Uh, yeah, right. Let us assume that it works, is affordable, and will be out tomorrow while we are assuming. Heck, lets assume that it will kick eveyone's ass while we're at it!
My point is lack of information is not information.
1. Peace and quiet. Get her noise reduction headphones (pick a brand).
2. Incense. She'll figure out what it's for.
3. A new car. I had a 1968 VW Minibus (yeah, they're cool now, but we're talking 1976). Oh, it also had an 8-Track. Of course, I learned how to fix brakes on it, but that wasn't fun.
4. Washer and dryer. Forget quarters. Who needs 'em? She can then charge her friends to use it and pay you back (yeah, right!).
5. A maid.
7. The ability to control time and space. Still need it, in fact. Only feasible on very, very, small scales...
Okay, after all the hype and the PRO-Spidey rhetoric, me and my sweetie saw it.
Okay, we saw two different movies. I went in expecting a GOOD movie and got a Sam Raimi movie. Damn my forgetfulness! My sweetie went in to see a movie you would watch on cable (i.e. not worth the money to rent) and she said she got more than that.
Not dissing Raimi, who seems to put Ted and Bruce in every flick (nice to see you Bruce, but even I manage to get some exercise now and then). I'm dissing the folks that argued that Spider-man (with hyphen) was a great movie. It is not.
Aside from killing off a major villain (bad move), the wet t-shirt contest, the come-on in the cemetery (eeewwwww!) and the rubber Spider-man (looked more like a superball - very weak CG folks), it read more like a course in what not to do. But, then, Microsoft has the majority of the OS market - just because it is popular doesn't mean it is good.
My sweetie had the same problems with the movie. But figured it was going to suck anyway so was surprised that it didn't suck much. Not much of an endorsement.
"Didn't suck as much as it could..." Philidelphia Post
"Who am I?" A superhero who's spidey-sense apparently fails half-way through the movie. I mean, lets face it, this is a movie where if you see the first half and leave, you get your money's worth. When they do all the CG butt-kicking, it actually gets pretty dull (oh, let me guess, at the last minute he'll jump out of the way [sigh]). I do wish GG had yelled "oh, shit, not in the nuts!" That would have been entertainment.
Now, excuse me if I ignore you all and see ATOTC on my own terms.
IBM keeps developing "fast stuff" that, by the way, has to be refrigierated with liquid helium. Not exactly common at my local 7-11 (will a cold six-pack work?).
And what substrate will they use? How will they build it en masse? These are important questions that this article "failed" to mention [sigh].
This is similar to to the way a phone company handles wiretaps.
Ah, but then that would ALSO apply to Time/Warner which petitioned the government recently (and got) a ruling that said cable was NOT like the phone company.
In other words, your analogy works if indeed Yahoo WERE like the phone company. But even you would be hard pressed to agree that they are.
Since the deputized staff have the equivalent training to police officers for this type of evidence retrieval, there is no break in the the chain of custody
This makes assumptions - that they will not have a certain loyalty to their paycheck. In the case of phone company wiretaps, they are rarely directed at the phone company itself. So again, I believe your analogy fails.
My favorite "useless" comment was one that was part of a (thank gawd) proprietary OS which had in the header to a chunk of assembly language "DOES NOT CHANGE REGISTER HL". The first thing it did was change register HL.
My point is that comments can be as much a problem as they can be a solution. If you have time to change the code, but no time to change the comment, then in essence you may as well have NO COMMENTS. Which really defeats the purpose.
I have found, for the most part, that GOOD function and variable names are FAR better than a half page of comments (as an example, take a page of C++ code and change all the variables to one character... see how hard that is to read?).
Second, ignore the law that says we can't exceed 80 columns. It is dumb. It is old. It defeats the purpose of having a HUGE SCREEN with little teeny lines. 80 columns are the size of IBM punch cards. AKA dinosaurs.
Third, kill whomever sez that Hungarian notation helps. It doesn't. It is the SECOND DUMBEST thing to come out of Microsoft. People who adopt it are mindless beasts of burden. You don't want to be one of THEM do you?
Fourth, BE FANATICAL about taking the what reads from others and discard what doesn't. I used to make boxes with slashes and dashes, etc. When I realized I spent more time "refixing boxes" I got rid of the boxes.
Fifth, is the best size for a bottle of gin. Gin and tonics may not help with coding, but they take the pain away from reading others code. Also good when the boss says "so, what the hell does this mean?".
Sixth, "standards" doesn't mean squat in the real world. Getting code out is far more important. Learn what is absolutely required for comments.
Seventh, if it is a trick TELL THE READER! Your audience is the next guy who has to support your dreck...er...wonderful creation. He is probably going to be less brilliant. If you use a trick of the compiler, LET HIM KNOW. I have worked (and written) code that dies a mysterious death when you "optimize it" - when in fact it IS optimized.
Eighth, learn from the screwups of others. If something you picked up reads like crap, then figure out how to make it better. Does it need to be indented more? Better variable names? Etc. Surprisingly, others probably had the same problem.
Ninth, NEVER write code with comments like "YES". I knew of a HUGE chunk (when printed is stood three feet tall) which had five comments in it. One was "YES". The contractor had to sit for several days with it remembering what it did before he could modify it. Mindblowing, isn't it?
Tenth, Keep evolving. Writing comments is a lot like writing code, you get better at it as you get older. And the style eventually gets more terse, but more reasonable.
Eleventh, EVEN if it seems obvious, sometimes it may not be. Be prepared to defend what may seem like simplistic comments.
Twelfth, This is the most important. BE CONSISTANT.
Okay, so what is the best way to disrupt your competitor? What, you say, build a better product? NO!!! Dammit! Hire lawyers! Lots of 'em for frivolous lawsuits. Why? It slows down the competition so a) you can keep a weak product on the market longer b) if you are damn lucky, you can kill their product.
I have worked for a lot of companies and have been surprised at the number of frivolous lawsuits that do PRECISELY that. I really don't consider that "competing" (which is what "competition" is about, right?). Isn't the point to build better products? Last I looked, lawyers really weren't considered to be a part of economic theory (but, hey, economic theory says monopolies provide the lowest priced goods - guess there are flaws in everything, eh?).
So, if we look at Microsoft, in essence they did EXACTLY what this guy says is successful. The question is, was it ethical or moral? And my grandfather could have made children work in coal mines for slave wages while he got rich, but noooooo, he had this damn ethical streak!!! So now instead of a billionaire, I'm a working stiff. Doesn't seem fair in the end does it?
Expect more folks to be following the Microsoft model [sigh]...
Re:Just an observation...
on
Bitter Java
·
· Score: 1
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, oh, I see, running away then. You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you. I'll bite your legs off!
Actually, I thought about this first, but feared the twenty-somethingers wouldn't have got it (my office-mate didn't [sigh]).
"Brave, brave Sir Robin, rode forth from Camelot. He was not afraid to die, brave, brave Sir Robin. He was not at all afraid to killed in nasty ways...."
Re:Just an observation...
on
Bitter Java
·
· Score: 1
Another huge win for OOD is in threading. Writing multithreaded code in C is a nightmare.
No doubt for some it is. However, having written not one, but two (sadly proprietary) RTOS's, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Perhaps it is just me, but I find them rather trivial.
My point is NOT that C++ is a "bad" language (well, okay, it has a few problems [grin]), but that folks get all geared up creating classes, etc. to get around inherent weaknesses that they don't seem to realize that they are making things harder not easier.
"New and improved" does not mean that what we used previously was "old and lousy". Personally, I have seen OOD and OOP being hyped to death and when push came to shove, they always allocated TWICE as much time as they would have for a project written in C.
But what do I know, I'm old. If I were Inuit, they would put me on the next chunk of ice and say "ta ta". [grin]
Oh, I guess this is the form of captitalism that they never taught in my graduate Economics course - the hidden hand of the market spy...
Please explain to me how Microsoft's dirty tricks have squat to do with captalism?
You remind me of Kevin Kline in the movie "A Fish Named Wanda" - (to paraphrase) "Baboons read economic theory, they just don't understand it!
Just an observation...
on
Bitter Java
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
One thing that I noted when I first dealt with the problem of C++ (yeah, the language is a problem, we all know that) - is that everyone was writing these "wonderful" classes and yet, I found that not a SINGLE ONE made writing code that much easier. Oh, it changed the paradigm, but it didn't change the amount of work that had to be done. Far from it: it actually INCREASED work because we had to learn each and every class (which, in that perverse way that programmers are, seldom had much in common).
"So what", you may say, "just deal with it."
Well, the problem is not "just dealing" with it - the problem is if classes do not make my life easier, write code faster, write code that fails predictably, then they are in fact failures.
Part of my history with software is I like to write software that you look at and go "oh, I could have written that". Which is far more difficult than writing code that is hard to understand. "Intuitive programming" is what someone once called it (I forget the brilliant soul who came up with the phrase). C++, much like Java, does not fall into that category.
Sooooo, it was with much trepedation that I plunged into Objective C. At first, I hated the syntax (and the NeXT/Apple classes). Then, quickly and surprisingly, I learned how rich and powerful it was. Best it really DID make programming easier and fun again.
But I am back at C++ (ugh). It is again like cutting off both arms and legs and being expected to whip Jet Li's ass. Yah, right!
OO has been touted as the best thing since sliced bread, yet I have found that for the most part it is like having bread where all the slices are tagged as "virtual" - the REAL slicing still has to be done by yours truly. And to be honest, the tools are still effing primitive. I can't believe that we STILL debug EXACTLY the same effing way we did 20+ years ago (okay, source code debugging makes it easier still, but not significantly).
Finally, for those who expect Microsoft to save the day, 'bout time to give up on those losers. By the time they get something out and it is being used a LOT, they dump it for the NEXT GREAT THING (and folks see pink slips).
I think we pay around $40-80/hr for the off-shore ones
Lessee, if one assumes no vacations, doesn't $80/hr work out to around $166K per year? Damn, I'll take that money! Hell, I'll take half!
There is some really good talent in the U.S. but for some reason, for the same reason I guess that no one gets fired for buying Microsoft, folks think that offshore is cheaper. Yeah, and Enron was a good buy at the time, wasn't it?
These searches are carried out mostly by "officers of the court"...
But I think the point is that the staff of Yahoo, in fact most U.S. citizens, are not officers of the court.
I find it disturbing that:
a) someone appears to be advocating fishing expeditions b) that the body of evidence can be mishandled, modified, or severely tampered with c) that people are willing to trample the Constitution in the name of "getting pornographers".
The real question is when will people figure out these leaks are fake.
...and the DOJ is nothing but a puppet on Bill's hand "hello Mr Gates, I want to break you up!" "No, no!!!" "yes I do" "No no!!!" ...Some damning evidence later..."hello Mr Gates we aren't going to break you" "Yes, yes"
If you ask me, the memos are real, the DOJ is fake.
"The e-mail represents some random thoughts of a company executive who no longer has anything to do with our relationship with Intel or (computer makers)," Desler said.
1. Security: MacOS X has only been around a short time... A quick check with SARC indicates that there are FAR fewer virii, worms, et. al. that infect Macs. Windows is FAR more vulnerable.
2. Stability:...it has no proven track record... And MS has a proven track record of security holes. A lot of 'em. Personally, I've had OS X running for months (literally - no shut down) and the system just worked. This was with Public Beta! I have never had a Windows system work half this well.
3. Visibility: Macs (modern macs) always announce their presence.... What the hell does THAT mean? Is their a point or are you just fabricating out of whole cloth?
4. Cost-effectiveness: Try explaining to a CBO accountant... And I will show you a wasted afternoon. Your argument is weak.
The biggest issue with Macs not being "accepted" is the perception that somehow there is something "wrong" with them. There has yet to be anyone to explain what that might be. It is all FUD, plain and simple.
Jon seems to WANT to draw in myth and yet I never really saw where he did (much less why Spidey is more "myth" than Star Wars!)... Here is my take...
Spiderman is, in fact, merely a rehash of a tired theme: that the use of radioactivity will "somehow" unlock power/create powers/instill powers not granted to the normal Joe. This is "science" of the 50's - quaint, but rather foolish.
The comic was, as to my wife would put it as I am a diehard D.C. fan (I'll get to Batman in a minute), "Spiderman is a soap opera". I couldn't put it more succinctly. I found the comic to be EXCEEDINGLY dull with stories that, no doubt, interested those who enjoyed super-heroes having the ability to bash heads, but don't have enough courage to ask a woman out on a date. Give me a break already! Where is the exit!!!
Spiderman fails, for me, where many other comics fail. Jeez, if he is not whining about not having he courage to ask Mary Jane out on a date it is remembering (lower lip trembles) about Uncle Ben! Fond memories, yes, but these are, well, on the order of Tommy!
Batman, was more my style. He didn't have superpowers, didn't use a gun, and attempted to avoid killing anyone. Period. And did the man have problems! Sheesh! He SHOULD turn himself into an asylum! But he remains my fav. Why? Because his weapon is a far older mythology, the fear of the dark, the dangers of the unknown and, in this case, the angst that comes about knowing that you can't save everyone.
What Parker never was, and I will argue never can be successfully, is the person that we all are - the one that yells at those who don't deserve it; the person that secretly wishes people to JUST...PLAIN...DIE - these types of emotions just do not exist in the Peter Parker universe. This is why Spiderman does not fall within the realm of myth. Perhaps the films receipts do, but receipts do not a legend make.
Star Wars, despite Luke being a yahoo from the rural areas, succeeds in this because it describes the imperfections of man, right down to the tiny bit of greed (the Dark Side). It runs into the scare of incest (whoa, Luke, that's your sister you're tonguing!), of true paternity, and the meaning of family ("yeah, they may be charcoal briquets, but Uncle Owen an Aunt Beru were like kin").
So, AOTC may not pull in the same receipts that Spidey did, in the end, so what? The more interesting aspect of it is that EVERYONE in this country (save but a few) know what you're talking about when you say "the Dark Side". THAT, my friend, is the power of myth.
My day has been ruined! Outlook AND Explorer both can spread virii?
Shit, this is like Microsoft writes bad code or something...
Can this be true or am I just living a nightmare?
Will we end up removing BOTH programs and installing two million candle-power lights to point up into the night sky to symbolize where these two mighty titans once stood?
Will Bush launch a strike against Redmond killing thousands (or putting them out of there misery)?
Slashdot Mirror
...we can assume...
Uh, yeah, right. Let us assume that it works, is affordable, and will be out tomorrow while we are assuming. Heck, lets assume that it will kick eveyone's ass while we're at it!
My point is lack of information is not information.
What if you have no peer?
1. Peace and quiet. Get her noise reduction headphones (pick a brand).
2. Incense. She'll figure out what it's for.
3. A new car. I had a 1968 VW Minibus (yeah, they're cool now, but we're talking 1976). Oh, it also had an 8-Track. Of course, I learned how to fix brakes on it, but that wasn't fun.
4. Washer and dryer. Forget quarters. Who needs 'em? She can then charge her friends to use it and pay you back (yeah, right!).
5. A maid.
7. The ability to control time and space. Still need it, in fact. Only feasible on very, very, small scales...
8. There is no number six.
Okay, after all the hype and the PRO-Spidey rhetoric, me and my sweetie saw it.
Okay, we saw two different movies. I went in expecting a GOOD movie and got a Sam Raimi movie. Damn my forgetfulness! My sweetie went in to see a movie you would watch on cable (i.e. not worth the money to rent) and she said she got more than that.
Not dissing Raimi, who seems to put Ted and Bruce in every flick (nice to see you Bruce, but even I manage to get some exercise now and then). I'm dissing the folks that argued that Spider-man (with hyphen) was a great movie. It is not.
Aside from killing off a major villain (bad move), the wet t-shirt contest, the come-on in the cemetery (eeewwwww!) and the rubber Spider-man (looked more like a superball - very weak CG folks), it read more like a course in what not to do. But, then, Microsoft has the majority of the OS market - just because it is popular doesn't mean it is good.
My sweetie had the same problems with the movie. But figured it was going to suck anyway so was surprised that it didn't suck much. Not much of an endorsement.
"Didn't suck as much as it could..." Philidelphia Post
"Who am I?" A superhero who's spidey-sense apparently fails half-way through the movie. I mean, lets face it, this is a movie where if you see the first half and leave, you get your money's worth. When they do all the CG butt-kicking, it actually gets pretty dull (oh, let me guess, at the last minute he'll jump out of the way [sigh]). I do wish GG had yelled "oh, shit, not in the nuts!" That would have been entertainment.
Now, excuse me if I ignore you all and see ATOTC on my own terms.
IBM keeps developing "fast stuff" that, by the way, has to be refrigierated with liquid helium. Not exactly common at my local 7-11 (will a cold six-pack work?).
And what substrate will they use? How will they build it en masse? These are important questions that this article "failed" to mention [sigh].
This is similar to to the way a phone company handles wiretaps.
Ah, but then that would ALSO apply to Time/Warner which petitioned the government recently (and got) a ruling that said cable was NOT like the phone company.
In other words, your analogy works if indeed Yahoo WERE like the phone company. But even you would be hard pressed to agree that they are.
Since the deputized staff have the equivalent training to police officers for this type of evidence retrieval, there is no break in the the chain of custody
This makes assumptions - that they will not have a certain loyalty to their paycheck. In the case of phone company wiretaps, they are rarely directed at the phone company itself. So again, I believe your analogy fails.
My favorite "useless" comment was one that was part of a (thank gawd) proprietary OS which had in the header to a chunk of assembly language "DOES NOT CHANGE REGISTER HL". The first thing it did was change register HL.
My point is that comments can be as much a problem as they can be a solution. If you have time to change the code, but no time to change the comment, then in essence you may as well have NO COMMENTS. Which really defeats the purpose.
I have found, for the most part, that GOOD function and variable names are FAR better than a half page of comments (as an example, take a page of C++ code and change all the variables to one character... see how hard that is to read?).
Second, ignore the law that says we can't exceed 80 columns. It is dumb. It is old. It defeats the purpose of having a HUGE SCREEN with little teeny lines. 80 columns are the size of IBM punch cards. AKA dinosaurs.
Third, kill whomever sez that Hungarian notation helps. It doesn't. It is the SECOND DUMBEST thing to come out of Microsoft. People who adopt it are mindless beasts of burden. You don't want to be one of THEM do you?
Fourth, BE FANATICAL about taking the what reads from others and discard what doesn't. I used to make boxes with slashes and dashes, etc. When I realized I spent more time "refixing boxes" I got rid of the boxes.
Fifth, is the best size for a bottle of gin. Gin and tonics may not help with coding, but they take the pain away from reading others code. Also good when the boss says "so, what the hell does this mean?".
Sixth, "standards" doesn't mean squat in the real world. Getting code out is far more important. Learn what is absolutely required for comments.
Seventh, if it is a trick TELL THE READER! Your audience is the next guy who has to support your dreck...er...wonderful creation. He is probably going to be less brilliant. If you use a trick of the compiler, LET HIM KNOW. I have worked (and written) code that dies a mysterious death when you "optimize it" - when in fact it IS optimized.
Eighth, learn from the screwups of others. If something you picked up reads like crap, then figure out how to make it better. Does it need to be indented more? Better variable names? Etc. Surprisingly, others probably had the same problem.
Ninth, NEVER write code with comments like "YES". I knew of a HUGE chunk (when printed is stood three feet tall) which had five comments in it. One was "YES". The contractor had to sit for several days with it remembering what it did before he could modify it. Mindblowing, isn't it?
Tenth, Keep evolving. Writing comments is a lot like writing code, you get better at it as you get older. And the style eventually gets more terse, but more reasonable. Eleventh, EVEN if it seems obvious, sometimes it may not be. Be prepared to defend what may seem like simplistic comments. Twelfth, This is the most important. BE CONSISTANT.
[snoooooooze] Oh, I'm sorry, did I miss something worth commenting about?
disrupting competitors, not customers
Okay, so what is the best way to disrupt your competitor? What, you say, build a better product? NO!!! Dammit! Hire lawyers! Lots of 'em for frivolous lawsuits. Why? It slows down the competition so a) you can keep a weak product on the market longer b) if you are damn lucky, you can kill their product.
I have worked for a lot of companies and have been surprised at the number of frivolous lawsuits that do PRECISELY that. I really don't consider that "competing" (which is what "competition" is about, right?). Isn't the point to build better products? Last I looked, lawyers really weren't considered to be a part of economic theory (but, hey, economic theory says monopolies provide the lowest priced goods - guess there are flaws in everything, eh?).
So, if we look at Microsoft, in essence they did EXACTLY what this guy says is successful. The question is, was it ethical or moral? And my grandfather could have made children work in coal mines for slave wages while he got rich, but noooooo, he had this damn ethical streak!!! So now instead of a billionaire, I'm a working stiff. Doesn't seem fair in the end does it?
Expect more folks to be following the Microsoft model [sigh]...
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, oh, I see, running away then. You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you. I'll bite your legs off!
Actually, I thought about this first, but feared the twenty-somethingers wouldn't have got it (my office-mate didn't [sigh]).
"Brave, brave Sir Robin, rode forth from Camelot. He was not afraid to die, brave, brave Sir Robin. He was not at all afraid to killed in nasty ways...."
Another huge win for OOD is in threading. Writing multithreaded code in C is a nightmare.
No doubt for some it is. However, having written not one, but two (sadly proprietary) RTOS's, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Perhaps it is just me, but I find them rather trivial.
My point is NOT that C++ is a "bad" language (well, okay, it has a few problems [grin]), but that folks get all geared up creating classes, etc. to get around inherent weaknesses that they don't seem to realize that they are making things harder not easier.
"New and improved" does not mean that what we used previously was "old and lousy". Personally, I have seen OOD and OOP being hyped to death and when push came to shove, they always allocated TWICE as much time as they would have for a project written in C.
But what do I know, I'm old. If I were Inuit, they would put me on the next chunk of ice and say "ta ta". [grin]
Oh, I guess this is the form of captitalism that they never taught in my graduate Economics course - the hidden hand of the market spy...
Please explain to me how Microsoft's dirty tricks have squat to do with captalism?
You remind me of Kevin Kline in the movie "A Fish Named Wanda" - (to paraphrase)
"Baboons read economic theory, they just don't understand it!
One thing that I noted when I first dealt with the problem of C++ (yeah, the language is a problem, we all know that) - is that everyone was writing these "wonderful" classes and yet, I found that not a SINGLE ONE made writing code that much easier. Oh, it changed the paradigm, but it didn't change the amount of work that had to be done. Far from it: it actually INCREASED work because we had to learn each and every class (which, in that perverse way that programmers are, seldom had much in common).
"So what", you may say, "just deal with it."
Well, the problem is not "just dealing" with it - the problem is if classes do not make my life easier, write code faster, write code that fails predictably, then they are in fact failures.
Part of my history with software is I like to write software that you look at and go "oh, I could have written that". Which is far more difficult than writing code that is hard to understand. "Intuitive programming" is what someone once called it (I forget the brilliant soul who came up with the phrase). C++, much like Java, does not fall into that category.
Sooooo, it was with much trepedation that I plunged into Objective C. At first, I hated the syntax (and the NeXT/Apple classes). Then, quickly and surprisingly, I learned how rich and powerful it was. Best it really DID make programming easier and fun again.
But I am back at C++ (ugh). It is again like cutting off both arms and legs and being expected to whip Jet Li's ass. Yah, right!
OO has been touted as the best thing since sliced bread, yet I have found that for the most part it is like having bread where all the slices are tagged as "virtual" - the REAL slicing still has to be done by yours truly. And to be honest, the tools are still effing primitive. I can't believe that we STILL debug EXACTLY the same effing way we did 20+ years ago (okay, source code debugging makes it easier still, but not significantly).
Finally, for those who expect Microsoft to save the day, 'bout time to give up on those losers. By the time they get something out and it is being used a LOT, they dump it for the NEXT GREAT THING (and folks see pink slips).
I think we pay around $40-80/hr for the off-shore ones
Lessee, if one assumes no vacations, doesn't $80/hr work out to around $166K per year? Damn, I'll take that money! Hell, I'll take half!
There is some really good talent in the U.S. but for some reason, for the same reason I guess that no one gets fired for buying Microsoft, folks think that offshore is cheaper.
Yeah, and Enron was a good buy at the time, wasn't it?
These searches are carried out mostly by "officers of the court"...
But I think the point is that the staff of Yahoo, in fact most U.S. citizens, are not officers of the court.
I find it disturbing that:
a) someone appears to be advocating fishing expeditions
b) that the body of evidence can be mishandled, modified, or severely tampered with
c) that people are willing to trample the Constitution in the name of "getting pornographers".
But that seems to be the attitude post-9/11...
The real question is when will people figure out these leaks are fake.
...and the DOJ is nothing but a puppet on Bill's hand "hello Mr Gates, I want to break you up!" "No, no!!!" "yes I do" "No no!!!"
...Some damning evidence later..."hello Mr Gates we aren't going to break you" "Yes, yes"
If you ask me, the memos are real, the DOJ is fake.
"The e-mail represents some random thoughts of a company executive who no longer has anything to do with our relationship with Intel or (computer makers)," Desler said.
Riiiight...
So I guess that makes it all right then?
1. Security: MacOS X has only been around a short time... A quick check with SARC indicates that there are FAR fewer virii, worms, et. al. that infect Macs. Windows is FAR more vulnerable.
...it has no proven track record... And MS has a proven track record of security holes. A lot of 'em. Personally, I've had OS X running for months (literally - no shut down) and the system just worked. This was with Public Beta! I have never had a Windows system work half this well.
2. Stability:
3. Visibility: Macs (modern macs) always announce their presence.... What the hell does THAT mean? Is their a point or are you just fabricating out of whole cloth?
4. Cost-effectiveness: Try explaining to a CBO accountant... And I will show you a wasted afternoon. Your argument is weak.
The biggest issue with Macs not being "accepted" is the perception that somehow there is something "wrong" with them. There has yet to be anyone to explain what that might be. It is all FUD, plain and simple.
We donna need no stinkin' hyphen's...
Okay, so now we got the motors, the gears. Now all we need are the wheels, a good nanostereo system and GM can sell cars to bacteria.
These things are all very interesting, but has anyone managed to do anything of use with them?
Jon seems to WANT to draw in myth and yet I never really saw where he did (much less why Spidey is more "myth" than Star Wars!)... Here is my take...
Spiderman is, in fact, merely a rehash of a tired theme: that the use of radioactivity will "somehow" unlock power/create powers/instill powers not granted to the normal Joe. This is "science" of the 50's - quaint, but rather foolish.
The comic was, as to my wife would put it as I am a diehard D.C. fan (I'll get to Batman in a minute), "Spiderman is a soap opera". I couldn't put it more succinctly. I found the comic to be EXCEEDINGLY dull with stories that, no doubt, interested those who enjoyed super-heroes having the ability to bash heads, but don't have enough courage to ask a woman out on a date. Give me a break already! Where is the exit!!!
Spiderman fails, for me, where many other comics fail. Jeez, if he is not whining about not having he courage to ask Mary Jane out on a date it is remembering (lower lip trembles) about Uncle Ben! Fond memories, yes, but these are, well, on the order of Tommy!
Batman, was more my style. He didn't have superpowers, didn't use a gun, and attempted to avoid killing anyone. Period. And did the man have problems! Sheesh! He SHOULD turn himself into an asylum! But he remains my fav. Why? Because his weapon is a far older mythology, the fear of the dark, the dangers of the unknown and, in this case, the angst that comes about knowing that you can't save everyone.
What Parker never was, and I will argue never can be successfully, is the person that we all are - the one that yells at those who don't deserve it; the person that secretly wishes people to JUST...PLAIN...DIE - these types of emotions just do not exist in the Peter Parker universe. This is why Spiderman does not fall within the realm of myth. Perhaps the films receipts do, but receipts do not a legend make.
Star Wars, despite Luke being a yahoo from the rural areas, succeeds in this because it describes the imperfections of man, right down to the tiny bit of greed (the Dark Side). It runs into the scare of incest (whoa, Luke, that's your sister you're tonguing!), of true paternity, and the meaning of family ("yeah, they may be charcoal briquets, but Uncle Owen an Aunt Beru were like kin").
So, AOTC may not pull in the same receipts that Spidey did, in the end, so what? The more interesting aspect of it is that EVERYONE in this country (save but a few) know what you're talking about when you say "the Dark Side". THAT, my friend, is the power of myth.
Mention Uncle Ben and most people think of rice.
May the "m*a" be with you...
Various campus groundskeepers said they would not do windows, even at a group rate...
When will someone write a patch that has it shoot itself in the head?
Computer A: Did you know about Jim? He is really getting teed off at me.
Comp. B: How can you tell?
Just what we need, computers that gossip...
Shit, this is like Microsoft writes bad code or something...
Can this be true or am I just living a nightmare?
Will we end up removing BOTH programs and installing two million candle-power lights to point up into the night sky to symbolize where these two mighty titans once stood?
Will Bush launch a strike against Redmond killing thousands (or putting them out of there misery)?