I'm guessing that such a "switch" would once again create demand for the tech sector, for companies trying to switch as well as for companies seeing the new opportunities that may arise.
Would be nice... especially for all of those unemployed people out there!
I agree is doesn't always have a strong basis of a person's work. And it doubtfully ever will. And I agree that your value should be somewhat relevant to others, but on a more averaged scale. You should be aware of your position's value in the market/location/etc. that you are in.
And no, I don't make your point. The environment is not bad because people are paid differently. The environment turns bad because when people know about the variations, they become jealous and a ton of other emotions. Business is business, not a utopian system. Most people do not have a common agreement on what should be valuable. Some think it's their knowledge and how current it is. Others think it's years of experience. And still others think it's think it's value returned to the company directly.
Really it comes down to what the person paying you thinks. And a good manager of a company is going to think that there is a balance of cost vs what is returned to the company itself by that person, or that person's effective role in the organization. The "value" of a position is a complex thing. It's not just relative to other people. That would be stupid, since a company also pays you based roughly on the value you provide back to it (to one extent), and not relative to what it pays everyone else. There are also a large number of other factors. History with the company is another factor. If one person has been with the company for a larger number of years, and stuck it out through rough times, and proven themself loyal, that can make for more value to the company.
So, when you actually have more experience in the real world, and realize that it's a complex system that is not "your" version of perfect, maybe you'll see that there is value to not discussing salaries. I say maybe, because maybe you'll never come to that conclusion. I did, though. For the first 2-3 years of my career, I thought salaries should be more balanced. But I've eventually come to understand some of the other inputs that formulate a person's salary, and come to more-or-less respect it. But I'll still push my boss for a raise.
Hey! That reminds me, my annual review is about due, and I've taken on more responsibility than I was hired for. I think I deserve a raise. I'll have to push for it and see what happens.
Well, in my experience, older people tend not to share salary info. It's people who are relatively new to the working world ( 2-3 years), who like to compare, especially when talking about salaried individuals. I attribute this to people eventually realizing there actually ARE other advantages to not discussing it.
A company accomplishes a lot more than being able to pay people less, by encourage non-disclosure of salaries. They also keep any feelings of resentment and bad attitudes to a minimum which can affect productivity. It allows employees the freedom to fight for a salary they feel they're worth, without having to deal with the pressure and attitude of their peers because they are paid more. I've told coworkers that were friends, but I also trust that they wouldn't spread it around. Anyone I wouldn't trust, I certainly wouldn't tell. And I certainly wouldn't tell anyone else another person's salary.
If you aren't happy with your salary, talk to your boss. But don't think a company doesn't have more redeeming reasons for discouraging people from discussing salaries. I've seen what happens when people do, and it usually just makes for a bad environment. I'm not saying that they might also use that as a way to control salary levels... but do you REALLY think a manager is going to give everyone raises just because they know? What are they gonna do, quit? So quit! They'll just hire someone else, and probably at a lower salary.
People whine too much about not having what others have. They really should worry less about everyone else, and think about their own happiness and contentment with their own job and salary.
Same here. I setup a Linksys Wireless router/firewall with Yahoo/SBC and a Mac. However, we didn't have to do the PPPoE thing, but I know the Linksys supports it. The annoying thing about the setup I did is that SBC assigns you an internal IP address (not routable on the net), so there's NO chance of sharing files. Kinda sucks IMHO.
Fortunately, for myself, I have SBC's 5 static IP service. Costs a little more ($15 difference), but I don't have to mess with the funky crap they pull on dynamic IP users. Well worth the extra $15.
Why are people STILL using DSL and Cable modems without a Firewall??? They are there to protect you not just from those malicious people out there, but your own lack of understanding of computer security. This isn't meant to be a slam on anyone.. just a realistic fact that most people don't understand what's involved in network security.
First of all, kids are not full citizens. They do not have the right to vote, drink, or even marry (in most cases). Most children are not capable of being responsible citizens. They are impulsive, selfish, cruel, violent, and completely undisciplined. They're cute until they're about 2 years old. Then they become evil monsters. Then they're cute again after a couple years... then they become monsters once more. And they don't stop being monsters until they become adults, hopefully.
It is the responsibility of the school to teach kids. That means they have the right to do what is necessary to teach the kids within the allowance of parental consent. Most parents don't actually protest these "invasions of privacy", because they know their own kids. And they know that kids, in general, will try and get away with whatever they can and avoid learning or working.
As for your rediculous comments regarding copyright... and not to beat a dead horse... but kids don't have the right to it. They cannot file for copyrights. Only an adult can. Their parents might be able to lay claim to it, but I'm guessing a parent will more likely punish the kid for misbehaving.
Universities are a different story, since college students (for the most part) are adults, and full-fledged citizens. However, monitoring of network bandwidth is not a violation of privacy, providing it is clearly communicated. Just because you pay tuition doesn't give you unlimtted rights to do what you want with school facilities. The precedent set here is along the lines of corporate monitoring and 'spying'. If you want privacy, go pay for a network connection yourself where the terms of agreement specify privacy guaranteed. Schools do not claim to provide this. And no one has a right to expect them to. If this is something the majority of citizens (real ones, not those junior soon-to-be ones), then it should be pushed through legislation.
To not think about all of the ramifications of such a thing is also a great tragedy. I shutter to think what would happen to an already pathetic public school system (not counting college/university). This is society. And society has rules to limit and restrict "freedoms" so that we don't collapse upon ourselves. If you want to remove them, fine... but don't just think that blindly making changes for more "freedom" is always a good thing. It could be... but in the case of students (children) getting the right to do what they want... let's just destroy public education even more then.
This is mostly about HS and below. Not college. And if a university wants to limit services made available through the computers they provide well, tough shit. As with most universities, your bandwidth is probably provided to you free! It's not part of your tuition.
I was at school before they had networks available in the dorms and all. Actually, I was part of the beta group to make them available at UCSD. Don't whine because you don't get everything exactly the way you want it.
To think that there is such a thing as absolute freedom is ignorance. That would be anarchy, and we all know that anarchy is a perfectly good environment for freedom and growth. Perhaps if you paid attention more, and weren't reading email during class you MIGHT learn something. I did.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but what the hell is wrong with the youth these days??? heh. Yeah, I know that I probably thought I deserved everything I wanted when I was younger... but be a little realistic. Damn kids think they know everything, and that the world can be a perfect place if only people did what they said and gave them what they wanted. Sounds more like a temper tantrum than anything else. Grow up!
Invasion of privacy in a school environment? Okay! I'm an advocate of right to privacy too, but give me a break. Don't ruin the cause by making claims that something like THIS is an invasion.
In a school, students don't have much privacy to begin with. And when you're talking about what they are doing on school provided computers, during classtime (ie. when they are supposed to be working), the teacher has every right to look. Teachers used to walk around the classroom and peek over your shoulder. Was that an invasion to privacy? If you got caught writing a note, the teacher could read it aloud if they wanted.
Kids are being given more "rights to privacy" than we ever had before, despite technology allowing for monitoring.
Video cameras in the school. That I'm still on the fence about. But monitoring computer use. The school has EVERY right. If they can be held responsible for a student doing something bad with the computer (which they would be), they can do what is necessary to prevent it, and see that school funds are used appropriately.
Although I understand your meaning in reference to a *NIX system, however, I think you mean "Terminal". The Console in OS X is more or less a system log of sorts.:)
Unelss you really like to just sit and watch error messages as they occur.:)
-Alex
Re:Pah, cann't be bothered reading the article
on
A Better Finder?
·
· Score: 1
Well, I tried not to use a Mac pre-OSX, but from what I remember, I used Chooser to do something like select a printer on the network. Rendezvous has replaced the need for a user to do ANYTHING to access a printer.
It never made any sense to me why what should have been a "Finder" interface (connecting to shares...essentially a folder that's saved somewhere else) was in a burried configuration utility. Hmmm... in OSX, if I want to connect to a machine, I use the Finder now. "Go->Connect to Server". Or for you quick-key weenies (yes, I am one myself), Command-K. I always thought the Chooser to be a very unintuitive interface compared to the Finder.
Anyway... you old-Mac users really need to think about the design sometimes. As another reply to this post pointed out... Chooser just got STUCK with AppleShare. It wasn't even designed for it. And if something wasn't designed for a particular use, it often times shouldn't be there. Hmmm...where can we hack this support into?
I admit, OSX's Finder could use some improvement. Better use of extended attributes would be nice. But before OSX, I wouldn't touch a Mac if I could help it. I even preferred Linux with X-Windows for God's sake, because I could do more than one thing at a time, at the sacrafice of a pretty interface. REAL productivity people! If you are going to use that argument for a Mac, lets remain consistent to the Big Picture.
Thanks for that correction. If you didn't, I would have. As much as I refrain from forming too strong an opinion on this (being half French and Half American [born in Brooklyn, NY]), I do oppose war in general... but I do NOT oppose supporting our troops once things have started.
As my father's commanding officer in Vietnam (Hal Moore, lead character played by Mel Gibson in "We were Soldiers") once said, "Hate war! But love the American Soldier."
And as much as I "voted for the other guy", Powell is the one person I seomwhat trust in this whole thing more than any other.
Yeah... I eventually realized that. I remember them hyping how he was doing the switch a while back. I didn't realize it was over a 3 month period for evaluation.
Man, it's almost time for my anual Mac purchase. *grin* But, I don't know... I did splurge a little last year with the $3000 plasma screen.
But I agree... I think more and more people are seriously eye-balling Macs since MacOS X. It's what got me to buy my first Mac 2 years back. I hated Macs prior to that.
I just can't wait to save up for the 17" PB. *drool*... but alas, my 1 year old 15" PB will have to suffice for a while.
For those considering the switch... unless you HAVE to have all the latest games, get a Mac! Heck, I even play enough games to suck up free time I dont' even have (Damn I love Ghost Recon).
The point is, if it shouldn't be done, don't allow it to be done.
Umm... you mean have the user restricted so that they don't have permission to do it?? What OS do YOU use? Technically, Apple DOES do this. Only the Admin user (when prompted for sudo authentication) can make such changes. The problem is that people use an admin user as their main user, without thinking about the consequences, and then do what they want.
People are used to the old Mac and Windows world, where any user is "root" privileges. They're not used to be forced into a structure... and of course, the average Joe seems to refuse to accept this (in general).
So... before you make a comment like that, maybe you SHOULD use what you are commenting on. OS X, like any other *nix, does enforce what should or shouldn't be done. But like any other *nix, a "root" or admin user can still make changes. They NEED to be able to, but with caution.
Why do I get the feeling you've not taken a look at a PowerMac. The absolute FIRST thing I noticed when I got my first Mac (2 years ago, thanks to OS X), was how friggen well designed the case was for easy access and configuration. All you have to do is pull a level, and the side opens up (even while running). Everything is layed out perfectly for easy access. ATA connectors are relatively close to the bays for the drives. There are tracks for the belts to be guided. There is NO metal casing blocking your ability to get to your memory, or processor!
I have a scar on my hand (deep one) from having to try and work around the difficult to deal with cases of the PC realm.
Now, as far as compatibility with hardware... - Memory: no different (aside from being easier to access) - Hard drives: no different - Video cards: You have a choice of a couple of the best cards out there. Hell, what's in the Macs is what I actually chose (older models of course in PC) for my PCs. So, I'd prefer the smaller selection in exchange for the lack of headache caused in operating systems trying to support everything and their brother! - Processor: No different. Go buy a processor upgrade (available at many resellers) and plug the thing in! - Modems: Why the hell do you need to change it? No ones coming out with a faster modem anymore. - NIC: Do you KNOW what's in a PowerMac??? They ship standard with Gigabit ethernet! (10/100/1000) I don't anticipate needing to change for a while. And if I do need to, well, it's just a PCI card. Simple upgrade.
So... the real moral of the story is that you need to check on your facts before you go blabbing. You even admit you've not seen the inside of a Mac. I would agree with most of what you said about 5 years ago! But since the latest PowerMac design, they've been using standards buddy! You really ought to check out the latest PowerMacs. I was a hardcore PC advocate (Linux mostly on them)... but I can't imagine going back. Even with slightly higher up front cost... it's friggen worth it!!!
True. The military does kinda screw with hiding things. But the space station is international. And it's also planned for commercial access and research. There is a contest (I think it's called the X Race, or something with "X"), where companies are completing to create the first viable public space vehicle for orbital transport. Public meaning, you and me.
Check out the Science Channel on Friday nights (if you have no life). They have cool topics about what's in the works regarding space exploration and research.
So, yeah... military may classify things... but more than just the military is now involved in space exploration now.
So, having people in orbit is useless? What about the effects extended weightlessness has on humans? That should be figured out while they're 250 thousand miles away? Yeah, I can see people really putting more funding into a project where people are taking that kind of stupid ass risk!
One of the major factors of the space station research is to determine what is necessary for extended stays in space. This includes physical and psychological. I'm guessing that you think the initial research done on human isolation here on earth was a waste as well. Those were the steps before what is going on now.
Mir was a dead station. It wasn't designed to last as long as it did. To try and keep it running would likely cost more, and have much higher risk of uncontrolled costs. That's like buys computer systems for your network that were designed for a 4 year life, and trying to keep them around for 8 years. Sorry... that ends up costing more and increasing risk. And in case you didn't notice, the space program is very big on little to no risk now-a-days. The last disasters nearly crippled its support and funding.
Mir also wasn't designed for expandability. ISS is designed to be modular enough for expansion. For example, what they're doing now is adding on components to mount larger solar panels. These additional solar panels are so that more labs can be added on, and powered. These additional labs mean more research, and thus returning the benefit and profit.
Also, the space station is a stepping stone. It will be much more cost effective to schedule launches FROM the station to the moon than to go straight from the earth.
Well, if you actually paid any attention to what the space station is about, you'd realize that it IS about other scientific endeavors. The whole purpose of the current missions is to expand the power capacity of the space station to add on many more labs for international scientific research.
The types of research include medical (ability to culture medicines that cannot be done in a gravity environment), physics (studying propulsion, etc), and several other things.
Is it just me, or has anyone else come to realize that some of the most beneficial breakthroughs were related to the space program. Things that were NEEDED for space exploration ended up finding a really good use on earth. Velcro anyone??? Sure, many may say that velcro is useless... but have you really thought about how useful it is in general (not just to yourself).
So, while space exploration is defense related, it's rediculous to think that there isn't benefit to other areas indirectly. The military (as much as I'm NOT pro-military) does have a need to push scientific need to further limits. Limits that are not encountered in most environments, and so would not get the funding. And in the end, other get to benefit from the investment.
Sure, things can be achieved without the middle man, but no one seems to have a need until they see the results... especially not a need that is willing to invest that kind of money!
Yeah... thought has occured to me. I've already started spending more of my reading/posting time on other boards. Slashdot's starting to get stale and poor quality.
Not that I don't think it has good potential, but I'm just seeing quality go down over the years. Or mayb just not keeping up with my expectations.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing that such a "switch" would once again create demand for the tech sector, for companies trying to switch as well as for companies seeing the new opportunities that may arise.
Would be nice... especially for all of those unemployed people out there!
-Alex
I agree is doesn't always have a strong basis of a person's work. And it doubtfully ever will. And I agree that your value should be somewhat relevant to others, but on a more averaged scale. You should be aware of your position's value in the market/location/etc. that you are in.
And no, I don't make your point. The environment is not bad because people are paid differently. The environment turns bad because when people know about the variations, they become jealous and a ton of other emotions. Business is business, not a utopian system. Most people do not have a common agreement on what should be valuable. Some think it's their knowledge and how current it is. Others think it's years of experience. And still others think it's think it's value returned to the company directly.
Really it comes down to what the person paying you thinks. And a good manager of a company is going to think that there is a balance of cost vs what is returned to the company itself by that person, or that person's effective role in the organization. The "value" of a position is a complex thing. It's not just relative to other people. That would be stupid, since a company also pays you based roughly on the value you provide back to it (to one extent), and not relative to what it pays everyone else. There are also a large number of other factors. History with the company is another factor. If one person has been with the company for a larger number of years, and stuck it out through rough times, and proven themself loyal, that can make for more value to the company.
So, when you actually have more experience in the real world, and realize that it's a complex system that is not "your" version of perfect, maybe you'll see that there is value to not discussing salaries. I say maybe, because maybe you'll never come to that conclusion. I did, though. For the first 2-3 years of my career, I thought salaries should be more balanced. But I've eventually come to understand some of the other inputs that formulate a person's salary, and come to more-or-less respect it. But I'll still push my boss for a raise.
Hey! That reminds me, my annual review is about due, and I've taken on more responsibility than I was hired for. I think I deserve a raise. I'll have to push for it and see what happens.
-Alex
Well, in my experience, older people tend not to share salary info. It's people who are relatively new to the working world ( 2-3 years), who like to compare, especially when talking about salaried individuals. I attribute this to people eventually realizing there actually ARE other advantages to not discussing it.
A company accomplishes a lot more than being able to pay people less, by encourage non-disclosure of salaries. They also keep any feelings of resentment and bad attitudes to a minimum which can affect productivity. It allows employees the freedom to fight for a salary they feel they're worth, without having to deal with the pressure and attitude of their peers because they are paid more. I've told coworkers that were friends, but I also trust that they wouldn't spread it around. Anyone I wouldn't trust, I certainly wouldn't tell. And I certainly wouldn't tell anyone else another person's salary.
If you aren't happy with your salary, talk to your boss. But don't think a company doesn't have more redeeming reasons for discouraging people from discussing salaries. I've seen what happens when people do, and it usually just makes for a bad environment. I'm not saying that they might also use that as a way to control salary levels... but do you REALLY think a manager is going to give everyone raises just because they know? What are they gonna do, quit? So quit! They'll just hire someone else, and probably at a lower salary.
People whine too much about not having what others have. They really should worry less about everyone else, and think about their own happiness and contentment with their own job and salary.
Just my $0.02.
-Alex
Same here. I setup a Linksys Wireless router/firewall with Yahoo/SBC and a Mac. However, we didn't have to do the PPPoE thing, but I know the Linksys supports it. The annoying thing about the setup I did is that SBC assigns you an internal IP address (not routable on the net), so there's NO chance of sharing files. Kinda sucks IMHO.
Fortunately, for myself, I have SBC's 5 static IP service. Costs a little more ($15 difference), but I don't have to mess with the funky crap they pull on dynamic IP users. Well worth the extra $15.
-Alex
This doesn't address the issue of all Rendezvous sharing. Sure, it handles actual file sharing, but not printer sharing.
Is there a way to PW protect the printer share, so that it shows up, but you're prompted for a PW (save to keychain if you like)?
-Alex
Yeah. That was my first thought.
Why are people STILL using DSL and Cable modems without a Firewall??? They are there to protect you not just from those malicious people out there, but your own lack of understanding of computer security. This isn't meant to be a slam on anyone.. just a realistic fact that most people don't understand what's involved in network security.
-Alex
Do you have kids? I'm serious.
First of all, kids are not full citizens. They do not have the right to vote, drink, or even marry (in most cases). Most children are not capable of being responsible citizens. They are impulsive, selfish, cruel, violent, and completely undisciplined. They're cute until they're about 2 years old. Then they become evil monsters. Then they're cute again after a couple years... then they become monsters once more. And they don't stop being monsters until they become adults, hopefully.
It is the responsibility of the school to teach kids. That means they have the right to do what is necessary to teach the kids within the allowance of parental consent. Most parents don't actually protest these "invasions of privacy", because they know their own kids. And they know that kids, in general, will try and get away with whatever they can and avoid learning or working.
As for your rediculous comments regarding copyright... and not to beat a dead horse... but kids don't have the right to it. They cannot file for copyrights. Only an adult can. Their parents might be able to lay claim to it, but I'm guessing a parent will more likely punish the kid for misbehaving.
Universities are a different story, since college students (for the most part) are adults, and full-fledged citizens. However, monitoring of network bandwidth is not a violation of privacy, providing it is clearly communicated. Just because you pay tuition doesn't give you unlimtted rights to do what you want with school facilities. The precedent set here is along the lines of corporate monitoring and 'spying'. If you want privacy, go pay for a network connection yourself where the terms of agreement specify privacy guaranteed. Schools do not claim to provide this. And no one has a right to expect them to. If this is something the majority of citizens (real ones, not those junior soon-to-be ones), then it should be pushed through legislation.
To not think about all of the ramifications of such a thing is also a great tragedy. I shutter to think what would happen to an already pathetic public school system (not counting college/university). This is society. And society has rules to limit and restrict "freedoms" so that we don't collapse upon ourselves. If you want to remove them, fine... but don't just think that blindly making changes for more "freedom" is always a good thing. It could be... but in the case of students (children) getting the right to do what they want... let's just destroy public education even more then.
Just my thoughts...
-Alex
This is mostly about HS and below. Not college. And if a university wants to limit services made available through the computers they provide well, tough shit. As with most universities, your bandwidth is probably provided to you free! It's not part of your tuition.
I was at school before they had networks available in the dorms and all. Actually, I was part of the beta group to make them available at UCSD. Don't whine because you don't get everything exactly the way you want it.
To think that there is such a thing as absolute freedom is ignorance. That would be anarchy, and we all know that anarchy is a perfectly good environment for freedom and growth. Perhaps if you paid attention more, and weren't reading email during class you MIGHT learn something. I did.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but what the hell is wrong with the youth these days??? heh. Yeah, I know that I probably thought I deserved everything I wanted when I was younger... but be a little realistic. Damn kids think they know everything, and that the world can be a perfect place if only people did what they said and gave them what they wanted. Sounds more like a temper tantrum than anything else. Grow up!
-Alex
Invasion of privacy in a school environment? Okay! I'm an advocate of right to privacy too, but give me a break. Don't ruin the cause by making claims that something like THIS is an invasion.
In a school, students don't have much privacy to begin with. And when you're talking about what they are doing on school provided computers, during classtime (ie. when they are supposed to be working), the teacher has every right to look. Teachers used to walk around the classroom and peek over your shoulder. Was that an invasion to privacy? If you got caught writing a note, the teacher could read it aloud if they wanted.
Kids are being given more "rights to privacy" than we ever had before, despite technology allowing for monitoring.
Video cameras in the school. That I'm still on the fence about. But monitoring computer use. The school has EVERY right. If they can be held responsible for a student doing something bad with the computer (which they would be), they can do what is necessary to prevent it, and see that school funds are used appropriately.
Yeesh!
-Alex
Although I understand your meaning in reference to a *NIX system, however, I think you mean "Terminal". The Console in OS X is more or less a system log of sorts. :)
:)
Unelss you really like to just sit and watch error messages as they occur.
-Alex
Well, I tried not to use a Mac pre-OSX, but from what I remember, I used Chooser to do something like select a printer on the network. Rendezvous has replaced the need for a user to do ANYTHING to access a printer.
It never made any sense to me why what should have been a "Finder" interface (connecting to shares...essentially a folder that's saved somewhere else) was in a burried configuration utility. Hmmm... in OSX, if I want to connect to a machine, I use the Finder now. "Go->Connect to Server". Or for you quick-key weenies (yes, I am one myself), Command-K. I always thought the Chooser to be a very unintuitive interface compared to the Finder.
Anyway... you old-Mac users really need to think about the design sometimes. As another reply to this post pointed out... Chooser just got STUCK with AppleShare. It wasn't even designed for it. And if something wasn't designed for a particular use, it often times shouldn't be there. Hmmm...where can we hack this support into?
I admit, OSX's Finder could use some improvement. Better use of extended attributes would be nice. But before OSX, I wouldn't touch a Mac if I could help it. I even preferred Linux with X-Windows for God's sake, because I could do more than one thing at a time, at the sacrafice of a pretty interface. REAL productivity people! If you are going to use that argument for a Mac, lets remain consistent to the Big Picture.
-Alex
Thanks for that correction. If you didn't, I would have. As much as I refrain from forming too strong an opinion on this (being half French and Half American [born in Brooklyn, NY]), I do oppose war in general... but I do NOT oppose supporting our troops once things have started.
As my father's commanding officer in Vietnam (Hal Moore, lead character played by Mel Gibson in "We were Soldiers") once said, "Hate war! But love the American Soldier."
And as much as I "voted for the other guy", Powell is the one person I seomwhat trust in this whole thing more than any other.
-Alex
Yeah... I eventually realized that. I remember them hyping how he was doing the switch a while back. I didn't realize it was over a 3 month period for evaluation.
-Alex
Oh! Nevermind. Same poster. heh. :)
-Alex
Apparently the original poster had not problem Copy/Pasting.
Can't believe I actually took the time to reword it a little, and was dissed in exchange for a plagiarist's post. *grin*
-Alex
Man, it's almost time for my anual Mac purchase. *grin* But, I don't know... I did splurge a little last year with the $3000 plasma screen.
... but alas, my 1 year old 15" PB will have to suffice for a while.
But I agree... I think more and more people are seriously eye-balling Macs since MacOS X. It's what got me to buy my first Mac 2 years back. I hated Macs prior to that.
I just can't wait to save up for the 17" PB. *drool*
For those considering the switch... unless you HAVE to have all the latest games, get a Mac! Heck, I even play enough games to suck up free time I dont' even have (Damn I love Ghost Recon).
-Alex
This was on TechTV in January, I thought. It was around the time of the MacWorld SF.
Did someone just come across the article in an archive?
Patrick is pretty good about giving in depth, objective feedback on things... although he does have his pet pieves and strong opinions on some things.
-Alex
The point is, if it shouldn't be done, don't allow it to be done.
Umm... you mean have the user restricted so that they don't have permission to do it?? What OS do YOU use? Technically, Apple DOES do this. Only the Admin user (when prompted for sudo authentication) can make such changes. The problem is that people use an admin user as their main user, without thinking about the consequences, and then do what they want.
People are used to the old Mac and Windows world, where any user is "root" privileges. They're not used to be forced into a structure... and of course, the average Joe seems to refuse to accept this (in general).
So... before you make a comment like that, maybe you SHOULD use what you are commenting on. OS X, like any other *nix, does enforce what should or shouldn't be done. But like any other *nix, a "root" or admin user can still make changes. They NEED to be able to, but with caution.
-Alex
Why do I get the feeling you've not taken a look at a PowerMac. The absolute FIRST thing I noticed when I got my first Mac (2 years ago, thanks to OS X), was how friggen well designed the case was for easy access and configuration. All you have to do is pull a level, and the side opens up (even while running). Everything is layed out perfectly for easy access. ATA connectors are relatively close to the bays for the drives. There are tracks for the belts to be guided. There is NO metal casing blocking your ability to get to your memory, or processor!
I have a scar on my hand (deep one) from having to try and work around the difficult to deal with cases of the PC realm.
Now, as far as compatibility with hardware...
- Memory: no different (aside from being easier to access)
- Hard drives: no different
- Video cards: You have a choice of a couple of the best cards out there. Hell, what's in the Macs is what I actually chose (older models of course in PC) for my PCs. So, I'd prefer the smaller selection in exchange for the lack of headache caused in operating systems trying to support everything and their brother!
- Processor: No different. Go buy a processor upgrade (available at many resellers) and plug the thing in!
- Modems: Why the hell do you need to change it? No ones coming out with a faster modem anymore.
- NIC: Do you KNOW what's in a PowerMac??? They ship standard with Gigabit ethernet! (10/100/1000) I don't anticipate needing to change for a while. And if I do need to, well, it's just a PCI card. Simple upgrade.
So... the real moral of the story is that you need to check on your facts before you go blabbing. You even admit you've not seen the inside of a Mac. I would agree with most of what you said about 5 years ago! But since the latest PowerMac design, they've been using standards buddy! You really ought to check out the latest PowerMacs. I was a hardcore PC advocate (Linux mostly on them)... but I can't imagine going back. Even with slightly higher up front cost... it's friggen worth it!!!
-Alex
I don't know if this was mentioned higher up, but I recently openned a Tivo, and saw that it used a PPC chip as well.
-Alex
It has begun!
True. The military does kinda screw with hiding things. But the space station is international. And it's also planned for commercial access and research. There is a contest (I think it's called the X Race, or something with "X"), where companies are completing to create the first viable public space vehicle for orbital transport. Public meaning, you and me.
Check out the Science Channel on Friday nights (if you have no life). They have cool topics about what's in the works regarding space exploration and research.
So, yeah... military may classify things... but more than just the military is now involved in space exploration now.
-Alex
So, having people in orbit is useless? What about the effects extended weightlessness has on humans? That should be figured out while they're 250 thousand miles away? Yeah, I can see people really putting more funding into a project where people are taking that kind of stupid ass risk!
One of the major factors of the space station research is to determine what is necessary for extended stays in space. This includes physical and psychological. I'm guessing that you think the initial research done on human isolation here on earth was a waste as well. Those were the steps before what is going on now.
Mir was a dead station. It wasn't designed to last as long as it did. To try and keep it running would likely cost more, and have much higher risk of uncontrolled costs. That's like buys computer systems for your network that were designed for a 4 year life, and trying to keep them around for 8 years. Sorry... that ends up costing more and increasing risk. And in case you didn't notice, the space program is very big on little to no risk now-a-days. The last disasters nearly crippled its support and funding.
Mir also wasn't designed for expandability. ISS is designed to be modular enough for expansion. For example, what they're doing now is adding on components to mount larger solar panels. These additional solar panels are so that more labs can be added on, and powered. These additional labs mean more research, and thus returning the benefit and profit.
Also, the space station is a stepping stone. It will be much more cost effective to schedule launches FROM the station to the moon than to go straight from the earth.
More of my $0.02.
-Alex
Well, if you actually paid any attention to what the space station is about, you'd realize that it IS about other scientific endeavors. The whole purpose of the current missions is to expand the power capacity of the space station to add on many more labs for international scientific research.
The types of research include medical (ability to culture medicines that cannot be done in a gravity environment), physics (studying propulsion, etc), and several other things.
Is it just me, or has anyone else come to realize that some of the most beneficial breakthroughs were related to the space program. Things that were NEEDED for space exploration ended up finding a really good use on earth. Velcro anyone??? Sure, many may say that velcro is useless... but have you really thought about how useful it is in general (not just to yourself).
So, while space exploration is defense related, it's rediculous to think that there isn't benefit to other areas indirectly. The military (as much as I'm NOT pro-military) does have a need to push scientific need to further limits. Limits that are not encountered in most environments, and so would not get the funding. And in the end, other get to benefit from the investment.
Sure, things can be achieved without the middle man, but no one seems to have a need until they see the results... especially not a need that is willing to invest that kind of money!
Just my $0.02.
-Alex
Yeah... thought has occured to me. I've already started spending more of my reading/posting time on other boards. Slashdot's starting to get stale and poor quality.
Not that I don't think it has good potential, but I'm just seeing quality go down over the years. Or mayb just not keeping up with my expectations.
-Alex