Having your email address on your own domain can be considered the same as a POBox for post. People can send mail to you, even if you move, and they can't see where you REALLY live. Isn't that the ideal state?
Factories are part of your capitalized costs. If the items produced do not make enough money to realize their capitalized investment, then they'll be a loss no matter how you want to calculate the numbers. WCOM or Enron accounting practices cannot hide the ultimate fact that you lost money, as your bank account will be negative.
Sadly, any religion that claims to be a religion of peace is lying through its teeth....
Just a moment... wasn't it Judaism (in the western world, at least) that effectively pioneered the concept of goodwill for goodwill's sake?... Wasn't Christianity the religion that replaced competitors that were primarily centered around appeasement and little else, and taught the powerful that simply killing the weak wasn't proper? Yep, that whole Spanish Inquisition and burning witches/unbelievers/heretics at the stake must have been some other religion. (You can insert whatever other examples you wish here:...)
And if you head further east, wasn't Buddhism oriented primarily towards teaching you how to find peace through helping others find it themselves? There are others, but these are the dominant religions, and by no coincidence happen to focus heavily on morality itself. Buddhism is the one larger "religion" that's missing one vital element: a god. In that way it's different from every other religion out there. (I'm sure someone will point out some small religion A or B that also doesn't have a god of some sort). Because of this lack, I personally do not classify Buddhism as a religion.
Brad Wardell/Stardock produces some of the best least hyped games out there. Their stance on DRM alone should make any self-respecting/.er buy at least one of their games. They also tend to have much better AI than the competition, and created some of the first multi-threaded games, as they originally developed for OS/2 whcih encouraged multi-threading in applications just as a best practice. (I'm a long time Stardock fan, all the way back to their OS/2 days - Object Desktop for OS/2 was something to behold for true customization of an OS, makes anything in the MS realm seem trivial... and then there was Avarice... but I digress) Their DRM-less game, Galactic Civilizations II, outperformed all their expectations in sales.
The reason you make backups is, take for instance the MLB site that disappeared and now people with "legally" purchased games can no longer see them. With Stardock and no DRM, you have the scenario that as long as you have a disk, should they even go out of business, your purchase will still be playable (provided you have the other requisite items: PC and OS). Valve, on the other hand, could go out of business or be bought or merely change their minds, and your Steam access could disappear.
Thanks to the GP however, I'm now aware they've released another game I'll go check out.
have you actually ever had your legs broken by a machine-gun armed thug? because unless you have, I'm not sure you can make this comparison. No, and neither have you. BTW, if you'll read my statement above, it's the threat thereof, not the actual doing. Al got what he wanted by threat. The reason the threat worked is because he followed through. The RIAA isn't much different in that sense. They both extort money from individuals. It could be argued that the RIAA is even worse, because they do it "legally".
I think its tragic how people can even debate this. But hey go for it, it just makes the anti-RIAA stance look juvenile. Why don't people start comparing Record Execs to Hitler and Stalin, that's the next step right? You're entitled to your opinions, no matter how wrong they might be. I'd compare record execs to greedy small-minded two year olds throwing a temper tantrum because they need to share something. But hey, you go right ahead with your Nazi/Commie red herring.
Some truth in this, but in the 1970s the computer business was described as "IBM and the seven dwarfs". The other truth was "No one ever got fired for buying IBM" And what amazes me is that the quote today is "No one ever got fired for buying MS".
Fortunately that seems to be changing, although far too slowly.
Does it really make any difference if Al and his boys threaten to break your legs so you can't work and go into financial ruin or if they file frivolous lawsuits with no merit to force you into financial ruin. Or, of course, you can pay up.
IBM used to make overpriced hardware sold at tremendous profit True, but so did everyone else in the space at the time. Go look at your history and look at the number of players in the game. It was far more than '1'.
... until that little upstart microsoft came along and elegantly used their own weight against them in a classic game of corporate judo. Actually, MS was merely along for the ride on the original IBM PC boat. What killed IBM is manifold, from their lack of vision of where PCs would go to the massive infighting among divisions (the above mentioned high profit businesses especially) choking the life out of the PC divisions. Even the open nature of the PC hardware spec wasn't that big an issue. But I really don't want to bring up the entire "what-if" set of threads again.
It may just be that IBM still smarts from that or it may be that they've really 'seen the light'. This is good news, personally I'd like to see the transparency of these committees and their members go up a notch or two, too much potential for procedural trickery still exists. I guarantee you the only the light IBM has seen is the green one from profit in services. Open Specs means everyone can play. More implementations means more bugs to work around. More bugs means gee - we can build you this layer.... which is merely the layer they built 900 customers ago and are reselling yet again for 90000% profit. Those are numbers that make even MS drool.
If you were talking about Exchange 5.5 and before, I'd agree with you. When they integrated with AD, the performance went to shit. Try sending an email to a distribution list crossing several servers. Might as well take a nap. In the "old" days, with all 5.x varieties, we could send a message end to end, across 250K plus recipients in less than 10 minutes. With 2000+ and AD integration, sending a 1200 recipient message on a single large server took over 5 hours end to end.
As far as corrupted stores went, they only time I experienced one was upgrading from 5.0 beta to 5.0GA. two tries with 2 corruptions, and threw the manual away and did it the way we'd done the previous upgrades. It still took 24 hours, and that was for about a 5GB store on a 5 disk raid array. Fortunately it was our POC system, so we didn't have active users baying about email being down....:)
I can honestly say that I've never seen a well-managed UNIX system go down. I have seen well-managed Exchange systems go down - Melissa comes to mind. Watching the queues on that one was interesting, right before we disconnected everyone and waited a couple of hours for a cleanup fix.
They did not improve a single part of it - instead they just moved everything around. This is a half truth, they did move everything around, but there is now massively more functionality. Less emphasis is put on drop down menus (File, Edit, View etc). As for functionality in excel for example, one of the most useful things IMO is conditional formatting (eg: shade green if > 100) There is no new functionality. You could do conditional formatting since at least O95 IIRC. They just moved things around making O2007 a non starter in every company I still have ties to due to the retraining costs.
I beleive you can get updates for office 2003 which makes it "forward compatible" with 2007. And why on earth would I want to do that and be incompatible with everyone else in the world?
Finally, I work in a medium sized business (roughly 50 users), we use Sharepoint and Office 2007. There has been a great deal of learning going on but overall, a vast improvement. 50 is small. It's why you still have hair, considering you're using Sharepoint, probably one of the worst pieces of crap MS has pawned off on the market. All I can tell you is just wait, your POV will change.
And in many ways, the MS style of apps exacerbates the problem. Many traditional unix based mail servers have the mail store as just a bunch of files and folders. This makes it slow and bloated due to duplicated data, but makes certain things MUCH easier and more reliable (backups & restores, and recovery from point errors on the underlying disc). Exchange, on the other hand, is very sensitive to disk problems and generally demands higher quality hardware. I don't think the "slow and bloated" aspect is as slow as you make it out to be, and certainly not as bloated. Exchange has a single store mechanism, but that single store mechanism deconstructs your mail into various bits and pieces to be stored in their mail system. You'll really see the effects of this with MIME types. t's not pretty. t's why Outlook/Exchange is the only server in large scale commercial use that will corrupt email.
There's a ton of other problems with Exchange too. Try upgrading it. That was a super fun process, at least in the old days. I fortunately no longer deal with that, the last upgrade I did was to Exchange 2000. I don't recall if they moved all the X.500 info out of the exchange store or not, but in the previous versions each "bit" (as described above) was physically tagged with X.500 information. The effect of this? Well, if you tried to change your organization name, good luck. You had a lot of JetDB hacking to do, or a nifty full export/import, which totally destroyed the entire single store concept.
Your lame trolling anecdotal idiocy is still quite amusing. Office 2007 file formats are incompatible. MS tried with O2007 to do the same thing they did with O95 - force a full refresh. It looks like this time the installed user base is not going for it.
As for blame, if the only reason you buy MS is so you have someone to point a finger at, you should be fired. You're obviously incompetent, or perhaps just an MBA.
MS are still using a kernel written (or rather, cobbled together) in 1991. Oddly enough, so are Linux distros! I'm sure 17 years of development counts for absolutely nothing... Got to get me a kernel which was written last week instead. Except, MS's kernel doesn't seem to have improved much since around 2000. Linux, on the other hand....
So do you hate BluRay because of some irrational hatred of Sony? I personally like BluRay because it comes free with a PS3 and the lack of have handed tactics by MS (such as buying support) used to try and force us all to convert.
And Sony would never buy support?
Frankly if you want to look at the sides involved you could at most choose the lesser of two evils, lets see who is the convicted monopolist again? Who is the rootkit company again? Who insist on ignoring standards and enforcing their own inferior solutions on the public?
a)MS, but they're not HD DVD, last time I checked. b)Sony c)Sony?
Sorry, this format war was about the difference between Jack Johnson and John Jackson. If the parties involved had been smart they would simply have merged their products and saved everyone a lot of trouble.
Oh and I don't hate MS, I just don't trust them, they got a very long history of lying to serve their own goals. Sony does the same, but I have never ever been forced to use a Sony product that was riddled with bugs. Can you say the same for MS?
Try several of Sony's CD's with root kits. I believe that was well-publicized, you might even get a hit or two on Google. MS has almost nothing to do with HD DVD other than providing one minor codec, VC9, and using it as the add-on component for the XBox 360. You realize that Toshiba's HD DVD players all run linux, right? And Sony never lies, oh, and they're not the driver of BD, and you trust them intimately, right? I dislike MS greatly, but after a little research, all ten minutes of it, will quickly show you that MS is to HD DVD like MS is to milk production: not very involved. Sony, however, has bet the farm on BD.
here is a finalized spec, but it's silly to say that Blu-ray also doesn't have a finalized spec. BD is not finalized.
Cheaper for sure, but so what? Eventually blu-ray will be MUCH cheaper BD may get cheaper, but will be more expensive in the near term, at least over the next 2 years. This is straight from the manufacturers expected to release BD 2.0 players later this year. The cheapest player expected to come out will be over $600.
Not sure what your point for combo discs means. I don't need combo discs for blu-ray devices because obviously blu-ray will be in every $50 drive in five years. You can't get a combo disc for most movies, since most studios aren't on HD-DVD. Just a lame point. Audio compression is a red herring. Lossless is lossless, whether it's compressed or not. You're an idiot.
Besides that, name me 1 dual layer BD disk. You can't? That's because there aren't any, and there's no guarantee that the current players could even play one. So, HD DVD is at 30GB, BD is at 25GB. Hmmmm...
Not sure what your point for combo discs means. I don't need combo discs for blu-ray devices because obviously blu-ray will be in every $50 drive in five years. You can't get a combo disc for most movies, since most studios aren't on HD-DVD. Just a lame point. I hope you're not holding your breath on that one. I'd predict $250+ on the BD 3.0 drives in 5 years. The combo disks are good for HD @ home, and DVD in car. HD/BD is pointless on a 7-9 inch screen. Oh, you'll just buy that DVD also, because you're so hot on DRM? (See below)
The market is choosing blu-ray 9:1 You need to check those numbers again. Something like 9:1 HD DVD standalone vs BD minus PS3. At least until Sony paid WB a reputed $500M.
Particularly high quality with great DRM. The HD-DVD's failure in DRM is a big reason why they lost. If you are so opposed to DRM, then you need to give up on optical movies. And now we know you're a trolling moron. DRM? Great? How much did Sony pay you, or do you just smoke crack prior to posting? DRM has NO positive effects on quality. And HD DVD and BD use the SAME DRM, AACS. BD+ is the "extensible" system that will most likely nerf players sooner than later, effectively killing HDM. Hooray DRM!!! Moron.
Well, considering that both are built upon the same type of chemical interaction present in the cheaper DVDs, I'd save archival shelf time is about 10 years max for any type of reliable storage. Pressed disks should be good for about 100 years, although nobody really knows.
You'll be happy to know that after the BD camp claimed themselves the "winner", that the next generation of BD 2.0 players will actually increase in price to $600 or more. A monopoly is a beautiful thing.
They need to get burners to market in mass quantity as well as offer those licenses for free or very very small royalties.
Like pennies per unit. You realize there are millions upon millions of HD DVD capable burners out there already? DVD burners, with the proper program, can burn HD DVD9 disks, which are standard DVD DL disks encoded either with H.264 (MPEG4 rev 10) or VC9 (MS WMA) encoding. (BTW, Monty Python Meaning of Life is a VC9 disk)
What they really need to do is advertise this ability.
But, say what you will, I've got 40+ HD DVD movies, and am looking for more. For the amount I'd otherwise spend on a soon to be obsolete BD player with its 5 free movies, I'll have 60+ movies and 2 players, and the ability to burn HD DVD content for them. I wouldn't touch a BD player today, as the BD group has already stated that all BD players, other than maybe the PS3, will be obsolete when the 2.0 spec comes out and quite possibly won't play BD 2.0 disks.
In short, current BD adopters are in the same boat as HD DVD adopters if BD should "win". Personally, after reading through the specifics of the BD spec, and with special attention to the BD+ capabilities, should BD "win", it will be short lived as BD kills HDM with the first exercise of BD+ that bricks a large proportion of the players.
I don't know about you, but I don't want content providers being able to rewrite my system should they choose to do so. After all, that never goes wrong (Sony explicitly excluded for their root kit attempts)
I can only hope BD fades away quickly, leaving the HDM field to HD DVD, because otherwise, I think HDM may fail completely in the consumer market just like Betamax, leaving us all with regular DVD until the next iteration comes along.
The point of the BoR from the supporters point of view was to enumerate certain rights to keep them from being eroded, like has happened anyway some 200+ years later.
The critics of the BoR stated that the BoR's explicit enumeration weakened the argument that the Federal Government's powers were limited to those enumerated in the Constitution only. If current law was filtered with strict constitutional interpretation, many laws and agencies would disappear.
And to the above respondent: the drafters of the BoR may have listed them based on their recent experiences, but do remember that they were all against a strong central government. Even the establishment of a central bank caused a huge rift within these self-same individuals with the proponents stating it was needed and winning because it was.
Anything that is beyond the average life-expectancy can be argued to be effectively unlimited duration. There are, for example, Disney works that are effectively copyrighted from long before I was born to quite possibly after I'm dead. How is that a "limited" duration from my POV? How does this law benefit the public good?
In short: Apple screwed up one minor software component release on this round. Let's see what the reaction from Apple is and how long it takes to get this fixed, either from Apple or Adobe.
Then let's see what MS does with Vista. Isn't it like 14 months and counting? Don't know personally, as Vista is DOA. Just look at the marketing engine winding up for "Windows 7". That wasn't just the final nail in the coffin for Vista, it was the stake through the heart.
And yes, I would guide people to Macs over PCs, as they do just work better. But, that guidance depends upon what they want to do and their budget. Macs aren't always the right answer for the consumer.
Slashdot Mirror
Factories are part of your capitalized costs. If the items produced do not make enough money to realize their capitalized investment, then they'll be a loss no matter how you want to calculate the numbers. WCOM or Enron accounting practices cannot hide the ultimate fact that you lost money, as your bank account will be negative.
Just a moment... wasn't it Judaism (in the western world, at least) that effectively pioneered the concept of goodwill for goodwill's sake?
Brad Wardell/Stardock produces some of the best least hyped games out there. Their stance on DRM alone should make any self-respecting /.er buy at least one of their games. They also tend to have much better AI than the competition, and created some of the first multi-threaded games, as they originally developed for OS/2 whcih encouraged multi-threading in applications just as a best practice. (I'm a long time Stardock fan, all the way back to their OS/2 days - Object Desktop for OS/2 was something to behold for true customization of an OS, makes anything in the MS realm seem trivial... and then there was Avarice... but I digress) Their DRM-less game, Galactic Civilizations II, outperformed all their expectations in sales.
The reason you make backups is, take for instance the MLB site that disappeared and now people with "legally" purchased games can no longer see them. With Stardock and no DRM, you have the scenario that as long as you have a disk, should they even go out of business, your purchase will still be playable (provided you have the other requisite items: PC and OS). Valve, on the other hand, could go out of business or be bought or merely change their minds, and your Steam access could disappear.
Thanks to the GP however, I'm now aware they've released another game I'll go check out.
Fortunately that seems to be changing, although far too slowly.
So we won't have to wait for Netcraft this time?
Does it really make any difference if Al and his boys threaten to break your legs so you can't work and go into financial ruin or if they file frivolous lawsuits with no merit to force you into financial ruin. Or, of course, you can pay up.
... until that little upstart microsoft came along and elegantly used their own weight against them in a classic game of corporate judo. Actually, MS was merely along for the ride on the original IBM PC boat. What killed IBM is manifold, from their lack of vision of where PCs would go to the massive infighting among divisions (the above mentioned high profit businesses especially) choking the life out of the PC divisions. Even the open nature of the PC hardware spec wasn't that big an issue. But I really don't want to bring up the entire "what-if" set of threads again. It may just be that IBM still smarts from that or it may be that they've really 'seen the light'. This is good news, personally I'd like to see the transparency of these committees and their members go up a notch or two, too much potential for procedural trickery still exists. I guarantee you the only the light IBM has seen is the green one from profit in services. Open Specs means everyone can play. More implementations means more bugs to work around. More bugs means gee - we can build you this layer.... which is merely the layer they built 900 customers ago and are reselling yet again for 90000% profit. Those are numbers that make even MS drool.If you were talking about Exchange 5.5 and before, I'd agree with you. When they integrated with AD, the performance went to shit. Try sending an email to a distribution list crossing several servers. Might as well take a nap. In the "old" days, with all 5.x varieties, we could send a message end to end, across 250K plus recipients in less than 10 minutes. With 2000+ and AD integration, sending a 1200 recipient message on a single large server took over 5 hours end to end.
:)
As far as corrupted stores went, they only time I experienced one was upgrading from 5.0 beta to 5.0GA. two tries with 2 corruptions, and threw the manual away and did it the way we'd done the previous upgrades. It still took 24 hours, and that was for about a 5GB store on a 5 disk raid array. Fortunately it was our POC system, so we didn't have active users baying about email being down....
I can honestly say that I've never seen a well-managed UNIX system go down. I have seen well-managed Exchange systems go down - Melissa comes to mind. Watching the queues on that one was interesting, right before we disconnected everyone and waited a couple of hours for a cleanup fix.
There's a ton of other problems with Exchange too. Try upgrading it. That was a super fun process, at least in the old days. I fortunately no longer deal with that, the last upgrade I did was to Exchange 2000. I don't recall if they moved all the X.500 info out of the exchange store or not, but in the previous versions each "bit" (as described above) was physically tagged with X.500 information. The effect of this? Well, if you tried to change your organization name, good luck. You had a lot of JetDB hacking to do, or a nifty full export/import, which totally destroyed the entire single store concept.
Yep, I'm happy that's no longer my headache.
Your lame trolling anecdotal idiocy is still quite amusing. Office 2007 file formats are incompatible. MS tried with O2007 to do the same thing they did with O95 - force a full refresh. It looks like this time the installed user base is not going for it.
As for blame, if the only reason you buy MS is so you have someone to point a finger at, you should be fired. You're obviously incompetent, or perhaps just an MBA.
You know you can turn all those "services" off, right? It certainly helps on startup.
Try any DL DVD burner and the HD DVD9 format (H.264 or VC9).
So do you hate BluRay because of some irrational hatred of Sony? I personally like BluRay because it comes free with a PS3 and the lack of have handed tactics by MS (such as buying support) used to try and force us all to convert.
And Sony would never buy support?Frankly if you want to look at the sides involved you could at most choose the lesser of two evils, lets see who is the convicted monopolist again? Who is the rootkit company again? Who insist on ignoring standards and enforcing their own inferior solutions on the public?
a)MS, but they're not HD DVD, last time I checked.b)Sony
c)Sony?
Sorry, this format war was about the difference between Jack Johnson and John Jackson. If the parties involved had been smart they would simply have merged their products and saved everyone a lot of trouble.
Oh and I don't hate MS, I just don't trust them, they got a very long history of lying to serve their own goals. Sony does the same, but I have never ever been forced to use a Sony product that was riddled with bugs. Can you say the same for MS?
Try several of Sony's CD's with root kits. I believe that was well-publicized, you might even get a hit or two on Google. MS has almost nothing to do with HD DVD other than providing one minor codec, VC9, and using it as the add-on component for the XBox 360. You realize that Toshiba's HD DVD players all run linux, right? And Sony never lies, oh, and they're not the driver of BD, and you trust them intimately, right? I dislike MS greatly, but after a little research, all ten minutes of it, will quickly show you that MS is to HD DVD like MS is to milk production: not very involved. Sony, however, has bet the farm on BD.Besides that, name me 1 dual layer BD disk. You can't? That's because there aren't any, and there's no guarantee that the current players could even play one. So, HD DVD is at 30GB, BD is at 25GB. Hmmmm... Not sure what your point for combo discs means. I don't need combo discs for blu-ray devices because obviously blu-ray will be in every $50 drive in five years. You can't get a combo disc for most movies, since most studios aren't on HD-DVD. Just a lame point. I hope you're not holding your breath on that one. I'd predict $250+ on the BD 3.0 drives in 5 years. The combo disks are good for HD @ home, and DVD in car. HD/BD is pointless on a 7-9 inch screen. Oh, you'll just buy that DVD also, because you're so hot on DRM? (See below) The market is choosing blu-ray 9:1 You need to check those numbers again. Something like 9:1 HD DVD standalone vs BD minus PS3. At least until Sony paid WB a reputed $500M. Particularly high quality with great DRM. The HD-DVD's failure in DRM is a big reason why they lost. If you are so opposed to DRM, then you need to give up on optical movies. And now we know you're a trolling moron. DRM? Great? How much did Sony pay you, or do you just smoke crack prior to posting? DRM has NO positive effects on quality. And HD DVD and BD use the SAME DRM, AACS. BD+ is the "extensible" system that will most likely nerf players sooner than later, effectively killing HDM. Hooray DRM!!! Moron.
Well, considering that both are built upon the same type of chemical interaction present in the cheaper DVDs, I'd save archival shelf time is about 10 years max for any type of reliable storage. Pressed disks should be good for about 100 years, although nobody really knows.
You'll be happy to know that after the BD camp claimed themselves the "winner", that the next generation of BD 2.0 players will actually increase in price to $600 or more. A monopoly is a beautiful thing.
Try any DVD DL burner (HD DVD9 format)
Like pennies per unit. You realize there are millions upon millions of HD DVD capable burners out there already? DVD burners, with the proper program, can burn HD DVD9 disks, which are standard DVD DL disks encoded either with H.264 (MPEG4 rev 10) or VC9 (MS WMA) encoding. (BTW, Monty Python Meaning of Life is a VC9 disk)
What they really need to do is advertise this ability.
But, say what you will, I've got 40+ HD DVD movies, and am looking for more. For the amount I'd otherwise spend on a soon to be obsolete BD player with its 5 free movies, I'll have 60+ movies and 2 players, and the ability to burn HD DVD content for them. I wouldn't touch a BD player today, as the BD group has already stated that all BD players, other than maybe the PS3, will be obsolete when the 2.0 spec comes out and quite possibly won't play BD 2.0 disks.
In short, current BD adopters are in the same boat as HD DVD adopters if BD should "win". Personally, after reading through the specifics of the BD spec, and with special attention to the BD+ capabilities, should BD "win", it will be short lived as BD kills HDM with the first exercise of BD+ that bricks a large proportion of the players.
I don't know about you, but I don't want content providers being able to rewrite my system should they choose to do so. After all, that never goes wrong (Sony explicitly excluded for their root kit attempts)
I can only hope BD fades away quickly, leaving the HDM field to HD DVD, because otherwise, I think HDM may fail completely in the consumer market just like Betamax, leaving us all with regular DVD until the next iteration comes along.
The point of the BoR from the supporters point of view was to enumerate certain rights to keep them from being eroded, like has happened anyway some 200+ years later.
The critics of the BoR stated that the BoR's explicit enumeration weakened the argument that the Federal Government's powers were limited to those enumerated in the Constitution only. If current law was filtered with strict constitutional interpretation, many laws and agencies would disappear.
And to the above respondent: the drafters of the BoR may have listed them based on their recent experiences, but do remember that they were all against a strong central government. Even the establishment of a central bank caused a huge rift within these self-same individuals with the proponents stating it was needed and winning because it was.
Anything that is beyond the average life-expectancy can be argued to be effectively unlimited duration. There are, for example, Disney works that are effectively copyrighted from long before I was born to quite possibly after I'm dead. How is that a "limited" duration from my POV? How does this law benefit the public good?
In short: Apple screwed up one minor software component release on this round. Let's see what the reaction from Apple is and how long it takes to get this fixed, either from Apple or Adobe.
Then let's see what MS does with Vista. Isn't it like 14 months and counting? Don't know personally, as Vista is DOA. Just look at the marketing engine winding up for "Windows 7". That wasn't just the final nail in the coffin for Vista, it was the stake through the heart.
And yes, I would guide people to Macs over PCs, as they do just work better. But, that guidance depends upon what they want to do and their budget. Macs aren't always the right answer for the consumer.