That's okay. All the companies still paying Office licensing fees and relying on VBA for internal apps will be crushed by the competition in a few years anyway:)
Just like all those companies that never migrated away from the big iron mainframes of yesteryear? Oh, wait...:)
Automatic updates is supposed to be for things like security updates. Microsoft doesn't push things like WMP, the.net framework, or driver updates in automatic updates - why should they do it for IE7?
From what I have seen with Firefox 2.0, it has been very stable. No problems on my work's machine, no problems on my mother's machine (and my Mom is infamous for breaking computer things the moment I turn away), and no problems on my main machine (though granted, Opera is my main browser on that machine so it hasn't seen heavy use).
Possibly one of the reasons why I have't had many problems is that none of these installations have many extensions. I think my Mom just has Adblock, at home I just have Session Saver, and at work I don't have any installed.
Did you try running something like Prime95 on the box? Prime95 shouldn't really care about the drive speed at all, I imagine Prime95 (or atleast 4 instances of it) would be able to peg those cores.
It doesn't have to be a vast conspiracy. You're dealing with the closed source software that is essentially running on a black box. This could be easily pulled off by a handful of people with access to the code that runs on these things.
And that is different from the large telecoms who have dragged their feet at upgrading their infastructure how exactly? Atleast if it's locally run, you'll have a better chance to do something about it when the time comes. If the telecom company doesn't care about your small town on 33.6kbps dial up right now, do you think they'll care in 2025 when you're still on 1.5mbps DSL?
But compared to a commodity PC, the Mac Pro has a propriety motherboard, power supply, and case. You can keep dropping in new video cards, harddrives, more memory, and maybe an overdrive processor - but eventually, you're going to reach a dead end on upgrades, and have to buy a whole new Mac tower for a nice chunk of change.
Yes, they always find the one little thing that their computer does do a whole lot faster on some benchmark, then apply that thing to the whole machine by making claims like "up to 7x faster". Sure, they are technically correct, but they are also being very misleading when they do this.
Well, take how much faster Apple claimed the PPC chips were than the P4's, then multiply that by how much faster Apple claims the Core chips are than the PPC chips, and you will have how much faster the Core chips are compared to the P4 according to Apple. There is no question that the Pentium 4 was a dead end, but there is no way the Core chips are 25-35x faster as Apple math would imply.
How can they make such a claim? I could understand missing by a few percentage points, but their claim is WAY off reality.
Apple's been doing this for years, it's nothing new - it was actually quite funny to watch them do a complete 180 in regards to Intel vs. PPC a while back. Basically, don't pay any attention to any benchmarks performed by the same company that sells the hardware.
Bush is accused with not working with the Dems and of being partisan - but when he refuses to veto the bills that make it to his desk, now he's not divisive and partisan enough.
Come on guys. No matter what he does you're going to find fault.
There is no contradiction here. Bush has had both a Republican House and Senate for nearly the last 6 years. That easily explains how he can be both hostile to the Democrats and still be able to sign nearly every single Bill that has crossed his desk.
As a right winger I'm so mad at the big spending, big government Republicans that I've almost talked myself into staying home in November.
Instead of staying home, atleast go out and vote for one of the third parties. Sure, it may not do much good in this election, but if we want a political party other than the Democrats and Republicans, the third parties are going to need to have votes before Joe Public takes them seriously.
I installed FF 2.0 on a Windows 2000 machine, and it did not change my default browser from IE to Firefox. On the other hand, this particular computer Firefox had never been installed before, which might explain the difference.
There are lots of bugs that hundreds, if not thousands of hours of testing aren't going to catch with something as complex as Windows Vista. All that it would take is one of those bugs to corrupt the file system, hose the partition table, mess up the registry, or something similar and you would hose the system. It's not that unfeasable at all.
I suppose that would be an issue for a company that loves propriety motherboard designs. Though companies like HP manage to juggle both an AMD and Intel line up for their notebook computers, so I'm sure Apple could handle it. Besides, they wouldn't have to deal with the really tough stuff, as all their code for their Intel Macs would run on an AMD Mac just fine (well, except for that stuff that deals with the TPM, which is certainly another reason Apple went with Intel - the included DRM). Basically, switching between AMD and Intel would be a lot easier than the switch from PPC or even the switch from the 68k line - so it's really pretty silly to say that Apple would be tied to either AMD or Intel like they were to Motorola and IBM.
Supply programs have haunted Apple for quite some time. Why switch to a new architecture just to get more of the same?
Except that it wouldn't be the same. Apple was dependent on Motorola and later IBM because they were the only suppliers of the PPC chips they needed for the Mac. However, since AMD and Intel both make x86 chips that function the same, they wouldn't be dependent on AMD if they went that route because they could switch over to Intel chips at any time without much trouble (and vice-versa I suppose - Apple could switch over to AMD right now if they wanted to).
First, he said vote out the Republicans, didn't say a single word about Democrats. And even if he did, the rest of the world has a better overall impression of Democrats than the current crop of Republicans. There has to be something to that.
I can't fathom where you get off with this assessment, so I have to assume you're not very well-travelled and you base your entire opinion on what you see on CNN.
Slashdot Mirror
That's okay. All the companies still paying Office licensing fees and relying on VBA for internal apps will be crushed by the competition in a few years anyway :)
:)
Just like all those companies that never migrated away from the big iron mainframes of yesteryear? Oh, wait...
Automatic updates is supposed to be for things like security updates. Microsoft doesn't push things like WMP, the .net framework, or driver updates in automatic updates - why should they do it for IE7?
From what I have seen with Firefox 2.0, it has been very stable. No problems on my work's machine, no problems on my mother's machine (and my Mom is infamous for breaking computer things the moment I turn away), and no problems on my main machine (though granted, Opera is my main browser on that machine so it hasn't seen heavy use).
Possibly one of the reasons why I have't had many problems is that none of these installations have many extensions. I think my Mom just has Adblock, at home I just have Session Saver, and at work I don't have any installed.
Did you try running something like Prime95 on the box? Prime95 shouldn't really care about the drive speed at all, I imagine Prime95 (or atleast 4 instances of it) would be able to peg those cores.
It doesn't have to be a vast conspiracy. You're dealing with the closed source software that is essentially running on a black box. This could be easily pulled off by a handful of people with access to the code that runs on these things.
And that is different from the large telecoms who have dragged their feet at upgrading their infastructure how exactly? Atleast if it's locally run, you'll have a better chance to do something about it when the time comes. If the telecom company doesn't care about your small town on 33.6kbps dial up right now, do you think they'll care in 2025 when you're still on 1.5mbps DSL?
But I know, Bush is horrible because he didn't do enough in eight months. But Clinton is a saint because he did nothing for eight years.
Yes, of course, because any attempt by Clinton to do anything about it was simply "wagging the dog", correct?
So, in your world, using the power of veto, is by definition, partisan?
Wow, you really don't get the point.
But compared to a commodity PC, the Mac Pro has a propriety motherboard, power supply, and case. You can keep dropping in new video cards, harddrives, more memory, and maybe an overdrive processor - but eventually, you're going to reach a dead end on upgrades, and have to buy a whole new Mac tower for a nice chunk of change.
While you're throwing blame around, do be sure to note that Bush likewise ignored the threat for the first 8 months of his office.
Yes, they always find the one little thing that their computer does do a whole lot faster on some benchmark, then apply that thing to the whole machine by making claims like "up to 7x faster". Sure, they are technically correct, but they are also being very misleading when they do this.
Well, take how much faster Apple claimed the PPC chips were than the P4's, then multiply that by how much faster Apple claims the Core chips are than the PPC chips, and you will have how much faster the Core chips are compared to the P4 according to Apple. There is no question that the Pentium 4 was a dead end, but there is no way the Core chips are 25-35x faster as Apple math would imply.
How can they make such a claim? I could understand missing by a few percentage points, but their claim is WAY off reality.
Apple's been doing this for years, it's nothing new - it was actually quite funny to watch them do a complete 180 in regards to Intel vs. PPC a while back. Basically, don't pay any attention to any benchmarks performed by the same company that sells the hardware.
The hard drive is indeed a shame, as my older MacBook Pro has a 7200rpm drive. That alone helps me avoid too much envy of the newer models.
Atleast you can always buy a 7200RPM drive and install it if you are so inclined. Not much you can do about the other omissions.
Bush is accused with not working with the Dems and of being partisan - but when he refuses to veto the bills that make it to his desk, now he's not divisive and partisan enough.
Come on guys. No matter what he does you're going to find fault.
There is no contradiction here. Bush has had both a Republican House and Senate for nearly the last 6 years. That easily explains how he can be both hostile to the Democrats and still be able to sign nearly every single Bill that has crossed his desk.
If Bush is impeached and removed from office, it should be no problem to do the same to Cheney.
As a right winger I'm so mad at the big spending, big government Republicans that I've almost talked myself into staying home in November.
Instead of staying home, atleast go out and vote for one of the third parties. Sure, it may not do much good in this election, but if we want a political party other than the Democrats and Republicans, the third parties are going to need to have votes before Joe Public takes them seriously.
I installed FF 2.0 on a Windows 2000 machine, and it did not change my default browser from IE to Firefox. On the other hand, this particular computer Firefox had never been installed before, which might explain the difference.
There are lots of bugs that hundreds, if not thousands of hours of testing aren't going to catch with something as complex as Windows Vista. All that it would take is one of those bugs to corrupt the file system, hose the partition table, mess up the registry, or something similar and you would hose the system. It's not that unfeasable at all.
I suppose that would be an issue for a company that loves propriety motherboard designs. Though companies like HP manage to juggle both an AMD and Intel line up for their notebook computers, so I'm sure Apple could handle it. Besides, they wouldn't have to deal with the really tough stuff, as all their code for their Intel Macs would run on an AMD Mac just fine (well, except for that stuff that deals with the TPM, which is certainly another reason Apple went with Intel - the included DRM). Basically, switching between AMD and Intel would be a lot easier than the switch from PPC or even the switch from the 68k line - so it's really pretty silly to say that Apple would be tied to either AMD or Intel like they were to Motorola and IBM.
Supply programs have haunted Apple for quite some time. Why switch to a new architecture just to get more of the same?
Except that it wouldn't be the same. Apple was dependent on Motorola and later IBM because they were the only suppliers of the PPC chips they needed for the Mac. However, since AMD and Intel both make x86 chips that function the same, they wouldn't be dependent on AMD if they went that route because they could switch over to Intel chips at any time without much trouble (and vice-versa I suppose - Apple could switch over to AMD right now if they wanted to).
First, he said vote out the Republicans, didn't say a single word about Democrats. And even if he did, the rest of the world has a better overall impression of Democrats than the current crop of Republicans. There has to be something to that.
I can't fathom where you get off with this assessment, so I have to assume you're not very well-travelled and you base your entire opinion on what you see on CNN.
You know, I just assumed he was making a joke.
Don't you know? The plural of anecdote is data.