If it's a jury trial, I also apportion blame to the jury. Jurors who are too stupid to educate themselves about their power, including jury nullification, offend me. If the law is stupid, the original jury could have just found the defendant not guilty; end of story.
So in the end we are both blaming the common people.
Probably because the company doing the shipping of the 1000 separate parcels doesn't treat them as such (until the end). They are shipped much of the way with a much larger volume of goods. bringing the transport costs down to the pallet load.
Not in my experience. The stuff I get from China on ebay arrive in a small packet via post which has clearly been sent direct from China. And the shipping is almost always _free_. A similar product purchased by mail from a US supplier is 3 to 5x the cost _AND_ the US supplier tacks on a criminally excessive shipping charge more than the cost of the item itself.
We pay 100% taxes on any imported goods, be it wine, shoes or Intel processors, except for books. If you think it's hard in Australia try to make it in Brazil.
I'm curious as to how that works. If you order a tablet from Hong Kong, do they open all incoming mail, try to figure out what you paid, and assess a fee on the buyer before you can pick up your package? That sounds pretty expensive and manpower heavy to implement.
No. Just no. The hosts file is one of the most fundamental STANDARDS in TCP/IP networking.
Now more than ever, anyone who uses Windows is either a clueless moron or is FORCED into it because of some program he HAS to use which is Windows-only.
The take-home message is the fact that Microsoft thought they NEEDED to do this because their OS design is so shitty. Nobody using a REAL OS has to lay awake at night worrying that some "malware" might mess with his hosts file. The idea of such a blatant fundamental design defect is ludicrous.
Indeed the XJACK is pretty crappy. I have seen them broken off, the contacts all bent or even snapped off, etc.
Ethernet only requires 4 conductors, even for 100Base-TX[*]; the RJ-11 telephone jack has 6, so why in the blazes don't we just use RJ-11's? I would just package a short cheap 6" RJ-45 jack to RJ-11 dongle cord. It's not ideal, but it's a lot better than those fragile make-do's.
[*] I guess gigabit requires all 8 conductors, but it would be a fair tradeoff for me to be restricted to 100 MBps for such a tiny device.
As long as we're throwing around meaningless personal preferences, 900 pixels is fine. 768 is unusable. Mine is 1440x900 13" and i scorn all the 99% losers trying to live with 1366x768 on 12", 13", 14" or 15". That extra 132 pixels makes all the difference to me. More is gravy, but less is unusable.
I bet we can both agree that 1024x600 is to gag at. If I ever had one of those dogs, there's no way I could resist the impulse to just hurl it against concrete.
The super-thin fad is just that. A silly fad. Form over function. Portability is governed by weight, and by max dimensions - NOT thickness, which is an inconsequential factor by itself. It's completely irrelevant in any REAL sense how thick a notebook is, given that they are all huge in length and width.
Why would you reach that conclusion? This model is obviously a response to the similarly-crippled Macbook Air. It would have rocked if they could have made it without having most of the same drawbacks, but probably no one could. As long as "real" Thinkpads don't have these drawbacks, I'm don't see why you'd take the leap of jumping to another brand, when every brand is going to have the same drawbacks in this particular form factor.
Forgive me, but why did you get a W when the X's and the T's are the real Thinkpads? The W's are just laptops not all that different from run of the mill brands.
I'm confused. Are we talking about the Thinkpad X1 Carbon here, or something else? Because Thinkpad X1 Carbon page at Lenovo says you've got an anti-glare option.
Yep. Thank you. Every time I get enraged at my US government's tyranny, I get reminded how much more corrupt and subverted other forces in the world are, like the UN, the ICC, and the forces behind Kyoto. It's hard to find instances where these forces are resisted, but you listed three fine examples.
Sorry to say; nix on the applets, although Xfce now has comparable native versions of most of the Gnome2 applets. I won't claim Xfce is a full replacement for all the good stuff in Gnome2, but it is remarkably close to it in the latest version.
If all you want is long term support, you could do what I did: adopt one of the free clones of RHEL6. RHEL6 has Gnome2.32 and will be fully supported until 2017.
Given what seem to be your preferences, which are pretty much the same as mine, I find it passing strange that you went from one single-menu-bar abortion to another single-menu-bar abortion. Why didn't you just switch to Xfce on linux?
Unlike, ahem, certain other DEs, each version of Xfce is markedly improved. The current version is already markedly better than even the one in Xubuntu 12.04. I can hardly wait to play with Xubuntu 12.10 and Xfce on Fedora 18.
Sorry, Bob and the Paperclip DO count. It's absurd not to count them (even though I personally never hated the paperclip with any fervor, the general verdict in in). And the pervasive awfulness of Windows Me. And the hopeless morass of Windows Vista. And the garbage heap that is Windows 8. You can't just excuse away their continual stream of massive goofs.
On the other hand, open source works, you anonymous idiot. So Gnome lays an egg; so what? It doesn't automatically make linux stink, because there is a wealth of lines of development going on, not like the walled garden of closed source. Just switch to Xfce for god's sake. If Xfce and half a dozen other alternate solutions were not already there, SOMEBODY WOULD START THEM. Because they COULD.
The one strategy that GNOME has never tried is asking users what
Almost all software has that problem.
Those are both very perceptive remarks by the article and the poster. The difference with Gnome is that they not only (1) didn't ask, but also (2) went with stupidly awful ideas of their own. Obviously you can survive (1) but not if (2) is also active. And not all software projects have stupidly awful ideas of their own. A lot of them do, but nowhere near all. For example, Xfce is dead on the mark with their instinct.
FAIL. Do these featherweights somehow think that accelerating at 1 mph every minute makes you a safer driver? Judging braking and cornering is just as nonsensical without being able to witness the CIRCUMSTANCES and evaluate the CAPABILITIES of the driver.
Of course the test would be absurdly easy to game, though.
And what the Sam Hill does that have to do with discussion point posed? OK, you are smart and are part of the large majority who want to have your own insurance. Good health to you. You (and I) almost certainly don't have a thing to worry about from the speculative point raised.
Don't take the refund unless they give you the investment plus a fair rate of interest over the intervening years. Time value of money. Even that is still doing them a favor considering the future years they have stolen from you, but I suppose it's better than a kosh on the head in a dark alley.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's a jury trial, I also apportion blame to the jury. Jurors who are too stupid to educate themselves about their power, including jury nullification, offend me. If the law is stupid, the original jury could have just found the defendant not guilty; end of story.
So in the end we are both blaming the common people.
They also like to say "get off my lawn, sonny".
And I want a pony. Somebody send me a pony.
Sheesh.
Not in my experience. The stuff I get from China on ebay arrive in a small packet via post which has clearly been sent direct from China. And the shipping is almost always _free_. A similar product purchased by mail from a US supplier is 3 to 5x the cost _AND_ the US supplier tacks on a criminally excessive shipping charge more than the cost of the item itself.
I'm curious as to how that works. If you order a tablet from Hong Kong, do they open all incoming mail, try to figure out what you paid, and assess a fee on the buyer before you can pick up your package? That sounds pretty expensive and manpower heavy to implement.
No. Just no. The hosts file is one of the most fundamental STANDARDS in TCP/IP networking.
Now more than ever, anyone who uses Windows is either a clueless moron or is FORCED into it because of some program he HAS to use which is Windows-only.
The take-home message is the fact that Microsoft thought they NEEDED to do this because their OS design is so shitty. Nobody using a REAL OS has to lay awake at night worrying that some "malware" might mess with his hosts file. The idea of such a blatant fundamental design defect is ludicrous.
Indeed the XJACK is pretty crappy. I have seen them broken off, the contacts all bent or even snapped off, etc.
Ethernet only requires 4 conductors, even for 100Base-TX[*]; the RJ-11 telephone jack has 6, so why in the blazes don't we just use RJ-11's? I would just package a short cheap 6" RJ-45 jack to RJ-11 dongle cord. It's not ideal, but it's a lot better than those fragile make-do's.
[*] I guess gigabit requires all 8 conductors, but it would be a fair tradeoff for me to be restricted to 100 MBps for such a tiny device.
As long as we're throwing around meaningless personal preferences, 900 pixels is fine. 768 is unusable. Mine is 1440x900 13" and i scorn all the 99% losers trying to live with 1366x768 on 12", 13", 14" or 15". That extra 132 pixels makes all the difference to me. More is gravy, but less is unusable.
I bet we can both agree that 1024x600 is to gag at. If I ever had one of those dogs, there's no way I could resist the impulse to just hurl it against concrete.
The super-thin fad is just that. A silly fad. Form over function. Portability is governed by weight, and by max dimensions - NOT thickness, which is an inconsequential factor by itself. It's completely irrelevant in any REAL sense how thick a notebook is, given that they are all huge in length and width.
Why would you reach that conclusion? This model is obviously a response to the similarly-crippled Macbook Air. It would have rocked if they could have made it without having most of the same drawbacks, but probably no one could. As long as "real" Thinkpads don't have these drawbacks, I'm don't see why you'd take the leap of jumping to another brand, when every brand is going to have the same drawbacks in this particular form factor.
The X's are the good ones. The T's are pretty good too. The W's, not so much.
Love my X301.
Forgive me, but why did you get a W when the X's and the T's are the real Thinkpads? The W's are just laptops not all that different from run of the mill brands.
I'm confused. Are we talking about the Thinkpad X1 Carbon here, or something else? Because Thinkpad X1 Carbon page at Lenovo says you've got an anti-glare option.
Yep. Thank you. Every time I get enraged at my US government's tyranny, I get reminded how much more corrupt and subverted other forces in the world are, like the UN, the ICC, and the forces behind Kyoto. It's hard to find instances where these forces are resisted, but you listed three fine examples.
Sorry to say; nix on the applets, although Xfce now has comparable native versions of most of the Gnome2 applets. I won't claim Xfce is a full replacement for all the good stuff in Gnome2, but it is remarkably close to it in the latest version.
If all you want is long term support, you could do what I did: adopt one of the free clones of RHEL6. RHEL6 has Gnome2.32 and will be fully supported until 2017.
Given what seem to be your preferences, which are pretty much the same as mine, I find it passing strange that you went from one single-menu-bar abortion to another single-menu-bar abortion. Why didn't you just switch to Xfce on linux?
If you don't give the customer what they want, SOMEBODY ELSE WILL.
There is a difference. On Windows 8 you are effing stuck with Metro, but on linux you are in no way stuck with Gnome3.
Unlike, ahem, certain other DEs, each version of Xfce is markedly improved. The current version is already markedly better than even the one in Xubuntu 12.04. I can hardly wait to play with Xubuntu 12.10 and Xfce on Fedora 18.
Sorry, Bob and the Paperclip DO count. It's absurd not to count them (even though I personally never hated the paperclip with any fervor, the general verdict in in). And the pervasive awfulness of Windows Me. And the hopeless morass of Windows Vista. And the garbage heap that is Windows 8. You can't just excuse away their continual stream of massive goofs.
On the other hand, open source works, you anonymous idiot. So Gnome lays an egg; so what? It doesn't automatically make linux stink, because there is a wealth of lines of development going on, not like the walled garden of closed source. Just switch to Xfce for god's sake. If Xfce and half a dozen other alternate solutions were not already there, SOMEBODY WOULD START THEM. Because they COULD.
The one strategy that GNOME has never tried is asking users what
Almost all software has that problem.
Those are both very perceptive remarks by the article and the poster. The difference with Gnome is that they not only (1) didn't ask, but also (2) went with stupidly awful ideas of their own. Obviously you can survive (1) but not if (2) is also active. And not all software projects have stupidly awful ideas of their own. A lot of them do, but nowhere near all. For example, Xfce is dead on the mark with their instinct.
FAIL. Do these featherweights somehow think that accelerating at 1 mph every minute makes you a safer driver? Judging braking and cornering is just as nonsensical without being able to witness the CIRCUMSTANCES and evaluate the CAPABILITIES of the driver.
Of course the test would be absurdly easy to game, though.
And what the Sam Hill does that have to do with discussion point posed? OK, you are smart and are part of the large majority who want to have your own insurance. Good health to you. You (and I) almost certainly don't have a thing to worry about from the speculative point raised.
Don't take the refund unless they give you the investment plus a fair rate of interest over the intervening years. Time value of money. Even that is still doing them a favor considering the future years they have stolen from you, but I suppose it's better than a kosh on the head in a dark alley.