Perhaps you should stick a sign above your bathroom mirror: AS AMERICA DOES NOT RULE THE WORLD, COUNTRIES OTHER THAN AMERICA DO NOT HAVE TO ADHERE TO AMERICAN LAWS?
Perhaps you should stick a sign above your bathroom mirror: SINCE THE REST OF THE WORLD IS A BAD JOKE, COUNTRIES THAT DO NOT YIELD TO AMERICA ARE INSIGNIFICANT AND UTTERLY UNIMPORTANT. SEE ANY MEMBER NATION OF THE EU FOR AN EXAMPLE.
Yeah, but the CD you're making has no where near the quality of a REAL CD. Problem not solved. Problem glossed over like a lies in a presidential press conference.
But you know that before you make your purchase. If you feel like the quality isn't good enough then don't spend your money. If it's good enough for the price, then go right ahead. My problem is when people who know better complain about the DRM. Yes it's there but it's possible to get around it with either no loss in quality (using Hymn or buring to a CD and re-ripping with a lossless codec) or with a minimal loss in quality (burning to a CD then re-ripping with a lossy codec).
The whole "but it's got DRM" argument is a loser. Major labels will never allow users to purchase DRM free tracks online. It just won't happen. I'll take the iTunes DRM over other forms any day. It's flexable enough that I never notice it and that's how DRM, which is a fact of life in the digital age, should be.
There is no such thing as liberal DRM as long as you don't own what you buy. I don't consider owning a licence to play on up to 5 computers simultaneously and being allowed to burn to cd without changing playlist 7 times as something i own.
Burn to a CD and re-rip or use Hymn. Problem solved.
Great point. I think that confirms what most of feel about lawyers, that they're really just hired guns. back in 2000, did anyone not think that the lawyers in Bush v. Gore could have just as easily switched sides and argued the same? remember the Roberts ruckus that he worked pro bon for a gay rights case? It's like people expect lawyers to have scruples or something.
Come on. We're all hired guns in some form or another. Or have you never been put into a position by a client or employer of doing something that you didn't necessarily believe was the best course of action?
US isn't perfect. But we get another shot every 8 years, at worst.
Further, after about 2 years into the second term the President becomes a lame duck and generally does not get major new policy initiaves (either foreign or domestic) through Congress.
the 'linux standard base' is a wonderful idea but people have been trying it for 10 years and it hasnt worked. there is something fundamental in the 'open source' leaders in general that destroys ideas of backwards compatability and simple consitency.
You speak the truth, which is why this post will be modded as a troll or flamebait. Linux will remain a niche player until I can download and install a program without having to compile it from source or wade through a list of compiled binaries by platform and version. Why, you ask? Simple, the majority of commercial software developers will not want to put up with the hassel.
If Linux is to become a major player, something like the LSB is needed.
It also didn't mention welfare, social security, victim disarmament ("gun control"), corporate subsidies, regulation of voluntary trade, government-sponsored monopolies (telco, power), foreign "aid", national ID card (social security #, driver's license), prohibition, war without an explicit congressional vote, or a federal government that has the slightest bit of authority beyond national defense and border control. Weird, huh?
Don't forget income taxes, social security, medicare and medicaid.
If TiVo implements this, I'm throwing my TiVo out the door. I think TiVo is by far the best PVR out there, but I'd much rather settle for a less elegant UI and move to something like Replay TV. Replay TV has got some pretty sweet features of it's own and I was considering it as my next DVR but I really do (or did anyway) love my TiVo.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't!
on
Office 12 Exposed
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
What they are doing is taking an already extremely complex piece of software, and suddenly changing how to do everything. Suddenly, switching to OpenOffice seems like less of a change than upgrading to the next version of MS Office.
Microsoft is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Look, if they don't change the user interface and just keep on adding more and more high level features (those not used by the average user) to the product open source advocates will say that there is no point in upgrading, the UI is the same as it's always been and most of the new features aren't of value to the average user so switch to Open Office.
If Microsoft does change the UI to try and improve usability and give things a bit of a makeover you say that moving to the new version will require retraining so why not move to Open Office.
Microsoft will be damned by the open source crowd either way. I, for one, am glad that they are trying something new. As others have noted, Office has been mostly stagnant for the average Office user for several versions now (with the exception of Outlook). It's nice to see the UI get an overhaul and perhaps it will end up working better than it did in previous versions.
I fail to believe the current UI for Office types of programs (and let's face it, they are all mostly the same) is the be all, end all of interfaces for these kinds of programs. There is always room for improvement and now that Apple has some serious momentum and open source is continuing to slowly eat away at Microsoft's user base, they would be crazy not to make some changes.
You must be one of those completely independent, self-made American pioneers. Please tell me how you built your career without government-built-and-maintained roads, sewage, or water, and ate healthfully at home and away with no FDA standards. Or this nice internet we're on; perhaps you invented it, and not Al Gore, but how did you build such a powerful global economy about it? And how did you accomplish all these feats alone with no public libraries or schools to assist you? And how did you keep big companies from dumping toxic waste near your back yard? These are staggering accomplishments for one individual.
Don't even try to turn this around! Your objeting to a point that I did not make. No one is objecting to the goverment taxing us to provide services that benefit everybody. Read the post before you respond. What I, and others, object to is the goverment taking money from us to provide services that benefit a group of citizens who are in need because they made poor choices. That is what we are objecting to. It's been known for a long, long time that New Orleans would be in serious trouble if a hurricane hit. The entire city is below sea level. Yet people choose to live their and to build there. Then a hurricane hits, causes massive damage and everyone else has to foot the bill? That's classic bleeding heart liberalism at work. I don't mind footing the bill if a disaster occurs that no one was expecting. I will object to the day I die if I'm made to foot the bill for a disaster that occurs because of poor choices.
When choices lead to misfortune, citizens should be allowed to choose to help by way of charities. Which, BTW, I've donated to in this case beacause I think it's a worthy cause and that's they way it should be. The goverment has no business helping anyone but the poorest individuals rebuild. Corporations and everyone else should have either known better or should have gotten insurance. Infrastructure and ports are another story. As they are vital to everyone, the Fed's have every right to use tax dollars to rebuild that.
Once again, in order to get where you are and be able to earn your cherished private property, you have received support from the community of people called the US citizens, in the form of commodities, security, a stable country, education, etc.
No disagreement there, but paying taxes to provide the same to others is a far cry from paying taxes to help people rebuild if they choose to build in a location where it is virtually garunteed that at some point in the future there will be a disaster. To make matters worse, after my hard earned money is taken to help these people rebuild, it'll all happen all over again at some point in the future. Study up on the location of New Orleans. It's below sea level. It's been known for years that a direct hit by a hurricane would cause massive amounts of damange. Yet people choose to live and build there and after it's all said and done will choose to do it again and act amazed and shooked when it happens again. Given that, nobody in this country should be made to pay because these people make poor choices. Tax me for secuirty, for education, for roads, for any services that will benefit all of the people. Taxing me because some minority of citizens made poor choices is where I draw the line. That ought to be left to charities. Which is the point of my original post. Let people who are in need because the made poor choices be helped by the fellow citizens who choose to help. Don't force other people to pay via taxes because somebody else made a mistake.
Note that I'm not talking about all disaster relief. Just disaster relief that is necessary because of poor choices.
I work 10 hours a day, 6 days a week as a software developer and system admin. If you work less than that, chances are you're being subsidized, so don't knock it unless you really do work for a living and aren't on some 9 to 5 vaction your whole life.
Perhaps you just have a bad job or picked the wrong sector to work in. I live and work in the suburbs. I work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week with some occasional overtime and I never work on the weekends and that is more than enough to be completely self sufficient. I don't live in the sticks, I work for a small (but growing) business which has nothing to do with the government or academia, I was certainly not born rich and the business I work for is not family owned..
I.. gasp... payed my own way through college, selected a career path that I knew would be in demand and would pay well and I'm 100% self sufficient minus loans from the bank for my house and my car payment. I also didn't make the most common, life altering, mistake a person can make (if they do it before they are ready). That is, I have yet to get married and start a family. The only person I have to worry about supporting is me. It will stay that way for the time being. All of my friends who are stuck in your position are stuck there because they got married and had kids (or skipped the getting married part and just had a kid) before they should have. Now they are stuck because they've got to support a family. They hate their jobs, but are afraid to quite because they need the money. That won't happen to me. I'm in my mid 20's and won't even think about getting married or starting a family until I'm closer to 30. That gives me time to build up a bit of financial cushion so I can change jobs even after I'm married without having to worry. I bought a modest house at a modest price so mortgage doesn't kill me. It's all about the choices that one makes.
Just because you haven't found a way to work an 8 - 5, 5 days a week and pay your own bills doesn't mean other people have not or that other people can not. It just a matter of making the right decisions. I know that in this world we live in nobody is responsible for their own choices and everything is always somebody else's fault , but we've become that way as a society by choice. That brings me back to my original post. The government doesn't have the right to take my hard earned money and give it to someone else because they made poor choices. Victim's of circumstance I can understand, but if someone chooses to live in floodplain in an area that can be (and has been) affected by hurricanes, they shouldn't get any help by way of my dollars unless I choose to give it to them. Which, BTW, I have by giving to the red cross. Which is probably more than can be said by some of the liberals on this board who talk about giving other peoples money away all day long all the while not giving one red cent in addition to what they pay in taxes.
Your being able to earn any property at all is the consequence of an organized society being around and providing you with infrastructure, education, security, contract law... etc and the general organization that makes life in common possible and makes a country worth more than the sum of its parts, period.
That perfectly illustrates the differnece between the European and American mindset. You believe that your rights are given to you (and thus can be taken away) by the govement. Americans, on the other hand, believe that the goverment is given it's rights by the people. That idea is enshrined in our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
I have the right to own property and to work and to spend my my money how I choose because I exist. Not because the goverment says that I can. The goverment has the right to tax me only because the citizens of the United States of America have given it the power to do so. That power is being abused, and we the people, have the right to correc that should we choose to do so, not the other way around.
Typical American attitude. "Every man for himself!". No sense of community at all.
Get real. There is a differnece between donating your money to those in need and having your money taken from you. If I stick a gun in your face, take your wallet, but give 25% of it to a charity, I'm I not guilty of theft? That's the point the of the original post. I have no problem giving to charitys that will help the people of New Orleans get back on their feet. What I, and many others, have a problem with is that money is taken from us without our permission by the goverment and given to these people when their is a 100% chance that a similar event will happen in the future because of the location these people choose to live in and do business in. Theft is theft, no matter how good you believe the cause to be. Let those who wish to give, give. Let those who do not, keep their money. Nobody is entitled to anyone elses hard earned property or earnings under any circumstances, period.
I realize that's hard for you to wrap your liberal head around but I don't work 8 hours a day , 5 days a week so other people can decide how to spend my hard earned dollars. I work so that I can.
The more I think about this, the more I think it's pure and total BS. Apple has become the WalMart of music downloads. Apple accounts for more than half of digital music downloads. The record companies can huff and puff all they want, iTunes and the iTMS have become the WalMart of digital music. If they don't carry it, it doesn't sell. The record companies would be shooting themselves in the foot.
I won't play more than $0.99 for a song. Yes, buying online is easier than going to the record store and being able to buy only the tracks you want is a plus. That being said, I won't pay more than $0.99 for a song, period. iTunes completely got me off P2P cause for $0.99, IMHO it's worth it. You get the song you want, it's high enough quality for me and the price is right. But there is just something about that dollar berrier in my mind. Any more than $0.99 and P2P starts looking like an option again. Either that or I'll just stop listening to new music alltogather. Most of the stuff on the radio today is crap anyway and I've got enough of a library (11+ full days of music) to last a lifetime.
Think about it. You've got a game where the whole point is to steel, kill and blow things up and people are fine with that. But oh, no, show nudity and even a sex scene... we can't have that now can we? The citizens of this country have one seriously fucked up mentality! It's a never ending source of amazement for me. Oh and remember kids, you can't have manslaughter without laughter!
Bugs and security holes in a beta? No! It's impossible. Not that Microsoft gets the benefit of the doubt anymore, but let's at least wait until the product is out of the beta testing phase before we begin harping on it for bugs and security flaws. Unless, of course, the flaws exist because of fundamental problems with the design of the product (a la Internet Explorer). Then by all means, pile on!
Slashdot Mirror
If the link is slow use the Coral Cache link.
But you know that before you make your purchase. If you feel like the quality isn't good enough then don't spend your money. If it's good enough for the price, then go right ahead. My problem is when people who know better complain about the DRM. Yes it's there but it's possible to get around it with either no loss in quality (using Hymn or buring to a CD and re-ripping with a lossless codec) or with a minimal loss in quality (burning to a CD then re-ripping with a lossy codec).
The whole "but it's got DRM" argument is a loser. Major labels will never allow users to purchase DRM free tracks online. It just won't happen. I'll take the iTunes DRM over other forms any day. It's flexable enough that I never notice it and that's how DRM, which is a fact of life in the digital age, should be.
Burn to a CD and re-rip or use Hymn. Problem solved.
Come on. We're all hired guns in some form or another. Or have you never been put into a position by a client or employer of doing something that you didn't necessarily believe was the best course of action?
Another day, another browser exploit. When will the madness end? On a side note, TGIF!
Further, after about 2 years into the second term the President becomes a lame duck and generally does not get major new policy initiaves (either foreign or domestic) through Congress.
I wish Microsoft would but it will never happen. See OS X's market share.
You speak the truth, which is why this post will be modded as a troll or flamebait. Linux will remain a niche player until I can download and install a program without having to compile it from source or wade through a list of compiled binaries by platform and version. Why, you ask? Simple, the majority of commercial software developers will not want to put up with the hassel.
If Linux is to become a major player, something like the LSB is needed.
Don't forget income taxes, social security, medicare and medicaid.
Exactly, Slashdot has been sucking on Google's proverbial teet for far to long now. It's getting tiresome.
Nothing will ever top edit.com from the old MS-DOS days! Billy G and the crew should give it up. Long live edit.com!
If TiVo implements this, I'm throwing my TiVo out the door. I think TiVo is by far the best PVR out there, but I'd much rather settle for a less elegant UI and move to something like Replay TV. Replay TV has got some pretty sweet features of it's own and I was considering it as my next DVR but I really do (or did anyway) love my TiVo.
Microsoft is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Look, if they don't change the user interface and just keep on adding more and more high level features (those not used by the average user) to the product open source advocates will say that there is no point in upgrading, the UI is the same as it's always been and most of the new features aren't of value to the average user so switch to Open Office.
If Microsoft does change the UI to try and improve usability and give things a bit of a makeover you say that moving to the new version will require retraining so why not move to Open Office.
Microsoft will be damned by the open source crowd either way. I, for one, am glad that they are trying something new. As others have noted, Office has been mostly stagnant for the average Office user for several versions now (with the exception of Outlook). It's nice to see the UI get an overhaul and perhaps it will end up working better than it did in previous versions.
I fail to believe the current UI for Office types of programs (and let's face it, they are all mostly the same) is the be all, end all of interfaces for these kinds of programs. There is always room for improvement and now that Apple has some serious momentum and open source is continuing to slowly eat away at Microsoft's user base, they would be crazy not to make some changes.
Don't even try to turn this around! Your objeting to a point that I did not make. No one is objecting to the goverment taxing us to provide services that benefit everybody. Read the post before you respond. What I, and others, object to is the goverment taking money from us to provide services that benefit a group of citizens who are in need because they made poor choices. That is what we are objecting to. It's been known for a long, long time that New Orleans would be in serious trouble if a hurricane hit. The entire city is below sea level. Yet people choose to live their and to build there. Then a hurricane hits, causes massive damage and everyone else has to foot the bill? That's classic bleeding heart liberalism at work. I don't mind footing the bill if a disaster occurs that no one was expecting. I will object to the day I die if I'm made to foot the bill for a disaster that occurs because of poor choices.
When choices lead to misfortune, citizens should be allowed to choose to help by way of charities. Which, BTW, I've donated to in this case beacause I think it's a worthy cause and that's they way it should be. The goverment has no business helping anyone but the poorest individuals rebuild. Corporations and everyone else should have either known better or should have gotten insurance. Infrastructure and ports are another story. As they are vital to everyone, the Fed's have every right to use tax dollars to rebuild that.
Note that I'm not talking about all disaster relief. Just disaster relief that is necessary because of poor choices.
Perhaps you just have a bad job or picked the wrong sector to work in. I live and work in the suburbs. I work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week with some occasional overtime and I never work on the weekends and that is more than enough to be completely self sufficient. I don't live in the sticks, I work for a small (but growing) business which has nothing to do with the government or academia, I was certainly not born rich and the business I work for is not family owned..
I .. gasp ... payed my own way through college, selected a career path that I knew would be in demand and would pay well and I'm 100% self sufficient minus loans from the bank for my house and my car payment. I also didn't make the most common, life altering, mistake a person can make (if they do it before they are ready). That is, I have yet to get married and start a family. The only person I have to worry about supporting is me. It will stay that way for the time being. All of my friends who are stuck in your position are stuck there because they got married and had kids (or skipped the getting married part and just had a kid) before they should have. Now they are stuck because they've got to support a family. They hate their jobs, but are afraid to quite because they need the money. That won't happen to me. I'm in my mid 20's and won't even think about getting married or starting a family until I'm closer to 30. That gives me time to build up a bit of financial cushion so I can change jobs even after I'm married without having to worry. I bought a modest house at a modest price so mortgage doesn't kill me. It's all about the choices that one makes.
Just because you haven't found a way to work an 8 - 5, 5 days a week and pay your own bills doesn't mean other people have not or that other people can not. It just a matter of making the right decisions. I know that in this world we live in nobody is responsible for their own choices and everything is always somebody else's fault , but we've become that way as a society by choice. That brings me back to my original post. The government doesn't have the right to take my hard earned money and give it to someone else because they made poor choices. Victim's of circumstance I can understand, but if someone chooses to live in floodplain in an area that can be (and has been) affected by hurricanes, they shouldn't get any help by way of my dollars unless I choose to give it to them. Which, BTW, I have by giving to the red cross. Which is probably more than can be said by some of the liberals on this board who talk about giving other peoples money away all day long all the while not giving one red cent in addition to what they pay in taxes.
That perfectly illustrates the differnece between the European and American mindset. You believe that your rights are given to you (and thus can be taken away) by the govement. Americans, on the other hand, believe that the goverment is given it's rights by the people. That idea is enshrined in our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
I have the right to own property and to work and to spend my my money how I choose because I exist. Not because the goverment says that I can. The goverment has the right to tax me only because the citizens of the United States of America have given it the power to do so. That power is being abused, and we the people, have the right to correc that should we choose to do so, not the other way around.
Get real. There is a differnece between donating your money to those in need and having your money taken from you. If I stick a gun in your face, take your wallet, but give 25% of it to a charity, I'm I not guilty of theft? That's the point the of the original post. I have no problem giving to charitys that will help the people of New Orleans get back on their feet. What I, and many others, have a problem with is that money is taken from us without our permission by the goverment and given to these people when their is a 100% chance that a similar event will happen in the future because of the location these people choose to live in and do business in. Theft is theft, no matter how good you believe the cause to be. Let those who wish to give, give. Let those who do not, keep their money. Nobody is entitled to anyone elses hard earned property or earnings under any circumstances, period.
I realize that's hard for you to wrap your liberal head around but I don't work 8 hours a day , 5 days a week so other people can decide how to spend my hard earned dollars. I work so that I can.
Certainly not on Slashdot ... judging by the number of stories were subjected to on a daily basis.
The more I think about this, the more I think it's pure and total BS. Apple has become the WalMart of music downloads. Apple accounts for more than half of digital music downloads. The record companies can huff and puff all they want, iTunes and the iTMS have become the WalMart of digital music. If they don't carry it, it doesn't sell. The record companies would be shooting themselves in the foot.
I won't play more than $0.99 for a song. Yes, buying online is easier than going to the record store and being able to buy only the tracks you want is a plus. That being said, I won't pay more than $0.99 for a song, period. iTunes completely got me off P2P cause for $0.99, IMHO it's worth it. You get the song you want, it's high enough quality for me and the price is right. But there is just something about that dollar berrier in my mind. Any more than $0.99 and P2P starts looking like an option again. Either that or I'll just stop listening to new music alltogather. Most of the stuff on the radio today is crap anyway and I've got enough of a library (11+ full days of music) to last a lifetime.
12 hours without a Google story. Slashdot is too predictable. What to change things up a little bit? I know ... let's bash Microsoft ... oh wait ...
Think about it. You've got a game where the whole point is to steel, kill and blow things up and people are fine with that. But oh, no, show nudity and even a sex scene ... we can't have that now can we? The citizens of this country have one seriously fucked up mentality! It's a never ending source of amazement for me. Oh and remember kids, you can't have manslaughter without laughter!
Bugs and security holes in a beta? No! It's impossible. Not that Microsoft gets the benefit of the doubt anymore, but let's at least wait until the product is out of the beta testing phase before we begin harping on it for bugs and security flaws. Unless, of course, the flaws exist because of fundamental problems with the design of the product (a la Internet Explorer). Then by all means, pile on!