? Most still maintain a significant percentage of their budget to pay for those teams.
PE is a good use of money. It attempts to show children how exercise is supposed to be done, and why it is important. Sports teams are an outside of school activity. They should be done by the community, like Little League is. They are not a good use of school money.
A better suggestion would be to kill the sports teams, bring back PE, and make it about exercise instead of dodge ball or whatever.
That edit is a lot more difficult that you may think. Get a copy of your school system's budget sometime. Try to figure out what they're spending money on, and what isn't necessary. Schools account for roughly 50% of the budget for many towns.
Responsibility and respect don't cost money. Even a school in a budget crisis can afford to do something about those.
Don't be too dismissive of those ideas being possible. You say that parents wouldn't stand for it, and things would never be allowed in school. Those very things *were* in school and were the norm, and not that long ago.
What we have now is an education based on the concept of entitlement. You're entitled to a good job, to government handouts, to good grades, a college education, a high school diploma, etc. We teach kids this from the first day of school. Parents are convinced that this is the way things should be. They all seem to forget that when they were in school, the world wasn't like that. When they were getting started in the real world, as adults, the world wasn't like that.
Now that the majority is convinced that the world works in ways which it does not, it will be very difficult to go back to reality. However, we did education right once upon a time, and we can make it be done right again. It's just going to be a lot of work.
Longhorn is definitely not vaporware, but the features statement isn't completely untrue. They've dropped most of the *publicized* features, but certainly not all the changes they were making. Odds are that if was a hyped feature, Longhorn isn't shipping with it.
:)
Your explaination of the single binary makes a lot more sense. We've had string tables for a long time, so I'm not sure why it's as much a big deal. You could patch the binary around the table without troubling over potential internationalization. It doesn't really make anything worse, so if they want to do it that way, that's their prerogative.
I get amused seeing MS pull back all the "innovative" changes they made to their OS. They went from the nice NT microkernel to the nearly monolithic nighmare of today, and now they're "innovating" by backing it all out. Most of the unfortunate NT changes happened in the mid 90's with the release of NT4, and then steadily devolved as time and releases went on. Considering that we had Pentiums, and very shortly had PPro and P2 machines, there weren't really hardware limitations to get around. They hacked in all their ring 0 and direct application access to the kernel for DirectX. Now they have to undo it all as a result of the security implications.
I'm sure I could turn off all the graphics effects, too. I get a bit annoyed that I have to do so much disabling of things when I install XP, but at least I can make a custom install CD that has it all done. I'm sure that will also be possible in Longhorn. I feel it's just such a waste of effort to put all the eye candy in that only results in making the system harder to use. At least make it useful or neutral eye candy, rather than distracting.
I'm curious to play with the coming version of D3D, because it is nifty, even if I don't like DirectX. I would've just preferred that MS didn't ignore yet another standard, and then proceed to make things harder for everyone not on Windows. They could've at least used an OpenGL comptabile syntax and rewrote the backend and extended the API to be capable of what they do now.
It's been known for quite some time that they dropped WinFS. They dropped just about everything they were tauting as "a big deal in Longhorn". They might have been fixing and tweaking a lot under the hood, but it's just an incremental update, a patch if you will.
The vector display tech seems to be the only real change that they're making. We'll see if it ends up in the release.
Amusing enough, XP was supposed to get multiuser that works, LUA that works, better standards support, and improved search. Instead all we got was a stupid dog.
That half of the features on modern UIs actually decrease productivity.
I'm not really an OSX user, so I can't comment on too much. I remember only the annoying icon zoom junk that makes it harder to use.
On Windows, we get all sorts of things to slow us down. The ridiculous Start Menu, crowded with trash and now featuring multiple columns. Inconsistent UIs (Office and WMP, among others). The horror of "smooth scrolling" to make us wait even longer to scroll through things. The need to randomly right click or middle click for things. Maybe the scroll wheel will work, maybe not. Do I have that program? Let me find out... Start, All Programs, nope... wait... click silly double arrow, "Sort by name", silly double arrow, oh there it is. There's the control panel that you now have to worry about two modes it might be in. Parts of windows that aren't really parts of the window (HTML view in Explorer).
There are plenty of useful UI eye candy and things that either don't matter or increase productivity. It's just that there are *so* many that hurt, and they're all on by default.
On Windows using an nVidia card, or with some 3rd party software, you will get the same thing. It *is* a really useful feature and I was happy when Windows got around to having window transparency.
With the nVidia way you can also hotkey transparencies so you don't have to bother with messing about with the mouse. That saves a lot more time as you didn't have to stop, move to the mouse, move the window, read/see what you need, then move back to the keyboard.
UI is the only thing that matters to end users. That UI is total garbage! The window borders are very distracting and the transparency makes it hard to read menus and window titles. You have splashes of random color all over the screen. They added all sorts of random crap to clutter everything up. Look at that copy dialog. It's a simple operation, but they screwed it up with that "more options" silliness. And the tab bar above the menu... what is that trash? Now they have yet another program that departs from the rest of the UI. So we get to have Office, IE, and WMP that break all the rules.
It shows that their UIs are an afterthought. There is always something that isn't quite right or that ticks off the majority of the users. There's always things that make so many users say "Why do I have to go there for that? They contradict!". They add more UI decisions that make it harder to troubleshoot and support the system. The UI should be decided in the beginning, along with the feature list. When you are near the end, having started your beta cycle, you should damn well be feature complete. That's tweak and bugfix territory, and doing otherwise makes for instability and weak products.
As for D3D vs OpenGL, Microsoft could have just used the well established 3D standard instead of trying to clone it badly. It took *SIX* versions of DirectX before it was useful. And they still ended up having to support OpenGL. They have to deal with both because they were arrogant pricks about the whole thing.
The driver failure handling and FS filter improvements are welcome. They should've been there years ago, but none the less, it's good to have. As for componentizing everything, they could've just not screwed up the original NT design. Everything did used to be that way, before they pushed it all into the kernel.
The single binary doesn't really matter. It just adds more and more overhead and abstraction to an already ridiculously heavy platform. It won't do anything more for the world than Java did, as far as universal applications. Where are our fast, responsive, platform independant applications? Written in C/C++ and compiled targetted at the individual platforms, that's where.
The added hardware support is irrelevent as a feature. MS always tries to add hardware support for the common hardware out during development. What do mic arrays or light sensors or any of that mean to 99%+ of the people using the system? Absolutely nothing.
The only thing that has been talked about in Longhorn that seems cool/useful is the display size independence. I want to be able to size my screen to anything and have all the elements adjust nicely. The rest of the "features" amount of CPU gobbling annoyance in the UI and elsewhere, and piles of stuff to fix things they broke.
HP has been in this one too, with their SuperDome servers. You also could choose a SunFire. Either will run Linux. Either will work better if you run the vendor OS (HP-UX or Solaris).
HP SuperDome will go up to 128 Itanium-2 processors and does full partitioning. You can't go a single partition of 128 on MS software though, you'd have to run HP-UX.
The big SunFires are on UltraSPARC IV, and scale up to 72 processors. The small ones are on Opterons, but only up to 4 dual core processors.
Big systems are going to be on other architectures until/unless x86 stops being junk hardware for serious I/O. When SGI started selling Visual Workstations, they re-engineered the backplane and I/O hardware to get good performance from the platform. x86 has caught up a bit, but still lacks heavily. x86 software has caught up less to things like HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, IRIX, etc. They have features like ACLs, LVM, etc, but they can't match the reliability.
You can buy Sun Blades with UltraSPARC IIi's up to 650MHz, and with UltraSPARC IIIi's up to 1.6GHz CPUs. You certainly pay for it, though.
IIIi 1.6GHz = 7195$ and up
IIIi 1.5GHz = 3195$ and up
IIi 550MHz = 1395$
IIi 650MHz = 1995$ and up
Were you on workstations or servers? Their servers are pretty badass. Highly reliable, impressive I/O capabilities, and hot swappable everything. Even today, the older 240MHz machines put up a damn good show. There are also a lot of things in HP-UX that don't have real equivalents on other platforms, or didn't until the last few years. It's had integrated LVM for years, full ACL support, supports lots of memory and CPUs, and is security rated, among other things.
:)
I enjoyed working on PA-RISC systems and with HP-UX. Very nice change from the consumer oriented crap that we usually have. I hate running servers on x86 just becuase of the poor I/O performance and unrefined OS's. It's more manageable for single user systems (workstations), but I've still had better experiences on non-x86 platforms. It's hard to compare Linux to what you *can* do with the likes of HP-UX, Solaris, and AIX, especially on the server side, but fairly equivelant on the workstation side.
I do agree that I always hated the monitors.
Nah, IBM beat them to it over 30 years ago.
Take a look at this if you haven't already found it. It has a ton of tips for using Windows as a LUA.
http://nonadmin.editme.com/
Actually, there was the Apple Newton which did full handwriting recognition. The reasons the Newton flopped were its size and price tag.
The next time pen computing was really visible was with Palm, eventually followed by the MS version. The only reason the MS version came out at all was because Palm just took the market and made good profits.
I still think the Newton interface was much easier than Graffiti, and both are by far superior to Windows CE.
You shouldn't *have* to do that. You are no longer in control of the vehicle at the point that it changes your vehicle's behaviour. This will just clog up courts with stupid revenue based cases, and lock the country down for no good reason. This isn't going to save anyone or prevent any accidents, it will just make more tickets.
It really isn't the place of the government to babysit it's "free" populace by force, anyway.
All living things that fly can breathe, but not all things that breathe can fly.
In many states you will have broken several laws doing what you do. Unlawful use of the passing lane, obstructing the flow of traffic, unsafe driving, etc. You don't get to decide anything about this. If you want to do so, join the police. Otherwise drive more safely and stop trying to encourage others to drive unsafely.
PS: You certainly can pick what rules you want to obey. Just because a law exists does not make it just or Constitutional. Your stance just makes you sound like a PC prick with a poor idea of history and an odd similarity to sheep.
You do realise that they aren't limited to the left lane largely because people doing 66mph that spend the next five minutes trying to pass the guy doing 64mph *are*? You end up with people swerving through traffic doing significantly over the speed limit becuase you get self-righteous fools and outright idiots blocking all the lanes. There isn't very good reason for a 40mi stretch of straight highway to have a 70mph limit. You get it anyway, and you still get the lane guru assholes in the way for no reason.
I tend to wait and give people a chance to get out of the way. It isn't worth endangering people rather than slowing down 5 or 10mph for a few seconds. I still end up stuck behind some shit ever day doing 70mph in the left lane on the interstate for no reason, and I end up passing on the right. At the same time, so many other random people are doing the same kind of thing that if you leave half a car length in front of you, you will get cut off because of some other shit doing 70mph in another lane. You are still safer getting closer to the car in front of you than letting someone cut you off. You maintain more control over your situation that way.
Basically, people drive like crap, there is no real training, and driver test are a joke. I have no problem with speed when compared to unobservant drivers and lack of turn signals.
Great job jeopardising everyone around you. Now if he's that ass driving the 6 ton SUV you have a good chance that you just killed two or three people. I'll agree that doing 100mpg in traffic isn't safe, you slowing down to be 35mph under him is idiotic.
You know what though, I generally have no problem with doing 85mph. It's about where I feel safe driving on interstate highways. Then some completely asshole pulls out in front of you either because they decide you're driving too fast, or because they didn't even bother to look behind them. Now you get to slam on your brakes and hope the guy behind you is as perceptive as you are. Who was the problem? The ass going slower than you, or the ass not paying attention.
So clearly, doing 85mph or 100mph isn't a problem if you're driving that speed allowing for response time and conditions. The problem is incompetent drivers not doing the same.
Perhaps you will learn not to be one of these assholes and drive like you don't want to die. I've had to deal with people who decide they know best far too often. You know what usually happens to them right afterward I encounter them? Me and the next 20 cars fly past them giving them the finger. What did they accomplish? Pissing off 21 cars and making the road significantly less safe.
You can always spot the jerk that decided to make a point about the speed limit. They're the one up front that everyone behind them is trying to cut around. They're the cause of half the traffic out there.
Get off the road, asshole.
Looks like a company to never do business with. The article implies that they had a new computer system and didn't train their employees. Uncertainty in the new program caused an incorrect purchase, resulting in their loss. Rather than fix the problem by educating their employee(s), they fire the employee that made a typo.
Sucks that such a costly mistake was made. Next time maybe they should ensure that their employees know what they're doing before putting them live on trades.
There needs to be a definite and hard set maximum, and that needs to be a short duration. Inifite copyright will result in what we already have, even if it is very expensive. Then the useless cruft will drift into public domain, but anything actually innovate and useful will continue to be copyrighted.
There is no benefit to society to maintain a copyright for very long. It uses force of government to protect profit. The Constitution allowed for that becuase there was, and still is, a need to protect new works from immediate duplication. Used in this way it can accomplish the original pupose of encouraging innovation and new works.
Ultimately, the fees for copyrigth and patent hinder the little guy and do nothing to big business. We could always fix many problems in the USPTO by removing the requirement for sulf-sufficient operation.
Very interesting, yet not unexpected, to see how so many changes to the Constitution resulted in terrible things. The copyright and patent laws, the 16th, 17th, and 18th(repealed by 21st) amendments, as examples. Yet we don't fix things that do need improvement, like the commerce or public welfare clauses.