While their comments about Photoshop and Quark are more or less valid, they overlooked an app that was more important than both of their claims: Pagemaker. Photoshop may have saved Apple in the 90s, but that never would have been an issue if Pagemaker hadn't put the Mac on the map to begin with in the 80s. Pagemaker was to the Mac what Lotus 1-2-3 was to the IBM PC: the sine-qua-non reason to buy one. And although Quark came to dominate the desktop publishing industry (for a while), that honor would be beside the point if Pagemaker had not created practical DTP to begin with.
Most of the people I meet, when they learn that I travel most of the time, complain about how they feel bored in their community with their crap job and they wish they could travel too.
News flash: Many people hate their jobs, and assume that the grass will be greener on the other side of the fence. Or they hate their community. Or whatever is a large factor in their lives. That doesn't mean that they would actually be happier if they cut ties and went vagabond... and the fact that they don't do it suggests that many of them realize that. Meanwhile, many people who travel a lot wish they could just settle down... which may be the same phenomenon happening from the other side. Another clue for you: Just because someone complains about something doesn't mean they hate it. People just need to complain to strangers sometimes, y'know?
Do they actually have the means to travel as lifestyle?
Yes, many of them do. Look, if you're this intent on not believing people when they tell you things that don't fit your assumptions, then you probably don't actually get to know people in your travels, because you lack the necessary listening and empathy skills. And just because you lack the ability to form deep or lasting relationships with people or places doesn't mean we're all similarly handicapped.
I've long thought that the ideal job would be one where I spent half the day (or every other day or whatever) doing physical manual work, and the rest of the time doing sedentary intellectual work. Better for the body and better for the mind than doing all one or the other.
I hear that claim from time to time, but in practice I've never met anyone who got the chance to travel freely and didn't take it, unless they were already shackled down by a spouse or children.
In that case, I'd like to introduce myself. I used to travel a lot (19 countries, sometimes a month or more at a time), but not so much anymore. No spouse or children. I still go places (planning a week-long scooter trip along Lake Michigan for this summer) but I just prefer staying at home most of the time. If you really haven't met anyone like this before, maybe you need to try harder to actually meet people in the places you travel to, or at least try harder to listen and understand them, instead of (from the sound of it) going there and burying your face in your laptop and projecting your own values onto everyone else. Because I know lots of people who simply find travel a nuisance, and who find things like spouses, children, and communities to be anything but "shackles". Not that they're "right" and you're "wrong"... but clearly there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I can't see the point of 20+ sessions for most users. Granted, there are power users and teenagers with ADD who'll have that many sessions going at once, but the typical computer user still doesn't take advantage of tabs, let alone whatever post-tab interface they're trying to invent here.
Although I thought it amusing too, I was quite serious about thinking this cast/setting would make a good weekly TV series. I would like to see more, and I'd like it to be more than just another 120 minutes, three years from now.
The fanonical explanation for why Spock behaved rather emotionally in "The Cage"/"The Menagerie" (i.e. in the pilot, before the "cool, logical" characterization was established) is that during his tenure as Pike's science officer Spock was going through a phase of indulging his emotions somewhat, but by the time he served on Kirk's 5-year mission, he'd developed a more mature, logical personality.
Besides, we need all the available lithium for making batteries now; we can't afford to waste it on people who are probably just going to kill themselves anyway.
One is whether the "Android Data" trademark could be valid in the first place: it is. Even though "android" is an ordinary English word, that doesn't mean it can't be used as a trademark. What it means is that it's a legally weak trademark, and unlike an invented name, it isn't a slam-dunk in court if someone tries to appropriate it.
Another question is whether the trademark is currently valid, and Google infringing on it: technically yes. It was duly registered, it's in the same field of business as Google, and it hasn't lay fallow for very long. "Android Data" and "Android" are similar enough to be confusing.
But a related question is whether it should be, and the answer to that is: probably not. If the trademark never got a foothold in the marketplace (i.e. no one knows it), and there's no apparent intent to use on the horizon (i.e. the company is defunct), another company should be able to pick it up and use it.
Re:Who cares about history majors...now scientists
on
Cosmetic Neurology
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
"If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your Singularity." - a 21st century Emma Goldman
Um... "a whole bunch smarter, and a whole bunch less creative" is damn near a contradiction in terms. Granted, there are all kinds of "smart", but some form of creativity (whether analytic or intuitive) is involved in most of them.
"an initial offering of 1,200 ancient manuscripts, parchments and documents"
Huh? Many manuscripts (something written by hand) are also parchments (sheets made from animal skin), and they're pretty much all documents, no matter how they were produced or what material they're on. So why not just say "an initial offering of 1,200 ancient documents"?
"Journalists can take pictures of anything they see"
Journalists are subject to the same restrictions on copying as anyone else. If they reproduce something that's protected by copyright, they need to justify it as a "fair use" of the material.
Um... Apple didn't make their formats proprietary. They put some (easily circumvented) DRM on them to placate the publishers, but AAC and MPEG4 are published standards.
HTML markup isn't about making the site look nice; it's about identifying types of content, for the browser to display according to its configuration. CSS markup is more about making the site look nice. And speaking from the perspective of someone with a degree in CS who went back to school to get a degree in graphic design after he got interested in "making web sites", I'd argue there's a lot more to design (both visual and architectural) than the coding that implements it.
It amazes me that people are willing to pay to sit and watch some stranger play any sport. Spectator sports simply bore me, and the handful of times I've found myself stuck standing around with nothing to do but watch someone play a video game, were a special kid of purgatory.
Slashdot Mirror
While their comments about Photoshop and Quark are more or less valid, they overlooked an app that was more important than both of their claims: Pagemaker. Photoshop may have saved Apple in the 90s, but that never would have been an issue if Pagemaker hadn't put the Mac on the map to begin with in the 80s. Pagemaker was to the Mac what Lotus 1-2-3 was to the IBM PC: the sine-qua-non reason to buy one. And although Quark came to dominate the desktop publishing industry (for a while), that honor would be beside the point if Pagemaker had not created practical DTP to begin with.
Acoustic-coupler style modems are dialed by pushing the buttons (or actually dialing) on the telephone whose handset is plugged into it.
But in Soviet Russia, 15000 people recognise the cameras!
News flash: Many people hate their jobs, and assume that the grass will be greener on the other side of the fence. Or they hate their community. Or whatever is a large factor in their lives. That doesn't mean that they would actually be happier if they cut ties and went vagabond... and the fact that they don't do it suggests that many of them realize that. Meanwhile, many people who travel a lot wish they could just settle down... which may be the same phenomenon happening from the other side. Another clue for you: Just because someone complains about something doesn't mean they hate it. People just need to complain to strangers sometimes, y'know?
Yes, many of them do.
Look, if you're this intent on not believing people when they tell you things that don't fit your assumptions, then you probably don't actually get to know people in your travels, because you lack the necessary listening and empathy skills. And just because you lack the ability to form deep or lasting relationships with people or places doesn't mean we're all similarly handicapped.
I've long thought that the ideal job would be one where I spent half the day (or every other day or whatever) doing physical manual work, and the rest of the time doing sedentary intellectual work. Better for the body and better for the mind than doing all one or the other.
In that case, I'd like to introduce myself. I used to travel a lot (19 countries, sometimes a month or more at a time), but not so much anymore. No spouse or children. I still go places (planning a week-long scooter trip along Lake Michigan for this summer) but I just prefer staying at home most of the time. If you really haven't met anyone like this before, maybe you need to try harder to actually meet people in the places you travel to, or at least try harder to listen and understand them, instead of (from the sound of it) going there and burying your face in your laptop and projecting your own values onto everyone else. Because I know lots of people who simply find travel a nuisance, and who find things like spouses, children, and communities to be anything but "shackles". Not that they're "right" and you're "wrong"... but clearly there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I can't see the point of 20+ sessions for most users. Granted, there are power users and teenagers with ADD who'll have that many sessions going at once, but the typical computer user still doesn't take advantage of tabs, let alone whatever post-tab interface they're trying to invent here.
Missed the season finale, did you? :)
Although I thought it amusing too, I was quite serious about thinking this cast/setting would make a good weekly TV series. I would like to see more, and I'd like it to be more than just another 120 minutes, three years from now.
The fanonical explanation for why Spock behaved rather emotionally in "The Cage"/"The Menagerie" (i.e. in the pilot, before the "cool, logical" characterization was established) is that during his tenure as Pike's science officer Spock was going through a phase of indulging his emotions somewhat, but by the time he served on Kirk's 5-year mission, he'd developed a more mature, logical personality.
You know, I think they could even make a TV series out of this "Star Trek"...
"goats are a lot cuter to watch than lawn mowers"
They clearly haven't seen the guys who mow the lawn for one of my neighbors.
Besides, we need all the available lithium for making batteries now; we can't afford to waste it on people who are probably just going to kill themselves anyway.
You must be new here.
There are a few different questions in play here.
One is whether the "Android Data" trademark could be valid in the first place: it is. Even though "android" is an ordinary English word, that doesn't mean it can't be used as a trademark. What it means is that it's a legally weak trademark, and unlike an invented name, it isn't a slam-dunk in court if someone tries to appropriate it.
Another question is whether the trademark is currently valid, and Google infringing on it: technically yes. It was duly registered, it's in the same field of business as Google, and it hasn't lay fallow for very long. "Android Data" and "Android" are similar enough to be confusing.
But a related question is whether it should be, and the answer to that is: probably not. If the trademark never got a foothold in the marketplace (i.e. no one knows it), and there's no apparent intent to use on the horizon (i.e. the company is defunct), another company should be able to pick it up and use it.
"If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your Singularity." - a 21st century Emma Goldman
Um... "a whole bunch smarter, and a whole bunch less creative" is damn near a contradiction in terms. Granted, there are all kinds of "smart", but some form of creativity (whether analytic or intuitive) is involved in most of them.
The idea of healthy people taking modern pharmaceuticals to enhance their thinking dates back at least to LSD in the 1960s.
"an initial offering of 1,200 ancient manuscripts, parchments and documents"
Huh? Many manuscripts (something written by hand) are also parchments (sheets made from animal skin), and they're pretty much all documents, no matter how they were produced or what material they're on. So why not just say "an initial offering of 1,200 ancient documents"?
"Journalists can take pictures of anything they see"
Journalists are subject to the same restrictions on copying as anyone else. If they reproduce something that's protected by copyright, they need to justify it as a "fair use" of the material.
Um... Apple didn't make their formats proprietary. They put some (easily circumvented) DRM on them to placate the publishers, but AAC and MPEG4 are published standards.
HTML markup isn't about making the site look nice; it's about identifying types of content, for the browser to display according to its configuration. CSS markup is more about making the site look nice. And speaking from the perspective of someone with a degree in CS who went back to school to get a degree in graphic design after he got interested in "making web sites", I'd argue there's a lot more to design (both visual and architectural) than the coding that implements it.
Neither does it make you a designer. It makes you an HTML coder.
It amazes me that people are willing to pay to sit and watch some stranger play any sport. Spectator sports simply bore me, and the handful of times I've found myself stuck standing around with nothing to do but watch someone play a video game, were a special kid of purgatory.
Because otherwise it gets really boring at the restaurant waiting for your order to arrive?
I'm allergic to cortisol, you insensitive clod!