Oddly enough, I just watched this movie last night for the first time. Interesting movie. I really liked the editing workstation they called, guillotine. That movie was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this article post.
And how much would it cost to monitor, analyze and store the data from the tracking of even a small percentage of their 10,169,726 users and communities? Is it such that it would add any value to their ad-service business? Would it be less per month than the combined ad revenue per month? Would it be worth going out of their way to shut down any of the users they found in violation, particularly in the eyes of the advertisers?
So let's say they honestly can't (because I know it's possible not to), why would they even want to? I doubt it makes good business sense.
"He touts this as if people are jumping into it blindly, and being swindeled. Come on, get with it. Pleople realize this, and are looking forward to it. It's a benefit, not some underhanded sucker punch."
Exactly what I was thinking. I mean, how does getting the equivalent of two computers rolled into one count as getting "...taken for a ride?" It's with this argument that I think he starts heading into obviously facetious double-speak. I really don't think this article is intended to be taken seriously. By the end of the article he's blaming Apple for all kinds of physical ailments like hearing loss, carpal tunnel, and the like. He even has a few good things to say about Apple and windows on Mac performance as he points out near the beginning of the article. I think maybe he's pulling a Dvorak in hopes of pumping up the web-traffic numbers.
I think Microsoft's real problem is that (apparently) they are still building an OS that allows arbitrary software from the Internet, etc. to be downloaded and executed due to lax permissions and security via their ActiveX crapware, and other holes. Otherwise, why would there be a concern about malware, spyware and other types of malicious software making outbound connections in the first place? Other operating systems don't have this problem for a reason: permissions being what they are on a more reasonably secure system (particularly one that isn't so wedded to a weak point of entry like a browser) don't allow code from external sources to be executed on a system level without the proper permissions, and proper security. In an attempt to make Windows "user friendly", they've tossed the baby out with the bath water, in terms of security. In light of all this customer demand (which means there must have been some communication about the functionality of their firewall configuration to outside sources), it would appear that the Vista team isn't learning from the mistakes of their predecessors.
Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids
In fact it's cold as hell
And there's no one there to raise them if you did
And all this science I don't understand
It's just my job five days a week
I'm a rocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone.
Yes, it's true. The world might love Vista. And it's very likely that Vista will love up on the world like a prison inmate on a cheap hooker, but toss aside the butt sex and black eyes, and you're still left with a mediocre product.
That's where other products like OSX and Linux comes in to show you what the good lovin' is like. That's when the world will wise up to their bad relationship, and leave it for the hot piece of action that knows a thing or two about a thing or two.
"Then tell me what apps run on XP that don't run on Win2K. I can't think of any."
I can.
Speaking as a video professional, After Effects 7.0, Premiere Pro, and Encore DVD which represents 3 of Adobe's biggest video production software packages.
Why? I don't know and I don't care. Video is a competitive marketplace, and at the end of the day, if you aren't running the newest and best equipment/software, you're dead in the water.
The documentation tells you to use the partition labeled, "C:". I'm willing to bet that most people didn't read the documentation, and picked a partition willy-nilly.
You should modify your statement to specify "DUMB early adopters." My bet is that 1) They over-wrote the Mac partition during winxp install, and 2) they don't know how to use the Startup Disk preference pane in either Win or OSX, both of which are a result of the user not R'ingTFM (or in this case, documentation) like they should.
If you've ever lived, or at least spent enough time in a small town, you'd know that Wal-Mart comes in like a monster (Super Wal-Marts) and disrupts the local economy to such a degree that they manage to wipe out all other businesses, including most mom and pop shops, grocery stores, mechanics, furniture stores, florists, gardening shops, day care facilities, etc. The problem is this: small-town economies, such as they are, rarely generate income beyond a level of sustenance for small businesses. These businesses goods and services are priced so that they sell to the local consumers at a profit enough to keep the shop open, and provide their owners with some income. Wal-Mart comes in, and undercuts these businesses with greater inventory, larger selection and considerably lower prices, taking the local shop's customers and their owner's income with them. These shop owners sometimes leave town, or sometimes they look for work, finding it at the Super Wal-Mart. In fact, a large percentage of the town becomes employees of the Super Wal-Mart, who are generally low paid. Their low pay is usually spent at the Super Wal-Mart since it's all they can afford (plus they get a discount) much like the company stores of the mining and industrial era. Soon, the whole town is in some way dependent on Super Wal-Mart for everything from employment and benefits, to groceries, clothing, medicine (pharmacies are driven out of business), eyeglasses, you name it. Wal-Mart understands how this works, and essentially exploits these small-town economies.
Now, I don't really know where you live, but if you've ever had the distinct displeasure of driving across the United States, you'd discover that most of the middle of the country consists of a lot of small towns. What do you suggest all those people do, stop shopping at Wal-Mart? You might as well tell them to pack up, leave town and head for the coast, or at least a large metropolitan area like Dallas, or something. If you're not living in a small town, then you might have the good fortune of having a choice of where you shop, but for lots of people across the U.S., there isn't many options.
Lastly, don't underestimate the buying power of the low-end of the market. The Median household income for 2004 was around $44,000 with the poverty rate ringing in around 13% [source: ESRB-Income] You can bet those people aren't spending their money at Sak's and Banana Republic. Wal-Mart's huge margins are created by buying product at dirt prices, and selling them at rock prices to the lowest end of the market, which also happens to be a very LARGE market base in the United States. And for that market, Wal-Mart is about all they've got.
In my experience, the rebooting isn't so bad. It's definitely slower booting into WinXP than into Mac OSX, but on a fresh install, with very few software installs (save the typical anti-virus package) it's not in the realm of 3 minutes. I've learned that on a fresh install, if go into the control panel > internet options, and set the default homepage to http://www.getfirefox.com/ you can open up IE only once ever, just for the firefox download, and then you never have to mess with it ever again, thus eliminating the need to get a anti-spyware client. Additionally, I use CCleaner to completely dump all my temp files and cookies every week or so. It seems to keep my WinXP systems cleaner, and more junk free than say Ad-Aware and the Disk Cleanup system tool.
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics processor using PCI Express 128 MB of GDDR3 video memory
(I believe this video card is specially designed for the iMac. I will use the closest configuration I can find on the Newegg.com website)
ATI 100-505103 FireGL V5000 128MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card
Retail: $299.00
250GB Serial ATA1; 7200 rpm
Average Retail: $100.00
Near-Equivalent motherboard with Two(2) FireWire 400 ports, 3 USB 2.0 ports, built-in 10/100/1000BASE-T networking
- ASRock 775Dual-880Pro Socket T (LGA 775) VIA PT880 Pro ATX Intel Motherboard
- Zonet Firewire/USB2.0 PCI Combo Card Model ZUC2400 - Retail
MoBo: $58.00 / FireWire card: $17.00
Apple Software - Mac OSX Tiger and iLife '06
Retail: $129 + $79.00 = $208
(As as reference, Windows XP Professional with SP2 costs $284.00 on sale from Amazon.com)
TOTAL COST: $2574.00 (on the low-end)
Similarly configured iMac w/Tax: $1932.change
Granted, these numbers might be a little old, but if take into account things such as form factor, the remote for Front Row, and taking the time to find hardware that operates harmoniously with each other, then I think it's worth the money.
Disclaimer: I am no hardware expert, and this post is a result of a quick and dirty search. Feel free to correct me.
I've thought about this statement (which comes up alot) and I have started to wonder if this mantra is just a way of keeping Apple Records off Jobs' back. I suppose that Apple could be any kind of company they want to be (software, hardware, media distribution, entertainment device manufacturer, etc.), but if the public hears from Jobs that Apple is anything but a music-related company, then Apple Records has less ammo in court.
The product is called Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta. There's a free full-functioning download available for your Intel-based Mac. It has been speculated that OS X release 10.5 - Leopard will support such a thing and launch just around the corner from Vista.
That's interesting because I'm running 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519CO (don't know what the deal is with the CO on the end there, I just typed out what it says in the about box) and I found that I was vulnerable. Supposedly my XP machine is fully patched as well (Work PC with forced daily patch roll-outs via IT).
br.
FWIW, this post is coming from the Firefox browser. I still have to run IE for all the crappy Peoplesoft and SAP applications that depend on it.
You have a point, but I really think you should be thanking the RIAA for starting the scaremongering craze sweeping the nation.
What with all the press coverage of lawsuits against pirating, spyware, viruses, you-name-it, the average joe-user is probably wondering if checking his email is still legal.
Slashdot Mirror
What about straight up, "The Party"?
That would be totally radical.
And with any luck, Pirate will become the new Terrorist will become the new Communist.
I have no clue what the parent was referring to, but it could have been this device.
More like, smoked out too much.
Oddly enough, I just watched this movie last night for the first time. Interesting movie. I really liked the editing workstation they called, guillotine. That movie was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this article post.
"Sales are expected to be strong with college-freshmen males who are looking for an excuse to invite females over to play with their Wii."
And how much would it cost to monitor, analyze and store the data from the tracking of even a small percentage of their 10,169,726 users and communities? Is it such that it would add any value to their ad-service business? Would it be less per month than the combined ad revenue per month? Would it be worth going out of their way to shut down any of the users they found in violation, particularly in the eyes of the advertisers?
So let's say they honestly can't (because I know it's possible not to), why would they even want to? I doubt it makes good business sense.
"He touts this as if people are jumping into it blindly, and being swindeled. Come on, get with it. Pleople realize this, and are looking forward to it. It's a benefit, not some underhanded sucker punch."
Exactly what I was thinking. I mean, how does getting the equivalent of two computers rolled into one count as getting "...taken for a ride?" It's with this argument that I think he starts heading into obviously facetious double-speak. I really don't think this article is intended to be taken seriously. By the end of the article he's blaming Apple for all kinds of physical ailments like hearing loss, carpal tunnel, and the like. He even has a few good things to say about Apple and windows on Mac performance as he points out near the beginning of the article. I think maybe he's pulling a Dvorak in hopes of pumping up the web-traffic numbers.
I think Microsoft's real problem is that (apparently) they are still building an OS that allows arbitrary software from the Internet, etc. to be downloaded and executed due to lax permissions and security via their ActiveX crapware, and other holes. Otherwise, why would there be a concern about malware, spyware and other types of malicious software making outbound connections in the first place? Other operating systems don't have this problem for a reason: permissions being what they are on a more reasonably secure system (particularly one that isn't so wedded to a weak point of entry like a browser) don't allow code from external sources to be executed on a system level without the proper permissions, and proper security. In an attempt to make Windows "user friendly", they've tossed the baby out with the bath water, in terms of security. In light of all this customer demand (which means there must have been some communication about the functionality of their firewall configuration to outside sources), it would appear that the Vista team isn't learning from the mistakes of their predecessors.
Will you be here all week? And, yes I've tipped my waitress.
Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids In fact it's cold as hell And there's no one there to raise them if you did And all this science I don't understand It's just my job five days a week
I'm a rocket man, burning out his fuse up here alone.
Word!
Yes, it's true. The world might love Vista. And it's very likely that Vista will love up on the world like a prison inmate on a cheap hooker, but toss aside the butt sex and black eyes, and you're still left with a mediocre product.
That's where other products like OSX and Linux comes in to show you what the good lovin' is like. That's when the world will wise up to their bad relationship, and leave it for the hot piece of action that knows a thing or two about a thing or two.
A fine, fine troll indeed, my boy!
"Then tell me what apps run on XP that don't run on Win2K. I can't think of any."
I can.
Speaking as a video professional, After Effects 7.0, Premiere Pro, and Encore DVD which represents 3 of Adobe's biggest video production software packages.
Why? I don't know and I don't care. Video is a competitive marketplace, and at the end of the day, if you aren't running the newest and best equipment/software, you're dead in the water.
The documentation tells you to use the partition labeled, "C:". I'm willing to bet that most people didn't read the documentation, and picked a partition willy-nilly.
You should modify your statement to specify "DUMB early adopters." My bet is that 1) They over-wrote the Mac partition during winxp install, and 2) they don't know how to use the Startup Disk preference pane in either Win or OSX, both of which are a result of the user not R'ingTFM (or in this case, documentation) like they should.
Wow, good for u.
If you've ever lived, or at least spent enough time in a small town, you'd know that Wal-Mart comes in like a monster (Super Wal-Marts) and disrupts the local economy to such a degree that they manage to wipe out all other businesses, including most mom and pop shops, grocery stores, mechanics, furniture stores, florists, gardening shops, day care facilities, etc. The problem is this: small-town economies, such as they are, rarely generate income beyond a level of sustenance for small businesses. These businesses goods and services are priced so that they sell to the local consumers at a profit enough to keep the shop open, and provide their owners with some income. Wal-Mart comes in, and undercuts these businesses with greater inventory, larger selection and considerably lower prices, taking the local shop's customers and their owner's income with them. These shop owners sometimes leave town, or sometimes they look for work, finding it at the Super Wal-Mart. In fact, a large percentage of the town becomes employees of the Super Wal-Mart, who are generally low paid. Their low pay is usually spent at the Super Wal-Mart since it's all they can afford (plus they get a discount) much like the company stores of the mining and industrial era. Soon, the whole town is in some way dependent on Super Wal-Mart for everything from employment and benefits, to groceries, clothing, medicine (pharmacies are driven out of business), eyeglasses, you name it. Wal-Mart understands how this works, and essentially exploits these small-town economies.
Now, I don't really know where you live, but if you've ever had the distinct displeasure of driving across the United States, you'd discover that most of the middle of the country consists of a lot of small towns. What do you suggest all those people do, stop shopping at Wal-Mart? You might as well tell them to pack up, leave town and head for the coast, or at least a large metropolitan area like Dallas, or something. If you're not living in a small town, then you might have the good fortune of having a choice of where you shop, but for lots of people across the U.S., there isn't many options.
Lastly, don't underestimate the buying power of the low-end of the market. The Median household income for 2004 was around $44,000 with the poverty rate ringing in around 13% [source: ESRB-Income] You can bet those people aren't spending their money at Sak's and Banana Republic. Wal-Mart's huge margins are created by buying product at dirt prices, and selling them at rock prices to the lowest end of the market, which also happens to be a very LARGE market base in the United States. And for that market, Wal-Mart is about all they've got.
In my experience, the rebooting isn't so bad. It's definitely slower booting into WinXP than into Mac OSX, but on a fresh install, with very few software installs (save the typical anti-virus package) it's not in the realm of 3 minutes. I've learned that on a fresh install, if go into the control panel > internet options, and set the default homepage to http://www.getfirefox.com/ you can open up IE only once ever, just for the firefox download, and then you never have to mess with it ever again, thus eliminating the need to get a anti-spyware client. Additionally, I use CCleaner to completely dump all my temp files and cookies every week or so. It seems to keep my WinXP systems cleaner, and more junk free than say Ad-Aware and the Disk Cleanup system tool.
Says you...
The following is a cost breakdown of MOST of the hardware needed to build a DIY Windows PC similarly equipped as the 20-inch Intel iMac.
(Sources: Newegg.com, Apple.com, Crucial.com) as of 2/15/06
Granted, these numbers might be a little old, but if take into account things such as form factor, the remote for Front Row, and taking the time to find hardware that operates harmoniously with each other, then I think it's worth the money.
Disclaimer: I am no hardware expert, and this post is a result of a quick and dirty search. Feel free to correct me.
I've thought about this statement (which comes up alot) and I have started to wonder if this mantra is just a way of keeping Apple Records off Jobs' back. I suppose that Apple could be any kind of company they want to be (software, hardware, media distribution, entertainment device manufacturer, etc.), but if the public hears from Jobs that Apple is anything but a music-related company, then Apple Records has less ammo in court.
The product is called Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta. There's a free full-functioning download available for your Intel-based Mac. It has been speculated that OS X release 10.5 - Leopard will support such a thing and launch just around the corner from Vista.
That's interesting because I'm running 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519CO (don't know what the deal is with the CO on the end there, I just typed out what it says in the about box) and I found that I was vulnerable. Supposedly my XP machine is fully patched as well (Work PC with forced daily patch roll-outs via IT).
br. FWIW, this post is coming from the Firefox browser. I still have to run IE for all the crappy Peoplesoft and SAP applications that depend on it.
You have a point, but I really think you should be thanking the RIAA for starting the scaremongering craze sweeping the nation.
What with all the press coverage of lawsuits against pirating, spyware, viruses, you-name-it, the average joe-user is probably wondering if checking his email is still legal.