Ditto. I work in a small shop (300 or so users) and we have four people in our group. In some places you would have your help desk people, your network people, your pc techs, and so forth. Not here though.
We do a little bit of all of it so things stay interesting. I do primarily work in front of a screen all day but I value highly the time I get to go out and do other things. We run our cables, we help the CAD users, it's variety that keeps me in the "satisfied with my job" group.
I once had someone on Slashdot remark that if I was out swapping out a users broken mouse then I wasn't a network administrator which made me laugh. I bet the majority of those happy in their profession work in smaller shops where they get to do more than a single set of tasks.
Exactly. Not every company aspires to be Microsoft or Dell BUT as long as they either aren't trying to be like those two or are trying but failing to accomplish it the standard party line from the press is going to be "They are dying".
Like I said I just don't pay very much attention to him or rather I don't base my movie going decisions on whether or not he's in something (or for the most part whether or not almost anyone is in something) so I really hadn't considered those films at all. On further consideration...
Probably more accurately I'd have to say that he started out with the "Risky Business", "All the Right Moves" stuff (which I wasn't real interested in though Rebecca De Morney's nude scenes were good stuff (Hey, I was in high school when that came out). Then he kind of graduated to the formula junk that he became known for (Your "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder" junk) and again, I didn't think much of it.
Somewhere after that time he did the Marine Corp movie with Nicholson (YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!) and I watched that and enjoyed it. Sure maybe he wasn't the reason I enjoyed it but I thought he did a good job. I also liked him in "Rain Man" but you're right, it's very much Tom playing, well Tom. "Interview With a Vampire" and I was dreading it because I just didn't think he could do it. I hated the very concept of him in that part (like a lot of people) and then he did it and he did it well. I was impressed. "Jerry McGuire" was another good movie (no stretch but he was again solid) so I'm thinking there's more to Tom Cruise acting wise than I thought.
Then came "Mission Impossible" and that was absolute shit IMO. "MI2" was a bigger bunch of shit (I saw this against my will thanks to my son who had to see it) and at that point I think I wrote the guy off forever.
Eyes Wide Shut I've never seen in it's entirety. What I have seen was maybe the least erotic movie filled with sexual content I can imagine. Boring to the point where I either shut it off or fall asleep. I have since passed on all the other movies you mentioned. "Vanilla Sky" I was warned away from by my brother. Minority Report I thought looked like a typical Cruise film only set in the future, and "The Last Samurai" I took a pass on from the moment I saw the trailer.
So you're right. He's done more stuff but I guess my view of his career and choices is somewhat dated since I've blown off his more recent attempts to branch out.
Interesting, I was thinking much the same thing. I'm not sure exactly where it was timeline wise because I don't really pay all that much attention to Tom Cruise but I recall a point in his career where he was (apparently at least) trying to do a wider variety of roles. He seemed to be trying to elevate himself. Somewhere in there he seems to have decided that "Action Hero/Aging Hearthrob" ain't a bad gig if you can get the work and he seems to have resigned himself to a small subset of roles (nicely summed up by a previous poster as "Tom is the bestest...."
I don't know, as I recall (and like most things where Star Trek is concerned I'm not counting on it being consistent) Picard usually said something like "Picard to Doctor Crusher" so that might account for it.
When asking the computer to locate someone (say for instance Acting Ensign Wesley Crusher) He'd say "Computer, locate Ensign Crusher" and I guess the computer worked out the "Acting" part itself. Then it would come back with something like (insert Majel Barrett voice here) "Acting Ensign Crusher is on Holodeck Seven in a state of undress and presently running the "Blue Oyster Club" program"
And if you move you're in a small world of pain so be very still when you get one of those. I also recall that they're either completely painless or hurt like hell but I can't really tell you why that's the case. I just chalked it up to skill of the person giving the shot but maybe I twitched a little or something.
Indiana Jones didn't "come out of nowhere" though to the average movie going slob. It came out of Lucas/Spielberg which said average movie going slob was very familiar with so in essence it came with a "Trusted Brand Label" on it.
If it showed up today with Lucas name on it I wonder how much "Hey that should be good" sentiment it could count on?
Man, seriously I'm not trying to flame or troll either (someone will not take me at my word though, just watch) but IMO (and I understand that it's strictly my opinion) The Mac just has so much other stuff licked that the urge to say "Try a Mac" in some fashion is tough to resist. Time and again I see Windows (and Linux sometimes these days) users wanting to do something that the Mac "just does" with the software it showed up on my doorstep with.
Having said that though I've begun making a concerted effort to not necessarily throw out the "If you had a Mac you could...." answer first. If I have an answer for a question then I provide it before going "zealot" on others.
In general I've found that people get hacked over this so I figure that among a bunch of people who are annoyed because I'm suggesting a completely different platform/OS/approach there will be very few converts.
...Note to self, saw interesting proposal today on the internet about possible new revenue stream based on added fees for blank paper. Need to remember to run this one by the lawyers tomorrow morning when we meet for our weekly animal sacrifice and supplication ceremony to Satan. This could be big! Helloooooo Bonus!
I'm not suprised at all. SCO is probably sitting there thinking that if they can pull off what they've got on their plate then there will be plenty of time for every other form of nix on the planet after they finish counting the dumptrucks full of money they'll get from IBM (and whoever else they're presently after).
Then, in that scary alternate reality where SCO is right about this they can quietly line everyone else up for the settlements.
Every time I click on that Starbrite link I get a blank page that reads "Service Unavailable" so I'm stumped. Is that link in the story bad?
And yeah, odds are good that the slashdot effect is what's causing it but maybe, just maybe a crack team of Apple lawyers got their first. They probably timed their strike to coincide with the appearance of this story just so they could hide their own attack in the giant dustcloud created by the slashdotting.
Well, if he had declined to "take an axe to it" it might not have ever been made so I think most of the world (that cares) is ok with his interpretation of the books. I can only imagine that if he had tried to film them in some sort of all encompassing way we might have just seen the third film come out and be waiting for the fourth and fifth to wrap it up.
The Hobbit is a tighter piece of work. I can't see him having any trouble doing a nice fitting and relatively complete version of it. The Dwarves are IMO more comic relief in The Hobbit so if anything he'll probably have to pull that in some just to be in line with what he's done to Gimli in LOTR.
That (Dwarf jokes) is maybe the one thing I didn't much care for. Not that I can't appreciate a good "let's laugh at the short guy" joke. I just didn't think that LOTR needed comic relief added to it. That's just me though.
I'd like to chime in here on why it's crappy. I don't use it myself but I support two GIS people here where I work. They're 2 out of 300 or so but I've noticed one thing.
No matter what they run it on it's dog slow. Those two guys get new machines, RAM upgrades, whatever they ask for, etc more often than any of my other users and I hear one thing consistantly from them. It's too friggin slow.
I don't know what the problem is. The guy here with the most understanding of it says it's the software and he's been working with it for years.
They need it, can't live without it, and love what they can do with it. They just hate it's performance.
I've got a better plan. Why don't we let it slide and when this is all over hope that they've learned something. Whether they fell for the SCO BS or not they're technically still on "our" team aren't they?
If they're running Linux on anything (desktop, server, game cube, vibrating butt plug - it's been ported, whatever) then spare them the rightous anger and check the revolutionary zeal. Go boycott someone who's actually doing something to merit it (there are plenty of candidates)
Why do you have to hate it now? Why can't you appreciate it for what it is? Mostly simplistic but it sounds to me like it was the thing that first got you interested in science fiction. When I was a kid I thought it was great too. I still think it's great but I qualify that statement with an understanding that it's a childs version of what I like now. It's the reason I only see the new ones once as opposed to repeated viewings.
You can go on to bigger/better material without turning it into a Star Wars hate fest.
You should have posted this without the AC. I'd have some respect for you then. As it is you're just another asshole without the balls to fess up to being one. In this case the way you post reflects the way you like to play online obviously. You insult people behind your AC here, you screw with them trying to play the game there. Same reason for both, no accountability.
Being killed by another player isn't the same thing as being killed by an NPC if you didn't log in to play against other players but then that's where you need to reexamine what kind of game you're wanting to play.
Personally I look at the PK's as interfering with my playing "the game" (that's just me, you might feel different about it) and so I had to decide whether or not I wanted to play in an online world where others could interfere with what I was doing. My conclusion was that this wasn't the kind of game for me.
I love playing Q3 online where I expect and intend to play a PvP game but in games like UO and say Diablo 2 I am there to play the game, not play against the game AND the other players. I walked away from UO very early and limit my Diablo 2 playing to closed games where the PK's can't get in. That suits me fine.
People make more of this than it's really worth. If an online game allows the PK's to do what they want and doesn't provide the other players any way of going about their business without having to deal with them then just walk away. Granted you might really want to play that game but if it's not your kind of game then it's just not your kind of game. Add it to the list (we all have one) of crappy games you purchased and move on.
If enough people close their accounts and voice their dislike for the situation then maybe they fix it in a future release and you get to try it again. Probably not but it's possible.
Slashdot Mirror
Ditto. I work in a small shop (300 or so users) and we have four people in our group. In some places you would have your help desk people, your network people, your pc techs, and so forth. Not here though.
We do a little bit of all of it so things stay interesting. I do primarily work in front of a screen all day but I value highly the time I get to go out and do other things. We run our cables, we help the CAD users, it's variety that keeps me in the "satisfied with my job" group.
I once had someone on Slashdot remark that if I was out swapping out a users broken mouse then I wasn't a network administrator which made me laugh. I bet the majority of those happy in their profession work in smaller shops where they get to do more than a single set of tasks.
Exactly. Not every company aspires to be Microsoft or Dell BUT as long as they either aren't trying to be like those two or are trying but failing to accomplish it the standard party line from the press is going to be "They are dying".
You know what, you're right.
Like I said I just don't pay very much attention to him or rather I don't base my movie going decisions on whether or not he's in something (or for the most part whether or not almost anyone is in something) so I really hadn't considered those films at all. On further consideration...
Probably more accurately I'd have to say that he started out with the "Risky Business", "All the Right Moves" stuff (which I wasn't real interested in though Rebecca De Morney's nude scenes were good stuff (Hey, I was in high school when that came out). Then he kind of graduated to the formula junk that he became known for (Your "Top Gun" and "Days of Thunder" junk) and again, I didn't think much of it.
Somewhere after that time he did the Marine Corp movie with Nicholson (YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!) and I watched that and enjoyed it. Sure maybe he wasn't the reason I enjoyed it but I thought he did a good job. I also liked him in "Rain Man" but you're right, it's very much Tom playing, well Tom. "Interview With a Vampire" and I was dreading it because I just didn't think he could do it. I hated the very concept of him in that part (like a lot of people) and then he did it and he did it well. I was impressed. "Jerry McGuire" was another good movie (no stretch but he was again solid) so I'm thinking there's more to Tom Cruise acting wise than I thought.
Then came "Mission Impossible" and that was absolute shit IMO. "MI2" was a bigger bunch of shit (I saw this against my will thanks to my son who had to see it) and at that point I think I wrote the guy off forever.
Eyes Wide Shut I've never seen in it's entirety. What I have seen was maybe the least erotic movie filled with sexual content I can imagine. Boring to the point where I either shut it off or fall asleep. I have since passed on all the other movies you mentioned. "Vanilla Sky" I was warned away from by my brother. Minority Report I thought looked like a typical Cruise film only set in the future, and "The Last Samurai" I took a pass on from the moment I saw the trailer.
So you're right. He's done more stuff but I guess my view of his career and choices is somewhat dated since I've blown off his more recent attempts to branch out.
Yeah well, when MY kid was 2 he built his own Red Hat machine...
Interesting, I was thinking much the same thing. I'm not sure exactly where it was timeline wise because I don't really pay all that much attention to Tom Cruise but I recall a point in his career where he was (apparently at least) trying to do a wider variety of roles. He seemed to be trying to elevate himself. Somewhere in there he seems to have decided that "Action Hero/Aging Hearthrob" ain't a bad gig if you can get the work and he seems to have resigned himself to a small subset of roles (nicely summed up by a previous poster as "Tom is the bestest...."
Hey, laugh all you want but that would be three more things Linux would have that it didn't before they ported them.
Trust me, as a long time Apple user I know better than many that you'd better learn to take what you can get.
Yep, or as it popped into my mind "You've never heard of the Millenium Falcon? It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs"
I don't know, as I recall (and like most things where Star Trek is concerned I'm not counting on it being consistent) Picard usually said something like "Picard to Doctor Crusher" so that might account for it.
When asking the computer to locate someone (say for instance Acting Ensign Wesley Crusher) He'd say "Computer, locate Ensign Crusher" and I guess the computer worked out the "Acting" part itself. Then it would come back with something like (insert Majel Barrett voice here) "Acting Ensign Crusher is on Holodeck Seven in a state of undress and presently running the "Blue Oyster Club" program"
And if you move you're in a small world of pain so be very still when you get one of those. I also recall that they're either completely painless or hurt like hell but I can't really tell you why that's the case. I just chalked it up to skill of the person giving the shot but maybe I twitched a little or something.
Indiana Jones didn't "come out of nowhere" though to the average movie going slob. It came out of Lucas/Spielberg which said average movie going slob was very familiar with so in essence it came with a "Trusted Brand Label" on it.
If it showed up today with Lucas name on it I wonder how much "Hey that should be good" sentiment it could count on?
As an artist (sculptor in this case) you have a right to be compensated for your efforts. Preach on brother!
Man, seriously I'm not trying to flame or troll either (someone will not take me at my word though, just watch) but IMO (and I understand that it's strictly my opinion) The Mac just has so much other stuff licked that the urge to say "Try a Mac" in some fashion is tough to resist. Time and again I see Windows (and Linux sometimes these days) users wanting to do something that the Mac "just does" with the software it showed up on my doorstep with.
Having said that though I've begun making a concerted effort to not necessarily throw out the "If you had a Mac you could...." answer first. If I have an answer for a question then I provide it before going "zealot" on others.
In general I've found that people get hacked over this so I figure that among a bunch of people who are annoyed because I'm suggesting a completely different platform/OS/approach there will be very few converts.
I'm not suprised at all. SCO is probably sitting there thinking that if they can pull off what they've got on their plate then there will be plenty of time for every other form of nix on the planet after they finish counting the dumptrucks full of money they'll get from IBM (and whoever else they're presently after).
Then, in that scary alternate reality where SCO is right about this they can quietly line everyone else up for the settlements.
If they want to then I guess they will.
Knowing Pixar though it will probably be a very nice looking Apple logo that says "Made on a Mac".
Every time I click on that Starbrite link I get a blank page that reads "Service Unavailable" so I'm stumped. Is that link in the story bad?
And yeah, odds are good that the slashdot effect is what's causing it but maybe, just maybe a crack team of Apple lawyers got their first. They probably timed their strike to coincide with the appearance of this story just so they could hide their own attack in the giant dustcloud created by the slashdotting.
Fastest reaction time from Apple lawyers ever. Man those guys are good (or bad, depending on how you think of it).
Well, if he had declined to "take an axe to it" it might not have ever been made so I think most of the world (that cares) is ok with his interpretation of the books. I can only imagine that if he had tried to film them in some sort of all encompassing way we might have just seen the third film come out and be waiting for the fourth and fifth to wrap it up.
The Hobbit is a tighter piece of work. I can't see him having any trouble doing a nice fitting and relatively complete version of it. The Dwarves are IMO more comic relief in The Hobbit so if anything he'll probably have to pull that in some just to be in line with what he's done to Gimli in LOTR.
That (Dwarf jokes) is maybe the one thing I didn't much care for. Not that I can't appreciate a good "let's laugh at the short guy" joke. I just didn't think that LOTR needed comic relief added to it. That's just me though.
I'd like to chime in here on why it's crappy. I don't use it myself but I support two GIS people here where I work. They're 2 out of 300 or so but I've noticed one thing.
No matter what they run it on it's dog slow. Those two guys get new machines, RAM upgrades, whatever they ask for, etc more often than any of my other users and I hear one thing consistantly from them. It's too friggin slow.
I don't know what the problem is. The guy here with the most understanding of it says it's the software and he's been working with it for years.
They need it, can't live without it, and love what they can do with it. They just hate it's performance.
Yeah well there's more where that came from so from here on out watch it,
Don't let me catch you disrespecting the original holy movie again...
I've got a better plan. Why don't we let it slide and when this is all over hope that they've learned something. Whether they fell for the SCO BS or not they're technically still on "our" team aren't they?
If they're running Linux on anything (desktop, server, game cube, vibrating butt plug - it's been ported, whatever) then spare them the rightous anger and check the revolutionary zeal. Go boycott someone who's actually doing something to merit it (there are plenty of candidates)
Why do you have to hate it now? Why can't you appreciate it for what it is? Mostly simplistic but it sounds to me like it was the thing that first got you interested in science fiction. When I was a kid I thought it was great too. I still think it's great but I qualify that statement with an understanding that it's a childs version of what I like now. It's the reason I only see the new ones once as opposed to repeated viewings.
You can go on to bigger/better material without turning it into a Star Wars hate fest.
"novel but crappy"?
I disagree strongly. It changed everything (and no, not always for the better).
You don't deserve to live in a world where a movie like Star Wars gets released.
You should have posted this without the AC. I'd have some respect for you then. As it is you're just another asshole without the balls to fess up to being one. In this case the way you post reflects the way you like to play online obviously. You insult people behind your AC here, you screw with them trying to play the game there. Same reason for both, no accountability.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Being killed by another player isn't the same thing as being killed by an NPC if you didn't log in to play against other players but then that's where you need to reexamine what kind of game you're wanting to play.
Personally I look at the PK's as interfering with my playing "the game" (that's just me, you might feel different about it) and so I had to decide whether or not I wanted to play in an online world where others could interfere with what I was doing. My conclusion was that this wasn't the kind of game for me.
I love playing Q3 online where I expect and intend to play a PvP game but in games like UO and say Diablo 2 I am there to play the game, not play against the game AND the other players. I walked away from UO very early and limit my Diablo 2 playing to closed games where the PK's can't get in. That suits me fine.
People make more of this than it's really worth. If an online game allows the PK's to do what they want and doesn't provide the other players any way of going about their business without having to deal with them then just walk away. Granted you might really want to play that game but if it's not your kind of game then it's just not your kind of game. Add it to the list (we all have one) of crappy games you purchased and move on.
If enough people close their accounts and voice their dislike for the situation then maybe they fix it in a future release and you get to try it again. Probably not but it's possible.