Dell, HP, Acer, Gateway, et. al. have been in a race to the bottom ever since the Mhz wars ended. They used to compete on specs that 10% of the market actually understood as well as price, but when everyone started using the same parts they built this market of razor-thin margins that they now fight for, where the single company that didn't play that game (Apple) is now growing faster than anyone, with products that have differences other than the plastics that contain the functional bits.
Last week Dell held a presentation here about VDI solutions where they were rattling off all the companies they have bought, with the sales pitch being that your whole VDI stack can be from one vendor including SAN, network, servers, thin clients; so there's only one "throat to choke" so to speak.
My counter-argument is that sometimes it's better to go with best-of-breed in each of the components for maximized performance, maximized uptime, etc.; and then there's also the problems that arise should your single-source provider go titsup, but whatever.
So you made actual money, without doing any actual work in order to generate that "wealth" other than running a program on your computer for an extended amount of time. You created wealth without creating value.
Explain how this isn't a massive fiduciary jerk-off again? Sounds a lot like the much-maligned speculators of the futures markets to me.
What will be interesting is if they try this crap on LTE, where there are contractual obligations to not discriminate based on application usage in the Block-B spectrum they purchased. Verizon has already gone down this road with something more ambiguous (tethering) and lost. This is an actual application that they are discriminating against.
AT&T may not be able to get away with this shit for very long before running afoul of the FCC.
As with all things, context is king: - It is illegal to lie as a sworn witness in a courtroom. - It is illegal to lie as a sworn witness in a Congressional hearing. - It is illegal to submit a false report to police. - It is illegal to submit false documentation to many local, state, and federal agencies. - Forgery could be argued to be lying in documentation or authenticity. - It is illegal to sell something described as one thing, when it is actually something else (fraud).
There are other examples that I'm sure others can come up with.
This has got to be the single stupidest thing I've read all week, and if you knew what I've been working on this week, you should be pretty embarrassed. Well, you're likely already embarrassed since you didn't even have the stones to post this without checking the anonymous box, but whatever.
Just because some people like a particular company's products, does not create immoral employees. If it did, Google would be burning down churches right about now, because the Fandroid community is starting to be very reminiscent of the Apple Fanboy of yesteryear.
What makes immoral employees are immoral people (or amoral people that become immoral) getting hired as employees. Period. Best Buy doesn't have a healthy fanboy crowd, yet their Geek Squad has been rung up several times for data theft, etc.
Next time, try having some facts and evidence, rather than wild guesses and irrational hatred.
No, but I trust the bank that stands behind the credit card to honor the legal agreements they put forth when I open the account. I ordered a part from some shop in California earlier this year, they sent the wrong thing and didn't want to RMA, so American Express yanked my money back out of their account.
They tried to fuck me, but the bank fucked them first as my proxy. It's called buyer protection, and most payment services offer this.
Irreversible transactions aren't necessarily a good thing. Put the wrong part in your cart and checked out? Too bad, it's irreversible. No canceling that order!
You know what funds are available for spending within seconds? Cash. Yes, this is a valid argument because we're talking about using a damn MasterCard at a point-of-sale terminal in this article. Available in minutes is shit in comparison. Oh, and since they are reliant on the MasterCard network, you get the MasterCard funds transfer speed, so it becomes a moot point.
Cost very little, especially compared to other payment networks? BULLSHIT - they're charging an extra 1% on top of using another payment network as stated in the summary. Completely fucking false - it costs exactly 1% more.
In addition, at the best case, you're getting hosed for an extra 1% transaction fee instead of using the regular Visa / MasterCard debit card that is right next this card in your wallet.
What could possibly stand in the way of adoption?!
It boots 2 seconds faster, and then you spend 20 seconds asking what the fuck is this shit when you don't get a Start menu, and you can't figure out where your stuff is.
You know what? If we keep bitching about it, and Fortune-100 doesn't buy it because they don't want to retrain millions of office workers on their time, it WILL change.
Microsoft's Windows division is what keeps that company afloat, and that happens on the back of large business. If Windows 8 sells like Vista, they're going to make some rapid changes in order to bring big business along.
Windows 8: Get a few percentage more compute performance, at the cost of tens of percent of your time trying to figure out where your apps and documents are.
Probably not the most effective marketing campaign.
And every one of those 7000+ would be released within 24 hours if there wasn't a charge to back it up - a legal charge under a statute already on the books, tested and proven to be Constitutional.
Never mind that these protesters were being arrested for possession of controlled substances, vandalism, trespassing, assault, criminal mischief, etc. No, they were being locked up because they were "peaceably assembling."
Let me guess, because there's no formal declaration of war, that means that it's just more of the US Government eroding the Constitution and making the founding fathers spin in their graves, right?
Well, I need to ask if you think that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison were also somehow going against what the founding fathers wanted? They WERE the founding fathers, and used this in each of their administrations.
Congress has authorized the use of military force in the following years, for the countries and reasons listed, without a formal declaration of war: France (protect shipping in the war we weren't part of) 1798 Tripoli (protect shipping from piracy based in what we call Libya today) 1802 Algeria (beat the crap out of their navy for seizing US shipping vessels during the war of 1812) 1815 Suppression of Piracy (more protection of shipping, but this time in the Caribbean) 1819-1823 Formosa (Eisenhower wanted to make sure the new Communist government in China didn't get too frisky with Taiwan) 1955 MiddleEast (Congressional authorization of US forces to assist countries against communist takeover) 1957 Southeast Asia (Gulf of Tonkin resolution - Vietnam War) 1964 Lebanon (Marine deployment as a part of a multinational force) 1983 Iraq (Desert Shield / Desert Storm) 1991 Terrorist Attacks against the United States (Afghanistan) 2001 Authorization for Use of Force Against Iraq (Second Iraq War) 2002
The statutory authorization of use of force is hardly new - it goes back to when the country was founded. It's a tool that Congress can use to limit the scope of engagement without activating many executive powers that come with a formal declaration of war. Here's a nice big fat PDF from the US Department of State covering all of this.
Then make sure you don't buy from Samsung either, since they've been convicted of (or admitted to) price fixing in not one, not two, but three different product markets - DRAM, Mobile Phones, and LCD panels.
If you're going to crack on a company for business practices, make sure you use the same yardstick for all.
Valve built Steam for Mac like two years ago, yet there's still loads of Windows-only games on it, because they are tied to DirectX.
Trust me, the day I can jettison Windows 7 from my Mac Pro and still be able to play all the Steam titles in my library, is the day that I throw a massive party.
My company has downgrade rights for n-2 from whatever sticker is on the hardware. That means we can install Windows 7 until Microsoft ships Windows 10.
Slashdot Mirror
Dell, HP, Acer, Gateway, et. al. have been in a race to the bottom ever since the Mhz wars ended. They used to compete on specs that 10% of the market actually understood as well as price, but when everyone started using the same parts they built this market of razor-thin margins that they now fight for, where the single company that didn't play that game (Apple) is now growing faster than anyone, with products that have differences other than the plastics that contain the functional bits.
Last week Dell held a presentation here about VDI solutions where they were rattling off all the companies they have bought, with the sales pitch being that your whole VDI stack can be from one vendor including SAN, network, servers, thin clients; so there's only one "throat to choke" so to speak.
My counter-argument is that sometimes it's better to go with best-of-breed in each of the components for maximized performance, maximized uptime, etc.; and then there's also the problems that arise should your single-source provider go titsup, but whatever.
Today's Bitcoin story retracts yesterday's Bitcoin story, and tomorrow's will probably refute today's.
Can we just stop with the Bitcoin horseshit already? The news about Bitcoin is just about as stable as the "currency."
So you made actual money, without doing any actual work in order to generate that "wealth" other than running a program on your computer for an extended amount of time. You created wealth without creating value.
Explain how this isn't a massive fiduciary jerk-off again? Sounds a lot like the much-maligned speculators of the futures markets to me.
How does the end customer being charged an extra 1% "undercut their price" exactly?
What will be interesting is if they try this crap on LTE, where there are contractual obligations to not discriminate based on application usage in the Block-B spectrum they purchased. Verizon has already gone down this road with something more ambiguous (tethering) and lost. This is an actual application that they are discriminating against.
AT&T may not be able to get away with this shit for very long before running afoul of the FCC.
As with all things, context is king:
- It is illegal to lie as a sworn witness in a courtroom.
- It is illegal to lie as a sworn witness in a Congressional hearing.
- It is illegal to submit a false report to police.
- It is illegal to submit false documentation to many local, state, and federal agencies.
- Forgery could be argued to be lying in documentation or authenticity.
- It is illegal to sell something described as one thing, when it is actually something else (fraud).
There are other examples that I'm sure others can come up with.
This has got to be the single stupidest thing I've read all week, and if you knew what I've been working on this week, you should be pretty embarrassed. Well, you're likely already embarrassed since you didn't even have the stones to post this without checking the anonymous box, but whatever.
Just because some people like a particular company's products, does not create immoral employees. If it did, Google would be burning down churches right about now, because the Fandroid community is starting to be very reminiscent of the Apple Fanboy of yesteryear.
What makes immoral employees are immoral people (or amoral people that become immoral) getting hired as employees. Period. Best Buy doesn't have a healthy fanboy crowd, yet their Geek Squad has been rung up several times for data theft, etc.
Next time, try having some facts and evidence, rather than wild guesses and irrational hatred.
No, but I trust the bank that stands behind the credit card to honor the legal agreements they put forth when I open the account. I ordered a part from some shop in California earlier this year, they sent the wrong thing and didn't want to RMA, so American Express yanked my money back out of their account.
They tried to fuck me, but the bank fucked them first as my proxy. It's called buyer protection, and most payment services offer this.
Irreversible transactions aren't necessarily a good thing. Put the wrong part in your cart and checked out? Too bad, it's irreversible. No canceling that order!
You know what funds are available for spending within seconds? Cash. Yes, this is a valid argument because we're talking about using a damn MasterCard at a point-of-sale terminal in this article. Available in minutes is shit in comparison. Oh, and since they are reliant on the MasterCard network, you get the MasterCard funds transfer speed, so it becomes a moot point.
Cost very little, especially compared to other payment networks? BULLSHIT - they're charging an extra 1% on top of using another payment network as stated in the summary. Completely fucking false - it costs exactly 1% more.
Can't be manipulated? Horseshit, it already has been manipulated. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/10/bitcoin-implodes-down-more-than-90-percent-from-june-peak/
This might as well be a gauge starting at zero going the other way. There's no way this ever takes a measurable fraction of volume from AMEX.
In addition, at the best case, you're getting hosed for an extra 1% transaction fee instead of using the regular Visa / MasterCard debit card that is right next this card in your wallet.
What could possibly stand in the way of adoption?!
I'd rather have an OS that doesn't need to reboot all the time, making the reboot time essentially zero. Oh wait, I have that, and it isn't Windows.
It boots 2 seconds faster, and then you spend 20 seconds asking what the fuck is this shit when you don't get a Start menu, and you can't figure out where your stuff is.
What a great tradeoff.
Well I'm sure glad that I can get an UI that it optimized for a tablet on my 27" desktop displays.
This is why people are pissed.
Here's a handy CLI for GateKeeper to enable / disable as well as configure: http://krypted.com/mac-os-x/manage-gatekeeper-from-the-command-line-in-mountain-lion/
Oh, you mean like multiple displays on Windows NT 4? What a step forward!
You know what? If we keep bitching about it, and Fortune-100 doesn't buy it because they don't want to retrain millions of office workers on their time, it WILL change.
Microsoft's Windows division is what keeps that company afloat, and that happens on the back of large business. If Windows 8 sells like Vista, they're going to make some rapid changes in order to bring big business along.
Windows 8: Get a few percentage more compute performance, at the cost of tens of percent of your time trying to figure out where your apps and documents are.
Probably not the most effective marketing campaign.
Don't let analysis get in the way of blind company hate!
And every one of those 7000+ would be released within 24 hours if there wasn't a charge to back it up - a legal charge under a statute already on the books, tested and proven to be Constitutional.
Never mind that these protesters were being arrested for possession of controlled substances, vandalism, trespassing, assault, criminal mischief, etc. No, they were being locked up because they were "peaceably assembling."
Let me guess, because there's no formal declaration of war, that means that it's just more of the US Government eroding the Constitution and making the founding fathers spin in their graves, right?
Well, I need to ask if you think that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison were also somehow going against what the founding fathers wanted? They WERE the founding fathers, and used this in each of their administrations.
Congress has authorized the use of military force in the following years, for the countries and reasons listed, without a formal declaration of war:
France (protect shipping in the war we weren't part of) 1798
Tripoli (protect shipping from piracy based in what we call Libya today) 1802
Algeria (beat the crap out of their navy for seizing US shipping vessels during the war of 1812) 1815
Suppression of Piracy (more protection of shipping, but this time in the Caribbean) 1819-1823
Formosa (Eisenhower wanted to make sure the new Communist government in China didn't get too frisky with Taiwan) 1955
MiddleEast (Congressional authorization of US forces to assist countries against communist takeover) 1957
Southeast Asia (Gulf of Tonkin resolution - Vietnam War) 1964
Lebanon (Marine deployment as a part of a multinational force) 1983
Iraq (Desert Shield / Desert Storm) 1991
Terrorist Attacks against the United States (Afghanistan) 2001
Authorization for Use of Force Against Iraq (Second Iraq War) 2002
The statutory authorization of use of force is hardly new - it goes back to when the country was founded. It's a tool that Congress can use to limit the scope of engagement without activating many executive powers that come with a formal declaration of war. Here's a nice big fat PDF from the US Department of State covering all of this.
Maybe he's trying to make a digital VHS? Movies on magnetic tape, but with 6-channel sound and HD bitrates!
Never mind that tapes physically wear out, break, etc.
Then make sure you don't buy from Samsung either, since they've been convicted of (or admitted to) price fixing in not one, not two, but three different product markets - DRAM, Mobile Phones, and LCD panels.
If you're going to crack on a company for business practices, make sure you use the same yardstick for all.
Valve built Steam for Mac like two years ago, yet there's still loads of Windows-only games on it, because they are tied to DirectX.
Trust me, the day I can jettison Windows 7 from my Mac Pro and still be able to play all the Steam titles in my library, is the day that I throw a massive party.
well after Windows 9 ships, with Microsoft already have taken their lumps from this lump of shit.
Just like Vista.
My company has downgrade rights for n-2 from whatever sticker is on the hardware. That means we can install Windows 7 until Microsoft ships Windows 10.