"If these crops get in, then farmers basically lose their rights to their own agricultural resources," said Carole Collins, senior policy analyst for the Washington-based Africa Faith and Justice Network.
Uh, did Ms. Carole Collins miss the part where the insane leader decided to take all the land from the people who actualy knew what to do with it?
First of all, older versions of DiVX were hard to aquire and install. If you're a geek who wants to watch pirated moves, it's OK. But I wouldn't put up web content in it. I wouldn't think your average luser would know where to find it
The fact that DiVX has gone propritary and even includes spyware (well, the last time I checked) dosn't help either. If you tell someone to 'download divx' they might just end up with that.
Re:So just use something everyone has...
on
Switch Different
·
· Score: 2
QuickTime is not proprietary crap, it's actually very good for things such as movie trailers. Plus, it's both PC and Mac. Some of us artist types think that's important.
I know it's often used for movie trailers, much to my annoyance. But why exactly is it "quite good"? Because apple will provide free hosting? MPEG or MPEG4 would work just as well IMO.
Look I don't care about what makes a video easy to 'make' I want something that will be easy to view on any computer. And the best bet for that right now is MPEG(no, the res is not capped).
DivX is nice, but you can't really call it non-proprietary these days. The last release actualy included spyware...
Well, obviously the ads are designed to say that Macs are better. I mean, all of those people said their lives improved soo much going to the Mac. It's more intuitive, it's more UNIXy, it's less crash prone, etc.
That last point really irks me, because until OSX, Mac OS was one of the least stable OSs out there.
It was a question designed to expose stupidity
on
Switch Different
·
· Score: 2
The person I was replying to said that someone didn't "Want enough" when they said their PC did everything they wanted. Now, don't you think it's fair to actually ask them what the hell they mean? What is it the PC user isn't wanting? What is it they can't do on a Mac.
You just replied with an idiotic statement that has no bearing in reality.
To bad apple didn't give me the choice a few years ago. Yes, they are better now but burned bridges are still burnned, and MPEG is still easier to deal with.
Well, I just tried that out and all I can say is that if it only takes a 3rd of a second to search a 30 gig hard drive my computer must be pretty god damn fast!
Anyway, I asked what you could do not what you could do slightly faster on a mac that you couldn't on a PC.
Maybe there are a lot of switch ads because people find them annoying and stupid?
An article [yahoo.com] on Yahoo News today about Northgate's new "challenge" to Apple with their all-in-one computer/home multimedia machine [northgate.com] (Personally, I think it looks sort of a combo iMac/eMac... an eiMac) was the latest example to my mind.
Well of course you do. But to me, it just looks like any other 'all in one' PC. There's no rounded bulb like the old school imac/emac, there's no swivel stand like the new imacs. There are lots of
MP3 players externally were the size of walkmen (and internally not much better then zip disks), connected via USB (if you were lucky) and were incredibly kludge. Out comes the iPod; everyone is racing to remake/top them.
That's not true either. There were, and still are, a lot of mp3 players that were a lot smaller then the iPod, True all of the 'hard drive' mp3 players around were big and clunky, but not all mp3 players.
Yeh, the iPod has a nice design, but it's hardly the end-all, be-all that Mac zealots seem to think it is. A nice refinement, but hardly revolutionary
(For every "too damn expensive, one button mouse" geek dismisser, I wonder how many are willing to admit that they drool at night at the thought of owning a TI Powerbook, and wish they could have back all the months it took them to try and configure their window manager to approach the functionality of Aqua out of the box).
No, my Sony Vaio SR is good enough for me, and smaller and lighter then an ibook with all the video editing capabilities (Firewire and all). And yes, it has more then two buttons.
It works for me pretty well right now, but I've had trouble with it in the past. Like when it ate the mime association for PNG and BMP files. If I tried to go to a.png URI it would load the whole thing scaled to the size of the window and I couldn't save. PNGs in pages used IE's internal renderer and didn't have a problem
Then there was the time when closing a QuickTime subwindow would kill IE and close every browser window I had open... Got to a page with a QuickTime move, go back or close the window, loose all the surf sessions. It was annoying as fuck.
And lots of other times it just didn't work. Id rather just not deal with it. What's wrong with MPEG? I'd rather have a 10% larger file or whatever then deal with all this crap
Dude, 5 minutes of hair, makeup, and wardrobe would have made these people presentable. It wouldn't have hurt if they practiced their little bits and actualy had something funny to say.
Compared to some of the other ones posted in this thread, the O'Riley switch parodies really suck. You guys really need to learn how to adjust the audio and gamma...
Using people who are not hideously ugly might help. Btw, was that chick pregnant or just fat?
So just use something everyone has...
on
Switch Different
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
Like MPEG.
It might not be the 'best for the project', but it will work for the most people. Quicktime is proprietary crap, and the player on windows sucks. Real is proprietary crap all around. And MS is proprietary (although the windows player is ok). If you use MPEG, everyone is happy.
Slashdot Mirror
Gravity is a force, it's not mesured seperately like 'pressue' or 'length'.
Do you even know what that word means?
No one stores dates in 'ascii' format anymore. They are usualy stored as integer numbers representing a number of seconds after an offset.
"If these crops get in, then farmers basically lose their rights to their own agricultural resources," said Carole Collins, senior policy analyst for the Washington-based Africa Faith and Justice Network.
Uh, did Ms. Carole Collins miss the part where the insane leader decided to take all the land from the people who actualy knew what to do with it?
No one reads user friendly, it sucks.
First of all, older versions of DiVX were hard to aquire and install. If you're a geek who wants to watch pirated moves, it's OK. But I wouldn't put up web content in it. I wouldn't think your average luser would know where to find it
The fact that DiVX has gone propritary and even includes spyware (well, the last time I checked) dosn't help either. If you tell someone to 'download divx' they might just end up with that.
QuickTime is not proprietary crap, it's actually very good for things such as movie trailers. Plus, it's both PC and Mac. Some of us artist types think that's important.
I know it's often used for movie trailers, much to my annoyance. But why exactly is it "quite good"? Because apple will provide free hosting? MPEG or MPEG4 would work just as well IMO.
Look I don't care about what makes a video easy to 'make' I want something that will be easy to view on any computer. And the best bet for that right now is MPEG(no, the res is not capped).
DivX is nice, but you can't really call it non-proprietary these days. The last release actualy included spyware...
Well, obviously the ads are designed to say that Macs are better. I mean, all of those people said their lives improved soo much going to the Mac. It's more intuitive, it's more UNIXy, it's less crash prone, etc.
That last point really irks me, because until OSX, Mac OS was one of the least stable OSs out there.
The person I was replying to said that someone didn't "Want enough" when they said their PC did everything they wanted. Now, don't you think it's fair to actually ask them what the hell they mean? What is it the PC user isn't wanting? What is it they can't do on a Mac.
You just replied with an idiotic statement that has no bearing in reality.
Emacs : Vi :: Unix : XP. Not the other way around.
Also, change your sig. April 27th is long gone...
To bad apple didn't give me the choice a few years ago. Yes, they are better now but burned bridges are still burnned, and MPEG is still easier to deal with.
some mod that up.
"I couldn't find the any key and e-machines told me to go fuck myself"
Brilliant.
Well, I just tried that out and all I can say is that if it only takes a 3rd of a second to search a 30 gig hard drive my computer must be pretty god damn fast!
Anyway, I asked what you could do not what you could do slightly faster on a mac that you couldn't on a PC.
Maybe there are a lot of switch ads because people find them annoying and stupid?
... an eiMac) was the latest example to my mind.
An article [yahoo.com] on Yahoo News today about Northgate's new "challenge" to Apple with their all-in-one computer/home multimedia machine [northgate.com] (Personally, I think it looks sort of a combo iMac/eMac
Well of course you do. But to me, it just looks like any other 'all in one' PC. There's no rounded bulb like the old school imac/emac, there's no swivel stand like the new imacs. There are lots of
MP3 players externally were the size of walkmen (and internally not much better then zip disks), connected via USB (if you were lucky) and were incredibly kludge. Out comes the iPod; everyone is racing to remake/top them.
That's not true either. There were, and still are, a lot of mp3 players that were a lot smaller then the iPod, True all of the 'hard drive' mp3 players around were big and clunky, but not all mp3 players.
Yeh, the iPod has a nice design, but it's hardly the end-all, be-all that Mac zealots seem to think it is. A nice refinement, but hardly revolutionary
(For every "too damn expensive, one button mouse" geek dismisser, I wonder how many are willing to admit that they drool at night at the thought of owning a TI Powerbook, and wish they could have back all the months it took them to try and configure their window manager to approach the functionality of Aqua out of the box).
No, my Sony Vaio SR is good enough for me, and smaller and lighter then an ibook with all the video editing capabilities (Firewire and all). And yes, it has more then two buttons.
It works for me pretty well right now, but I've had trouble with it in the past. Like when it ate the mime association for PNG and BMP files. If I tried to go to a .png URI it would load the whole thing scaled to the size of the window and I couldn't save. PNGs in pages used IE's internal renderer and didn't have a problem
Then there was the time when closing a QuickTime subwindow would kill IE and close every browser window I had open... Got to a page with a QuickTime move, go back or close the window, loose all the surf sessions. It was annoying as fuck.
And lots of other times it just didn't work. Id rather just not deal with it. What's wrong with MPEG? I'd rather have a 10% larger file or whatever then deal with all this crap
Dude, 5 minutes of hair, makeup, and wardrobe would have made these people presentable. It wouldn't have hurt if they practiced their little bits and actualy had something funny to say.
Yeh, okay...
What exactly can you do with a mac that you can't do with a PC? Act all elitest?
Compared to some of the other ones posted in this thread, the O'Riley switch parodies really suck. You guys really need to learn how to adjust the audio and gamma...
Using people who are not hideously ugly might help. Btw, was that chick pregnant or just fat?
That Ani Moller has a sexy accent.
Like MPEG.
It might not be the 'best for the project', but it will work for the most people. Quicktime is proprietary crap, and the player on windows sucks. Real is proprietary crap all around. And MS is proprietary (although the windows player is ok). If you use MPEG, everyone is happy.
When we have this
Well, that guy obviously was less then 50, so he could not have gotten above. My old acount still has like more then 100. Or it did, anyway.
Never mind, I apparently misread the original posters post.
I point out the correct information, but I'm the dumbass?
Well, no one had said anything incorrect, so if you were 'correcting' him, yes it would make you a dumbass.
Then I suppose under more extreme circumstances 2% would be reachable, right?
Yeh, I suppose But I don't think I would ever want to see those 'extreme' circumstances. Inflation would be insane.