Apple could not bother to check whether the device presenting itself to iTunes as a compatible device really is an Apple device, and then work with the device. They wouldn't have to offer support, and it's not exactly difficult to work as an iPod - the file formats are no mystery. Instead they get a bunch of sand in their vaginas and start complaining.
I totally agree with what you're saying, but I wouldn't have put that 'other' before 'two major OSs', as it's far from correct. I love linux, but let's not pretend it's a major OS just yet. One day, but not yet.
It's even simpler than that - as the Googlebot identifies itself, it's trivial to have special content served up if Googlebot requests a page. You don't have to use robots.txt to hide anything.
I don't know what hardware your friend has, or how you set it up, but Vista flies on my machines. The file transfer issue you talk about was fixed years ago - it can easily max out our gigabit ethernet at work. Backwards compatibility was indeed broken for drivers, as it uses a new driver model to increase stability. I've used vista for years, without re-installing it, and it's fine.
For me it didn't even take getting new hardware to get better performance under Vista. MS released some patches soon after launch that addressed the main performance issues people were having, and it's been great ever since. I'm still using it, after 2 years of no re-installs or cleaning up of my computer, and it's flying. The major problems people had, which were not addressed by Microsoft, were due to the new driver model, which made drivers less able to crash windows and generally mess up your computer (a Good Thing). Pre-Vista drivers weren't compatible, but now nearly everything has a Vista driver, so it's not a problem. The same thing happened when people moved from 98SE to XP - everyone decried XP's 'Fisher Price' interface and screwy drivers, but it was the exact same thing. Now folks are pining for XP, when in a few years Windows 7 will be the new XP. Vista was, in my opinion, rather unfairly tarnished by people spewing utter bullshit about it (which still goes on today on/.), and it'll never get over that. For those who have used it, the majority are still using it, and didn't go back to XP.
Incorrect. You are talking about parts of Sharia law that are not actually recognised by everyone. The Sharia law most Muslims recognise is simply the more tame parts - that about earning money from money, etc. We could look at the Bible, and all those Christians who swear an oath on it in their courtrooms, point out the ridiculously disgusting parts, and use that to condemn Christianity. Which would be tempting, if that was one's aim, but thoroughly incorrect.
On the voting-around-the-world thing, you're being a bit naive. Being able to walk into a voting booth and cast a ballot isn't democracy, it's just marking some paper. Democracy comes from informed voters casting informed votes. Neither those in Iraq or Afghanistan has had the unfettered access to information from all candidates in order to make such a decision, so people with purple thumbs means shit. It's just PR, and you apparently fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
And what has the rest of the world done for the US? Well, it's not necessarily what they've done, but what the US has done to them in order to make the US a better place. Don't pretend that the US got the way it did by scrupulous behaviour, hard work, and conducting itself in a perfect manner. Hard work obviously helped (as every nation is capable of, and performs, such) - it's more a matter of luck, stealing, and hypocrisy. That's what'll get you rich (it works for countries just as well as it does people). Oh, and it wasn't medicine packets from Somalia, but heating oil from Venezuela. Close, though. Not that your fantastic question means shit anyway - it has no bearing on this matter. Sure, Bush's work in Africa is to be commended, but don't forget that was just $48bn in total. How much did Bush spend blowing the ever-loving shit out of countries? How many nations did he alienate (including Iran, who were one of the first countries in the world to offer support to the US after 9/11, but were told to fuck off and added the 'Axis of Evil' just so it didn't seem like Bush was picking on Saddam and Jong-il, leading to the current situation where Iran is trying to stop getting fucked with?
I'd say the disproportionate amount of black people in prison isn't directly due to drugs, but to the disproportionate amount of poor black people. Level the playing field for long enough and you'll see the racial make-up of prisons level, also.
Aaaah lovely. You think they're taking the taxes and putting it in their pockets? They're trying to undo the deficits most governmental bodies incur, which skyrocket under the Republicans. Just look at the national debt - see how nicely its rises and falls fit in with the current party in power? Rising taxes are not a bad thing. Sure, you might have less money, but you'll have more of a future, and the country that has been so nice to you throughout your life, and the lives of all your ancestors who lived in it who eventually made you, will have more of a future to do the same for other folks. Your post is nothing short of massively selfish. They do care about you. They're trying to get you decent health care right now that's not going to fuck you over on the slightest error in your paperwork or for whatever whim they feel. That's just one thing. But please - continue to labor under the impression that because they raise your taxes to buy you civilization, they must be bad. Genius. I guess if the Republicans sold off every aspect of the armed forces, sold off all the police equipment, tore up all the roads and sold them to Mexico, and pawned every last asset they had just to give you a check, you'd be the happiest person alive. Because of what you wrote, it seems exactly how you'd be. Even though you no longer lived in a country that could take care of you, you had a nice big lump of cash. Yay the American dream in action.
When industries and sectors donate money, they're not necessarily giving it to the party that better represents them, but to the party that doesn't, in order to get them to do so. Your argument, while impressive on the surface, is hollow. Whereas lovely gestures like Bush's tax cuts for the rich are a slap in the face, as they plainly help the rich, and piss on the working stiff for all to see.
But as for positive discrimination, I totally agree. It's bullshit.
Remember: taxes are not bad. Squandered taxes are what's bad, and you don't have to look further than the Republicans to see masters of that art form at work. Especially when they're helping people who earn considerably more than you pay less than you do.
I used it for the first time the other day and I wasn't impressed, compared to Media Center, anyway. The uPNP client/server was nice, but the UI was shoddy, slow, and confusing.
Vista's been decent for the last couple of years. They released some patches soon after its release that really sped it up. Trotting out FUD like that contained in your post doesn't help anyone.
The HTML5 demos I've seen use way more power than Flash, and achieve a lot less. Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of it, but it's got a loooong way to go before it even starts to challenge Flash for some of the more dynamic web interfaces. Also, Flash is far more consistent across browsers, something which we all scream for for everything web-related.
Loads of Windows users don't even need those anti-virus and anti-malware tools. I don't use them on my installs, so they're not using up disk space and loaded every time I boot. My uptime is not determined by BSODs or other crashes - it restarts when I want it to, if I want it to. No band-aids required. I'm all for calling out the pros and cons of various operating systems, but banging on about Windows like it's 1998 would be like banging on about Linux like it's 1998. Something I'm sure no pro-Linux guy would appreciate;)
Flash is still faster for most folks (and of more consistent performance across browsers) than these new JavaScript engines out there. I know it can be misused, but it's still fantastically useful if employed correctly.
So even if the computer that drove the displays costs $39,999, you'd still save money. And you seem to be forgetting 3 screens, as shown in the article (they covered that point). Oh, and that 80" screen would most likely have a display of 1920x1080, as it would be for HDTV output. So yeah, go for it. woooo.
Yes, the life is innocent, so why bring it into the world when it's not going to have a good existence? We trust mothers with making decisions for their kid, so why tie their hands and not let them make the ultimate decision? Or would you rather have a bunch of unwanted kids, or kids living in horrific circumstances? Apparently you want that. Nice.
If waste is still sufficiently radioactive to be dangerous, it still has the ability to generate energy. That doesn't speak ill of the 'waste' but of the inefficient reactors that can't use the 'waste'. With decent reactors, the only waste would be slightly above (or not above) the level of background radiation one would naturally expect.
Incorrect. They are not essentially an arm of the government. They're nothing of the sort. There's nothing like it, that I know of, in the US, so it's not surprising you don't know what it actually is.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple could not bother to check whether the device presenting itself to iTunes as a compatible device really is an Apple device, and then work with the device. They wouldn't have to offer support, and it's not exactly difficult to work as an iPod - the file formats are no mystery. Instead they get a bunch of sand in their vaginas and start complaining.
As it is said by Americans. Most folks would say 28th of January, 2009.
I totally agree with what you're saying, but I wouldn't have put that 'other' before 'two major OSs', as it's far from correct. I love linux, but let's not pretend it's a major OS just yet. One day, but not yet.
Sorry - he should have added 'And it runs all your software' at the bottom. Problem solved!
It's even simpler than that - as the Googlebot identifies itself, it's trivial to have special content served up if Googlebot requests a page. You don't have to use robots.txt to hide anything.
I don't know what hardware your friend has, or how you set it up, but Vista flies on my machines. The file transfer issue you talk about was fixed years ago - it can easily max out our gigabit ethernet at work. Backwards compatibility was indeed broken for drivers, as it uses a new driver model to increase stability. I've used vista for years, without re-installing it, and it's fine.
For me it didn't even take getting new hardware to get better performance under Vista. MS released some patches soon after launch that addressed the main performance issues people were having, and it's been great ever since. I'm still using it, after 2 years of no re-installs or cleaning up of my computer, and it's flying. The major problems people had, which were not addressed by Microsoft, were due to the new driver model, which made drivers less able to crash windows and generally mess up your computer (a Good Thing). Pre-Vista drivers weren't compatible, but now nearly everything has a Vista driver, so it's not a problem. The same thing happened when people moved from 98SE to XP - everyone decried XP's 'Fisher Price' interface and screwy drivers, but it was the exact same thing. Now folks are pining for XP, when in a few years Windows 7 will be the new XP. Vista was, in my opinion, rather unfairly tarnished by people spewing utter bullshit about it (which still goes on today on /.), and it'll never get over that. For those who have used it, the majority are still using it, and didn't go back to XP.
I only saw the news stories about Christians being executed in Iran on Religious news websites, not on any actual international media... Interesting.
Incorrect. You are talking about parts of Sharia law that are not actually recognised by everyone. The Sharia law most Muslims recognise is simply the more tame parts - that about earning money from money, etc. We could look at the Bible, and all those Christians who swear an oath on it in their courtrooms, point out the ridiculously disgusting parts, and use that to condemn Christianity. Which would be tempting, if that was one's aim, but thoroughly incorrect.
On the voting-around-the-world thing, you're being a bit naive. Being able to walk into a voting booth and cast a ballot isn't democracy, it's just marking some paper. Democracy comes from informed voters casting informed votes. Neither those in Iraq or Afghanistan has had the unfettered access to information from all candidates in order to make such a decision, so people with purple thumbs means shit. It's just PR, and you apparently fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
And what has the rest of the world done for the US? Well, it's not necessarily what they've done, but what the US has done to them in order to make the US a better place. Don't pretend that the US got the way it did by scrupulous behaviour, hard work, and conducting itself in a perfect manner. Hard work obviously helped (as every nation is capable of, and performs, such) - it's more a matter of luck, stealing, and hypocrisy. That's what'll get you rich (it works for countries just as well as it does people). Oh, and it wasn't medicine packets from Somalia, but heating oil from Venezuela. Close, though. Not that your fantastic question means shit anyway - it has no bearing on this matter. Sure, Bush's work in Africa is to be commended, but don't forget that was just $48bn in total. How much did Bush spend blowing the ever-loving shit out of countries? How many nations did he alienate (including Iran, who were one of the first countries in the world to offer support to the US after 9/11, but were told to fuck off and added the 'Axis of Evil' just so it didn't seem like Bush was picking on Saddam and Jong-il, leading to the current situation where Iran is trying to stop getting fucked with?
I'd say the disproportionate amount of black people in prison isn't directly due to drugs, but to the disproportionate amount of poor black people. Level the playing field for long enough and you'll see the racial make-up of prisons level, also.
Aaaah lovely. You think they're taking the taxes and putting it in their pockets? They're trying to undo the deficits most governmental bodies incur, which skyrocket under the Republicans. Just look at the national debt - see how nicely its rises and falls fit in with the current party in power? Rising taxes are not a bad thing. Sure, you might have less money, but you'll have more of a future, and the country that has been so nice to you throughout your life, and the lives of all your ancestors who lived in it who eventually made you, will have more of a future to do the same for other folks. Your post is nothing short of massively selfish. They do care about you. They're trying to get you decent health care right now that's not going to fuck you over on the slightest error in your paperwork or for whatever whim they feel. That's just one thing. But please - continue to labor under the impression that because they raise your taxes to buy you civilization, they must be bad. Genius. I guess if the Republicans sold off every aspect of the armed forces, sold off all the police equipment, tore up all the roads and sold them to Mexico, and pawned every last asset they had just to give you a check, you'd be the happiest person alive. Because of what you wrote, it seems exactly how you'd be. Even though you no longer lived in a country that could take care of you, you had a nice big lump of cash. Yay the American dream in action.
When industries and sectors donate money, they're not necessarily giving it to the party that better represents them, but to the party that doesn't, in order to get them to do so. Your argument, while impressive on the surface, is hollow. Whereas lovely gestures like Bush's tax cuts for the rich are a slap in the face, as they plainly help the rich, and piss on the working stiff for all to see.
But as for positive discrimination, I totally agree. It's bullshit.
Remember: taxes are not bad. Squandered taxes are what's bad, and you don't have to look further than the Republicans to see masters of that art form at work. Especially when they're helping people who earn considerably more than you pay less than you do.
64-bit is smooth as silk in Windows 7. But I guess I'm a M$ shill, so ignore this comment.
I used it for the first time the other day and I wasn't impressed, compared to Media Center, anyway. The uPNP client/server was nice, but the UI was shoddy, slow, and confusing.
... that you have no evidence of. Nice.
Hah. Idiot. Thanks for showing everyone how viciously uneducated you are.
Vista's been decent for the last couple of years. They released some patches soon after its release that really sped it up. Trotting out FUD like that contained in your post doesn't help anyone.
The HTML5 demos I've seen use way more power than Flash, and achieve a lot less. Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of it, but it's got a loooong way to go before it even starts to challenge Flash for some of the more dynamic web interfaces. Also, Flash is far more consistent across browsers, something which we all scream for for everything web-related.
Loads of Windows users don't even need those anti-virus and anti-malware tools. I don't use them on my installs, so they're not using up disk space and loaded every time I boot. My uptime is not determined by BSODs or other crashes - it restarts when I want it to, if I want it to. No band-aids required. I'm all for calling out the pros and cons of various operating systems, but banging on about Windows like it's 1998 would be like banging on about Linux like it's 1998. Something I'm sure no pro-Linux guy would appreciate ;)
I would have had a single shot when I installed mine, then. Yay.
Flash is still faster for most folks (and of more consistent performance across browsers) than these new JavaScript engines out there. I know it can be misused, but it's still fantastically useful if employed correctly.
1x80" screen: $50,000
6x30" screens: $10,000
So even if the computer that drove the displays costs $39,999, you'd still save money. And you seem to be forgetting 3 screens, as shown in the article (they covered that point). Oh, and that 80" screen would most likely have a display of 1920x1080, as it would be for HDTV output. So yeah, go for it. woooo.
Yes, the life is innocent, so why bring it into the world when it's not going to have a good existence? We trust mothers with making decisions for their kid, so why tie their hands and not let them make the ultimate decision? Or would you rather have a bunch of unwanted kids, or kids living in horrific circumstances? Apparently you want that. Nice.
If waste is still sufficiently radioactive to be dangerous, it still has the ability to generate energy. That doesn't speak ill of the 'waste' but of the inefficient reactors that can't use the 'waste'. With decent reactors, the only waste would be slightly above (or not above) the level of background radiation one would naturally expect.
Incorrect. They are not essentially an arm of the government. They're nothing of the sort. There's nothing like it, that I know of, in the US, so it's not surprising you don't know what it actually is.