So, it is only Republicans who object when a newspaper openly calls for the murder of a Republican president? This is what the Guardian did.
Is there a name for the condition you have, where you are unable to tell when someone is being serious or not? Must be real tough going through life like that.
BG is good sci-fi, and has some non-nerd appeal because of the vague hope that they won't have strategically placed enough scenery to hide all the nipples this week.
Not that I'm against nipples on TV, but it's a pity that they are now the main interest in most TV sci-fi shows.
Haven't seen Firefly yet though, which is apparently a break from the norm.
They were just bad movies almost saved by fantastic visuals.
Completely agree. I couldn't understand why everyone was raving about these movies. And it's got nothing to do with being a Tolkien 'purist' or any such nonsense, because I think that, for example, the amplification of Arwen's character was an improvement. But almost all the other changes were to the detriment of the characters involved, notably towards the end of the story, when Faramir and Denethor were turned into one-dimensional and unbelievable caricatures.
Leaving aside the fact that he probably (may have) meant 'Redhat's version of Linux', he's still wrong to ignore other distributions, such as Novell/SuSE.
Any ideas on how to talk to these people? Has anyone out there ever been able to get a Microsoft Lover to switch?
I doubt it. These people are feeling pretty defensive right now, and that makes them reluctant to change.
The problem is that they feel like they have mastered a certain amount of technical knowledge (e.g. how to install a service pack and maybe change a registry setting), but geeks keep telling them they are clueless. The way to convert them probably involves being non-confrontational and respecting whatever knowledge/experience that they have gained. Often they are 'tweakers', they like fiddling with configurations of things, so you might be able to entice them that way by showing the tweaking possibilities with user-friendly open-source stuff like Firefox & Thunderbird. Then you need to give them maximum support when they do switch because they'll be getting anxiety attacks when the menus aren't where they expect them to be.
Alternatively you can call them MS weenies and forget about them, which is generally what I do.
Yes but MS also controls the server in many cases, and they are quite capable of coupling the browser to that if necessary. But I agree PHP would be difficult.
Now it would be possible for MS to make a browser that would 'freeze out' CSS - but what would be the point? Just so they could piss everyone off?
Well, they might decide to 'extend and embrace' CSS - it's a strategy they've used in the past. Adding proprietary features to a MS-CSS which only IE renders properly, for example?
Yes it would piss some people off, but many of them are the people who are already pissed off with MS. FrontPage users are not going to care.
I remember reading in Gleick's biography of Richard Feynman that when he first learnt it (as a schoolboy) he called it 'the most amazing equation in all of math'.
No, you're missing the point. People aren't buying an mp3 player which happens to be embedded into a pair of Oakleys, they're buying some Oakleys that play mp3s.
i.e. the market is people who buy Oakleys, viz expensive sunglasses, not techies or geeks looking for a wearable mp3 player.
or the imac, so they won't like these. nevertheless as the success of such products has shown, there is an enormous market for mixing fashion/design with tech; the difficulty is tapping into it. Only Apple & Sony have done it more than once so far. I would say Oakley have a good chance at hitting the vein.
illusion that if they become part of the majority, do their thing and vote, then they get to exercise power over the people they don't like
It's not an illusion; that really is pretty much how it works (with the exception that voters don't excercise power themselves, the people they vote for do).
But most people who are citizens of these various governments, and therefore forced at gunpoint to obey the whims of "majorities"
Why the inverted commas? Are you suggesting that democratic majorities aren't real? Granted, corruption can occur, but in healthy democracies people generally get voted in because they were able to muster up more support, i.e. they had some form of real majority. (And obviously rare borderline cases like Bush/Gore are subject to noise.. every system has noise.)
Yeah the idea is that you consent to the majority opinion about what services are necessary. If you persuade enough other people to agree with you, then things change accordingly. It's called democracy - one of those things you're supposed to have learnt while growing up.
It's a valid point and I wish power management was one of the issues that cropped up more regularly in Linux world. Hibernation is what we want, not a full shut down.
I have a Windows 2000 Server and a Windows 2000 Professional machine that I swear to GOD I NEVER have to reboot, unless I'm installing some piece of hardware/software that requires it.
That's right, presumably you rarely touch those boxes so nothing changes. Now try running and using one of the desktop versions mentioned in the article. (Which is in French so few of us can read it but hey, this is slashdot anyway).
Personally I use 2k at work and XP at home (for my Windows machines) and I can't remember a crash for either.
This is about rebooting. A crash is not the only time Windows forces you to reboot. You say you shut down daily - only Windows users would regard that as normal.
Slashdot Mirror
The alert needs to say "pwned". Then they'll ph34r your skillz (or something) and try and get your local police force to raid your house.
I hate it when someone gets called a zealot for making a valid point about the reality of a company's retail strategy.
IBM recommends Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional.
When they remove that, I'll know they're serious about Linux.
Is there a name for the condition you have, where you are unable to tell when someone is being serious or not? Must be real tough going through life like that.
Not that I'm against nipples on TV, but it's a pity that they are now the main interest in most TV sci-fi shows.
Haven't seen Firefly yet though, which is apparently a break from the norm.
Completely agree. I couldn't understand why everyone was raving about these movies. And it's got nothing to do with being a Tolkien 'purist' or any such nonsense, because I think that, for example, the amplification of Arwen's character was an improvement. But almost all the other changes were to the detriment of the characters involved, notably towards the end of the story, when Faramir and Denethor were turned into one-dimensional and unbelievable caricatures.
actually when I first glanced at the headline 'Sun's COO...' I though it was a SCO story.. it all blurs into one after a while you know.
Leaving aside the fact that he probably (may have) meant 'Redhat's version of Linux', he's still wrong to ignore other distributions, such as Novell/SuSE.
My guess would be that nobody said it.
I doubt it. These people are feeling pretty defensive right now, and that makes them reluctant to change.
The problem is that they feel like they have mastered a certain amount of technical knowledge (e.g. how to install a service pack and maybe change a registry setting), but geeks keep telling them they are clueless. The way to convert them probably involves being non-confrontational and respecting whatever knowledge/experience that they have gained. Often they are 'tweakers', they like fiddling with configurations of things, so you might be able to entice them that way by showing the tweaking possibilities with user-friendly open-source stuff like Firefox & Thunderbird. Then you need to give them maximum support when they do switch because they'll be getting anxiety attacks when the menus aren't where they expect them to be.
Alternatively you can call them MS weenies and forget about them, which is generally what I do.
Now it would be possible for MS to make a browser that would 'freeze out' CSS - but what would be the point? Just so they could piss everyone off?
Well, they might decide to 'extend and embrace' CSS - it's a strategy they've used in the past. Adding proprietary features to a MS-CSS which only IE renders properly, for example?
Yes it would piss some people off, but many of them are the people who are already pissed off with MS. FrontPage users are not going to care.
Not so sure about that. Microsoft tend to try and find other ways to fight these battles; improving their product is usually a last resort for them.
More often what they try to do is break things. Expect to see Microsoft trying to enforce proprietary standards and freeze out things like CSS & PHP.
Guess they should have called it Walkorg then.. sounds like one of Tolkien's monsters. Which is kind of appropriate.
I remember reading in Gleick's biography of Richard Feynman that when he first learnt it (as a schoolboy) he called it 'the most amazing equation in all of math'.
i.e. the market is people who buy Oakleys, viz expensive sunglasses, not techies or geeks looking for a wearable mp3 player.
or the imac, so they won't like these. nevertheless as the success of such products has shown, there is an enormous market for mixing fashion/design with tech; the difficulty is tapping into it. Only Apple & Sony have done it more than once so far. I would say Oakley have a good chance at hitting the vein.
It's not an illusion; that really is pretty much how it works (with the exception that voters don't excercise power themselves, the people they vote for do).
But most people who are citizens of these various governments, and therefore forced at gunpoint to obey the whims of "majorities"
Why the inverted commas? Are you suggesting that democratic majorities aren't real? Granted, corruption can occur, but in healthy democracies people generally get voted in because they were able to muster up more support, i.e. they had some form of real majority. (And obviously rare borderline cases like Bush/Gore are subject to noise.. every system has noise.)
Yeah the idea is that you consent to the majority opinion about what services are necessary. If you persuade enough other people to agree with you, then things change accordingly. It's called democracy - one of those things you're supposed to have learnt while growing up.
Get a grip, that wasn't FUD. He may have been mistaken, but there was nothing malicious about it.
Sure - most normal people use Windows.
In terms of costs perhaps not, but from an ecological standpoint, it's all energy being wasted if the machine is just turning cycles for no purpose.
It's a valid point and I wish power management was one of the issues that cropped up more regularly in Linux world. Hibernation is what we want, not a full shut down.
That's right, presumably you rarely touch those boxes so nothing changes. Now try running and using one of the desktop versions mentioned in the article. (Which is in French so few of us can read it but hey, this is slashdot anyway).
This is about rebooting. A crash is not the only time Windows forces you to reboot. You say you shut down daily - only Windows users would regard that as normal.
Not giving him a coat. Poor guy must have frozen out there.