The iPhone is not 3G, so I'm saying the absolute opposite of what you think I am, clearly. People are swallowing SJ's line of "3G=bad", even standing up for it, which flies in the face of reason when everything useful the iPhone does is served over its internet connection.
It is in Europe when they release them here shortly - we're bathed in 3G, and the rest of the competition seems to have figured out how to get decent battery life out of a 3G handset...
What was he going to say - "oops! we fucked up! It would have made our phones too expensive, eaten our margins, so we didn't include 3G". Of course not - he was going to make it a feature not a shortcoming! His arguments have made people think it's OK to pay to not have 3G. Which is clearly bullshit, as the difference in speeds between EDGE and 3 or 3.5G is staggering. Considering they decided the SDK was going to be for web apps, crippling its web speed is mind-bogglingly weird. It's another example of Apple's design, which is fantastic, curtailing the technical ability of the machine. The same thing happened to the nut-cooker PowerBooks, whose sleek design and aluminium cases made cooking your balls a daily chore, but damn it looks great when it's doing it. And the Cube, which turned into a truncated pyramid over time due to its fanless room-heating ability. I'm not bashing Apple or Steve Jobs when I write this - I'm a fan of using the right tool for the right job, and FUD by anyone about anything sucks ass, which is exactly what that iPhone ass-delving-for-excuses session Mr. Jobs had was full of.
That's not necessarily true. What if there's a coloured reflective surface near the opaque surface? Raytracing would allow that coloured surface to shade the opaque surface, whereas rasterisers would not, so in the middle of a beautifully-rendered scene, if a hybrid solution was used, there'd be an opaque surface standing out. Raytracing is more than just the surface at hand, but a sum part of everything else in the scene that might affect it, and the surface at hand. If you want to shoot rays, just use a ray tracer and be done with it;)
No, the US has claimed it's in Iraq to help, and blowing up the very people its trying to help is obviously showing that claim of being there to help is bogus. You can't help someone by blowing them up. CNN has nothing to do with this.
People will always act when they're threatened. You would have to kill EVERYONE who opposed to ensure no-one fought back.
If you could be a bit more specific with your criticisms other than saying things "suck", this discussion could actually be a discussion:)
The breadcrumbs work fine - you don't just have to click, you can tab to the address bar, and they go away. The only thing they do is not let you see the actual path of the folder you're in expressed in DOS notation. All the same information is there, it's still 100% keyboard-accessible, and you can still use it very quickly. I rarely use the mouse when I'm in Windows, especially when I'm organising my files, and Vista hasn't stopped me from doing that so far.
As for your sidebar concerns, gadgets are powerful when they're always visible. My downloads monitor would suck if I had to click something/gesture with the mouse/fart to see it - just a quick glance, and I'm updated. Same for the clock, for the CPU status, for the disk status.
Aero's live thumbnails don't suck. They're large, perfectly accurate representations of the application being described. They can't get any better than that. They're even overlaid with the icon of the application itself. The alt-tab also performs instantly on mine. I don't wait.1 second - the thing works perfectly, just as it did in XP - not one difference. It's not failed yet, even when I've really pushed it.
Explorer does show your drive letters, does have a details view for every folder, does have a status bar, does have a preview pane, can have its layout configured entirely, and does remeber these settings either for individual folders or for all folders (whichever you choose).
You can make Vista look just like 2000 by using the "Classic" settings - the classic theme and classic start-bar. No more Aero.
It's nothing too fantastic - it just reads Azureus's XML statistics file and makes some divs with the data that's in there. I'll give you a copy if you still want:)
My experience is pretty much completely the opposite to yours. I first got Vista a few months ago, and it's fantastic. Maybe it's the 4GB of memory, but it flies along. It's running two 22" monitors, and it's the fastest OS I've seen.
Explorer is great - sure it's different from XP, but it works perfectly for me. You can turn the left pane off, the breadcrums disappear if you click (giving you the ability to type your own addresses in, or copy the current one to the keyboard, or use the mouse to quickly jump from one directory to another.) The detail view works exactly the same as it does on XP, so I didn't have a problem with being slowed down after the change to Vista. Aero does add useful functionality, such as live thumbnails in the alt-tab and the task bar. Flip 3D also has its uses, though I can see it's not for everyone.
You can turn the sidebar off and just have gadgets on your desktop if you want. You don't have to use it if you don't want to. I have a lot of screen real-estate, so I have a clock, CPU monitor, disk space monitor, and a gadget I knocked up to track my torrent downloads at home.
So I'm having a great time with Vista. All the software I want to use works fine with it, performance is through the roof, and I like the interface. I guess it's not for everyone:)
Apart from all the US-on-ally friendly fire incidents, you have a point. The thing that's most likely to get a US aircraft out of the sky is a court martial.
You can end a war with weapons, but war itself is something no-one can win.
Why the US isn't using its weapons is because the US has no right to be where it currently is, let alone kill thousands upon thousands more innocent people, and still not "win". You can't blow up an idea, especially if each attempt just makes more followers.
They already said it was not on purpose, that it was an overcompensation to ensure the usability of Windows wasn't affected in any way. They're working on a fix.
So the terrorism the US is suffering is caused by US citizens blowing up the US in Iraq because of the US's stance on domestic technology? I don't see how crackdowns on various technologies creates terrorism. A technology such as this isn't necessary for existence, and fighting for existence itself is what most terrorists are about. Maybe your life is too cushy for you to realise that.
WGA is not activation. Your computer doesn't become deactivated. WGA is something different - it makes sure your copy of Windows, whether it's went through activation or not (as some copies, for example volume licensed copies, don't require activation of any sort), is a legitimate copy, as opposed to a potentially dangerous counterfeit. If your computer fails its WGA test, you lose access to some downloads at Microsoft.com, and your Windows Update will be temporarily interrupted. You will not lose the ability to use your computer in the slightest. The last figure I read stated that about 12,000 people were affected, all of whom are now not affected, and most of those would have never even known about the problem.
Brilliant! Because of that post, I uninstalled Windows, installed Linux, and now I can't do anything but sit on Slashdot responding to people talking about Nazis for no apparent reason. Yay!
Technically, you make a donation to receive an e-meter. As for churches asking for all your money to get into heaven, you can still get into heaven without having to spend a dime. You do need an e-meter to become "clear" in Scientology, however. You can use them at the Org, but that in itself costs money. There is no route to the spiritual end goals of Scientology without spending a lot of money. At least with Christianity (and I'm no Christian, believe me), you can just accept Jesus, live a good life, and Bob's your uncle - a winged reception, accompanied by harps and all your old pets, when you die. For no money down.
You only have to provide the source code to people who have purchased the software. You don't have to provide it as soon as you mention "open source" on your website.
As you've deftly proved, spouting out on Slashdot only muddies the water, getting folks involved in disputes that might not even exist.
"The official definition of a cult is an organization that rejects Jesus Christ, uses their own "scriptures" as superior to the King James Bible, discourages their members from reading the Bible, and then poses as a religion. The Co$ fits that definition to the tee, and they are also a criminal organization in many peoples' eyes, despite the celebrity attachments. Good to see the Belgium is brave enough to prosecute Co$ as such."
Bullshit. That's not a definition of cult in ANY dictionary, legal or layman's. Grow up.
I have no problem with that. As soon as humanity shakes off this ridiculous notion of supernatural rubbish we might actually get somewhere as a species. I admire the Quakers' take on community, but it's doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Using the word "intolerance" doesn't automatically make something wrong. Doctors are intolerant of disease, the police are intolerant of crime, and pilots are intolerant of airplane crashes - should they all stop being so intolerant?
Because in its death throws it will STILL be targetting the weak and needy, offering them false hope, and financially ruining them and their families. This isn't a fluffy organisation where you change your name to Fred and gain enlightenment, it costs you thousands and thousands of dollars (hundreds of thousands, even), and all you end up with is them having a folder of incriminating information on you, and a tattered mental state.
Scientology is not benign. It's insidious, dangerous, and relentless.
E-meters are not reprehensible? They cost members of the church $4,000, were claimed to cure illnesses, and cost $180 to make. That sounds reprehensible to me.
Slashdot Mirror
The iPhone is not 3G, so I'm saying the absolute opposite of what you think I am, clearly. People are swallowing SJ's line of "3G=bad", even standing up for it, which flies in the face of reason when everything useful the iPhone does is served over its internet connection.
I like to use the keyboard and play games, so OS X is out of the question for me, even with all its "enable keyboard blah blah GUI" options enabled.
No, those saying they don't want 3G on a phone who's sole SDK is web-based are apple fanboys.
The 3G choice was Apple's, not AT&Ts. They're not on AT&T in Europe, yet there still is no 3G on the iPhone over here...
It is in Europe when they release them here shortly - we're bathed in 3G, and the rest of the competition seems to have figured out how to get decent battery life out of a 3G handset...
What was he going to say - "oops! we fucked up! It would have made our phones too expensive, eaten our margins, so we didn't include 3G". Of course not - he was going to make it a feature not a shortcoming! His arguments have made people think it's OK to pay to not have 3G. Which is clearly bullshit, as the difference in speeds between EDGE and 3 or 3.5G is staggering. Considering they decided the SDK was going to be for web apps, crippling its web speed is mind-bogglingly weird. It's another example of Apple's design, which is fantastic, curtailing the technical ability of the machine. The same thing happened to the nut-cooker PowerBooks, whose sleek design and aluminium cases made cooking your balls a daily chore, but damn it looks great when it's doing it. And the Cube, which turned into a truncated pyramid over time due to its fanless room-heating ability. I'm not bashing Apple or Steve Jobs when I write this - I'm a fan of using the right tool for the right job, and FUD by anyone about anything sucks ass, which is exactly what that iPhone ass-delving-for-excuses session Mr. Jobs had was full of.
That's not necessarily true. What if there's a coloured reflective surface near the opaque surface? Raytracing would allow that coloured surface to shade the opaque surface, whereas rasterisers would not, so in the middle of a beautifully-rendered scene, if a hybrid solution was used, there'd be an opaque surface standing out. Raytracing is more than just the surface at hand, but a sum part of everything else in the scene that might affect it, and the surface at hand. If you want to shoot rays, just use a ray tracer and be done with it ;)
No, the US has claimed it's in Iraq to help, and blowing up the very people its trying to help is obviously showing that claim of being there to help is bogus. You can't help someone by blowing them up. CNN has nothing to do with this.
People will always act when they're threatened. You would have to kill EVERYONE who opposed to ensure no-one fought back.
If you could be a bit more specific with your criticisms other than saying things "suck", this discussion could actually be a discussion :)
.1 second - the thing works perfectly, just as it did in XP - not one difference. It's not failed yet, even when I've really pushed it.
The breadcrumbs work fine - you don't just have to click, you can tab to the address bar, and they go away. The only thing they do is not let you see the actual path of the folder you're in expressed in DOS notation. All the same information is there, it's still 100% keyboard-accessible, and you can still use it very quickly. I rarely use the mouse when I'm in Windows, especially when I'm organising my files, and Vista hasn't stopped me from doing that so far.
As for your sidebar concerns, gadgets are powerful when they're always visible. My downloads monitor would suck if I had to click something/gesture with the mouse/fart to see it - just a quick glance, and I'm updated. Same for the clock, for the CPU status, for the disk status.
Aero's live thumbnails don't suck. They're large, perfectly accurate representations of the application being described. They can't get any better than that. They're even overlaid with the icon of the application itself. The alt-tab also performs instantly on mine. I don't wait
Explorer does show your drive letters, does have a details view for every folder, does have a status bar, does have a preview pane, can have its layout configured entirely, and does remeber these settings either for individual folders or for all folders (whichever you choose).
You can make Vista look just like 2000 by using the "Classic" settings - the classic theme and classic start-bar. No more Aero.
It's nothing too fantastic - it just reads Azureus's XML statistics file and makes some divs with the data that's in there. I'll give you a copy if you still want :)
My experience is pretty much completely the opposite to yours. I first got Vista a few months ago, and it's fantastic. Maybe it's the 4GB of memory, but it flies along. It's running two 22" monitors, and it's the fastest OS I've seen.
:)
Explorer is great - sure it's different from XP, but it works perfectly for me. You can turn the left pane off, the breadcrums disappear if you click (giving you the ability to type your own addresses in, or copy the current one to the keyboard, or use the mouse to quickly jump from one directory to another.) The detail view works exactly the same as it does on XP, so I didn't have a problem with being slowed down after the change to Vista. Aero does add useful functionality, such as live thumbnails in the alt-tab and the task bar. Flip 3D also has its uses, though I can see it's not for everyone.
You can turn the sidebar off and just have gadgets on your desktop if you want. You don't have to use it if you don't want to. I have a lot of screen real-estate, so I have a clock, CPU monitor, disk space monitor, and a gadget I knocked up to track my torrent downloads at home.
So I'm having a great time with Vista. All the software I want to use works fine with it, performance is through the roof, and I like the interface. I guess it's not for everyone
Apart from all the US-on-ally friendly fire incidents, you have a point. The thing that's most likely to get a US aircraft out of the sky is a court martial.
Bridges were first built from iron in the 1700s, fyi...
You can end a war with weapons, but war itself is something no-one can win.
Why the US isn't using its weapons is because the US has no right to be where it currently is, let alone kill thousands upon thousands more innocent people, and still not "win". You can't blow up an idea, especially if each attempt just makes more followers.
They already said it was not on purpose, that it was an overcompensation to ensure the usability of Windows wasn't affected in any way. They're working on a fix.
So the terrorism the US is suffering is caused by US citizens blowing up the US in Iraq because of the US's stance on domestic technology? I don't see how crackdowns on various technologies creates terrorism. A technology such as this isn't necessary for existence, and fighting for existence itself is what most terrorists are about. Maybe your life is too cushy for you to realise that.
WGA is not activation. Your computer doesn't become deactivated. WGA is something different - it makes sure your copy of Windows, whether it's went through activation or not (as some copies, for example volume licensed copies, don't require activation of any sort), is a legitimate copy, as opposed to a potentially dangerous counterfeit. If your computer fails its WGA test, you lose access to some downloads at Microsoft.com, and your Windows Update will be temporarily interrupted. You will not lose the ability to use your computer in the slightest. The last figure I read stated that about 12,000 people were affected, all of whom are now not affected, and most of those would have never even known about the problem.
Brilliant! Because of that post, I uninstalled Windows, installed Linux, and now I can't do anything but sit on Slashdot responding to people talking about Nazis for no apparent reason. Yay!
Technically, you make a donation to receive an e-meter. As for churches asking for all your money to get into heaven, you can still get into heaven without having to spend a dime. You do need an e-meter to become "clear" in Scientology, however. You can use them at the Org, but that in itself costs money. There is no route to the spiritual end goals of Scientology without spending a lot of money. At least with Christianity (and I'm no Christian, believe me), you can just accept Jesus, live a good life, and Bob's your uncle - a winged reception, accompanied by harps and all your old pets, when you die. For no money down.
You only have to provide the source code to people who have purchased the software. You don't have to provide it as soon as you mention "open source" on your website.
As you've deftly proved, spouting out on Slashdot only muddies the water, getting folks involved in disputes that might not even exist.
"The official definition of a cult is an organization that rejects Jesus Christ, uses their own "scriptures" as superior to the King James Bible, discourages their members from reading the Bible, and then poses as a religion. The Co$ fits that definition to the tee, and they are also a criminal organization in many peoples' eyes, despite the celebrity attachments. Good to see the Belgium is brave enough to prosecute Co$ as such." Bullshit. That's not a definition of cult in ANY dictionary, legal or layman's. Grow up.
I have no problem with that. As soon as humanity shakes off this ridiculous notion of supernatural rubbish we might actually get somewhere as a species. I admire the Quakers' take on community, but it's doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Using the word "intolerance" doesn't automatically make something wrong. Doctors are intolerant of disease, the police are intolerant of crime, and pilots are intolerant of airplane crashes - should they all stop being so intolerant?
Because in its death throws it will STILL be targetting the weak and needy, offering them false hope, and financially ruining them and their families. This isn't a fluffy organisation where you change your name to Fred and gain enlightenment, it costs you thousands and thousands of dollars (hundreds of thousands, even), and all you end up with is them having a folder of incriminating information on you, and a tattered mental state.
Scientology is not benign. It's insidious, dangerous, and relentless.
To be honest, that's a tiny percentage of Muslims doing that. EVERY Scientologist leaving gets shit for leaving.
E-meters are not reprehensible? They cost members of the church $4,000, were claimed to cure illnesses, and cost $180 to make. That sounds reprehensible to me.