NO! That's my whole point...it's wrong for vendors to be forced to ship computers with Windows. It's also wrong for vendors to be forced to ship computers with Linux.
"What kind of shit is this, none of my old games work on my new computer."
DOS shipped with quite a large manual actually...all the way up until DOS 6. How many typical users care about having a compiler or the source code to their software? How is this relevant to my argument?
What Microsoft did to the computer market was wrong. They were found to be a monopoly and found to have illegally leveraged that position. Essentially forcing people to use Windows and forcing vendors to ship Windows.
How is forcing people to ship and use Linux different?
It doesn't matter how good or how crappy you perceive the product to be.
What if Microsoft decided to give copies of Windows to Vietnam, and the Vietnamese government forced all vendors to ship with Windows.
Would this be a fair practice?
It has nothing to do with cost...it has to do with advocating the Vietnamese government forcing a certain product on consumers. Doesn't matter whether or not it's linux or windows. It's wrong.
Let vendors ship both...and sell the computers preloaded with Linux for less. That's choice.
I didn't comment on cost...I commented on choice. It would be equally wrong for the same exact reason for the Vietnamese government to force vendors to ship only Windows.
I also hear that those cheap copies that are available on the streets are pirated...and who cares about cheap? Open source is free. Many of these countries have a higher degree of broadband penetration than other countries. Last I checked it was quite easy to download open source products.
If you want choice, make the systems dual boot Windows and Linux.
I never said freedom of choice...I said freedom and choice.
Correct, the government of Vietnam can decide what it wants about its country and people. Does that mean I should support their decision and other people should?
If the Vietnam government decided that any vietnamese citizen over 30 was too old and started killing them all, I guess that'd be ok because the government of Vietnam can do whatever it wants.
While I think it's good that Vietnam wants to move to open source, I think that forcing computer vendors to ship only open source products is not the way to go.
Open source is supposed to be about freedom and choice. Seems counter productive to me, to force people to use open source. If open source advocates try to encourage this kind of behavior, how are they better than Microsoft?
1. For the average user a single drive is easier to deal with than a raid configuration. It's not cheaper when you have to hire a tech to set it up for you.
2. A raid takes up quite a bit of space in a typical mini tower case.
3. You could stick this drive in an external enclosure and use it as part of a temporary backup system or for portable storage between multiple locations.
4. A raid of these drives makes sense for a lot of people that don't want external raid enclosures to have a lot of space. I fit in this category (although I'll wait until the price drops on this guy). I've got a 300 GB raid array at home that is almost completely full. Since when one creates a RAID array it is difficult to resize it later, I prefer to get the highest capacity drives available at a reasonable price point.
Everytime a new capacity drive comes out, people always talk about how it's a ridiculous amount of space or how you can get the same amount of space cheaper in a raid configuration. What you and these other people don't understand is that these drives will be common place in a few years. By that time the high capacity drives will be 600GB and you'll be saying, "600 GB drives are pointless, you could setup a raid array of 300 GB drives for cheaper". Furthermore no amount of space currently available to the typical consumer is too much. Even if you can't fill it, someone like me will...because I like to rip all my game cds (for easy mounting with daemon tools on my winblows machine), audio cds (at nice quality, not that 128 kb/s crap), and dvds.
The first ammendment specifically bars the government from mentioning the existance of or lack of religion.
1. The 10 commandments do have historical value. This does not mean they belong in a court of law. Regardless of their historical significance, they have a lot of religious significance as well. As mentioned in another post, some of the commandments refer specifically to a god.
2. Can't really argue with that.
3. I can assure you that in many places saying the pledge is compulsory. I had to say it.
4. This is a bad thing too. Our currency should not have any religious symbols or mentioning of god. How many people would freak if pentagrams were on the currency instead or if it specifically said, "In the lack of God we trust" or "In Ala we trust"? Same goes for swearing on a bible in court rooms and "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you god."
5. I'm sure some do complain, but regardless, this is a bit different then the pledge. Even though ballparks are sometimes built with tax payer dollars, the government itself is not in charge of ball games. For example it is also legal for a christian group to use a public civic center to hold an event, provided that when the muslims, jews, or a death metal satanic band want to hold a similar event they are allowed to. Contrast this view with complaints about prayers being said at -school- ball games where a big deal was made about it.
6. Teachers act as a representative of the government. They are providing a government funded service, they shouldn't have a bible on their desk or wear crucifixes. There are many other things teachers cannot do that are perfectly legal and acceptable under other circumstances. Imagine the outrage that would happen if a teacher came into a classroom wearing a "God is Dead" t-shirt or kept a book of satanic chants on their desk. Should they be allowed to do that too? Want your child to go to school where bibles and crucifixes are permissible? Send them to private school. I personally do not want to pay for teachers that outwardly represent the christian faith.
7. The problem isn't forcing religion. The problem is mentioning religion. The government shouldn't recognize the existance of god...or ala...or zeus...and likewise shouldn't refute the existance of god, or ala, or zeus. This country is supposed to be for everyone (white, black, gay, straight, godfearing, or athiest). A place where one person's personal views are no less important that anothers. The government shouldn't be advocating any particular view point unless it is a point of law.
In the past year I've RMA'd 4 maxtor drives...However, I'm of the opinion that with the exception of particular cases (i.e. the IBM 60/75 GB deathstars) you'll find that failure rates are fairly consistent among manufacturers for drives at similar price points.
For every drive manufacturer, you'll find two camps...the people that say they had nothing but trouble with a certain brand, and the people who have been using the same brand for all their corporate desktops and not had a single failure.
I think it's all statistical anomolies...(i.e. some people are just unlucky or Lucky). The one thing you can count on is that regardless of what drive you get, it will fail eventually.
300GB 5400RPM drives at $400 a piece x 4 = $1600 + $100 for a RAID 5 controller. You get 900 GB of space, it's faster, just as reliable, and it costs more.
I suppose I could get the same amount of space by cramming 9 of the 120 GB units in my case...but that would be kind of stupid I think. However (space, power, heat, and noise issues aside) if I could get 9 of those in my case, then I could spend a ton more money...and believe it or not get a ton more space with the 300 GB model drives.
But why stop there? For a lot less I could cram 30 of the 120 GB models in a case and get the same amount of space as cramming 9 of the 300 GB models...wow that would make me ub3rl337.
But wait...If could do 30 of the 120 GB models, why I could do 30 of the 300 GB models and...
Every home machine needs a copy of knoppix sitting next to it. This way when an update causes their machine to blue screen on start up, they will have everything they need for to allow for their techy friend to do a data recovery.
It wouldn't be by being the head of a software company whose software runs on over 90% of desktop computers would it?
Gates says jump, and the majority of the closed source software world (and a good bit of the hardware world) says, "How high?" Is this because he's wealthy? No. It's because they know that all Gates has to do is issue an order and cause their product to no longer work with Windows.
Influence and power are a bit different...influence is being able to get people to do things. Power is being able to -force- people to do things.
So...do you want to play games which happen to run under Windows, or do you really really want to run Windows?
I have Windows installed on my machine as well, but I only use it (Windows) to play games...anything else I do under linux. In fact, my saved game files are far more important to me than any of my Windows settings...for my purposes Windows is completely a throw away OS which I won't even give a second thought about reinstalling if it starts acting up (ala blue screens...etc).
Since I wouldn't run Windows if my games ran under linux, I wouldn't say I want to use Windows...I instead want to play my games and Windows happens to be the only vehicle that will allow me to do that.
Slashdot Mirror
NO! That's my whole point...it's wrong for vendors to be forced to ship computers with Windows. It's also wrong for vendors to be forced to ship computers with Linux.
It's not competition at all.
Let a gamer do the same thing with Linux today.
"What kind of shit is this, none of my old games work on my new computer."
DOS shipped with quite a large manual actually...all the way up until DOS 6. How many typical users care about having a compiler or the source code to their software? How is this relevant to my argument?
What Microsoft did to the computer market was wrong. They were found to be a monopoly and found to have illegally leveraged that position. Essentially forcing people to use Windows and forcing vendors to ship Windows.
How is forcing people to ship and use Linux different?
It doesn't matter how good or how crappy you perceive the product to be.
What if Microsoft decided to give copies of Windows to Vietnam, and the Vietnamese government forced all vendors to ship with Windows.
Would this be a fair practice?
It has nothing to do with cost...it has to do with advocating the Vietnamese government forcing a certain product on consumers. Doesn't matter whether or not it's linux or windows. It's wrong.
Let vendors ship both...and sell the computers preloaded with Linux for less. That's choice.
I didn't comment on cost...I commented on choice. It would be equally wrong for the same exact reason for the Vietnamese government to force vendors to ship only Windows.
I also hear that those cheap copies that are available on the streets are pirated...and who cares about cheap? Open source is free. Many of these countries have a higher degree of broadband penetration than other countries. Last I checked it was quite easy to download open source products.
If you want choice, make the systems dual boot Windows and Linux.
I never said freedom of choice...I said freedom and choice.
Correct, the government of Vietnam can decide what it wants about its country and people. Does that mean I should support their decision and other people should?
If the Vietnam government decided that any vietnamese citizen over 30 was too old and started killing them all, I guess that'd be ok because the government of Vietnam can do whatever it wants.
I realize this is Vietnam, however what does that have to with my opinion about open source advocates?
While I think it's good that Vietnam wants to move to open source, I think that forcing computer vendors to ship only open source products is not the way to go.
Open source is supposed to be about freedom and choice. Seems counter productive to me, to force people to use open source. If open source advocates try to encourage this kind of behavior, how are they better than Microsoft?
Score:4, Informative?
How about score -1 RTFA...
While eating poo has not yet been linked to higher salaries, kissing butt has...so perhaps you have plausable theory there.
That's not true.
1. For the average user a single drive is easier to deal with than a raid configuration. It's not cheaper when you have to hire a tech to set it up for you.
2. A raid takes up quite a bit of space in a typical mini tower case.
3. You could stick this drive in an external enclosure and use it as part of a temporary backup system or for portable storage between multiple locations.
4. A raid of these drives makes sense for a lot of people that don't want external raid enclosures to have a lot of space. I fit in this category (although I'll wait until the price drops on this guy). I've got a 300 GB raid array at home that is almost completely full. Since when one creates a RAID array it is difficult to resize it later, I prefer to get the highest capacity drives available at a reasonable price point.
Everytime a new capacity drive comes out, people always talk about how it's a ridiculous amount of space or how you can get the same amount of space cheaper in a raid configuration. What you and these other people don't understand is that these drives will be common place in a few years. By that time the high capacity drives will be 600GB and you'll be saying, "600 GB drives are pointless, you could setup a raid array of 300 GB drives for cheaper". Furthermore no amount of space currently available to the typical consumer is too much. Even if you can't fill it, someone like me will...because I like to rip all my game cds (for easy mounting with daemon tools on my winblows machine), audio cds (at nice quality, not that 128 kb/s crap), and dvds.
The first ammendment specifically bars the government from mentioning the existance of or lack of religion.
1. The 10 commandments do have historical value. This does not mean they belong in a court of law. Regardless of their historical significance, they have a lot of religious significance as well. As mentioned in another post, some of the commandments refer specifically to a god.
2. Can't really argue with that.
3. I can assure you that in many places saying the pledge is compulsory. I had to say it.
4. This is a bad thing too. Our currency should not have any religious symbols or mentioning of god. How many people would freak if pentagrams were on the currency instead or if it specifically said, "In the lack of God we trust" or "In Ala we trust"? Same goes for swearing on a bible in court rooms and "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you god."
5. I'm sure some do complain, but regardless, this is a bit different then the pledge. Even though ballparks are sometimes built with tax payer dollars, the government itself is not in charge of ball games. For example it is also legal for a christian group to use a public civic center to hold an event, provided that when the muslims, jews, or a death metal satanic band want to hold a similar event they are allowed to. Contrast this view with complaints about prayers being said at -school- ball games where a big deal was made about it.
6. Teachers act as a representative of the government. They are providing a government funded service, they shouldn't have a bible on their desk or wear crucifixes. There are many other things teachers cannot do that are perfectly legal and acceptable under other circumstances. Imagine the outrage that would happen if a teacher came into a classroom wearing a "God is Dead" t-shirt or kept a book of satanic chants on their desk. Should they be allowed to do that too? Want your child to go to school where bibles and crucifixes are permissible? Send them to private school. I personally do not want to pay for teachers that outwardly represent the christian faith.
7. The problem isn't forcing religion. The problem is mentioning religion. The government shouldn't recognize the existance of god...or ala...or zeus...and likewise shouldn't refute the existance of god, or ala, or zeus. This country is supposed to be for everyone (white, black, gay, straight, godfearing, or athiest). A place where one person's personal views are no less important that anothers. The government shouldn't be advocating any particular view point unless it is a point of law.
Better yet, sell AOL to itself...oh wait...
The answer is backups backups backups...
In the past year I've RMA'd 4 maxtor drives...However, I'm of the opinion that with the exception of particular cases (i.e. the IBM 60/75 GB deathstars) you'll find that failure rates are fairly consistent among manufacturers for drives at similar price points.
For every drive manufacturer, you'll find two camps...the people that say they had nothing but trouble with a certain brand, and the people who have been using the same brand for all their corporate desktops and not had a single failure.
I think it's all statistical anomolies...(i.e. some people are just unlucky or Lucky). The one thing you can count on is that regardless of what drive you get, it will fail eventually.
Hmm...fascinating...what's your point?
300GB 5400RPM drives at $400 a piece x 4 = $1600 + $100 for a RAID 5 controller. You get 900 GB of space, it's faster, just as reliable, and it costs more.
I suppose I could get the same amount of space by cramming 9 of the 120 GB units in my case...but that would be kind of stupid I think. However (space, power, heat, and noise issues aside) if I could get 9 of those in my case, then I could spend a ton more money...and believe it or not get a ton more space with the 300 GB model drives.
But why stop there? For a lot less I could cram 30 of the 120 GB models in a case and get the same amount of space as cramming 9 of the 300 GB models...wow that would make me ub3rl337.
But wait...If could do 30 of the 120 GB models, why I could do 30 of the 300 GB models and...
Every home machine needs a copy of knoppix sitting next to it. This way when an update causes their machine to blue screen on start up, they will have everything they need for to allow for their techy friend to do a data recovery.
I prefer tightvnc to realvnc...in my experience it has been more stable.
How do you think he got so insanely wealthy?
It wouldn't be by being the head of a software company whose software runs on over 90% of desktop computers would it?
Gates says jump, and the majority of the closed source software world (and a good bit of the hardware world) says, "How high?" Is this because he's wealthy? No. It's because they know that all Gates has to do is issue an order and cause their product to no longer work with Windows.
Influence and power are a bit different...influence is being able to get people to do things. Power is being able to -force- people to do things.
If you have to ask, it wasn't.
Yeah and go to jail just like when you mod an xbox or playstation...
I for one welcome our new reliable, secure, DRM enabled, and trusted Windows BIOS overlords...
Sorry...couldn't resist.
So...do you want to play games which happen to run under Windows, or do you really really want to run Windows?
I have Windows installed on my machine as well, but I only use it (Windows) to play games...anything else I do under linux. In fact, my saved game files are far more important to me than any of my Windows settings...for my purposes Windows is completely a throw away OS which I won't even give a second thought about reinstalling if it starts acting up (ala blue screens...etc).
Since I wouldn't run Windows if my games ran under linux, I wouldn't say I want to use Windows...I instead want to play my games and Windows happens to be the only vehicle that will allow me to do that.
Call'm asterors and asterites...
Perhaps selling old roms may be a good way to make money. I see no reason why Nintendo couldn't sell the old roms and make a gba game out of them.
Maybe Nintendo should take notice of this for original nes games.