I agree. I'd switch to Mint in a heartbeat if my apps ran there, (and I have a laptop running Mint on which I do web surfing and email and so forth) but even I have to conclude that Windows 10 was ok out of the box. It was better once I deleted the active tiles but I don't remember having to do anything else to make it what I would consider "usable".
Oh, and there's an easy fix for the tiles; right click, delete. Right click delete. Keep going until the tiles are all gone and the start menu looks sane.
TFA is very entertaining, and the part of me that desperately wants Microsoft to fail grinned at some of it, but I'm not sure I agree with all the conclusions. But I recognize that I'm not the user that the article is directed at. I only use Windows 10 for a few applications, a suite that only runs on Windows or Mac (and at the moment runs better on Windows) an app that only runs on Windows, and a browser that uses Google as the search engine. I don't care a lot about the OS except it manage my resources, be reliable, and run my apps.
All that said, I don't have a lot of problems with Windows 10. Yes, it's irritating to have settings in two different places. Sometimes I have to google how to set something if I haven't done it in awhile. But I don't have to make changes very often so that's not egregious.
10 fires up fast, (faster in my estimation, than did Win7) stays up, and runs my apps. I have never even looked in the app store, so it could be entirely filled with fecal matter and biohazards and I wouldn't know or care. I haven't been inclined to touch Cortana, despite the OS pleading with me to try it on every boot, so its insistence to use Edge and Bing don't affect me. (Although, now that I know Cortana will only use Edge and Bing, I'm even less likely to try it.) Speaking of which, I have no inclination to use Edge for anything, so its reliance on Bing is also not an issue.
I don't bring up Windows 10 to fondle and admire it, but to run the apps I need to get work done. And it seems to do that. I suspect the vast majority of users are only using it for that. And if so, and if they don't do their own administration, they probably care even less about the points in TFA than do I.
I admit, the lack of privacy bothers me. But being that the kind of work I do requires that I use apps the only practical OS for which is Windows, I don't really have any choice. So I try not to think about it.
So, is Windows 10 failing us? I don't see how one could come to that conclusion. It manages resources, and it loads programs, and it does all this in a reasonably reliable manner. It's not too painful or frustrating to use. I don't like it, but I can live with it.
I mean, it could be a *lot* worse. It could be Windows 8.
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
At worst, they'll have a real use-case when they try the experiment again.
Let's compare apples to apples. Modern motorcycle emissions are not higher than modern cars. Bikes built in this century, using this century's designs, have O2 sensors and injection and dynamic fuel mixture and antiknock sensors just like cars built in this century. It's California that's driving this -- bike manufacturers who sell in the US generally design to be CARB compliant so they don't miss out on the lucrative California market. The problem is that the bikes in Hanoi are old, or copies of an old design. Replace them with cars in the same economy, and you'll get old cars or copies of old cars. Incidentally, google "shipping cars to vietnam". It's already happening. Seriously, you don't think when they ban motorcycles everyone is going to go out and buy a new Prius?
And so, we replace old stinky bikes with old stinky cars, and make the problem worse.
Thing one: Government plans to convert people to mass transit often, historically, fall well short of expectation. Thing two: Banning motorcycles will cause an inevitable upsurge in car ownership. It won't be 1:1 of course, but people and things gotta move and life finds a way. The most probable result will be an increase in pollution and even more packed roads.
Regardless of what side one might be on, or where one stands on the issues, one has to admit, the lawsuits have been every much as entertaining as the movies.
I wonder if I'm alone in thinking that if anything has caused irreparable harm to Tolkien's legacy over the years, it was Christopher's whining.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. When I entered the workforce, minimum wage was $1.60/hour, and I was getting $1.45/hour through a high school work program as I was not yet 18 (California law at the time allowed employers to pay minors in a work program less than minimum wage).
At the time of my first job, I could afford to make $1.45 an hour because at 16 I was still living with my parents. I wasn't trying to feed a family of four. That's not what minimum wage jobs are intended to accomplish. Besides spending money, I got an education on arriving on time, learning and following procedures, following through on detail, and finishing my work. Having that job on my resume helped me get another, higher paying job in college, which paid my part of the rent and helped with school expenses. That job led to another, even higher paying job, and I could afford my own apartment. By then I was making substantially more than minimal wage.
Six years after that first, $1.45/hour job, I was making $26/hour as a lab tech. At that time, minimum wage was $3.10/hour. The difference was that I had graduated high school, put myself through college (a combination of loans and working to pay my own way) and had learned a useful skill that was in demand. I also had a resume that, although not in the field, at least illustrated that I knew how to get and keep a job. I really recommend this as a way to improve your bottom line, rather than waiting for the minimum rate to increase.
It's not that weird -- it's the cost of money. If it takes a vendor a significant time to get paid after rendering the product or service, the vendor loses the use of that money during that time period. Interest is a way to compensate for that.
I understand, and you don't even have to be an "undocumented worker". Years ago I spent a couple years as a private contractor and chose during that time not to have medical insurance at all. My salary at the time was fairly high, and I was in general good health, so it seemed a safe bet.
Then, it so happens I had to have some procedures done. Some precancerous growths removed, dental work done, nothing critical but still potentially spendy. The interesting thing is that as a cash customer, I was charged a significantly lower price than if I had insurance. Apparently there's a lot of overhead involved in doing business with insurance companies, and doctors are willing to pass some of the savings on to cash customers. The other thing is that as a cash customer, I could go pretty much anywhere for medical or dental care, without worrying about what's "in program" or "out of program" and the care providers realize that.
There's a part of me that wonders if one could actually do better "under the table", at least on the short term (lack of healthcare would eventually trip you up) due to the employer's lower overhead. (No payroll taxes, no insurance, etc.)
It depends on what that 5 bucks would buy, I guess. But the erroneous assumption here is the word "everyone". This isn't about "everyone" making minimum wage. There has to be entry level jobs with room to improve, else where do beginning employees start?
Yeah, I know, my machine got infected. I know 'cuz I got a call just the other day from a very helpful person. "Hello, I'm from The Microsoft, ok? I'm calling you about your computer, ok? Your computer is infested with the viruses, ok?" He helped me straighten it out. Cost me $300 and my machine runs a little slower now, but I'm sure it was worth it.
Meesa doesn't liksa people trying stupid shit with well established franchises.
The alternative to "safe" is the StarWars saga we like to pretend didn't exist. I mean episode 4 5 and 6 are great, I don't understand why they never made any prequels.
Yeah, I heard that Lucas had a story in mind, and everything.
...even if Telecom Cable wins, the max damages amount to pocket change for Comcast, and, if my understanding is correct, Telecom Cable still remains irreparably harmed, probably out of business. So Comcast wins no matter what happens.
As to why Comcast would resort to these tactics, the answer, simply, is because they work.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. I'd switch to Mint in a heartbeat if my apps ran there, (and I have a laptop running Mint on which I do web surfing and email and so forth) but even I have to conclude that Windows 10 was ok out of the box. It was better once I deleted the active tiles but I don't remember having to do anything else to make it what I would consider "usable".
Oh, and there's an easy fix for the tiles; right click, delete. Right click delete. Keep going until the tiles are all gone and the start menu looks sane.
TFA is very entertaining, and the part of me that desperately wants Microsoft to fail grinned at some of it, but I'm not sure I agree with all the conclusions. But I recognize that I'm not the user that the article is directed at. I only use Windows 10 for a few applications, a suite that only runs on Windows or Mac (and at the moment runs better on Windows) an app that only runs on Windows, and a browser that uses Google as the search engine. I don't care a lot about the OS except it manage my resources, be reliable, and run my apps.
All that said, I don't have a lot of problems with Windows 10. Yes, it's irritating to have settings in two different places. Sometimes I have to google how to set something if I haven't done it in awhile. But I don't have to make changes very often so that's not egregious.
10 fires up fast, (faster in my estimation, than did Win7) stays up, and runs my apps. I have never even looked in the app store, so it could be entirely filled with fecal matter and biohazards and I wouldn't know or care. I haven't been inclined to touch Cortana, despite the OS pleading with me to try it on every boot, so its insistence to use Edge and Bing don't affect me. (Although, now that I know Cortana will only use Edge and Bing, I'm even less likely to try it.) Speaking of which, I have no inclination to use Edge for anything, so its reliance on Bing is also not an issue.
I don't bring up Windows 10 to fondle and admire it, but to run the apps I need to get work done. And it seems to do that. I suspect the vast majority of users are only using it for that. And if so, and if they don't do their own administration, they probably care even less about the points in TFA than do I.
I admit, the lack of privacy bothers me. But being that the kind of work I do requires that I use apps the only practical OS for which is Windows, I don't really have any choice. So I try not to think about it.
So, is Windows 10 failing us? I don't see how one could come to that conclusion. It manages resources, and it loads programs, and it does all this in a reasonably reliable manner. It's not too painful or frustrating to use. I don't like it, but I can live with it.
I mean, it could be a *lot* worse. It could be Windows 8.
Be happy you did not find the hamsters.
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
At worst, they'll have a real use-case when they try the experiment again.
Let's compare apples to apples. Modern motorcycle emissions are not higher than modern cars. Bikes built in this century, using this century's designs, have O2 sensors and injection and dynamic fuel mixture and antiknock sensors just like cars built in this century. It's California that's driving this -- bike manufacturers who sell in the US generally design to be CARB compliant so they don't miss out on the lucrative California market. The problem is that the bikes in Hanoi are old, or copies of an old design. Replace them with cars in the same economy, and you'll get old cars or copies of old cars. Incidentally, google "shipping cars to vietnam". It's already happening. Seriously, you don't think when they ban motorcycles everyone is going to go out and buy a new Prius?
And so, we replace old stinky bikes with old stinky cars, and make the problem worse.
Thing one: Government plans to convert people to mass transit often, historically, fall well short of expectation. Thing two: Banning motorcycles will cause an inevitable upsurge in car ownership. It won't be 1:1 of course, but people and things gotta move and life finds a way. The most probable result will be an increase in pollution and even more packed roads.
Hi, Christopher, didn't know you were on Slashdot.
Regardless of what side one might be on, or where one stands on the issues, one has to admit, the lawsuits have been every much as entertaining as the movies.
I wonder if I'm alone in thinking that if anything has caused irreparable harm to Tolkien's legacy over the years, it was Christopher's whining.
What do the fiery letters say?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. When I entered the workforce, minimum wage was $1.60/hour, and I was getting $1.45/hour through a high school work program as I was not yet 18 (California law at the time allowed employers to pay minors in a work program less than minimum wage).
At the time of my first job, I could afford to make $1.45 an hour because at 16 I was still living with my parents. I wasn't trying to feed a family of four. That's not what minimum wage jobs are intended to accomplish. Besides spending money, I got an education on arriving on time, learning and following procedures, following through on detail, and finishing my work. Having that job on my resume helped me get another, higher paying job in college, which paid my part of the rent and helped with school expenses. That job led to another, even higher paying job, and I could afford my own apartment. By then I was making substantially more than minimal wage.
Six years after that first, $1.45/hour job, I was making $26/hour as a lab tech. At that time, minimum wage was $3.10/hour. The difference was that I had graduated high school, put myself through college (a combination of loans and working to pay my own way) and had learned a useful skill that was in demand. I also had a resume that, although not in the field, at least illustrated that I knew how to get and keep a job. I really recommend this as a way to improve your bottom line, rather than waiting for the minimum rate to increase.
It's not that weird -- it's the cost of money. If it takes a vendor a significant time to get paid after rendering the product or service, the vendor loses the use of that money during that time period. Interest is a way to compensate for that.
I understand, and you don't even have to be an "undocumented worker". Years ago I spent a couple years as a private contractor and chose during that time not to have medical insurance at all. My salary at the time was fairly high, and I was in general good health, so it seemed a safe bet.
Then, it so happens I had to have some procedures done. Some precancerous growths removed, dental work done, nothing critical but still potentially spendy. The interesting thing is that as a cash customer, I was charged a significantly lower price than if I had insurance. Apparently there's a lot of overhead involved in doing business with insurance companies, and doctors are willing to pass some of the savings on to cash customers. The other thing is that as a cash customer, I could go pretty much anywhere for medical or dental care, without worrying about what's "in program" or "out of program" and the care providers realize that.
If Google simply stopped answering requests from any Canadian IP address, wouldn't that accomplish the intent of the injunction?
There's a part of me that wonders if one could actually do better "under the table", at least on the short term (lack of healthcare would eventually trip you up) due to the employer's lower overhead. (No payroll taxes, no insurance, etc.)
It depends on what that 5 bucks would buy, I guess. But the erroneous assumption here is the word "everyone". This isn't about "everyone" making minimum wage. There has to be entry level jobs with room to improve, else where do beginning employees start?
Yeah, I know, my machine got infected. I know 'cuz I got a call just the other day from a very helpful person. "Hello, I'm from The Microsoft, ok? I'm calling you about your computer, ok? Your computer is infested with the viruses, ok?" He helped me straighten it out. Cost me $300 and my machine runs a little slower now, but I'm sure it was worth it.
And if the film had been *about* blowjobs, that would have been fine.
In all fairness, that scene was offensive in its unrealism to a lot of US movegoers also. What a load 'o' crap that film was.
> US films are usually about making money via drama and "entertainment" (whether or not you're entertained is subjective).
This is my new favorite phrase for the week.
Meesa doesn't liksa people trying stupid shit with well established franchises.
The alternative to "safe" is the StarWars saga we like to pretend didn't exist. I mean episode 4 5 and 6 are great, I don't understand why they never made any prequels.
Yeah, I heard that Lucas had a story in mind, and everything.
Ron Howard has made quite a few movies. None of them broke any boundaries or even pushed envelopes.
Really? What about filming Apollo 13 in freefall (aboard a "vomit comet"), instead of hanging people from wires?
I think that's the "technically solid" part.
That's true. And to my knowledge, there was only one episode where Andy ever allowed him to put it in his revolver.
As to why Comcast would resort to these tactics, the answer, simply, is because they work.
Doesn't mean some dogs aren't rather rough with their toys...