Only if you went shopping for Linux-compatible hardware. I have some random laptop from HP - if all the bits and pieces have Linux drivers I'd be the luckiest man alive.
Mostly power consumption and battery life, as well as memory and pixel density. If you are plugged in you may or may not notice a difference due to the increase in core count. It was hard (impossible?) to find more than 8 GB of ram in a laptop 5 years ago unless you got one of those "desktop replacement" behemoths. 4k screens are now common, but only Apple and a few copycats had them 5 years ago - and Windows was terrible on them until an update bout 4 months ago. USB 3 is not also standard on most high-end laptops, and would not have been available 5 years ago. The pace has definitely slowed, but 5 years is still a long time.
Like I told the other guy, I agree that if you are sending out resumes out to companies in response to job postings, you absolutely need to make sure that your resume contains as much of the keywords from the job description as possible. Game the stupid filter. But your "real" resume shouldn't have room for MS Office:)
Over the years, I've adopted a "leave whatever the hell it came with on it" attitude towards laptops. While modifying install images sounds fun, I just accept my fate and run Windows 10.
Alrighty, I would have thought it obvious, but just so we're clear:
An updated, maintained version of Windows 7. This was meant as a relatable comment on how an older version of an OS can actually be better than a newer version of an OS - don't worry, I'm not trying to freeze us in time. I use Windows 10, and it has some improvements over 7 - but it still has vestiges of the clumsy tablet features that made 8 such an abortion. On the whole, usability is less than 7 (though improving).
Right, because 2 million K or C is soooooo much more accessible than 3 million F. It just means "really really hot". They are giving us one significant digit in a 7-place number.
Yeah, agreed. Though if you rolled out LibreOffice that would also be worthy of a mention. Re number 3, if you are just sending out cold resumes, absolutely make sure you repackage their canned job description inside your document.
I'm sure there are exceptions, but if you have any office suite on your resume and you have ever had a relevant job it is not a good sign. You might as well list your gym membership under professional licenses.
It's true that they created the lake for the nuke plant, but to be fair they also have a 1MW hydro plant installed there as well. That's half of the Hoover Dam's capacity - nothing to sneeze at!
I don't think there is evidence that women, in aggregate, have lower ambitions than men. And in any event, when researchers try to account for such things it still does not wipe out wage and promotion disparities.
People are trying to defend the status quo using specific, cherry picked examples that serve as the exception rather than the rule. I completely agree that there are jobs which require strength that biology obviously skews towards men. This does not change the fact that women, statistically, make less than men doing the same job when adjusted for experience, etc. More importantly, it does not change the fact that women are a lot less likely to be in leadership positions.
There are studies that take these things into account, and there is still a difference in pay. More significantly, there is a huge gap in leadership positions.
Slashdot Mirror
Only if you went shopping for Linux-compatible hardware. I have some random laptop from HP - if all the bits and pieces have Linux drivers I'd be the luckiest man alive.
Mostly power consumption and battery life, as well as memory and pixel density. If you are plugged in you may or may not notice a difference due to the increase in core count. It was hard (impossible?) to find more than 8 GB of ram in a laptop 5 years ago unless you got one of those "desktop replacement" behemoths. 4k screens are now common, but only Apple and a few copycats had them 5 years ago - and Windows was terrible on them until an update bout 4 months ago. USB 3 is not also standard on most high-end laptops, and would not have been available 5 years ago. The pace has definitely slowed, but 5 years is still a long time.
I wouldn't try to install Linux on a brand-new laptop, either, unless I knew all the features were supported.
No, I need it to Skype my cat.
Like I told the other guy, I agree that if you are sending out resumes out to companies in response to job postings, you absolutely need to make sure that your resume contains as much of the keywords from the job description as possible. Game the stupid filter. But your "real" resume shouldn't have room for MS Office :)
Linux runs in the VM :)
Over the years, I've adopted a "leave whatever the hell it came with on it" attitude towards laptops. While modifying install images sounds fun, I just accept my fate and run Windows 10.
Alrighty, I would have thought it obvious, but just so we're clear:
An updated, maintained version of Windows 7. This was meant as a relatable comment on how an older version of an OS can actually be better than a newer version of an OS - don't worry, I'm not trying to freeze us in time. I use Windows 10, and it has some improvements over 7 - but it still has vestiges of the clumsy tablet features that made 8 such an abortion. On the whole, usability is less than 7 (though improving).
I bought a refurb HP Envy with an i7, 16GB of RAM, and a 500GB SSD, and 4k touchscreen for less than this phone...
That seems a bit pedantic, but yeah, OK, I wish current generation hardware was commonly available with Windows 7.
On a new laptop? Surely you are kidding? Where would one even get all the drivers?
I wish Windows laptops still shipped with 7.
Right, because 2 million K or C is soooooo much more accessible than 3 million F. It just means "really really hot". They are giving us one significant digit in a 7-place number.
Yeah, agreed. Though if you rolled out LibreOffice that would also be worthy of a mention. Re number 3, if you are just sending out cold resumes, absolutely make sure you repackage their canned job description inside your document.
I'm sure there are exceptions, but if you have any office suite on your resume and you have ever had a relevant job it is not a good sign. You might as well list your gym membership under professional licenses.
Yeaaup, I'm off by 1000. Good enough for government work.
HAHA! Got me. I'm only off by 3 orders of magnitude, though - so there's that.
It's true that they created the lake for the nuke plant, but to be fair they also have a 1MW hydro plant installed there as well. That's half of the Hoover Dam's capacity - nothing to sneeze at!
I found a copy of Beyonce's new album online and now I offer it to promote my brand. Seems legit.
I don't think there is evidence that women, in aggregate, have lower ambitions than men. And in any event, when researchers try to account for such things it still does not wipe out wage and promotion disparities.
OK, so change my statement to "It in no way follows that disagreeable people necessarily are better-equipped to attain leadership positions".
The logic problem still exists.
People are trying to defend the status quo using specific, cherry picked examples that serve as the exception rather than the rule. I completely agree that there are jobs which require strength that biology obviously skews towards men. This does not change the fact that women, statistically, make less than men doing the same job when adjusted for experience, etc. More importantly, it does not change the fact that women are a lot less likely to be in leadership positions.
Please point out where I did that. It would be very easy to lapse into giving specific examples, but that would not be a productive conversation.
Don't tell my kids. Especially my daughter, which is why I care so much about opportunities for women.
There are studies that take these things into account, and there is still a difference in pay. More significantly, there is a huge gap in leadership positions.