What I've heard is that every time Microsoft has looked into dumping the A:, C: etc. way of doing things, the users have overwhelmingly favored leaving it the same.
On the other hand, I would like to point out that it has been tweaked, it's just that it seems subtle enough that people haven't realized it. This is how it's been since Windows 95 came out:
Desktop -My Documents -Network Neighboorhod -My Computer
- A:
- C:
- Program Files
- Windows
- D: -Recycle Bin
I think the idea is, unless you need a new PC, the most environmentally friendly thing to do is keep using the one you have. To buy a new computer just because it uses less energy is actually bad for the enviroment once you take into account the costs of building the new PC, and properly disposing of the old PC.
Actually, it is deceptive because they are counting on the fact that most people don't realize that harddrive MB/GB's are different from other MB/GB's, even if they technically correct according to NIST. Don't forget that they started this whole thing anyway back in the 80's.
And your wood analogy is kind of close. Last time I was in the hardware store, the 1/2" plywood was really 15/32" plywood if you looked close enough. Like the harddrive makers back in the 80's, they just figured they can skim off a bit, and people won't notice.
On the other hand, people generally don't like throwing out perfectly good hardware just because support was dropped. People will accept it for something like a processor, as a new processor is going to be considerably better than that 5 year old one. But for something like a sound card, that old one is going to be just as good as a new one, and that new computer still has PCI slots, so why shouldn't I be able to use it? While I don't blame companies for not wanting to support hardware nearing a decade old, the fact that I'm having to buy a replacement because it's just been obsoleted will factor into what replacement I buy.
How is it any different than needing a corporate license server for Autocad, or Rational, or any of the other software commonly licensed this way on the corporate level? It's not like these license servers are terribly difficult to maintain.
It's different becaues with programs like Autocad, you generally don't have all your users of the software using it at the same time. Thus, the license server allows the company to save some money buy only buying the number of licenses they think they will need at any one time and having people "check out" the license from the server when they start the application, instead of buying a license for every computer that needs the software. On the other hand, most corporate PCs are going to be running Windows all the time, so the number of licenses is going to equal the number of PC's anyway. Thus, the server doesn't save the company any money by letting them get by with less licenses.
why I find it "easier" to laugh at people who are dirty, smelly, fat, lazy, or stupid - because all those can be taken care of, whereas anything you're born with, or physically stuck with is not.
You're just showing your prejudices. It's a perception thing. Some cultures consider being a bit obese to be a good thing. To make fun of people simply because they are fat (in your eyes) is a lot like making fun of someone simply because of their religion, or similar. Not everyone thinks like you.
Those are mostly worms, which are pretty much old news. Welcome to 2007, where most malware is installed by tricking the user into running something on their computer which then takes it over. Even Microsoft gets it (You're trying to use the mouse. Allow/Deny?). You don't.
My guess is that they are trying to stop people from creating in game utilities that hit Blizzard's site in the background to pull character data. However, I'm going to assume that making it Flash will merely slow them down a little.
For example, you notice Legolaughs is guarding the flag in a Battleground. Are you really going to ALT-TAB out, launch a web browser, go look up his talent spec, ALT-TAB back, then go to town? Of course not. Just knowing his class and level, which you can already get in-game, is mostly all you need. And then depending on what spells or skills he uses, you can get a pretty good idea of his talent specialization, if you really want to know that too.
How long do you suppose it would be before you could install some tool, then all you need to do is click on Legolaughs and in a couple of seconds you'll be able to see everything about that character? Actually, I would be surprised if someone hasn't coded this up yet.
Cars very rarely end up in a dump. Junkyards gladly take them off of people's hands, as they can make money parting them out. Many of them will even buy the old car from you. If they are no good for that, you can still sell it as scrap steel. Appliances are similar. Most appliance stores I have seen will haul away your old appliances when they deliver your new ones. Once again, it makes sense to them as there is a lot of scrap steel in appliances, not to mention scrap copper from motor driven appliances. Also, appliances (except for older fridges/freezers with freon) contain little in them that needs special treatment.
Really, I would be more concerned with smaller items that are not profitable to recycle. Things like batteries, flourescent light bulbs, and electronics.
You don't get it. We know that recycling old electronics is costly. The whole point is that the stuff is toxic, and we don't want it contaminating the ground water.
Just look at all the problems MSFT has had with getting playsforsure to actually play for sure.
But on the other hand, play-for-sure is the big gaping hole in the "RIAA won't let us share our DRM" argument from Steve Jobs. RIAA music is sold through play-for-sure, and play-for-sure can be licensed by anyone for an online music store, or for music players. So why is Fairplay any different?
And that is a nice bit of twisted Apple fanboy logic to explain away Apple's love of DRM. Is there any basis whatsoever for the "DRM for consistency" arguement? I don't ever remember Apple or Steve Jobs saying anything along those lines. Rather, they seem pretty silent about the whole forcing DRM on indie music thing.
Bullshit. The Mighty Mouse is a single button mouse, where the one button behaves differently depending on how you click it. Why this is better than having two (or more) physical buttons, I simply don't get. It would seem that having two physical buttons would be a lot less confusing, not to mention having physical buttons means I can also click more than one button at a time. The fact that you can't click more than one button at a time pretty much makes the Mighty Mouse a 1.5 button mouse, at best.
Same thing with the touchpad on Mac laptops. I've never liked used the touchpad as a mouse button as it's inprecise and likes to register a lot of false clicks (and click and drags). And you also have the same problem of only being able to click one button at a time. So you're still stuck with one physical mouse button, but atleast given the form factor atleast your other hand is usually right over the modifier keys.
And I don't buy the "DRM is for your convience argument". When has DRM ever been convienent? Of those that buy from iTunes, they are going to have songs with DRM (from iTMS), and those without (bought from elsewhere, ripped, downloaded, whatever). They already behave differently, and like many people, after a few years I don't remember where that particular track came from. So this little bit of convience isn't going to help te any. Why draw the line between "these were bought" and "these were not". Why not put the line at "these needs to have DRM because of licensing restrictions" and "these do not"?
In this case, Safari (or the OS) should cough up the memory it's sitting on when some other application needs it. There is still room for optimization here (assuming it simply isn't a leak).
In this day and age, people want and expect to be able to run multiple apps (including web browsers, instant messaging programs, office apps, and, gasp!, photo editing apps) at the same time.
No one is saying you can't do all these things at once, just don't expect these things to run quite as fast when you have a bunch of crap open. So long as you have to tough swap/scratch disks you're going to benefit from having as much ram available as possible.
A lot of them aren't particularly happy about the lock in to Windows, but they would much rather be locked into just the OS than to both the OS and the hardware to run it on.
I imagine that would have worked fine, but the computers had these horrid, cramped mini-tower cases and getting to the jumpers to underclock the computer would have required quite a bit of work. It was easier just to patch an old Pentium system, and move the files over by floppy (I think it was only 4 small files it ended up patching).
Slashdot Mirror
What I've heard is that every time Microsoft has looked into dumping the A:, C: etc. way of doing things, the users have overwhelmingly favored leaving it the same.
On the other hand, I would like to point out that it has been tweaked, it's just that it seems subtle enough that people haven't realized it. This is how it's been since Windows 95 came out:
Desktop
-My Documents
-Network Neighboorhod
-My Computer
- A:
- C:
- Program Files
- Windows
- D:
-Recycle Bin
and so on.
I think the idea is, unless you need a new PC, the most environmentally friendly thing to do is keep using the one you have. To buy a new computer just because it uses less energy is actually bad for the enviroment once you take into account the costs of building the new PC, and properly disposing of the old PC.
Actually, it is deceptive because they are counting on the fact that most people don't realize that harddrive MB/GB's are different from other MB/GB's, even if they technically correct according to NIST. Don't forget that they started this whole thing anyway back in the 80's.
And your wood analogy is kind of close. Last time I was in the hardware store, the 1/2" plywood was really 15/32" plywood if you looked close enough. Like the harddrive makers back in the 80's, they just figured they can skim off a bit, and people won't notice.
On the other hand, people generally don't like throwing out perfectly good hardware just because support was dropped. People will accept it for something like a processor, as a new processor is going to be considerably better than that 5 year old one. But for something like a sound card, that old one is going to be just as good as a new one, and that new computer still has PCI slots, so why shouldn't I be able to use it? While I don't blame companies for not wanting to support hardware nearing a decade old, the fact that I'm having to buy a replacement because it's just been obsoleted will factor into what replacement I buy.
If that's the card that came standard in some Packard Bells back in the day, it'll scare off the oldsters too!
How is it any different than needing a corporate license server for Autocad, or Rational, or any of the other software commonly licensed this way on the corporate level? It's not like these license servers are terribly difficult to maintain.
It's different becaues with programs like Autocad, you generally don't have all your users of the software using it at the same time. Thus, the license server allows the company to save some money buy only buying the number of licenses they think they will need at any one time and having people "check out" the license from the server when they start the application, instead of buying a license for every computer that needs the software. On the other hand, most corporate PCs are going to be running Windows all the time, so the number of licenses is going to equal the number of PC's anyway. Thus, the server doesn't save the company any money by letting them get by with less licenses.
why I find it "easier" to laugh at people who are dirty, smelly, fat, lazy, or stupid - because all those can be taken care of, whereas anything you're born with, or physically stuck with is not.
You're just showing your prejudices. It's a perception thing. Some cultures consider being a bit obese to be a good thing. To make fun of people simply because they are fat (in your eyes) is a lot like making fun of someone simply because of their religion, or similar. Not everyone thinks like you.
Those are mostly worms, which are pretty much old news. Welcome to 2007, where most malware is installed by tricking the user into running something on their computer which then takes it over. Even Microsoft gets it (You're trying to use the mouse. Allow/Deny?). You don't.
This has been disproved so many times it's not even funny. you must be a complete fucking idiot to make such a statement.
Since you seem so smart, how exactly has this been disproven so many times?
My guess is that they are trying to stop people from creating in game utilities that hit Blizzard's site in the background to pull character data. However, I'm going to assume that making it Flash will merely slow them down a little.
For example, you notice Legolaughs is guarding the flag in a Battleground. Are you really going to ALT-TAB out, launch a web browser, go look up his talent spec, ALT-TAB back, then go to town? Of course not. Just knowing his class and level, which you can already get in-game, is mostly all you need. And then depending on what spells or skills he uses, you can get a pretty good idea of his talent specialization, if you really want to know that too.
How long do you suppose it would be before you could install some tool, then all you need to do is click on Legolaughs and in a couple of seconds you'll be able to see everything about that character? Actually, I would be surprised if someone hasn't coded this up yet.
C:\cat /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/info | grep model
Bad Command or File Name
C:\
*ducks*
*laptop explodes*
Cars very rarely end up in a dump. Junkyards gladly take them off of people's hands, as they can make money parting them out. Many of them will even buy the old car from you. If they are no good for that, you can still sell it as scrap steel. Appliances are similar. Most appliance stores I have seen will haul away your old appliances when they deliver your new ones. Once again, it makes sense to them as there is a lot of scrap steel in appliances, not to mention scrap copper from motor driven appliances. Also, appliances (except for older fridges/freezers with freon) contain little in them that needs special treatment.
Really, I would be more concerned with smaller items that are not profitable to recycle. Things like batteries, flourescent light bulbs, and electronics.
You don't get it. We know that recycling old electronics is costly. The whole point is that the stuff is toxic, and we don't want it contaminating the ground water.
Just look at all the problems MSFT has had with getting playsforsure to actually play for sure.
But on the other hand, play-for-sure is the big gaping hole in the "RIAA won't let us share our DRM" argument from Steve Jobs. RIAA music is sold through play-for-sure, and play-for-sure can be licensed by anyone for an online music store, or for music players. So why is Fairplay any different?
And that is a nice bit of twisted Apple fanboy logic to explain away Apple's love of DRM. Is there any basis whatsoever for the "DRM for consistency" arguement? I don't ever remember Apple or Steve Jobs saying anything along those lines. Rather, they seem pretty silent about the whole forcing DRM on indie music thing.
Bullshit. The Mighty Mouse is a single button mouse, where the one button behaves differently depending on how you click it. Why this is better than having two (or more) physical buttons, I simply don't get. It would seem that having two physical buttons would be a lot less confusing, not to mention having physical buttons means I can also click more than one button at a time. The fact that you can't click more than one button at a time pretty much makes the Mighty Mouse a 1.5 button mouse, at best.
Same thing with the touchpad on Mac laptops. I've never liked used the touchpad as a mouse button as it's inprecise and likes to register a lot of false clicks (and click and drags). And you also have the same problem of only being able to click one button at a time. So you're still stuck with one physical mouse button, but atleast given the form factor atleast your other hand is usually right over the modifier keys.
And I don't buy the "DRM is for your convience argument". When has DRM ever been convienent? Of those that buy from iTunes, they are going to have songs with DRM (from iTMS), and those without (bought from elsewhere, ripped, downloaded, whatever). They already behave differently, and like many people, after a few years I don't remember where that particular track came from. So this little bit of convience isn't going to help te any. Why draw the line between "these were bought" and "these were not". Why not put the line at "these needs to have DRM because of licensing restrictions" and "these do not"?
Which is nonsense, as we are talking about supporting 2GB SODIMMs, not buying them. Someday in the future, they will be pretty cheap.
In this case, Safari (or the OS) should cough up the memory it's sitting on when some other application needs it. There is still room for optimization here (assuming it simply isn't a leak).
In this day and age, people want and expect to be able to run multiple apps (including web browsers, instant messaging programs, office apps, and, gasp!, photo editing apps) at the same time.
No one is saying you can't do all these things at once, just don't expect these things to run quite as fast when you have a bunch of crap open. So long as you have to tough swap/scratch disks you're going to benefit from having as much ram available as possible.
Here is a list of the stores that are staying open:
http://www.compusa.com/locations/store.asp
Look for the ones near you and see if they made the cut.
A lot of them aren't particularly happy about the lock in to Windows, but they would much rather be locked into just the OS than to both the OS and the hardware to run it on.
Sure they do. Even if you aren't worried about OSX, that Mac could also be running Windows.
I imagine that would have worked fine, but the computers had these horrid, cramped mini-tower cases and getting to the jumpers to underclock the computer would have required quite a bit of work. It was easier just to patch an old Pentium system, and move the files over by floppy (I think it was only 4 small files it ended up patching).