Maybe one day you will awaken to the real world instead of being spoon-fed propaganda by your college sociology professor
Oh wow, did you find out about the real world on CNN? Was it Larry King Live? I guess I missed the NRA meeting where they were telling everyone about the real world.
The point is that if you know what you are doing and set things up properly, you don't have issues.
The point is that even if you "set things up properly" you wind up with scores of vulnerabilities still clinging on to the most fundamental parts of the system. Patching one set of vulnerabilities to open up another.
The point is, you need to tell us your company wasn't hurt by the many viruses, worms, trojans and plain bad engineering built into the Microsoft system. That in itself says enough.
The point is, you need to make the claim that everything Microsoft is good, you need to restate it over and over again precisely because as a satisfied customer, you are the exception. If there were more who were not harmed by stupid engineering, there wouldn't be the need to tell us all how great your production machines have worked.
Sure, there's a place for a Windows OS computer, but it isn't where mission critical data is, it sure isn't where lives are at stake and it isn't where public dollars get spent.
Sorry Sheldon, I think the poster is referring to the fact that you simply can't learn how your software security works when all you've got is a big, nasty black box full of holes you can't possibly know about.
Learn how things work, why things work, and then implement the solutions.
Your solution is the right one in either case, but there's a world of difference in understanding how things work, and understanding why things work the way they do.
It sounds like a good deal at the outset, and, yes you're right, the licensing issues, the cost for hardware, even the access to source code are all arguments that can be debunked.
The problem is that Microsoft forces you to give up your ability to choose other options. Microsoft can offer a lot, but in the end, educational institutions need to keep their options open.
It simply isn't wise for an educational institution to undercut the opportunities of their students by signing the Microsoft agreements that won't allow any competing software to be used.
Ah yes, it's funny now, seeing how inadequately one expresses themselves through the use of four-letter epithets.
It seemed like it was "Big Boy talk" back then. Maybe you think it's big boy talk, but for the rest of us, it's just some vapid noise meant to fill a sentence.
It almost appears like you have something to say, but then, you never quite make it there, do you "fuck" boy?
I'd ask what you're trying to say, but I've already grown tired of you.
The poster wasn't referring to end displays, but all shelf-space.
Again, the poster wasn't referring to "product placement," but forcing a competing product off the shelves.
No one is suggesting any more laws, just simply expressing their frustration in the system (that's allowed, you know).
Real solutions are born of discussions like this. Instead of a complacent, "well the problem is too big to solve," maybe this kind of discussion will lead to something.
Honestly, I wish more people would take the time to read carefully.
I ordered DSL for my new place about two months ago. I didn't find out until after the order was placed that I would be getting MSN for my ISP. I immediately canceled the order--this was almost a week BEFORE DSL was to be installed.
I never got MSN DSL actually running, but I waited over two months while MSN blamed Qwest, and Qwest blamed MSN for keeping our line blocked from getting new DSL.
In the end, I had to disconnect my phone line, reconnect, and only then could I even ORDER DSL.
Luckily, I found someone at Qwest sales who knows what they're doing and actually cares about customers.
If you're interested in talking with someone at Qwest who will get things done for you, e-mail
rgriese $spamblockstring$ qwest.com
His name's Ricco.
After talking to all the people who didn't know what they were doing, or just didn't care, I was truly grateful.
Although Microsoft likes to use the word innovation a lot, there's really not much more than words that they can be litigious about.
Think about it, what is the last original idea that Microsoft had?
Are you going to try convincing me that Word (WordPerfect) was a Microsoft "innovation." Are you going to tell me that Excell (Lotus 1-2-3) was a product that Microsoft could possibly try suing someone for copying? I guess next you'll be telling me that Microsoft invented the GUI.
Equating Apple's protection of the "look and feel" of its desktop operating system (although I don't necessarily agree) to Microsoft's all-the-sudden we want to protect windows (although we never really have before) is different. Apple would lose their right to defend their "look and feel" if they didn't try to defend it--even if it is against a couple of guys who want their Gnome desktop to have an Aqua "look and feel."
After all of the ideas Apple had ripped by Microsoft, I don't blame them a bit. Just see how much of the Jolly Rancher OS resembles OS X since Apple has asserted and defended their right to the "look and feel" of their desktop OS.
Either the CEO of Lindows knows Microsoft has lapsed in the protection of its trademark and has already accounted for this possibility, or he's a nutkus and needs to slow down before developing any more business models.
"PC Cheaper" argument relies upon the existence of cheap hardware vendors.
Good, quality manufactured PCs aren't built with hardware made by cheap hardware vendors.
Good, quality manufactured PCs cost just as much or more than comparable Apple PCs.
Therefore, "I get just as much as you, cheaper" does not make sense.
No sheldon, no one here is coveting Monopolies, except you. I know what Premium PC hardware is good for, and in a couple of years, when you sell yours for next to nothing, I'll be buying it and putting OpenBSD on it.
I own Dell Intel PCs, use them daily, but I got mine for about thirty dollars.
When I decide to sell my mac, I'll have lost almost nothing compared to what you'll be losing.
People who buy apple aren't looking to buy the cheapest computer they can. People who buy apple want to buy a computer that really works.
I'll pay the extra because when I buy Apple I get:
1. A premium PC that I know will work.
2. Quality hardware that holds its value. How much do you think that Pentium II you got on the cheap is worth today? (You paid about $800.00 for it, right?) I've actually gotten more reselling some of my old Apple hardware than I paid for it.
3. A single company that stands behind its product, that will talk to you, that will make certain that you are a happy customer. You won't be paying $40 for some pimple-faced fart at Microsoft to tell you that you should have consulted the Windows Hardware Compatibility list.
4. An operating system that is built from the ground up to run well on specific, controlled premium PC hardware--not built from the ground up to run "well-enough" on any crap that you can put into a beige sheet metal box.
This "Apple costs too much" whine is tired.
You get what you pay for.
After the initial hi-res, dynamic feeling appeal of the dock wore off, I too found myself not liking it very much; I felt like I had to work against it. Using the Dock felt strange, hard... much like the dumbfounded feeling I had the first time I tried to be productive with OpenSTEP (that wasn't around for long).
Funny thing is, now that I've gotten used to the dock, I can't really get along without it. Dare I say it--I like the dock. I start seeing everything as a dock now.
Now when I have to look at a windows machine, that plain old windows taskbar with the silly Start button has become another (albeit dry, waste of space, single-function) dock.
Even though there are things I would like to change, I am much more productive than I ever was forever trying to configure Windows so it it would actually work as promised or spending hours reading, configuring, compiling, installing and then finally working with a X Windows application (that worked as promised!).
Sorry Sheldon, but you sounds like one of those old spy movies where the bad guy says, "No, it can't be!" after the hero comes back from peril to defeat him.
Via your sig you show as much respect for human beings who happen to posess vaginas as the Taliban did.
Quite off topic, I know, but I'm tired of idiots trying to justify their own sexist and dehumanizing actions by trying to set the Taliban up as a straw man to knock down.
Those who cover the bodies of women out of jealousy have just as much respect f or the people who happen to be those bodies as you who speak of women having "hot bodies."
Sure, both parties played rough (and in some opinions dirty) but there was no corruption.
Why did Katherine Harris want so badly to have hard drives on computers she used to write and receive e-mails with during the post-election period to be formatted?
No, I'm not living in the one dimensional line between Democrats and Republicans.
I'm talking about the idea that votes do count, and taking the time to make sure everything is correct--even if it means holding another election--is worth the effort to ensure that democracy remains alive.
In the abstract way you are talking about votes, they may matter, but what Bush showed over his first eight months was that it didn't matter what the voters thought, just what his, and his financial donors wanted.
It ain't about Bush and Gore anyway, it's about being represented by people who would look after all of our interests rather than the few elite rich that can pay for elections to happen. Elections have been bullshit for as long as I can remember, but Bush vs Gore just made it official.
Al-Qaeda's first step is to drive the U.S. out of the region that they want to conquer and to sufficiently damage us that we would not have the resources to ever come back in. Al-Qaeda is manipulating the hatred and jealousy toward the United States among the many Muslims to further their own goals of political/military conquest.
Doesn't it seem a little absurd to attack the world trade center when what you want is to remove troops from the soil of Saudi Arabia? It's much more likely that we just played right into what was a calculated attempt to provoke a military reaction. The uglier Americans seem to the rest of the world, the better sounding idiots like bin Laden will be.
It doesn't seem like Bush knows chess at all, or maybe he can only fathom one or two moves of play--sacrificing a knight to compromise your opponent's queen is considered a good move, and it looks like the Marlboro-boy just took the bait.
Powell has been trying hard to work through this situation with intelligence, but I don't know how long the voice of reason will sway a small-minded man only concerned with punishment.
Yeah, we're all along for the ride, but there is no reason to choose sides in this battle of witlessness. Those in control don't care what you or I think anyway.
You've shown how little you know about running a server, little one.
Even us x86 chumps know that you're not getting any performance enhancements out of Apache because it's not specifically compiled for the rhapsody engine.
And us x86 chumps know how to separate services for security. I'm glad you're not responsible for protecting any mission-critical data. Either that, or the idiots that hired you are even more stupid than you are.
Oh, and this x86 chump owns 1 G4 and 1 G3 ibook and knows enough not to use them as servers.
Sit down and shut up. Go back to the company whose server is probably already 0wnzed and try to convince them you know something about systems administration and security, because you're not fooling anyone here.
Slashdot Mirror
Gee, I wish I hadn't missed that one.
The point is, you need to tell us your company wasn't hurt by the many viruses, worms, trojans and plain bad engineering built into the Microsoft system. That in itself says enough.
The point is, you need to make the claim that everything Microsoft is good, you need to restate it over and over again precisely because as a satisfied customer, you are the exception. If there were more who were not harmed by stupid engineering, there wouldn't be the need to tell us all how great your production machines have worked.
Sure, there's a place for a Windows OS computer, but it isn't where mission critical data is, it sure isn't where lives are at stake and it isn't where public dollars get spent.
Philosophy major, right?
It sounds like a good deal at the outset, and, yes you're right, the licensing issues, the cost for hardware, even the access to source code are all arguments that can be debunked.
The problem is that Microsoft forces you to give up your ability to choose other options. Microsoft can offer a lot, but in the end, educational institutions need to keep their options open.
It simply isn't wise for an educational institution to undercut the opportunities of their students by signing the Microsoft agreements that won't allow any competing software to be used.
That's the real issue.
oi
I completely agree, fuck is a great word!
Problem is, kids just don't know how and when to use it.
I guess it just takes experience to figure out that if you use fuck to describe everything, it becomes as vapid as "but," "a," and "the."
Over use of fuck ruins one of the best words in the language.
Hey, I used to talk just like that.
Back in junior-high.
Ah yes, it's funny now, seeing how inadequately one expresses themselves through the use of four-letter epithets.
It seemed like it was "Big Boy talk" back then. Maybe you think it's big boy talk, but for the rest of us, it's just some vapid noise meant to fill a sentence.
It almost appears like you have something to say, but then, you never quite make it there, do you "fuck" boy?
I'd ask what you're trying to say, but I've already grown tired of you.
Bye.
The poster wasn't referring to end displays, but all shelf-space.
Again, the poster wasn't referring to "product placement," but forcing a competing product off the shelves.
No one is suggesting any more laws, just simply expressing their frustration in the system (that's allowed, you know).
Real solutions are born of discussions like this. Instead of a complacent, "well the problem is too big to solve," maybe this kind of discussion will lead to something.
Honestly, I wish more people would take the time to read carefully.
I never got MSN DSL actually running, but I waited over two months while MSN blamed Qwest, and Qwest blamed MSN for keeping our line blocked from getting new DSL.
In the end, I had to disconnect my phone line, reconnect, and only then could I even ORDER DSL.
Luckily, I found someone at Qwest sales who knows what they're doing and actually cares about customers.
If you're interested in talking with someone at Qwest who will get things done for you, e-mail
His name's Ricco.After talking to all the people who didn't know what they were doing, or just didn't care, I was truly grateful.
Although Microsoft likes to use the word innovation a lot, there's really not much more than words that they can be litigious about.
Think about it, what is the last original idea that Microsoft had?
Are you going to try convincing me that Word (WordPerfect) was a Microsoft "innovation." Are you going to tell me that Excell (Lotus 1-2-3) was a product that Microsoft could possibly try suing someone for copying? I guess next you'll be telling me that Microsoft invented the GUI.
Equating Apple's protection of the "look and feel" of its desktop operating system (although I don't necessarily agree) to Microsoft's all-the-sudden we want to protect windows (although we never really have before) is different. Apple would lose their right to defend their "look and feel" if they didn't try to defend it--even if it is against a couple of guys who want their Gnome desktop to have an Aqua "look and feel."
After all of the ideas Apple had ripped by Microsoft, I don't blame them a bit. Just see how much of the Jolly Rancher OS resembles OS X since Apple has asserted and defended their right to the "look and feel" of their desktop OS.
Either the CEO of Lindows knows Microsoft has lapsed in the protection of its trademark and has already accounted for this possibility, or he's a nutkus and needs to slow down before developing any more business models.
"PC Cheaper" argument relies upon the existence of cheap hardware vendors.
Good, quality manufactured PCs aren't built with hardware made by cheap hardware vendors.
Good, quality manufactured PCs cost just as much or more than comparable Apple PCs.
Therefore, "I get just as much as you, cheaper" does not make sense.
No sheldon, no one here is coveting Monopolies, except you. I know what Premium PC hardware is good for, and in a couple of years, when you sell yours for next to nothing, I'll be buying it and putting OpenBSD on it.
I own Dell Intel PCs, use them daily, but I got mine for about thirty dollars.
When I decide to sell my mac, I'll have lost almost nothing compared to what you'll be losing.
C'mon Sheldon, I have more faith in you than that. Can't you do better than name calling.
I'll pay the extra because when I buy Apple I get:
This "Apple costs too much" whine is tired.
You get what you pay for.
Sorry my friend, that's just funny.
Talking about emulating Mac OS on Windows reminds me of one of those $400 cars with $2000 worth of stereo equipment in them.
Obviously you don't use your machines for much production work.
HAHAHAHA!!!
You just made my day. Thanks.
After the initial hi-res, dynamic feeling appeal of the dock wore off, I too found myself not liking it very much; I felt like I had to work against it. Using the Dock felt strange, hard... much like the dumbfounded feeling I had the first time I tried to be productive with OpenSTEP (that wasn't around for long).
Funny thing is, now that I've gotten used to the dock, I can't really get along without it. Dare I say it--I like the dock. I start seeing everything as a dock now.
Now when I have to look at a windows machine, that plain old windows taskbar with the silly Start button has become another (albeit dry, waste of space, single-function) dock.
Even though there are things I would like to change, I am much more productive than I ever was forever trying to configure Windows so it it would actually work as promised or spending hours reading, configuring, compiling, installing and then finally working with a X Windows application (that worked as promised!).
--Hell is Microsoft Word, Windows and a deadline.
Welcome to the world of the corporate Christmas.
Sorry Sheldon, but you sounds like one of those old spy movies where the bad guy says, "No, it can't be!" after the hero comes back from peril to defeat him.
Zounds!
Via your sig you show as much respect for human beings who happen to posess vaginas as the Taliban did.
Quite off topic, I know, but I'm tired of idiots trying to justify their own sexist and dehumanizing actions by trying to set the Taliban up as a straw man to knock down.
Those who cover the bodies of women out of jealousy have just as much respect f or the people who happen to be those bodies as you who speak of women having "hot bodies."
Why did Katherine Harris want so badly to have hard drives on computers she used to write and receive e-mails with during the post-election period to be formatted?
Why?
I'm talking about the idea that votes do count, and taking the time to make sure everything is correct--even if it means holding another election--is worth the effort to ensure that democracy remains alive.
In the abstract way you are talking about votes, they may matter, but what Bush showed over his first eight months was that it didn't matter what the voters thought, just what his, and his financial donors wanted.
But who cares about whether votes count anyway?
Democracy ended because Gore did win.
I'd feel safer with deep blue at the wheel than daddy Bush's idiot son anyway.
It doesn't seem like Bush knows chess at all, or maybe he can only fathom one or two moves of play--sacrificing a knight to compromise your opponent's queen is considered a good move, and it looks like the Marlboro-boy just took the bait.
Powell has been trying hard to work through this situation with intelligence, but I don't know how long the voice of reason will sway a small-minded man only concerned with punishment.
Yeah, we're all along for the ride, but there is no reason to choose sides in this battle of witlessness. Those in control don't care what you or I think anyway.
Even us x86 chumps know that you're not getting any performance enhancements out of Apache because it's not specifically compiled for the rhapsody engine.
And us x86 chumps know how to separate services for security. I'm glad you're not responsible for protecting any mission-critical data. Either that, or the idiots that hired you are even more stupid than you are.
Oh, and this x86 chump owns 1 G4 and 1 G3 ibook and knows enough not to use them as servers.
Sit down and shut up. Go back to the company whose server is probably already 0wnzed and try to convince them you know something about systems administration and security, because you're not fooling anyone here.