Presumption of innocence is before the law. Would you like the IRS to take you to court and have you pay legal fees too? You are presumed innocent as the system processes everyone. It then finds something that's suspicious, and then the IRS examines it more closely. If they decide to ask for an explination, that is well within their rights. And it is well within your rights to not give them one. And then it is well within their rights to audit you and take you to court, where you are then innocent before the law.
How is it unconstitutional? The government is using PUBLIC data to verify that you are paying your taxes the way you should. Show me what part of the constitution it violates?
Well, the were terrorists and criminals. The only reason we like them is because we're better off for it. If they had lost, we'd be hearing about how evil they were while we had afternoon tea
Some of us recall that Sadam broke the conditions of the Cease Fire which ended the last gulf war, and recall that if a cease fire is broken, hostilities are resumed.
Was it done by the Congress as demanded by the Constitution?
Yes. Or in as much as this war could have been approved by congress. Let me clue you in on a working of the government. All money and spending HAS to be approved by congress. They approved the funds and the usage of troops in Iraq.
Hmm, see I've had just the opposite experience. Once you teache someone how to click (and not hold the button down) it's then just a matter of telling them to click twice to open something. And usualy they do it fine. But try telling someone new "click on document X" and they almost invariably ask "which button"
We still have the option to demand the removal of a public official from office. While california isn't the shining example of polotics, they did show that if you get enough people pissed off, they can change leaders mis stride.
What this means is that we need to start holding politicians to standards. Get elected on the ticket of reducing spending? Do it or you're gone.
Doubtful. The problem our founding fathers had was not the taxation, but the fact that they had no say in said taxation. You do. You get to vote for your legislators. The fact that you keep voting legislators that just raise taxes is your own fault isn't it?
And that's an overly roundabout way to do things, and bad design. Too many steps to do what should be a simple process. And it's because windows is designed with the idea that a user has and uses 2 buttons, where as the mac OS is designed assuming the absolute minimum of one button, with support for more.
Really? I'd say it bodes rather well. With OS X, I can run almost any *NIX app, any OS X app, and almost any OS 9 app within the native environment. If this does not meet my needs, I then have the option of installing a proven and powerful emulator which is now currently being developed by the very people who have access to the windows source. All of this on one machine.
I'm not putting down linux (hell I use it daily) but let's face the facts here, no one is or ever will run a multi million dollar linux campaign.
Re:I wouldn't mind Apple if it wasn't for ...
on
Steve Jobs' Grand Vision
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
1) Woz was a genius yes, but Woz was the Apple. Steve and his team was the Mac.
2) And yet for all of that, no one did anything like it until Apple did it.
3) No matter where you go, there will be fan boys
4) It's not that the single button itself is better, it's the philosophy that you should be able to do everything with a single mouse button. Just for fun, try to create a new folder on your desktop of your windows machine with only the left click.
That and when you really think about it. If you're hard set in teh 2 button ways, you already own a 2 button mouse, so just plug it into your mac and be done with it.
It seems to me that Apple is greatly expanding. The X Serves are actualy selling fairly well (and those can't all be going to schools) and many of the markets that started to drop Apple have started moving back, for example, 2 years ago, my highschool decided it was going all Dell. They had given us a great deal and they were cheap computers, so we started pulling machines for Dells. Now the school is probably about 90% Dell, and we're rapidly back pedling and trying to get new macs. The teachers want them because they were less of a hassle, the sys admins want them because the dell rackmounts have been nightmares (and they want something that will play nice with the linux boxes and the old macs that are still being used) and the repair techs want them so that they can sit down for longer than 5 minutes at a time. Similarly my college was considering a year ago to standardize all computers across the campus as x86 windows machines. Just 2 weeks ago, the IT department sent out a campus wide email to all staff that the school had just negotiated a bulk order from apple, and anyone who wanted a machine should order now. To top it off, they just recently opened a mac tech position to support the influx of new macs into the campus.
I realize these are anecedotes, but going on what I've seen, I think Apple is slowly creeping back.
IF is the operative word there. Linux doesn't. And it won't. There is no company with such a huge stake invested in Linux that they are going to invest millions of dollars in making an ad campaign for the product. Granted, IBM ran some linux commercials, but don't you see where the flaw is. It was an IBM commercial, and the IBM brand, that's really what was advertised.
I did not say the clones didn't sell, I said the ports didn't sell. The comment was in regards to clones having ports that current apple machines do not (serial and printer). There were clones, they didn't have the ports because people didn't want them.
Every one of the numerous examples of "software for PC but not Mac" is met with either "users don't want to do that" excuses or "oh, but we must not count games, business applications, or home user programs"
No, I clearly met this challenge with both an alternative piece of software and an alternative work arround.
Please read all of what I write before responding. I don't waste words writing unimportant statements.
aren't we talking about TCO here? Seems like an invalid argument for this. Or do you mean cost less initialy.
run a lot faster
Because farmer joe really needs those extra 3 Ghz out of his computer. Let's stick to the same set of apps here. No farm management software is going to use even close to half of a modern day processor.
likely will have standard hardware interfaces missing on most Macs
Like...... USB? Nope got that. Firewire? Nope got that too. PCI? Got that too. IDE? got that. Standard RAM? got that. AGP? got that. Ethernet? Got that. 802.11? got that. A modem? Got that.
you won't have the kludge of running an emulator to get it to be useful.
The computer is perfectly useful, it's the user who is stuck on using a certain App, and it's perfectly useable under VPC.
And there's nothing preventing said mac owner from picking up a copy of VPC if they're really stuck on using farmworks. But just glancing over that site, it appears most of that functionality can be duplicated by using a standard business management package.
Actualy, I highly doubt MS has been. Because those 1000 developers are being wasted. They could be bringing windows futher ahead of the competition (note I'm speaking from MS viewpoint, not from a standard view) but instead you have them trying to poke holes in the current version of the competition.
There's an old saying about advertisements that the leader in any field will never mention it's competition in advertising. So would it be with MS, they have the lead for now, so most of their efforts are going to go to keeping that lead, not bringing the other guy down.
The numbers game could simply be a matter of windows zealots being of a lower magnitude (those actualy capable of finding these exploits I mean) or also because perhaps they have other things to do with their time than run throught elinux code (like keeping windows from dying on them). I'm not defending MS here, but the grandparent does make a point about a lot of this speed probably has something to do with certian linux fan boys spending the last week or so going through this code and trying their damndest to make an exploit.
IIRC early Apple computers actualy had a memory location called "MonkeyLives" or something like that, which was used for a program they called the monkey. The monkey program randomly entered commands and clicks and such for as long as the program was running. The problem was, sometimes it would shutdown the computer (by executing a shutdown, not by crashing it) so they created a memory location that when shutdown was called, it first checked that location to see if the monkey program was running, and would cancel the shutdown if it was.
Slashdot Mirror
Presumption of innocence is before the law. Would you like the IRS to take you to court and have you pay legal fees too? You are presumed innocent as the system processes everyone. It then finds something that's suspicious, and then the IRS examines it more closely. If they decide to ask for an explination, that is well within their rights. And it is well within your rights to not give them one. And then it is well within their rights to audit you and take you to court, where you are then innocent before the law.
How is it unconstitutional? The government is using PUBLIC data to verify that you are paying your taxes the way you should. Show me what part of the constitution it violates?
Well, the were terrorists and criminals. The only reason we like them is because we're better off for it. If they had lost, we'd be hearing about how evil they were while we had afternoon tea
Some of us people other than bush declaring WMDs in Iraq . Some of us recall this was used to justify a 3 day wasteful bombing of Iraq back in 1998.
Some of us recall that Sadam broke the conditions of the Cease Fire which ended the last gulf war, and recall that if a cease fire is broken, hostilities are resumed.
Was it done by the Congress as demanded by the Constitution?
Yes. Or in as much as this war could have been approved by congress. Let me clue you in on a working of the government. All money and spending HAS to be approved by congress. They approved the funds and the usage of troops in Iraq.
Well consider this your one time:
Bush was not AWOL
Hmm, see I've had just the opposite experience. Once you teache someone how to click (and not hold the button down) it's then just a matter of telling them to click twice to open something. And usualy they do it fine. But try telling someone new "click on document X" and they almost invariably ask "which button"
We still have the option to demand the removal of a public official from office. While california isn't the shining example of polotics, they did show that if you get enough people pissed off, they can change leaders mis stride.
What this means is that we need to start holding politicians to standards. Get elected on the ticket of reducing spending? Do it or you're gone.
Doubtful. The problem our founding fathers had was not the taxation, but the fact that they had no say in said taxation. You do. You get to vote for your legislators. The fact that you keep voting legislators that just raise taxes is your own fault isn't it?
And that's an overly roundabout way to do things, and bad design. Too many steps to do what should be a simple process. And it's because windows is designed with the idea that a user has and uses 2 buttons, where as the mac OS is designed assuming the absolute minimum of one button, with support for more.
Really? I'd say it bodes rather well. With OS X, I can run almost any *NIX app, any OS X app, and almost any OS 9 app within the native environment. If this does not meet my needs, I then have the option of installing a proven and powerful emulator which is now currently being developed by the very people who have access to the windows source. All of this on one machine.
I'm not putting down linux (hell I use it daily) but let's face the facts here, no one is or ever will run a multi million dollar linux campaign.
1) Woz was a genius yes, but Woz was the Apple. Steve and his team was the Mac.
2) And yet for all of that, no one did anything like it until Apple did it.
3) No matter where you go, there will be fan boys
4) It's not that the single button itself is better, it's the philosophy that you should be able to do everything with a single mouse button. Just for fun, try to create a new folder on your desktop of your windows machine with only the left click.
That and when you really think about it. If you're hard set in teh 2 button ways, you already own a 2 button mouse, so just plug it into your mac and be done with it.
It seems to me that Apple is greatly expanding. The X Serves are actualy selling fairly well (and those can't all be going to schools) and many of the markets that started to drop Apple have started moving back, for example, 2 years ago, my highschool decided it was going all Dell. They had given us a great deal and they were cheap computers, so we started pulling machines for Dells. Now the school is probably about 90% Dell, and we're rapidly back pedling and trying to get new macs. The teachers want them because they were less of a hassle, the sys admins want them because the dell rackmounts have been nightmares (and they want something that will play nice with the linux boxes and the old macs that are still being used) and the repair techs want them so that they can sit down for longer than 5 minutes at a time. Similarly my college was considering a year ago to standardize all computers across the campus as x86 windows machines. Just 2 weeks ago, the IT department sent out a campus wide email to all staff that the school had just negotiated a bulk order from apple, and anyone who wanted a machine should order now. To top it off, they just recently opened a mac tech position to support the influx of new macs into the campus.
I realize these are anecedotes, but going on what I've seen, I think Apple is slowly creeping back.
Yeah, I have a really sinking feeling that Lilo and Stitch was the last good disney film we will see for ages
IF is the operative word there. Linux doesn't. And it won't. There is no company with such a huge stake invested in Linux that they are going to invest millions of dollars in making an ad campaign for the product. Granted, IBM ran some linux commercials, but don't you see where the flaw is. It was an IBM commercial, and the IBM brand, that's really what was advertised.
I did not say the clones didn't sell, I said the ports didn't sell. The comment was in regards to clones having ports that current apple machines do not (serial and printer). There were clones, they didn't have the ports because people didn't want them.
Every one of the numerous examples of "software for PC but not Mac" is met with either "users don't want to do that" excuses or "oh, but we must not count games, business applications, or home user programs"
No, I clearly met this challenge with both an alternative piece of software and an alternative work arround.
Please read all of what I write before responding. I don't waste words writing unimportant statements.
You can be sure that if there were Mac clones being sold (non-Apple), they'd have these ports because the users want them.
Clones were sold. They didn't have them. Customers didn't want them.
No, it hardly runs any software unless you run an emulator. That shows a problem.
We have ONE example so far of software that it will not run without the emulator. I don't call that "hardly running any software"
cost a lot less
aren't we talking about TCO here? Seems like an invalid argument for this. Or do you mean cost less initialy.
run a lot faster
Because farmer joe really needs those extra 3 Ghz out of his computer. Let's stick to the same set of apps here. No farm management software is going to use even close to half of a modern day processor.
likely will have standard hardware interfaces missing on most Macs
Like...... USB? Nope got that. Firewire? Nope got that too. PCI? Got that too. IDE? got that. Standard RAM? got that. AGP? got that. Ethernet? Got that. 802.11? got that. A modem? Got that.
you won't have the kludge of running an emulator to get it to be useful.
The computer is perfectly useful, it's the user who is stuck on using a certain App, and it's perfectly useable under VPC.
Not to nitpick, but it's still a memory location:
We kept our system flags in an area of very low memory reserved for the system globals,
Well a quick google seach turns up:
y /d efault.html
http://software.powertekgroup.com/power_agronom
And there's nothing preventing said mac owner from picking up a copy of VPC if they're really stuck on using farmworks. But just glancing over that site, it appears most of that functionality can be duplicated by using a standard business management package.
Actualy, I highly doubt MS has been. Because those 1000 developers are being wasted. They could be bringing windows futher ahead of the competition (note I'm speaking from MS viewpoint, not from a standard view) but instead you have them trying to poke holes in the current version of the competition.
There's an old saying about advertisements that the leader in any field will never mention it's competition in advertising. So would it be with MS, they have the lead for now, so most of their efforts are going to go to keeping that lead, not bringing the other guy down.
No, there is not a lot of software in the Mac world
Prove it.
The numbers game could simply be a matter of windows zealots being of a lower magnitude (those actualy capable of finding these exploits I mean) or also because perhaps they have other things to do with their time than run throught elinux code (like keeping windows from dying on them). I'm not defending MS here, but the grandparent does make a point about a lot of this speed probably has something to do with certian linux fan boys spending the last week or so going through this code and trying their damndest to make an exploit.
IIRC early Apple computers actualy had a memory location called "MonkeyLives" or something like that, which was used for a program they called the monkey. The monkey program randomly entered commands and clicks and such for as long as the program was running. The problem was, sometimes it would shutdown the computer (by executing a shutdown, not by crashing it) so they created a memory location that when shutdown was called, it first checked that location to see if the monkey program was running, and would cancel the shutdown if it was.