I see what you're saying about business not needing tablet/laptop hybrids, but at least within my network: we don't buy crap laptops. The Lenovo Thinkpad we'd normally deploy for a user requiring mobility, is similarly priced to a Surface Pro (somewhere in the $700 - $1100 range). Buying the Surface gets you a great build, and a dual purpose machine, that functions as both a laptop and tablet with very little/no compromise.
Generally we don't buy cheap, because the build quality necessitates early replacement. Spending an extra few hundred dollars usually buys several years of additional useful life for the device.
You're wrong. Dead wrong. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't outweigh others experience. The Surface makes a fine business machine. Windows 8 isn't incapable of running within a business environment. Old, Luddite tech people are simply unwilling to try it. Windows 8 runs just fine, and is very similar in operation to Windows 7 within an AD domain, with GPO and all. Seen it, done it, doing it. It's working well.
Consider the ever growing culture of BYOD, it's even more plausible to use Windows 8 and the Surface in a business environment.
As someone who's actually using the Surface Pro 2 for business and who needs to be mobile, I think it serves the purpose better than a laptop or desktop.
Windows 8 may be the next Vista, but I think the perspective of most people commenting on this story is skewed. As is normal for human beings, ones existence generally alters ones perception.
I work in a large organization, developing software (primarily) and performing IT support duties (secondly). I think the paradigm shift that Win8 introduces is actually a positive thing for users like ours!
Watching 90+% of our users; they're already self-imposing all of the "restrictions" of Win8. If we "took away" multi-tasking, it'd barely be noticed at most desks. Most users here open a single program (full screened), use it, close it, and open the next, sometimes going back and forth between applications by fully exiting the prior app several times! Most users don't truly take advantage of window arrangement, tiling or cascading. Things like copy/paste and minimize are still *advanced* to them. For people who don't live and breathe computers, simple is better. Focus on a single task at hand! So the model that Win8 presents is almost easier, and certainly no more difficult than the way I see things rolling on down the road currently! In fact the full screen start menu, etc, actually brings a level of focus, that I think makes the computer easier for basic users.
Now as a developer, fuck no. I will continue using Windows 7 for a while at least. I run 3 monitors, and arrange dozens of windows to make software development easier. For it's integration, between phone tablet and PC, I will definitely use Win8 casually. I'm actually excited about the platform integration between phones, tablets, Xbox and PCs!
Thank you! As a fellow Montana resident, I agree. Sorry urban folks, who exclaim "move to cities, use mass transit", the urban lifestyle is supported by the rural lifestyle and visa-versa. Farms and ranches require space. Our economy is partly supported by the rural sprawl as well. Not to mention some of us want to live in a place that's clean, near nature and safe. Oh and the people here make less money and STILL are nicer in general. True story.
Well I'm sure Apple will be looking you up, the next time the CEO position is up for grabs...
First of all *every* company is *worried* about what's next; any smart company is worried about dominating the market segment they participate in. (Why else would they release an iPhone 4S? To capitalize on the lower-end market. Not to mention Apple is all about selling the hype. Their biggest and most important event every frickin' year is WWDC. I'd say that is Apple, showing that they are *worried* about "what's next".)
Now: in response to "They sell top spec'ed devices": Yes they can and sometimes do, but that's not their primary market. Neither the Macbook nor the Macbook Air lines are top-spec'ed. Sure you can configure them as such, but the normal machines they are selling are fairly average as far as components go. It's the chassis, the OS and other small details that set them apart and make them great PCs.
By the way, Apple is not "maintaining" 30% market share. There may be Android devices in the "low cost, pre-paid space", but that is not their primary market. The end. Period.
Next, the Galaxy Tab didn't copy the iPad any more than than the iPhone copied the LG Prada. All of this bickering between Samsung and Apple misses the basic point: it doesn't help the consumer, and that's what it's truly all about. Apple doesn't need lawyers to sell it's products, they sell themselves for the most part. All of this legal crap is just crass, it tarnishes their name and shows they're worried. If you believe otherwise, considering the evidence to the contrary, you're just a shill.
As for the legal stability of Android, I'd say Google has it under control. Google's primary point in picking up the HUGE patent portfolio in the past months was primarily to defend itself, Android and it's OEMs from attack. Currently the only credible threat to Android is Oracle, and that mess is just a licensing deal away from being settled anyhow.
In short: you sir, are a fanboi. I am not. I just wanted to clarify that for you and anyone else who cares to read this.
Disclosure: I own multiple Apple products and multiple Google products. As a matter of fact: I own a lot of products, produced by a lot of companies and I like them all.
Your'e funny and simply indoctrinated by Facebook. Changing your profile pic is easy, if you don't follow the Facebook model. It's under Settings > Profile! Whoa hard, right? I think if you use a computer in general, G+ is not only easier on this front, it's *STANDARD*. Jeezus.
Second, I'm not sure that you can post on other peoples walls. Is that bad? I'm not sure. It's just the way it is there. You can't advertise your crap agenda within other people's spaces. I kinda like that.
Third, yes it absolutely does tell you who your posts are shared with. Every damn post, from you and every one else, has an indicator on the top line of the post. All mine usually say limited. Click it, it'll tell you EXACTLY who it's shared with.
Just cuz you can't do it, and aren't willing to *explore* doesn't make it bad.
*Whine* I don't like it cuz it doesn't copy Facebook. *Whine* I don't like it cuz it's not original.
Can't have it both ways, just judge it on it's own merits.
No I'm not a Google apologist. I'm just a Facebook hater.
The numbers could be high, but in my opinion Chrome is the superior browser, thus has faster adoption. It's what I install on all computers I can. I rarely install Firefox unless it's on a Linux box. It's lightweight, extensible and the lowest barrier to entry (unless you count IE which has no barrier as it's pre-installed). Honestly, browse to google.com/chrome, you install it with just a few clicks. For the technically illiterate, that's a huge step forward. It may not seem like much to download and install Firefox, but it's markedly harder than Chrome. Plus Firefox only had grassroots behind it at the beginning (Chrome has a huge corporation behind it). Firefox was also plagued by memory leaks and general "heaviness" at its beginning and still, to some degree, has those problems today.
Secondly, any "savings" for this method will NOT be passed on to you, they will go to slightly greater corporate profits. You honestly still believe in such fairy tales?
Thirdly if such savings, in a fantasy world, WERE passed on to you, then you would see fresh produce for $0.98 per pound instead of $0.99 per pound. Face it, the company has passed on the cost of labor onto you, the consumer. And you think self-checkout is an advance and it makes no sense to do it otherwise!
I'm not sure where you shop, but produce is one area I DO see things like $0.98 / lb. In fact I just bought bananas last night for $0.46 / lb. Cucumbers were $0.62 / each. I would find it much more strange, at least where I shop, to find produce priced using the $x.x9 strategy.
Not that I completely disagree, but I have to say I actually have run across people who intentionally gone out of their way to have Flash installed. Guess who? Linux users. In the last 60 days, I've moved 7 people over to Ubuntu, SuSE and other varying distros, as their home, primary use PC (which has been overwhelmingly successful thus far, BTW, minimal support and headaches).
One of the things I always forget, as I disdain Flash, is to launch Firefox and ensure Flash has been installed. But as these people are using their PCs as home machines for FaceBook (aka Farmville) Flash is a necessary and deliberate installation. One thing I have not thought of: I do typically install Chromium (I personally dislike Firefox) as a browser option and allow the user to choose which to use, I'm not sure if Chromium auto-installs Flash or not...
This isn't a drilling rig, so I believe the capping point is moot, it's a refinery rig. It handles refinement of crude from a drilling platform, along a pipeline, IIRC. Shit happens, this company is being blamed for having a 'history of bad saftety practices', when in fact they only have had a few violations since 2005. Bad reporting. The violations are very routine stuff, someone fell cleaning the outside of the rig, ding, violation. It's just an inopportune time for it to happen.
I think what you fail to realize is the fact that we (the US) may have our problems, but who's to say that any other country is better. I guaran-fucking-tee that if you look into any country's past and present actions you will find thing that *someone* in this world will object to. The fact of the matter is that currently the US does a fine job of managing the *internet* (actually they don't manage the internet the simply govern the land on which the root servers sit), and if you don't like what's going on... make your government set-up your own root servers which sync to the US's root servers, and then you can filter out unsuitable content from that point. Then force all of your countries citizens to use your country's root servers.
Oh and by the way, at this point you can register chinakillspeople.com, photosofprisonerabuse.com and deadsoldiersreturnhome.com. It's just that most people in this world have the good taste not to do it.
You guys all talk about cookies as if the only thing they are used for is making advertisers more money.... The fact is cookies have a real and valuable use. They can track useful information for other kinds of applications. And most cookies (at least the ones I create in my web apps) do not contain user information, instead they contain a GUID key to a database record that contains non-personal information about that users session on the website.... The kind of stuff that is useful for the user, like what category they were last at when they added a product to their shopping cart, or what affiliate they entered our website through and various other such items. These thing make our website easier to use and pose to "privacy" issue to our users.
Just as a answer to your query.... Yes most *any* Windows based laptop can be configured to not go to standby when the lid is closed. This is a configuration feature of Windows, the BIOS or some combination of the two. On my Toshiba laptop, it's totally controlled by the Windows Power control panel applet.
Damage DreamWeaver? Isn't that software already damaged enough? I mean, look at the code it produces, reasonably healthy software should produce results like DreamWeaver.
Trust me if/when *nix/firefox/apple gains the same market share that windows/IE has, you'll start to see the same thing. No matter how hard the system developers try, the malware developers will be one step ahead, and you'll have a similar situation.
The problem isn't that Windows is so insecure (even though it is), it's simply this: If I am a malware developer, I want my malware to have the biggest possible target audience (or if I write viruses, or exploits, the same is true, otherwise I'm exerting my effort for a small effect). Right now IE/Windows is the largest possible target, so all malware developers are targeting their efforts there.
I bet that if the situation were reversed and *nix was on the top with a 90% market share, we'd see tons of viruses and malware for *nix. It's only common sense.
Is slashdot just an advertising board for Apple & Google? Why is this news? This *survey* hardly came from a random, independent sample! It seems to me that because Apple was shown in some positive light, the article became *slashdot-worthy*. I think not.
Yeah, sure there are differences between OSX and WinXP, when you really pick it apart. But basically they have the same components, perform the same functions, and even look somewhat similar. The biggest difference I see is the underlying engine OSX uses *nix, where as XP uses an NT core, but this is mostly invisible to the users.
I think you are very much mistaken! Are you telling me that state funded employees such as police officers, never use their patrol vehicle for personal transportation? If you don't think they do, you should think again. I see cops all the time doing things like this.
Would they get fired? Maybe in extreme circumstances, like if they were speeding, dealing drugs, and taking a cross country trip in their patrol vehicle. Would they get reprimanded, maybe, possibly, but there is usually a leeway for this kind of use.
In an obtuse view, yes, this is stealing, but with minor things like this, it is rarely ever escalated to the level of being terminated.
I'm not saying I think what the guy did was right, but I am saying that if he was fired soley for this reason, it's a bit over the top. Furthermore, the comments made by his previous employer were rude, and unprofessional, and that simply shows the caliber of employer. (And I personally hope he is repremanded for it.) I would never treat any employee that way, regardless of what he/she did.
Gimme a break, the first thing I have to say about this, is other companies have been doing this for years, and Tivo waits until now until to sue? It seems to me that Tivo (obviously) knew about this competitor product, and was just sitting around waiting until the competitor's product reached critical mass (with all of the promotions Dish is running, they have been distribution a very large number of these infringing DVRs). Waiting until the competition is firmly committed in their distrobution gives Tivo the largest advantage (READ: Amount of money).
In cases like this where a company waits around to sue until it will make them the most money, rather than suing to protect their property, should have their patents revoked. Patents are only around to protect inventors, not to make the inventor money (that's what the invention is for).
If we were all really non-hypocritical, and truly interested in security, and usability, and not just microsoft bashing, this is a great opportunity to help them out and point out their flaws.... NAH!!
But seriously, we all complain about MS's problems, now we've actually got a outlet to complain to. If you don't speak up now, you really have no room to speak later!
If your phone line stops working is it ok to start using your neighbors just because your cordless phones happen to be the same model and your receiver will work with his base station? If you even tried doing that you'd be in some serious hot water. I don't see why it should be any different for Internet connections.
Granted you shouldn't steal your neighbor's phone line, but if you don't protect your wirless network, I really don't think it should be considered theft. It's kinda like leaving a 300 ft Cat5 into your network on your lawn that says 'free internet'.
I would relate the open AP issue to some laws I've heard of that fine people who leave their cars running in public places, with the doors unlocked.... The reasoning? People who do this contribute to car theft. The same could be applied to leaving your network unsecured. Your causing our police time to be wasted on something that you could have prevented.
Thus, I think that unless you make an effort to protect your AP, you shouldn't have any rights to limit it's use. If you enable WEP, or something like that, you're making an effort to keep people from using it, and have ground to stand on. Otherwise someone could open up an AP, and cry wolf when someone used it, and get the 'theif' in big trouble.
It seems that the best innovations and most features, in DVD players now come from the small "cheapo" DVD player manufacturers.
I would imagine this is due to the fact that they have a smaller *perceived* market share, than the big boys (Sony, Phillips, Panasonic, RCA, etc), and they are trying to temp users from those company's share.
On a side note, this makes me wonder, how deep the penetration is for these off-brand players. Are they flooding the market, and just innovating for the hell of it, or do these features really make a difference in most consumer's minds?
I agree the article and idea definitly has merit, but Cringley offers no basic reasons to support the fact that MACs need less IT support, and thus cost less. That just doesn't make sense to me.
Now I think that he is wrong. (I appreciate his argument, and would like to hear some evidence supporting it) I believe that MACs in corporate america would actually increase support costs:
1) MACs are more expensive, regardless of what he seems to think, a MAC that costs $799.00 does cost more than a PC at $499.00. Granted that may only be $300, but over a entire network that could add up to thousands or even hundreds of thousands! That's quite a large cost difference.
2) The corporate applications (that are not web based) would require porting! This also seems like it would be very costly.
3) The learning curve of a MAC may be less sharp than a Windows based box, but really, on a properly setup network, and system, the user should be restricted to a group of programs that sits right in front of them. This really should be about as easy to use as any MAC.
4) IT Admin costs are overall more expensive, because there are less MAC techs around thus demanding a higher cost, and slower to obtain, and the employer has to work hard to keep him. It's similar to comparing an Windows Admin (who gets paid $15.00/hr), to an AS/400 admin (who gets paid $65.00/hr contracted), because the AS/400 guy has a more specialized skill, and requires more money.
Overall I think the idea is a good try, but I would like to see information to address my 4 concerns, otherwise Cringley is just running his mouth again.
Slashdot Mirror
I see what you're saying about business not needing tablet/laptop hybrids, but at least within my network: we don't buy crap laptops. The Lenovo Thinkpad we'd normally deploy for a user requiring mobility, is similarly priced to a Surface Pro (somewhere in the $700 - $1100 range). Buying the Surface gets you a great build, and a dual purpose machine, that functions as both a laptop and tablet with very little/no compromise.
Generally we don't buy cheap, because the build quality necessitates early replacement. Spending an extra few hundred dollars usually buys several years of additional useful life for the device.
The app problem is still concerning though.
You're wrong. Dead wrong. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't outweigh others experience. The Surface makes a fine business machine. Windows 8 isn't incapable of running within a business environment. Old, Luddite tech people are simply unwilling to try it. Windows 8 runs just fine, and is very similar in operation to Windows 7 within an AD domain, with GPO and all. Seen it, done it, doing it. It's working well.
Consider the ever growing culture of BYOD, it's even more plausible to use Windows 8 and the Surface in a business environment.
As someone who's actually using the Surface Pro 2 for business and who needs to be mobile, I think it serves the purpose better than a laptop or desktop.
Windows 8 may be the next Vista, but I think the perspective of most people commenting on this story is skewed. As is normal for human beings, ones existence generally alters ones perception.
I work in a large organization, developing software (primarily) and performing IT support duties (secondly). I think the paradigm shift that Win8 introduces is actually a positive thing for users like ours!
Watching 90+% of our users; they're already self-imposing all of the "restrictions" of Win8. If we "took away" multi-tasking, it'd barely be noticed at most desks. Most users here open a single program (full screened), use it, close it, and open the next, sometimes going back and forth between applications by fully exiting the prior app several times! Most users don't truly take advantage of window arrangement, tiling or cascading. Things like copy/paste and minimize are still *advanced* to them. For people who don't live and breathe computers, simple is better. Focus on a single task at hand! So the model that Win8 presents is almost easier, and certainly no more difficult than the way I see things rolling on down the road currently! In fact the full screen start menu, etc, actually brings a level of focus, that I think makes the computer easier for basic users.
Now as a developer, fuck no. I will continue using Windows 7 for a while at least. I run 3 monitors, and arrange dozens of windows to make software development easier. For it's integration, between phone tablet and PC, I will definitely use Win8 casually. I'm actually excited about the platform integration between phones, tablets, Xbox and PCs!
Thank you! As a fellow Montana resident, I agree. Sorry urban folks, who exclaim "move to cities, use mass transit", the urban lifestyle is supported by the rural lifestyle and visa-versa. Farms and ranches require space. Our economy is partly supported by the rural sprawl as well. Not to mention some of us want to live in a place that's clean, near nature and safe. Oh and the people here make less money and STILL are nicer in general. True story.
Well I'm sure Apple will be looking you up, the next time the CEO position is up for grabs...
First of all *every* company is *worried* about what's next; any smart company is worried about dominating the market segment they participate in. (Why else would they release an iPhone 4S? To capitalize on the lower-end market. Not to mention Apple is all about selling the hype. Their biggest and most important event every frickin' year is WWDC. I'd say that is Apple, showing that they are *worried* about "what's next".)
Now: in response to "They sell top spec'ed devices": Yes they can and sometimes do, but that's not their primary market. Neither the Macbook nor the Macbook Air lines are top-spec'ed. Sure you can configure them as such, but the normal machines they are selling are fairly average as far as components go. It's the chassis, the OS and other small details that set them apart and make them great PCs.
By the way, Apple is not "maintaining" 30% market share. There may be Android devices in the "low cost, pre-paid space", but that is not their primary market. The end. Period.
Next, the Galaxy Tab didn't copy the iPad any more than than the iPhone copied the LG Prada. All of this bickering between Samsung and Apple misses the basic point: it doesn't help the consumer, and that's what it's truly all about. Apple doesn't need lawyers to sell it's products, they sell themselves for the most part. All of this legal crap is just crass, it tarnishes their name and shows they're worried. If you believe otherwise, considering the evidence to the contrary, you're just a shill.
As for the legal stability of Android, I'd say Google has it under control. Google's primary point in picking up the HUGE patent portfolio in the past months was primarily to defend itself, Android and it's OEMs from attack. Currently the only credible threat to Android is Oracle, and that mess is just a licensing deal away from being settled anyhow.
In short: you sir, are a fanboi. I am not. I just wanted to clarify that for you and anyone else who cares to read this.
Disclosure: I own multiple Apple products and multiple Google products. As a matter of fact: I own a lot of products, produced by a lot of companies and I like them all.
Your'e funny and simply indoctrinated by Facebook. Changing your profile pic is easy, if you don't follow the Facebook model. It's under Settings > Profile! Whoa hard, right? I think if you use a computer in general, G+ is not only easier on this front, it's *STANDARD*. Jeezus.
Second, I'm not sure that you can post on other peoples walls. Is that bad? I'm not sure. It's just the way it is there. You can't advertise your crap agenda within other people's spaces. I kinda like that.
Third, yes it absolutely does tell you who your posts are shared with. Every damn post, from you and every one else, has an indicator on the top line of the post. All mine usually say limited. Click it, it'll tell you EXACTLY who it's shared with.
Just cuz you can't do it, and aren't willing to *explore* doesn't make it bad.
*Whine* I don't like it cuz it doesn't copy Facebook.
*Whine* I don't like it cuz it's not original.
Can't have it both ways, just judge it on it's own merits.
No I'm not a Google apologist. I'm just a Facebook hater.
The numbers could be high, but in my opinion Chrome is the superior browser, thus has faster adoption. It's what I install on all computers I can. I rarely install Firefox unless it's on a Linux box. It's lightweight, extensible and the lowest barrier to entry (unless you count IE which has no barrier as it's pre-installed). Honestly, browse to google.com/chrome, you install it with just a few clicks. For the technically illiterate, that's a huge step forward. It may not seem like much to download and install Firefox, but it's markedly harder than Chrome. Plus Firefox only had grassroots behind it at the beginning (Chrome has a huge corporation behind it). Firefox was also plagued by memory leaks and general "heaviness" at its beginning and still, to some degree, has those problems today.
FEWER staff, not less.
Secondly, any "savings" for this method will NOT be passed on to you, they will go to slightly greater corporate profits. You honestly still believe in such fairy tales?
Thirdly if such savings, in a fantasy world, WERE passed on to you, then you would see fresh produce for $0.98 per pound instead of $0.99 per pound. Face it, the company has passed on the cost of labor onto you, the consumer. And you think self-checkout is an advance and it makes no sense to do it otherwise!
I'm not sure where you shop, but produce is one area I DO see things like $0.98 / lb. In fact I just bought bananas last night for $0.46 / lb. Cucumbers were $0.62 / each. I would find it much more strange, at least where I shop, to find produce priced using the $x.x9 strategy.
Not that I completely disagree, but I have to say I actually have run across people who intentionally gone out of their way to have Flash installed. Guess who? Linux users. In the last 60 days, I've moved 7 people over to Ubuntu, SuSE and other varying distros, as their home, primary use PC (which has been overwhelmingly successful thus far, BTW, minimal support and headaches).
One of the things I always forget, as I disdain Flash, is to launch Firefox and ensure Flash has been installed. But as these people are using their PCs as home machines for FaceBook (aka Farmville) Flash is a necessary and deliberate installation. One thing I have not thought of: I do typically install Chromium (I personally dislike Firefox) as a browser option and allow the user to choose which to use, I'm not sure if Chromium auto-installs Flash or not...
This isn't a drilling rig, so I believe the capping point is moot, it's a refinery rig. It handles refinement of crude from a drilling platform, along a pipeline, IIRC. Shit happens, this company is being blamed for having a 'history of bad saftety practices', when in fact they only have had a few violations since 2005. Bad reporting. The violations are very routine stuff, someone fell cleaning the outside of the rig, ding, violation. It's just an inopportune time for it to happen.
First step: get this put in for "DWI convicted" people.
Second step: get them made mandatory in all cars.
First step: jail convicted criminals.
Second step: jail everyone!
Hm, something's amiss...
... profit?
I think what you fail to realize is the fact that we (the US) may have our problems, but who's to say that any other country is better. I guaran-fucking-tee that if you look into any country's past and present actions you will find thing that *someone* in this world will object to. The fact of the matter is that currently the US does a fine job of managing the *internet* (actually they don't manage the internet the simply govern the land on which the root servers sit), and if you don't like what's going on... make your government set-up your own root servers which sync to the US's root servers, and then you can filter out unsuitable content from that point. Then force all of your countries citizens to use your country's root servers.
Oh and by the way, at this point you can register chinakillspeople.com, photosofprisonerabuse.com and deadsoldiersreturnhome.com. It's just that most people in this world have the good taste not to do it.
You guys all talk about cookies as if the only thing they are used for is making advertisers more money.... The fact is cookies have a real and valuable use. They can track useful information for other kinds of applications. And most cookies (at least the ones I create in my web apps) do not contain user information, instead they contain a GUID key to a database record that contains non-personal information about that users session on the website.... The kind of stuff that is useful for the user, like what category they were last at when they added a product to their shopping cart, or what affiliate they entered our website through and various other such items. These thing make our website easier to use and pose to "privacy" issue to our users.
Just as a answer to your query.... Yes most *any* Windows based laptop can be configured to not go to standby when the lid is closed. This is a configuration feature of Windows, the BIOS or some combination of the two. On my Toshiba laptop, it's totally controlled by the Windows Power control panel applet.
Damage DreamWeaver? Isn't that software already damaged enough? I mean, look at the code it produces, reasonably healthy software should produce results like DreamWeaver.
Trust me if/when *nix/firefox/apple gains the same market share that windows/IE has, you'll start to see the same thing. No matter how hard the system developers try, the malware developers will be one step ahead, and you'll have a similar situation.
The problem isn't that Windows is so insecure (even though it is), it's simply this: If I am a malware developer, I want my malware to have the biggest possible target audience (or if I write viruses, or exploits, the same is true, otherwise I'm exerting my effort for a small effect). Right now IE/Windows is the largest possible target, so all malware developers are targeting their efforts there.
I bet that if the situation were reversed and *nix was on the top with a 90% market share, we'd see tons of viruses and malware for *nix. It's only common sense.
But that's just the way I see things....
Is slashdot just an advertising board for Apple & Google? Why is this news? This *survey* hardly came from a random, independent sample! It seems to me that because Apple was shown in some positive light, the article became *slashdot-worthy*. I think not.
Yeah, sure there are differences between OSX and WinXP, when you really pick it apart. But basically they have the same components, perform the same functions, and even look somewhat similar. The biggest difference I see is the underlying engine OSX uses *nix, where as XP uses an NT core, but this is mostly invisible to the users.
I think you are very much mistaken! Are you telling me that state funded employees such as police officers, never use their patrol vehicle for personal transportation? If you don't think they do, you should think again. I see cops all the time doing things like this.
Would they get fired? Maybe in extreme circumstances, like if they were speeding, dealing drugs, and taking a cross country trip in their patrol vehicle. Would they get reprimanded, maybe, possibly, but there is usually a leeway for this kind of use.
In an obtuse view, yes, this is stealing, but with minor things like this, it is rarely ever escalated to the level of being terminated.
I'm not saying I think what the guy did was right, but I am saying that if he was fired soley for this reason, it's a bit over the top. Furthermore, the comments made by his previous employer were rude, and unprofessional, and that simply shows the caliber of employer. (And I personally hope he is repremanded for it.) I would never treat any employee that way, regardless of what he/she did.
Actually lighter roasts are more acidic than dark roasts.
Gimme a break, the first thing I have to say about this, is other companies have been doing this for years, and Tivo waits until now until to sue? It seems to me that Tivo (obviously) knew about this competitor product, and was just sitting around waiting until the competitor's product reached critical mass (with all of the promotions Dish is running, they have been distribution a very large number of these infringing DVRs). Waiting until the competition is firmly committed in their distrobution gives Tivo the largest advantage (READ: Amount of money).
In cases like this where a company waits around to sue until it will make them the most money, rather than suing to protect their property, should have their patents revoked. Patents are only around to protect inventors, not to make the inventor money (that's what the invention is for).
If we were all really non-hypocritical, and truly interested in security, and usability, and not just microsoft bashing, this is a great opportunity to help them out and point out their flaws.... NAH!!
But seriously, we all complain about MS's problems, now we've actually got a outlet to complain to. If you don't speak up now, you really have no room to speak later!
Granted you shouldn't steal your neighbor's phone line, but if you don't protect your wirless network, I really don't think it should be considered theft. It's kinda like leaving a 300 ft Cat5 into your network on your lawn that says 'free internet'.
I would relate the open AP issue to some laws I've heard of that fine people who leave their cars running in public places, with the doors unlocked.... The reasoning? People who do this contribute to car theft. The same could be applied to leaving your network unsecured. Your causing our police time to be wasted on something that you could have prevented.
Thus, I think that unless you make an effort to protect your AP, you shouldn't have any rights to limit it's use. If you enable WEP, or something like that, you're making an effort to keep people from using it, and have ground to stand on. Otherwise someone could open up an AP, and cry wolf when someone used it, and get the 'theif' in big trouble.
It seems that the best innovations and most features, in DVD players now come from the small
"cheapo" DVD player manufacturers.
I would imagine this is due to the fact that they have a smaller *perceived* market share, than the big boys (Sony, Phillips, Panasonic, RCA, etc), and they are trying to temp users from those company's share.
On a side note, this makes me wonder, how deep the penetration is for these off-brand players. Are they flooding the market, and just innovating for the hell of it, or do these features really make a difference in most consumer's minds?
I agree the article and idea definitly has merit, but Cringley offers no basic reasons to support the fact that MACs need less IT support, and thus cost less. That just doesn't make sense to me.
Now I think that he is wrong. (I appreciate his argument, and would like to hear some evidence supporting it) I believe that MACs in corporate america would actually increase support costs:
1) MACs are more expensive, regardless of what he seems to think, a MAC that costs $799.00 does cost more than a PC at $499.00. Granted that may only be $300, but over a entire network that could add up to thousands or even hundreds of thousands! That's quite a large cost difference.
2) The corporate applications (that are not web based) would require porting! This also seems like it would be very costly.3) The learning curve of a MAC may be less sharp than a Windows based box, but really, on a properly setup network, and system, the user should be restricted to a group of programs that sits right in front of them. This really should be about as easy to use as any MAC.
4) IT Admin costs are overall more expensive, because there are less MAC techs around thus demanding a higher cost, and slower to obtain, and the employer has to work hard to keep him. It's similar to comparing an Windows Admin (who gets paid $15.00/hr), to an AS/400 admin (who gets paid $65.00/hr contracted), because the AS/400 guy has a more specialized skill, and requires more money.
Overall I think the idea is a good try, but I would like to see information to address my 4 concerns, otherwise Cringley is just running his mouth again.