Seriously. You guys bitching about the misuse of "gay" have got NOTHING on the guys (like me) bitching about the misuse of "hacker".
You're pretty damn far off base there. I assume you're trying to be funny, but like most technical folk, you should lay off the comedy because it's just not a skill you have.
Your intentions are good, but the execution is off base. Zealotry doesn't attract mainstream followers, only rabid believers. All the rabid believers already believe, in the case of the 'Open' software world. This means your approach is valid if you want to preach to the choir, but in the rest of the world it's the equivalent of standing on the street corner screaming about the end times.
I wish I could suggest a better approach, but the thing is, it's really just a technical issue. It has social ramifications, but mainly for technical folks. There's very little reason for mainstream users to care. All that can be done is some vague handwaving about rights and freedoms that typical users are in no position to exercise.
Possibly the best route to take is cost, but for most people the cost of software isn't really that onerous. A few hundred dollars a year isn't terribly out of line for the provided benefit.
You've drawn specious conclusions, in a manner which suggests you are a true zealot. I'd take a step back and breathe a bit if I were you - there are many things with more importance than trying to destroy Firefox's market share.
That's not true at all, unless you take so broad a view as to say all human interaction is schadenfreude. Puns and knock-knock jokes come to mind immediately as counterexamples.
Microsoft made a number of bad decisions (security-wise) in pursuit of "user friendly" systems.
To be fair, most Unixish system developers made a number of poor decisions usage-wise in pursuit of "secure" systems.
OS X seems to be the closest to blending the worlds, although it has some interesting foibles all its own. I look forward to the next ten years, because I think everyone is starting to get it all the way around. Uncharacteristically, I'm pretty damn optimistic.
Your comment, for some reason, really drove home to me the reality that global warming is a religious thing to a lot of you. You'll brook no interference with your unprovable beliefs. It's interesting, and I enjoy speculating as to the root cause of it. Probably something simple, like people just need something to believe in, something they are willing to 'defend to the death.'
Alright, I'll give you that, and take back my nasty attitude. Something about Tool definitely inspires a wild fanaticism normally found in Apple zealots and AMD fanbois.
You know what I hate? People that mix clever with politics. For some reason that particular combination results in a smug know-it-all attitude that is so fucking indigestible that I feel compelled to dispute every point made.
No, the only rule about music is that it must be complex, not that it has to sound good or bad.
That's just sad. Literally sad, like I now feel sympathy for you, and what must be a tortured existence, forced to live amongst the rest of us, who don't share such an insane opinion.
You must be making that up. Generally speaking I'm pretty good at the whole "mile in your shoes" thing, but I can't comprehend that point of view at all.
I guess that other poster summed it up when he said he was glad learning music thory didn't ruin his ability to enjoy music. Sorry that's what happened to you.
(The concept of "beautiful" or "ugly" sound makes no sense, nor does music written thereby; the amount of information carried by the sound is therefore the only true criterion for the validity of this or that music.)
Since the menu is at the edge of the screen, there is no chance of "overshooting" the menu (this adheres to "Fitt's Law" - the size of a target on the edge of the screen is essentially infinite).
Are you sure you didn't miss the point? It's not that the menu bar is all the way across the screen - it's that the menu bar is all the way over on a different monitor entirely. Working on multiple monitors on a Mac is something of a pain for this reason. This is particularly true with the Mac's propensity to switching to the Finder when you just miss the menu and click the desktop instead.
I am built larger than most people, but I have no problem carrying a 17 inch laptop and associated supplies in my backpack everywhere I go. Is there really that much difficulty in carrying 5 or 6 kilos? I can understand it being uncomfortable in a shoulder bag, but a properly adjusted backpack is barely even noticeable to me until I'm carrying two 17 inchers plus accoutrements.
(Notice: I assume I've done the conversions correctly here, I'm American but trying to use metric as much as possible)
Hey you, keep your reasoned stance out of this. This is a zealot's wankfest article, full of inflammatory misstatements guaranteed to rile even the most lax of Linux supporters. There's no call for reading the article or comprehending its meaning around here.
That statement has been proven to be FUD for quite some time now.
Actually, it hasn't been proven at all. It's not possible to prove it, as a matter of fact, without OS X being the dominant operating system on the market. The usual rebuttal, Apache vs. IIS, doesn't apply to anything but Apache and IIS.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously. You guys bitching about the misuse of "gay" have got NOTHING on the guys (like me) bitching about the misuse of "hacker".
You're pretty damn far off base there. I assume you're trying to be funny, but like most technical folk, you should lay off the comedy because it's just not a skill you have.
I don't follow your reasoning at all. Are you insinuating the database is somehow being used to enhance the photos in real time?
You have an interesting definition of "launch title."
Gamecube launched November 18, 2001 in North America
Metroid Prime released November 15, 2002 in North America
Care to elaborate?
Your intentions are good, but the execution is off base. Zealotry doesn't attract mainstream followers, only rabid believers. All the rabid believers already believe, in the case of the 'Open' software world. This means your approach is valid if you want to preach to the choir, but in the rest of the world it's the equivalent of standing on the street corner screaming about the end times.
I wish I could suggest a better approach, but the thing is, it's really just a technical issue. It has social ramifications, but mainly for technical folks. There's very little reason for mainstream users to care. All that can be done is some vague handwaving about rights and freedoms that typical users are in no position to exercise.
Possibly the best route to take is cost, but for most people the cost of software isn't really that onerous. A few hundred dollars a year isn't terribly out of line for the provided benefit.
You've drawn specious conclusions, in a manner which suggests you are a true zealot. I'd take a step back and breathe a bit if I were you - there are many things with more importance than trying to destroy Firefox's market share.
That's not true at all, unless you take so broad a view as to say all human interaction is schadenfreude. Puns and knock-knock jokes come to mind immediately as counterexamples.
Microsoft made a number of bad decisions (security-wise) in pursuit of "user friendly" systems.
To be fair, most Unixish system developers made a number of poor decisions usage-wise in pursuit of "secure" systems.
OS X seems to be the closest to blending the worlds, although it has some interesting foibles all its own. I look forward to the next ten years, because I think everyone is starting to get it all the way around. Uncharacteristically, I'm pretty damn optimistic.
Your comment, for some reason, really drove home to me the reality that global warming is a religious thing to a lot of you. You'll brook no interference with your unprovable beliefs. It's interesting, and I enjoy speculating as to the root cause of it. Probably something simple, like people just need something to believe in, something they are willing to 'defend to the death.'
You're entitled to whatever you want, guy. I don't care, I just comment.
Alright, I'll give you that, and take back my nasty attitude. Something about Tool definitely inspires a wild fanaticism normally found in Apple zealots and AMD fanbois.
You know what I hate? People that mix clever with politics. For some reason that particular combination results in a smug know-it-all attitude that is so fucking indigestible that I feel compelled to dispute every point made.
I like your attitude. An unreasonable sense of entitlement is a wonderful trait to have.
No, the only rule about music is that it must be complex, not that it has to sound good or bad.
That's just sad. Literally sad, like I now feel sympathy for you, and what must be a tortured existence, forced to live amongst the rest of us, who don't share such an insane opinion.
You must be making that up. Generally speaking I'm pretty good at the whole "mile in your shoes" thing, but I can't comprehend that point of view at all.
I guess that other poster summed it up when he said he was glad learning music thory didn't ruin his ability to enjoy music. Sorry that's what happened to you.
(The concept of "beautiful" or "ugly" sound makes no sense, nor does music written thereby; the amount of information carried by the sound is therefore the only true criterion for the validity of this or that music.)
That guy must have been a freakin Vulcan.
Aww poor baby has to pick on other people's musical taste to feel big?
Ever tried playing a DirectX game on the Mac?
We can do this one all day, if you like.
Oh, come on now, that's a kneejerk defense that doesn't even address the point. It's posts like yours that make people hate Mac zealots like they do.
Since the menu is at the edge of the screen, there is no chance of "overshooting" the menu (this adheres to "Fitt's Law" - the size of a target on the edge of the screen is essentially infinite).
Are you sure you didn't miss the point? It's not that the menu bar is all the way across the screen - it's that the menu bar is all the way over on a different monitor entirely. Working on multiple monitors on a Mac is something of a pain for this reason. This is particularly true with the Mac's propensity to switching to the Finder when you just miss the menu and click the desktop instead.
I am built larger than most people, but I have no problem carrying a 17 inch laptop and associated supplies in my backpack everywhere I go. Is there really that much difficulty in carrying 5 or 6 kilos? I can understand it being uncomfortable in a shoulder bag, but a properly adjusted backpack is barely even noticeable to me until I'm carrying two 17 inchers plus accoutrements.
(Notice: I assume I've done the conversions correctly here, I'm American but trying to use metric as much as possible)
Hey you, keep your reasoned stance out of this. This is a zealot's wankfest article, full of inflammatory misstatements guaranteed to rile even the most lax of Linux supporters. There's no call for reading the article or comprehending its meaning around here.
The statement can be neither proven nor refuted. This makes it opinion, which makes it invalid as worded.
Congratulations on a fantastic strawman. You've lived up to everything I expect from Slashdot.
Apple zealots, OSS zealots, and now California zealots? Great. I was really hoping we could up the flame ratio around here.
The basic problem is that there is no such thing as proof by analogy. It doesn't matter how good the analogy is.
That statement has been proven to be FUD for quite some time now.
Actually, it hasn't been proven at all. It's not possible to prove it, as a matter of fact, without OS X being the dominant operating system on the market. The usual rebuttal, Apache vs. IIS, doesn't apply to anything but Apache and IIS.