I worked IT in the DOS 3 to DOS 6 era. I believe I even installed a couple machines with disk compression on. Didnt lose anything.
A: What does that signify? Anecdote. Nothing more. Lose the right 512 byte block, and you might feel like the disk was worthless. Luck of the draw. You got lucky. I got lucky. Probably many were not all that put out. Some, I'll wager were very put out. More than a mild shock. Less than death. Potentially deadly in the right circumstances.
B: Now that that feature is on, *why* must I pay extra for my data to be secure? My alternatives
are to pay for a bug fix, or backup and restore the machine without a feature I was sold.
I dont know about you, but that starts to make me feel a bit bent over.
As to losing data that you would not have been able to store anyway, I'm not sure what to say to that, except I disagree with your analysis. If Chevy sold you an optional feature on an auto, and you learned it did not work correctly, you might well decide that it was not important to you, and you were not going to do anything about it. You might also feel more than a bit put out when asked to pay a significant portion of the purchase price ( 9.95 is my understanding of the fix price, I dont happen to recall DOS pricing, but I doubt it was $100.00. So, 10% or more? ) to get it made right for something you were sold that was advertised as having certain capabilities.
On the "turbo boost" analogy, I'm not really buying that either. Microsoft did not warn users about this feature maybe causing damage as I recollect. And should Chevy add some feature to their cars that cause a few to require fixing, I would expect Chevy to fix it.
And, on the replacement, why, if I was sold a feature as part of the package do I have to prove or do anything to get the item corrected? I might use it. It was a feature of the system as sold to me, and I think I should have every right to be able to expect to turn that feature on at a later date without worrying. Also, I might sell it to someone that will use it. It should be put right. Ford just had a recall on a brake/cruise control part that might cause a fire. By the test "you must experience actual damage before you can get a correction", I must wait until my car has already caught fire before anything is done about it. And by the "damages" standard, my "fix" will be the faulty component alone.
And I doubt that Microsoft made it clear that they felt people had a right to claim damages. Just that the ones that experienced data loss should be compensated to the small extent of making the item work as intended/advertised. Damages, for some, would be much much more than the retail cost of the fix.
A: You didnt allocate a segment, segmentation was a hack to allow access to more memory without having the register size change to *really* support it. Two registers were used to point to a given memory location, one was offset ( shifted left ) by ( I think ) 4 bit positions so that you got a 20 bit address from 16 bit registers. Any combinations in the two registers that resulted in a given address were OK to use to get that address.
B: I dont think the MMU or any other feature gave you any overrun or underrun exceptions on violations. And the segment size was 64k IIRC.
But how do you know a dozen is enough? *Maybe* they really need 400? **Maybe** they really need 600, but have been running lean because they dont really have the wherewithal to do more. We dont know, and neither ( probably ) do those offering the advice from wall street.
There is one point, Mr Grishnakh, sir ( I have been wanting to say that for 10^9 femtoseconds ).
Preparing yourself for the next job with a better place.
*And* the payback is when you leave for the other place, and they try oh so hard to keep you, you can say "keep the money, you had years to offer it to me, if I was worth it". COurse, it sounds like you got to experience that.
I hadnt considered the money paid for Windows or Office licenses as "taken" ( I was assuming the word was meant in an 'against their will' sort of way. ).
But do lets be clear.... I am not a Microsoft fan, by any stretch.
What have I attributed to you? You brought up your "unbiased" sources to back up your opinion. I asked for your sources. You declined ever so graciously. I pointed out that there was little point to talking about your sources if you were not prepared to shared them, that I am not going to change my mind based on sources you will not share. The rest is dicsussion about who said and implied what.
As to "Take my comments at face value", you should realize that as with art, the work is subject to multiple interpretations. Some you mean, some, perhaps you dont. Language is imprecise.
There was, intended or not, implication in the line about your opinion. And the possiblity of misinterpretation. To the extent that I misinterpreted you, I apologize. To you extend that you left yourself open to misinterpretation, you owe me an apology.
However, you did implicitly, entering into the discussion as you did, with your opinions. You knew, I believe, full well what we might assume those opinions were.
I will agree with you that anyone that believes marketing hype are not terribly smart.
No, it is not your responsiblity to look up anything for me. But you come in with a claim based on "credible sources". And you want people to modify their thoughts based on this. I am not prepared to take your biased word any more than you are inclined to take my biased word. If your sources are so good, perhaps they will stand on their own. I have to think that, since you will not share them, that they will not. Perhaps this is in error, you are gunshy from presenting good sources or data. I looked at your recent posting history, and according to that it looks like you have the entrenched viewpoint you seem to believe I have.
Yes, I have a bias toward Linux. But I am capable of seeing and admitting that Microsoft has some products and services that have a deserved place in the market.
I am not interested, personally, in defending any particular viewpoint. I know there are many here who are, on both sides of the Linux/Microsoft divide. Personally, I just want to see the truth of the matter, not just confirmation of my current views and opinions. Might I exhibit some resistance before changing my mind? Yes. But present good facts, make a good arguement, you might change my mind.
1. Skype
2. Google Talk (speculation)
3. Teleo ( who were free to develop to whatever platforms made sense to themselves )
4. Other players as mentioned elsewhere
After announcement
1. Skype
2. Google Talk (speculation)
3. Microsoft's product (to be released)( having purchased Teleo, who will never do anything but Windows now )
4. Other players as mentioned elsewhere
Windows: Probably the same number of choices Other: Potentially fewer choices.
Right now, they probably have to pay a premium to induce people to work with big iron, since many will avoid it to keep from getting too specialized ( machine goes out of common usage, jobs for programmers for machine go out of common usage ). And most employers are not smart enough to try to hire a good programmer, they usually look for thier specific skill set, not a general aptitude.
Except that "doing a great job" for the CEO these days is defined as making the short term stock value as high as possible so he, the "executive team", and the stockholders make lots of money, darn the long term consequences ( HP, Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, etc, etc ).
When has "employee value" been improved by the action of the CEO? When have working conditions been improved by the action of the CEO?
You do have a point, the CEO does have a great responsibility. But the "very finite limit on the help they can give" line about the floor worker seems a bit much. Tell you what. Thought experiment... You can work at one of two companies. One has a CEO and no floor workers. The other has floor workers, but no CEO. No changes are possible. No other choices are possible. Choose.
Slashdot Mirror
I worked IT in the DOS 3 to DOS 6 era. I believe I even installed a couple machines with disk compression on. Didnt lose anything.
A: What does that signify? Anecdote. Nothing more. Lose the right 512 byte block, and you might feel like the disk was worthless. Luck of the draw. You got lucky. I got lucky. Probably many were not all that put out. Some, I'll wager were very put out.
More than a mild shock. Less than death. Potentially deadly in the right circumstances.
B: Now that that feature is on, *why* must I pay extra for my data to be secure? My alternatives
are to pay for a bug fix, or backup and restore the machine without a feature I was sold.
I dont know about you, but that starts to make me feel a bit bent over.
As to losing data that you would not have been able to store anyway, I'm not sure what to say to that, except I disagree with your analysis. If Chevy sold you an optional feature on an auto, and you learned it did not work correctly, you might well decide that it was not important to you, and you were not going to do anything about it. You might also feel more than a bit put out when asked to pay a significant portion of the purchase price ( 9.95 is my understanding of the fix price, I dont happen to recall DOS pricing, but I doubt it was $100.00. So, 10% or more? ) to get it made right for something you were sold that was advertised as having certain capabilities.
On the "turbo boost" analogy, I'm not really buying that either. Microsoft did not warn users about this feature maybe causing damage as I recollect. And should Chevy add some feature to their cars that cause a few to require fixing, I would expect Chevy to fix it.
And, on the replacement, why, if I was sold a feature as part of the package do I have to prove or do anything to get the item corrected? I might use it. It was a feature of the system as sold to me, and I think I should have every right to be able to expect to turn that feature on at a later date without worrying. Also, I might sell it to someone that will use it. It should be put right. Ford just had a recall on a brake/cruise control part that might cause a fire. By the test "you must experience actual damage before you can get a correction", I must wait until my car has already caught fire before anything is done about it. And by the "damages" standard, my "fix" will be the faulty component alone.
And I doubt that Microsoft made it clear that they felt people had a right to claim damages. Just that the ones that experienced data loss should be compensated to the small extent of making the item work as intended/advertised. Damages, for some, would be much much more than the retail cost of the fix.
Data loss is not a mild shock.
The system was critical, if used.
And why shouldnt I ( even though I am a non-smoker ) be ineligible for
the free replacement lighter? Maybe I will start smoking in the near future.
Please excuse my ignorance!
:-)
(-: unfortunately, I have a lot of it...
I could be misremembering, but...
A: You didnt allocate a segment, segmentation was a hack to allow access to more memory without having the register size change to *really* support it. Two registers were used to point to a given memory location, one was offset ( shifted left ) by ( I think ) 4 bit positions so that you got a 20 bit address from 16 bit registers. Any combinations in the two registers that resulted in a given address were OK to use to get that address.
B: I dont think the MMU or any other feature gave you any overrun or underrun exceptions on violations. And the segment size was 64k IIRC.
He doesnt seem to allow for "some songs should be less".
I mean, if the market is going to decide...
Or it could have been Google engineers pretending to be Yahoo engineers to make us think it was Yahoo engineers pretending to be Google engineers.
I sent an email saying I wasnt going to use GMail, and I got beaten.
I think it was google engineers, hard to tell. They all look so alike.
A first for me.
.NYET.
Hmm hem hmmm.
In Soviet Russia, is marketed as
Then the nature of the "copy" is important?
But to do the thesis, he/she ( probably ) read the items, thus, in a sense, making a 100% copy of it.
So, is it illegal then? What if she/he has a "photographic memory" and can remember all of it verbatim? What if he/she doesnt?
But how do you know a dozen is enough? *Maybe* they really need 400? **Maybe** they really need 600, but have been running lean because they dont really have the wherewithal to do more. We dont know, and neither ( probably ) do those offering the advice from wall street.
There is one point, Mr Grishnakh, sir ( I have been wanting to say that for 10^9 femtoseconds ).
Preparing yourself for the next job with a better place.
*And* the payback is when you leave for the other place, and they try oh so hard to keep you, you can say "keep the money, you had years to offer it to me, if I was worth it". COurse, it sounds like you got to experience that.
My whole family makes that mistake.
NP, and thanks for the calm answer.
I am serious.
I hadnt considered the money paid for Windows or Office licenses as "taken" ( I was assuming the word was meant in an 'against their will' sort of way. ).
But do lets be clear.... I am not a Microsoft fan, by any stretch.
How does Microsoft take from local school budgets?
Almost forgot...
I had agreed that anecdotal evidence isnt worth much, *excepting for the individual with that evidence*.
What have I attributed to you? You brought up your "unbiased" sources to back up your opinion. I asked for your sources. You declined ever so graciously. I pointed out that there was little point to talking about your sources if you were not prepared to shared them, that I am not going to change my mind based on sources you will not share. The rest is dicsussion about who said and implied what.
As to "Take my comments at face value", you should realize that as with art, the work is subject to multiple interpretations. Some you mean, some, perhaps you dont. Language is imprecise.
There was, intended or not, implication in the line about your opinion. And the possiblity of misinterpretation. To the extent that I misinterpreted you, I apologize. To you extend that you left yourself open to misinterpretation, you owe me an apology.
You did not state. Correct.
As to implication, I think you did ( obviously ). Else why reply and say what you did?
You never did make any direct claim.
However, you did implicitly, entering into the discussion as you did, with your opinions. You knew, I believe, full well what we might assume those opinions were.
I will agree with you that anyone that believes marketing hype are not terribly smart.
No, it is not your responsiblity to look up anything for me. But you come in with a claim based on "credible sources". And you want people to modify their thoughts based on this. I am not prepared to take your biased word any more than you are inclined to take my biased word. If your sources are so good, perhaps they will stand on their own. I have to think that, since you will not share them, that they will not. Perhaps this is in error, you are gunshy from presenting good sources or data. I looked at your recent posting history, and according to that it looks like you have the entrenched viewpoint you seem to believe I have.
Yes, I have a bias toward Linux. But I am capable of seeing and admitting that Microsoft has some products and services that have a deserved place in the market.
I am not interested, personally, in defending any particular viewpoint. I know there are many here who are, on both sides of the Linux/Microsoft divide. Personally, I just want to see the truth of the matter, not just confirmation of my current views and opinions. Might I exhibit some resistance before changing my mind? Yes. But present good facts, make a good arguement, you might change my mind.
Perhaps you would care to share this list of credible studies by individual and organizations known to be unbiased?
Also, you have a point that his experience may not apply well to others, but you have to grant that his experience is very relevant *to him/her/it*.
Wasnt it really
Before announcement
1. Skype
2. Google Talk (speculation)
3. Teleo ( who were free to develop to whatever platforms made sense to themselves )
4. Other players as mentioned elsewhere
After announcement
1. Skype
2. Google Talk (speculation)
3. Microsoft's product (to be released)( having purchased Teleo, who will never do anything but Windows now )
4. Other players as mentioned elsewhere
Windows: Probably the same number of choices
Other: Potentially fewer choices.
Yes, but you dont understand.
Right now, they probably have to pay a premium to induce people to work with big iron, since many will avoid it to keep from getting too specialized ( machine goes out of common usage, jobs for programmers for machine go out of common usage ). And most employers are not smart enough to try to hire a good programmer, they usually look for thier specific skill set, not a general aptitude.
And, of course, none of the Microsoft loving people have any similiar problems.
Nay! They are completely on the side of Right! Truth! Justice! and all good Microsoft kinds of things.
Microsoft has never done any wrong thing, it's all envious smelly Linux lovers making it up.
Almost forgot... Say "hi" to mom.
Except that "doing a great job" for the CEO these days is defined as making the short term stock value as high as possible so he, the "executive team", and the stockholders make lots of money, darn the long term consequences ( HP, Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, etc, etc ).
When has "employee value" been improved by the action of the CEO? When have working conditions been improved by the action of the CEO?
You do have a point, the CEO does have a great responsibility. But the "very finite limit on the help they can give" line about the floor worker seems a bit much. Tell you what. Thought experiment... You can work at one of two companies. One has a CEO and no floor workers. The other has floor workers, but no CEO. No changes are possible. No other choices are possible. Choose.