These complaints are for the most part in direct response to all the "Linux is the only way" people's continual chant of
"Why use Photoshop? GIMP is just as good. Prorietary programs suck. Blah blah blah."
If you don't like the critisicm, don't go pushing your products on people.
A) There are consumers. They don't care about open source. They want something that works.
B) Many many many Linux people go on and on trying to convince people of type A to use open source. Type B people also tend to go on and on about how open source is 'as good' or 'better' than all proprietary programs.
Result) People of type A finally listen to all the nagging, go try some open source app that isn't up to it's proprietary counterpart, then go "GIMP sucks, I'd rather pay for Photoshop than use GIMP for free".
So you see, these complaints are largely due to the community pushing things on people of type A before they are ready.
A small portion of the people may also complain becasue they see a program with many usefull functions being completely ruined by a bad interface. They are frusterated that the developers will not listen to their opinions.
Sure, maybe they have no right, but isn't one of the great things about open source supposed to be feedback from "many eye's"?
Well, as someone who uses both linux and os/x on a daily basis to me running X11 apps on os/x is far slower than running them "pure" under linux. I realize that os/x is unix, but it's my impression (and that of another reply) that the X11 display gets translated through os/x's display layer first. Running X11 apps feels far slower to me anyway.
This I can understand. It's not so much emulation, as OS X's implementation of X11 it seems.
I can't say I disagree with you, though if you're used to the gimp it's not horrible. However, I was more referring to the fact that people who are used to os/x are used to having their menu bar along the top and nowhere else, which is a foreign concept to linux/windows users. Therefor, the menu system that the gimp uses will be double bad (1x for the fact it's far from optimal, 2x because he's not used to menus anywhere but the top menu bar).
Yes, this is a big problem with any portable app. I wounld't complain about differences such as mac style versus windows style versus linux style. My beef is that the GIMP interface is simply unbearable no matter what system I use it on. I use Dia quite a bit, which takes the separate tool window and right click menu idea from GIMP. Your right, I can use it. But it still endlessly annoys me and every time I lose the tool window (which is quite often) I end up cursing at the annoying interface. I still can't get used to the right click menu to do everything either. It's just not the way ANY other type of app works.
I believe there have been many arguments on the GIMP developers list over somehow grouping the controls a la MDI. It doesn't even HAVE to be MDI, just group the damn controls like one.
No go.
Someone even made some hack that puts the controls and image into the single window, but it was for a specific version, and of course did nothing to move those right click menus into normal menus. People have tried, but the developers LIKE the current interface.
First of all, running under X11 makes it slower than running natively under linux.
Umm, you do know that Linux uses X11 too right? I guess you also know that the Mac OS X X11 implementation is largly based on the linux one, but has some compositing improvements which actually speed it up compared to linux.
Mac users just aren't used to having menus show up in application windows.
I use linux daily at work, I still cannot stand this setup. It's just not usefull. I keep having to first find the graphic window under all my other apps, then all the toolbar windows. It's just stupid.
Some of the performance issues again are no doubt due to the emulation, again, same with the font handling. Try it on a real linux computer.
OS X does not emulate unix, it IS unix. There is no emulation going on here. Gimp wasn't designed for Linux, it was designed for unix and runs without any emulation on other operating systems such as BSD, OS X, I think there may even be a native windows port. This is not the problem.
I think the point here is that maybe the GIMP developers should *listen* to the designers. Some of these things (like the interface) are not impossibly hard to fix.
Then we'd have a usefull free program. But no, for some reason the designers of GIMP just will NOT listen. They like their crazy interface, regardless of how many professions tell them it's crap.
Yes, but this would me more annoying for the little computers than the person I would think. It's not hard for the body to kill off a small amount of non-reproducing pathogens. But it would make the treatment useless, not a good thing for sure.
I hate to break it to you, but we *already* get lots of cell viruses. Like the flu for example.
Besides, the research is far away from actually doing what the headline suggests. For now, they are trying to make something that can even *detect* a particular type of diseased cell.
Other questions about safty would be, are these computers capable of reproducing? I haven't yet read the literature on this, but I'd guess no. They do not use typical virus mechanics for one, and they are nowhere close to being a complete cell. If they can't reproduce, even if they did go haywire and start destroying cells willy nilly, there would only be so many of them in your body to do so. Treatmet could easily be stopped as soon as the first hint of ill effects are noticed.
* Gave open source Open Office. * Helped the GNOME project by sponsering usablilty studies. * Created the first *popular* garbage collected OO language that uses bytecode for portability.
This has helped linux immensly in the server arena by supplying a good enterprise web development platform competitng with MS's ASP. They did not HAVE to make a cross platform language. They did not HAVE to make a Linux jdk.
They use Linux and GNOME on their desktops and therefore have a vested interest in supporting Linux.
And you have the nerve to post this crap about them? You sound like a spoiled brat who's been a cookie and then proceeds to spit in the gift givers face and demand the cookie jar.
Compitition is the name of the game and Linux will have to *earn* it's support just like every OTHER operating system.
It's people like you that make me vehemently deny being at all associated with the 'open source community'.
Yup. I'll agree with that. But I doubt that there are many "reverse case" types.
People thinking that some scientific theory is infallible demonstrates a lack of understanding of the basics of the scientific method itself. Science is only as *true* as the evidence supports. At any moment, new evidence can cause a theory to go from right to wrong.
Personally I've yet to meet an athiest/agnostic who treats scientific theories as they would religious faith.
Saying that "truth scares religous folk" is not the correct statement really, as scientific theories are not nessarily *true* is some absolute sense of the word. By truth, I meant strongly supported theories that arose via the scientific method. Using such a complicated description may have warded off the the many flame type comments I've recieved. I live and learn.
3) It is Noah's ark, we will go on with our regular lives, and the scientists say "Umm... can we have a closer look at that book of yours?"
Umm. No. The scientists will not care any more about that book than they do now. It does not provide anything that helps us do research (otherwise known as science). They may ask to see the boat though, there is stuff to apply science to there.
Science is not some alternative to religion, it's only a tool. I guess the truth scares religous folk, and hence they always see science as some sort of competitor.
Maybe for type of music you like (bigger distribution stuff). I don't go for the mass marketed fluff.
Specifically, I tend to like downtempo and electronica. $20 is AVERAGE for CDs in this area. In fact, I've noticed that anything *other* than pop drivel is $20 average. Since I tend to like groups that happen to be from europe the prices can often soar to $30 or more for a single CD.
Yes, non pop drivel is astounding, but just because it's not what the gastapo is pushing does not mean it should be so expensive. And non US music should NOT be priced in the 30-40$ range.
Did the poster say they were used? No. Also, it's easy to find popular titles used, but not so easy to find more unkown or foreign titles.
And that would be $7500 USD above and beyond tuition, food, housing, computer (he said he had a fat pipe, which implies a comptuer), cloathes, etc. I don't know about you, but a lot of students I know struggle with the basics. There is no way they can afford 500-600 CDs. Even when I was making a lot of cash via summer jobs, and living at home, and having my parents pay tution, I STILL couldn't afford 500-600 CDs.
I used to buy CDs up until I was aroudn 20 or 21. So I CAN compare here. My collection is around 30 CDs, no where near what this guy claims. Plus, many of those were gifts.
So either he's BS, or he's a minority in being able to afford all that, or he did something like buy them all used. However you cut it, most students CAN NOT afford 500-600 regular priced CDs, let alone eurpean imports.
Nope. That's why I also looked at US prices. $15 seems about average for a US CD. I checked. I saw $20 quoted elsewhere, in articles. So that's why that's there. I researched it all. Here, it's probably a little more than $20 depending on the type of music you listen to. Since I listen to non-US groups or rare groups, the average CD price is often $22-30 CAD.
Also, plenty of students have a lot of spending money. It's called "not being a lazy ass" or "having a job".
I worked every summer and often during the school year as well. I got paid well for a student, and I lived at home and had help with tuition from my parents. That said, I STILL couldn't afford 500-600 CDs here. No way. And I AM well of and am a minority.
I'm sure things are not any different in the US. Sure, your money is worth more, but you make less as well. Plus, your school is *significatnly* more costly than here. Perhaps only the rich kids can afford to go to university in your country, and hence why they have spending money.
For you, I think we need a (-1, US Centric) mode. Get your head out of your ass, the world is a big place!
Honestly, if you think those values are not a lot, then I don't know where you are getting your money from. Certainly not a job. Throughout undergrad I worked evey summer and sometimes part time during the year. I also had help from my parents with my school tuition and lived at home.
Even so, I only was able to afford a new computer (3-4k CAD), every 3 years. Granted, I had a car which also took up a bunch of money, but the point is I only had around 4k a year of money to spend, and that was wtih a LOT of help from my parents. I consider myself very well off and in the minority. But even I couldn't afford more than a few CDs a year.
But this guy? He said he has a fat pipe, which also implies a computer, so clearly he spent some money there too. And this is in US funds, which is signficantly more than my canadian figures. After 8-15k + 4800 for housing he CAN'T have much left over. That's already at *least* 12k which represents a lot of time at an entry level position. Add another $2000 on top of that for CDs, and what? The guy doesn't go out? I doubt it. I'm sure he goes to the bar, movies, etc. That all costs too.
You claim he could have been collecting for 8 years. That would make him start when he's 13. What 13 year old do you know who makes $2000 a year?
Something doesn't add up here. This is not normal. The best defense for this guy is that the music is mostly indie punk and therefore only $3-5 a cd. Well, sure, then I could see it. But most music is NOT $3-5 a cd! If it were, I don't think ANYONE would be complaining. I know I would be buying a lot of music at that point as well.
1: I'm 21 years old, live on a college campus with a fat pipe.
2: I own between 500-600 cd's
Sooo. At $20 average cd price, and choosing the lower of the range you gave, $20*500 = $10,000. Ok, let's be REALLY conservative and say they were only $15 each. $15*500 = $7500. AND, you claim you are a student.
So, either you are bullshitting, or you are admitting to everyone here that you are from a family that is very very rich. Either way, your opinion is clearly from teh point of view of a very very small minority.
I view boycotts as one of the most in-effective tools to combat the RIAA.
Did you see their profits plummet? I think the boycott is working quite well. I can't believe you seriously suggest writting a LETTER to them. Give me a break. These are the same people who were convicted of price fixing by the US government. The prices are STILL high, and only seem to be goin higher.
Boycotting CD sales is the only way to combat the RIAA. Copying the songs only give the RIAA more excuses to justify their absurdly high prices. I have not bought a single RIAA affiliated CD in the past 3-4 years, and I urge everyone here to do the same. The only way to get through to these people is by hurting their bottom line. When they cannot afford their Ferraries anymore they might start to listen.
BUT, the post is still offtopic with regards to the STORY, which is the point. It may be more usefull if all responses to offtopic posts inheireted the offtopic moderation, since, naturally, they are also off topic.
Yes, by all means find a position you like. But I have one thing to add. Don't end up with NO work because you are looking for an interesting position. Depending on what you are looking for, it could be difficult to find. In the mean time take some other uninteresting position. Why?
Well, you get *some* money for one, but more importantly, employers don't like mysterious gaps in resume's. They might think, "oh this person is lazy" or "oh, this person has some huge ego."
You can always look for something better while at a position so long as you don't sign yourself away for multiple years via some nasty contract.
"Young Urban Professional" does not say "debt ridden" to me. Sounds like you have an extended definition. I know quite a few young people who most would look at and say "yuppie". They are not in debt, just damn successfull.
Hell, even I could be accused of being a yuppie. I dress nice, have a few expensive items. But I'm poor (grad student). I make do with the budget I have. No debt. I have a few expensive things (small wardrob) rather than a whole ton of crappy cheap things.
But yeah, there are a ton of poeple like you mention. They will suffer for it whne the debt catches up though, so I don't really take any notice (other than curse at their stupid SUVs when they block my vision or tailgate me).
This still doesn't change the fact that *I* don't want a CRT. My friends don't want a CRT. Everyone OTHER than graphic design peopel don't nessesarily want an LCD. The grpahic design people are a minority.
Attached monitors are silly. If apple made the eMac just a box, I assure you more people would buy it.
Wow. We don't even have a tax like that here in Canada. We do, however, pay property tax based on the size of our houses, which is a similar concept. Great part is, the government sometimes decides to pay an realator to *estimate* the value of your house. Of course this estimation is MUCH higher than the actual value. Then they go and say, well, since we forgot to get this estimation earlier, you now have to pay us back taxes too!
So they are taxing US for their incompatance. Nice eh?
Disclaimer: I'm sure I dont' really understand our tax system well, but someone I know claimed this happened to her.
Yes yes, so many people tell me. But this constitutes a very very small fraction of the population. And besides, a high-end graphic artist will want a G5, not an eMac.
Slashdot Mirror
I love it! An armchair philosopher!
I'm glad you have ethics so completely wrapped up like that. You should go publish a paper on the definition of "ethically pure", you'll be famous!
These complaints are for the most part in direct response to all the "Linux is the only way" people's continual chant of
"Why use Photoshop? GIMP is just as good. Prorietary programs suck. Blah blah blah."
If you don't like the critisicm, don't go pushing your products on people.
A) There are consumers. They don't care about open source. They want something that works.
B) Many many many Linux people go on and on trying to convince people of type A to use open source. Type B people also tend to go on and on about how open source is 'as good' or 'better' than all proprietary programs.
Result) People of type A finally listen to all the nagging, go try some open source app that isn't up to it's proprietary counterpart, then go "GIMP sucks, I'd rather pay for Photoshop than use GIMP for free".
So you see, these complaints are largely due to the community pushing things on people of type A before they are ready.
A small portion of the people may also complain becasue they see a program with many usefull functions being completely ruined by a bad interface. They are frusterated that the developers will not listen to their opinions.
Sure, maybe they have no right, but isn't one of the great things about open source supposed to be feedback from "many eye's"?
Well, as someone who uses both linux and os/x on a daily basis to me running X11 apps on os/x is far slower than running them "pure" under linux. I realize that os/x is unix, but it's my impression (and that of another reply) that the X11 display gets translated through os/x's display layer first. Running X11 apps feels far slower to me anyway.
This I can understand. It's not so much emulation, as OS X's implementation of X11 it seems.
I can't say I disagree with you, though if you're used to the gimp it's not horrible. However, I was more referring to the fact that people who are used to os/x are used to having their menu bar along the top and nowhere else, which is a foreign concept to linux/windows users. Therefor, the menu system that the gimp uses will be double bad (1x for the fact it's far from optimal, 2x because he's not used to menus anywhere but the top menu bar).
Yes, this is a big problem with any portable app. I wounld't complain about differences such as mac style versus windows style versus linux style. My beef is that the GIMP interface is simply unbearable no matter what system I use it on. I use Dia quite a bit, which takes the separate tool window and right click menu idea from GIMP. Your right, I can use it. But it still endlessly annoys me and every time I lose the tool window (which is quite often) I end up cursing at the annoying interface. I still can't get used to the right click menu to do everything either. It's just not the way ANY other type of app works.
I believe there have been many arguments on the GIMP developers list over somehow grouping the controls a la MDI. It doesn't even HAVE to be MDI, just group the damn controls like one.
No go.
Someone even made some hack that puts the controls and image into the single window, but it was for a specific version, and of course did nothing to move those right click menus into normal menus. People have tried, but the developers LIKE the current interface.
First of all, running under X11 makes it slower than running natively under linux.
Umm, you do know that Linux uses X11 too right? I guess you also know that the Mac OS X X11 implementation is largly based on the linux one, but has some compositing improvements which actually speed it up compared to linux.
Mac users just aren't used to having menus show up in application windows.
I use linux daily at work, I still cannot stand this setup. It's just not usefull. I keep having to first find the graphic window under all my other apps, then all the toolbar windows. It's just stupid.
Some of the performance issues again are no doubt due to the emulation, again, same with the font handling. Try it on a real linux computer.
OS X does not emulate unix, it IS unix. There is no emulation going on here. Gimp wasn't designed for Linux, it was designed for unix and runs without any emulation on other operating systems such as BSD, OS X, I think there may even be a native windows port. This is not the problem.
I think the point here is that maybe the GIMP developers should *listen* to the designers. Some of these things (like the interface) are not impossibly hard to fix.
Then we'd have a usefull free program. But no, for some reason the designers of GIMP just will NOT listen. They like their crazy interface, regardless of how many professions tell them it's crap.
Yes, but this would me more annoying for the little computers than the person I would think. It's not hard for the body to kill off a small amount of non-reproducing pathogens. But it would make the treatment useless, not a good thing for sure.
Then you get a virus.
I hate to break it to you, but we *already* get lots of cell viruses. Like the flu for example.
Besides, the research is far away from actually doing what the headline suggests. For now, they are trying to make something that can even *detect* a particular type of diseased cell.
Other questions about safty would be, are these computers capable of reproducing? I haven't yet read the literature on this, but I'd guess no. They do not use typical virus mechanics for one, and they are nowhere close to being a complete cell. If they can't reproduce, even if they did go haywire and start destroying cells willy nilly, there would only be so many of them in your body to do so. Treatmet could easily be stopped as soon as the first hint of ill effects are noticed.
You say this about the company that:
* Gave open source Open Office.
* Helped the GNOME project by sponsering usablilty studies.
* Created the first *popular* garbage collected OO language that uses bytecode for portability.
This has helped linux immensly in the server arena by supplying a good enterprise web development platform competitng with MS's ASP. They did not HAVE to make a cross platform language. They did not HAVE to make a Linux jdk.
They use Linux and GNOME on their desktops and therefore have a vested interest in supporting Linux.
And you have the nerve to post this crap about them? You sound like a spoiled brat who's been a cookie and then proceeds to spit in the gift givers face and demand the cookie jar.
Compitition is the name of the game and Linux will have to *earn* it's support just like every OTHER operating system.
It's people like you that make me vehemently deny being at all associated with the 'open source community'.
Yup. I'll agree with that. But I doubt that there are many "reverse case" types.
People thinking that some scientific theory is infallible demonstrates a lack of understanding of the basics of the scientific method itself. Science is only as *true* as the evidence supports. At any moment, new evidence can cause a theory to go from right to wrong.
Personally I've yet to meet an athiest/agnostic who treats scientific theories as they would religious faith.
Saying that "truth scares religous folk" is not the correct statement really, as scientific theories are not nessarily *true* is some absolute sense of the word. By truth, I meant strongly supported theories that arose via the scientific method. Using such a complicated description may have warded off the the many flame type comments I've recieved. I live and learn.
3) It is Noah's ark, we will go on with our regular lives, and the scientists say "Umm... can we have a closer look at that book of yours?"
Umm. No. The scientists will not care any more about that book than they do now. It does not provide anything that helps us do research (otherwise known as science). They may ask to see the boat though, there is stuff to apply science to there.
Science is not some alternative to religion, it's only a tool. I guess the truth scares religous folk, and hence they always see science as some sort of competitor.
Maybe for type of music you like (bigger distribution stuff). I don't go for the mass marketed fluff.
Specifically, I tend to like downtempo and electronica. $20 is AVERAGE for CDs in this area. In fact, I've noticed that anything *other* than pop drivel is $20 average. Since I tend to like groups that happen to be from europe the prices can often soar to $30 or more for a single CD.
Yes, non pop drivel is astounding, but just because it's not what the gastapo is pushing does not mean it should be so expensive. And non US music should NOT be priced in the 30-40$ range.
Did the poster say they were used? No. Also, it's easy to find popular titles used, but not so easy to find more unkown or foreign titles.
And that would be $7500 USD above and beyond tuition, food, housing, computer (he said he had a fat pipe, which implies a comptuer), cloathes, etc. I don't know about you, but a lot of students I know struggle with the basics. There is no way they can afford 500-600 CDs. Even when I was making a lot of cash via summer jobs, and living at home, and having my parents pay tution, I STILL couldn't afford 500-600 CDs.
I used to buy CDs up until I was aroudn 20 or 21. So I CAN compare here. My collection is around 30 CDs, no where near what this guy claims. Plus, many of those were gifts.
So either he's BS, or he's a minority in being able to afford all that, or he did something like buy them all used. However you cut it, most students CAN NOT afford 500-600 regular priced CDs, let alone eurpean imports.
Nope. That's why I also looked at US prices. $15 seems about average for a US CD. I checked. I saw $20 quoted elsewhere, in articles. So that's why that's there. I researched it all. Here, it's probably a little more than $20 depending on the type of music you listen to. Since I listen to non-US groups or rare groups, the average CD price is often $22-30 CAD.
Well, here in Canada, $20 is AVERAGE.
Also, plenty of students have a lot of spending money. It's called "not being a lazy ass" or "having a job".
I worked every summer and often during the school year as well. I got paid well for a student, and I lived at home and had help with tuition from my parents. That said, I STILL couldn't afford 500-600 CDs here. No way. And I AM well of and am a minority.
I'm sure things are not any different in the US. Sure, your money is worth more, but you make less as well. Plus, your school is *significatnly* more costly than here. Perhaps only the rich kids can afford to go to university in your country, and hence why they have spending money.
For you, I think we need a (-1, US Centric) mode. Get your head out of your ass, the world is a big place!
Honestly, if you think those values are not a lot, then I don't know where you are getting your money from. Certainly not a job. Throughout undergrad I worked evey summer and sometimes part time during the year. I also had help from my parents with my school tuition and lived at home.
Even so, I only was able to afford a new computer (3-4k CAD), every 3 years. Granted, I had a car which also took up a bunch of money, but the point is I only had around 4k a year of money to spend, and that was wtih a LOT of help from my parents. I consider myself very well off and in the minority. But even I couldn't afford more than a few CDs a year.
But this guy? He said he has a fat pipe, which also implies a computer, so clearly he spent some money there too. And this is in US funds, which is signficantly more than my canadian figures. After 8-15k + 4800 for housing he CAN'T have much left over. That's already at *least* 12k which represents a lot of time at an entry level position. Add another $2000 on top of that for CDs, and what? The guy doesn't go out? I doubt it. I'm sure he goes to the bar, movies, etc. That all costs too.
You claim he could have been collecting for 8 years. That would make him start when he's 13. What 13 year old do you know who makes $2000 a year?
Something doesn't add up here. This is not normal. The best defense for this guy is that the music is mostly indie punk and therefore only $3-5 a cd. Well, sure, then I could see it. But most music is NOT $3-5 a cd! If it were, I don't think ANYONE would be complaining. I know I would be buying a lot of music at that point as well.
1: I'm 21 years old, live on a college campus with a fat pipe.
2: I own between 500-600 cd's
Sooo. At $20 average cd price, and choosing the lower of the range you gave, $20*500 = $10,000. Ok, let's be REALLY conservative and say they were only $15 each. $15*500 = $7500. AND, you claim you are a student.
So, either you are bullshitting, or you are admitting to everyone here that you are from a family that is very very rich. Either way, your opinion is clearly from teh point of view of a very very small minority.
I view boycotts as one of the most in-effective tools to combat the RIAA.
Did you see their profits plummet? I think the boycott is working quite well. I can't believe you seriously suggest writting a LETTER to them. Give me a break. These are the same people who were convicted of price fixing by the US government. The prices are STILL high, and only seem to be goin higher.
Boycotting CD sales is the only way to combat the RIAA. Copying the songs only give the RIAA more excuses to justify their absurdly high prices. I have not bought a single RIAA affiliated CD in the past 3-4 years, and I urge everyone here to do the same. The only way to get through to these people is by hurting their bottom line. When they cannot afford their Ferraries anymore they might start to listen.
Why would you fear OT? I just post anyways. If you have an account you get notified of replys and such, so you can easily follow the thread.
BUT, the post is still offtopic with regards to the STORY, which is the point. It may be more usefull if all responses to offtopic posts inheireted the offtopic moderation, since, naturally, they are also off topic.
Yes, by all means find a position you like. But I have one thing to add. Don't end up with NO work because you are looking for an interesting position. Depending on what you are looking for, it could be difficult to find. In the mean time take some other uninteresting position. Why?
Well, you get *some* money for one, but more importantly, employers don't like mysterious gaps in resume's. They might think, "oh this person is lazy" or "oh, this person has some huge ego."
You can always look for something better while at a position so long as you don't sign yourself away for multiple years via some nasty contract.
"Young Urban Professional" does not say "debt ridden" to me. Sounds like you have an extended definition. I know quite a few young people who most would look at and say "yuppie". They are not in debt, just damn successfull.
Hell, even I could be accused of being a yuppie. I dress nice, have a few expensive items. But I'm poor (grad student). I make do with the budget I have. No debt. I have a few expensive things (small wardrob) rather than a whole ton of crappy cheap things.
But yeah, there are a ton of poeple like you mention. They will suffer for it whne the debt catches up though, so I don't really take any notice (other than curse at their stupid SUVs when they block my vision or tailgate me).
You hate people for being successfull? Boy aren't you the bitter one.
This still doesn't change the fact that *I* don't want a CRT. My friends don't want a CRT. Everyone OTHER than graphic design peopel don't nessesarily want an LCD. The grpahic design people are a minority.
Attached monitors are silly. If apple made the eMac just a box, I assure you more people would buy it.
Wow. We don't even have a tax like that here in Canada. We do, however, pay property tax based on the size of our houses, which is a similar concept. Great part is, the government sometimes decides to pay an realator to *estimate* the value of your house. Of course this estimation is MUCH higher than the actual value. Then they go and say, well, since we forgot to get this estimation earlier, you now have to pay us back taxes too!
So they are taxing US for their incompatance. Nice eh?
Disclaimer: I'm sure I dont' really understand our tax system well, but someone I know claimed this happened to her.
Yes yes, so many people tell me. But this constitutes a very very small fraction of the population. And besides, a high-end graphic artist will want a G5, not an eMac.