I don't understand why so many people are so willing to let themselves be addicted to caffeine so early in their lives. I don't want to give any substance enough control over me to where I say, "oh, I need my coffee or else I'm surly in the morning." Caffeine can be nice but I'm really hesitant to pump myself full of it on a regular basis. Do we know exactly what it does over time? Did people in the past consume it as much as we do today? Starbucks has created a culture where consuming large amounts of caffeine is mostly okay, perhaps even chic at times. Besides that, I'm not fond of drinking soft drinks on a regular basis because of the ingredients. Instead of using real sugar, they cut corners and use high fructose corn syrup, which isn't as easily digested. I've heard of several people losing a few pounds just by not drinking a soda everyday at lunch. (I'm not even much of a health nut, I'm just really skeptical.)
1. Camp out for iPhone in an area with a LOT of people waiting. Must be first in line. 2. Buy iPhone at 6PM. 3. Smash it on the pavement in front of everyone. 4. Post video on website and make a bazillion dollars.
I'd like to thank everyone here at Slashdot for educating me on what the real issues in the upcoming election are. I used to think I knew what was really important in a candidate. I looked for integrity, relentless honesty, a good attitude, and someone who puts some thought into what they say and believe in. However, thanks to this excellent article, we now know what to really look for. In 2008, don't concern yourself with silly matters such as Social Security, or matters of privacy. Ask your candidate: what OS do you host your webservers on? And what OS do you run? Make sure they know where they stand on the important matters of life.
This would be a perfect indie game. This isn't off-topic because it would definitely appeal to the youth of our age in choosing a 'cool' thing to make a game about.
It'd be an elaborate game of keep away. One player holds an iPhone for a round. They would move 50% faster through the maze, but his opponents would be have some sort of special power. The goal is to to run around to all the different 'sites' on the screen and correct all the misinformation about the iPhone before the release date. When you're at the site you have to do different things, like shake the controller, or draw pie charts and diagrams, to correct all the bad information that the Microsoft-loving press generates.
But when I get my hands on that sweet, sweet iPhone, I'm going to literally cry with joy. Lately, I have been unable to sleep. All I can think of is holding it and putting it in my pocket. Truly, Wednesday is going to be the best day of my life. The only problem is I have to find some friends to call on it. It is odd that none of the reviews mentioned how well the device performs in basements, as that is my primary dwelling place.
Fair enough, I'll refrain from the emotional rhetoric in the future. Although you aren't exactly exempt from it yourself - what of the ridiculous Photoshopped pictures in some of your articles? It seems rather hypocritical to demand that textual conversations be devoid of emotional appeals when you have those things running around. Nor do I see the point in trying to 'clarify' things in the media - people believe what they want to believe.
As for the Digg comment, I'll attribute that to sour grapes since you got busted for gaming it. I may make jabs at your site every now and then, but I don't dislike you. I make fun of anyone who takes technology too seriously, and RD really seems to take it seriously, albeit, in a lop-sided manner.
Anyway, in terms of argument or facts, where did I go wrong?
A level of bullshit I can barely comprehend...
on
The Perfect Phone Storm?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Who let this tripe get to the front page? Everyone should know that RD articles deserve to be marked down right in the Firehose. He profits directly from this exposure. Seriously, what did this article tell us? Oh, right, it told us nothing. It is useless conjecture and more silly defense of a company. The absolute best part is the author has the gall to label some bloggers as "impassioned." Hate to break it to you buddy, but who is the one Photoshopping heads of Microsoft onto movie posters? Or writing at least ten articles about a freakin MP3 player from Microsoft Or running a whole website devoted to spreading the 'truth' in this age of 'Microsoft-loving media'?
But, like everything unintentionally funny, it gets even better. He argues, and I quote, "Apple hacks the hackers." (How clever, did he think of that himself?) He issues a hand-waving argument about how the bugs weren't really in Safari (just in the shared libraries, which, *technically* isn't in Safari.exe. Yeah, let's try that argument for IE, shall we?). But, he then claims that by having the hackers find these bugs, they got free QA. I bet all those hackers are sitting around now and thinking, "BLAST! Our plans have been thoroughly foiled by Apple once again! We have been unfairly tricked! I call foul play!"
It looks like I need to up the ante when it comes to making jokes about RD. And I encourage you to do the same.
Let me tell you, I've always wanted a Java P2P client. My biggest irk with uTorrent is it doesn't take up enough resources. Honestly, I can't believe the developers of uTorrent had the nerve to not put an entire plug-in architecture into it. They're totally missing the boat here.
Besides, everyone KNOWS that the more design patterns you use, the better your program is!
I'm really struggling with this one. Why would they put an article like this on the front page? You're pitting two of the Absolute Goods against each other, and I'm really not equipped to handle the sort of critical thinking it requires. I'm not sure what to think here, could you help me along? Next thing you'll tell me is that Google has some employees that run Windows!
Ah, so now Safari isn't running natively on Win32, so it is all okay. Got it. I'll bring that point up when someone complains about the interface on a Mac app now. It will be nice to see how the opinion is magically different.
And Apple should bundle iTunes and Safari together. I don't see any issue with that. If people want to subject their machines to such ugliness, they can do so much quicker.:)
That doesn't counter what I said. It is still a terrible name, regardless of whether it has an explanation behind it or not. Almost as bad as "Pidgin."
All this "but Safari is an iPhone SDK" crap is silly. It is cognitive backpedaling in the face of a less than stellar product launch by a company that people want to be the great savior of computing. How can you reconcile the fact that Apple wants the browser is mostly an SDK with the fact that Jobs himself said he wanted to increase Safari's market share? From another perspective: if Microsoft was releasing a new browser, and it flunked some of its security tests, NOBODY would allow people to get away with saying, "but, its just beta software" or "its just the SDK for people writing AJAX apps." (Sit down, junior, with the, "but the rules change when you're a convicted monopolist" rhetoric that people love around here. They do and they don't. A browser is a high-profile application, and thus should be held to a very high level of scrutiny by any company.)
The other thing that is highly amusing lies in how people took my criticism of the Safari UI. You see, every Mac user gets all whiny when an applicaton is merely 'ported' to their platform without taking into consideration the 'unique nature of the Mac'. They despise the non-standard interfaces, the disregard for Apple's human interface guidelines, and the general feeling of clunkiness. And, they are right in feeling this way. Then Apple does the same thing, merely porting Safari to Windows. And their decision to ignore look and feel standards on another platform is actually defended by people. They fail to see that the thing they hate so much is being done to other people. And this isn't a massive gap in usability we're talking about, this is small enough to be annoying. (Watch, some nit-picker will come up and say, "what's the big deal then?" Amazing how people's standards change depending on what they are discussing.)
Neo1973?! It sounds like the nickname of a way too old, over-zealous Matrix fanboy.
There is zero chance that product will succeed with its current name, I'll tell you that much. I hope they didn't choose it to be hip and trendy, because when you try that hard, you end up being the opposite of what you're going for. Although I'm sure people like iphoneshoulddie98214 and xxappleSux298123xx might think it is cool.
Or at least that is what I was told by several people numerous times in the last Safari thread. Why are end users downloading and running this "SDK" as if it is an actual browser?
Either its a browser or its an SDK. It doesn't change its role based on whether the news is good or bad.
I prefer to think of my video gaming experience as a fine dining experience, as Sony so helpfully suggested. I cannot believe they would betray my trust by discounting their truly unique console to McDonald's-level prices. They've already said it was too cheap, and now they would cheapen it further? Traitorous hounds!
Yeah, I'm well aware he gamed Digg for awhile, and that is part of the reason I actually dish out jabs at him. But I don't want to follow him around Slashdot, that seems kind of mean. I'd rather just undermine RoughlyDrafted's reputation here and there.:)
Oh bugger, nothing like a typo to totally derail snide commentary. That whole should be a hole. I hereby disqualify myself from making additional snarky comments for this thread. Enjoy!
Apple seemed to have responded *awfully* quick to a security whole in their new SDK, almost as if it was a web browser vulnerability? But, it can't be a browser, that is not what people here said it was.
Let's see, internal audit finds out that privacy laws were broken during an investigation. Then, it gets printed in the newspaper, but doesn't receive much discussion. Guilty parties get a slap on the wrist, and 'accidentally' make the same mistakes again in future investigations. If the matter is pressed, the official response amounts to, "Sorry everyone, but you see, we got to protect you from dem terrorists!"
In the words of Joel from MST3K: "...we're stuck in a Moebius strip of a movie!"
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand why so many people are so willing to let themselves be addicted to caffeine so early in their lives. I don't want to give any substance enough control over me to where I say, "oh, I need my coffee or else I'm surly in the morning." Caffeine can be nice but I'm really hesitant to pump myself full of it on a regular basis. Do we know exactly what it does over time? Did people in the past consume it as much as we do today? Starbucks has created a culture where consuming large amounts of caffeine is mostly okay, perhaps even chic at times. Besides that, I'm not fond of drinking soft drinks on a regular basis because of the ingredients. Instead of using real sugar, they cut corners and use high fructose corn syrup, which isn't as easily digested. I've heard of several people losing a few pounds just by not drinking a soda everyday at lunch. (I'm not even much of a health nut, I'm just really skeptical.)
Sounds a lot like Slashdot, actually.
1. Camp out for iPhone in an area with a LOT of people waiting. Must be first in line.
2. Buy iPhone at 6PM.
3. Smash it on the pavement in front of everyone.
4. Post video on website and make a bazillion dollars.
I'd like to thank everyone here at Slashdot for educating me on what the real issues in the upcoming election are. I used to think I knew what was really important in a candidate. I looked for integrity, relentless honesty, a good attitude, and someone who puts some thought into what they say and believe in. However, thanks to this excellent article, we now know what to really look for. In 2008, don't concern yourself with silly matters such as Social Security, or matters of privacy. Ask your candidate: what OS do you host your webservers on? And what OS do you run? Make sure they know where they stand on the important matters of life.
This has been a public service announcement.
This would be a perfect indie game. This isn't off-topic because it would definitely appeal to the youth of our age in choosing a 'cool' thing to make a game about.
It'd be an elaborate game of keep away. One player holds an iPhone for a round. They would move 50% faster through the maze, but his opponents would be have some sort of special power. The goal is to to run around to all the different 'sites' on the screen and correct all the misinformation about the iPhone before the release date. When you're at the site you have to do different things, like shake the controller, or draw pie charts and diagrams, to correct all the bad information that the Microsoft-loving press generates.
But when I get my hands on that sweet, sweet iPhone, I'm going to literally cry with joy. Lately, I have been unable to sleep. All I can think of is holding it and putting it in my pocket. Truly, Wednesday is going to be the best day of my life. The only problem is I have to find some friends to call on it. It is odd that none of the reviews mentioned how well the device performs in basements, as that is my primary dwelling place.
Fair enough, I'll refrain from the emotional rhetoric in the future. Although you aren't exactly exempt from it yourself - what of the ridiculous Photoshopped pictures in some of your articles? It seems rather hypocritical to demand that textual conversations be devoid of emotional appeals when you have those things running around. Nor do I see the point in trying to 'clarify' things in the media - people believe what they want to believe.
As for the Digg comment, I'll attribute that to sour grapes since you got busted for gaming it. I may make jabs at your site every now and then, but I don't dislike you. I make fun of anyone who takes technology too seriously, and RD really seems to take it seriously, albeit, in a lop-sided manner.
You mean to say: "religious fanaticism over matters of technology is the way of ignorance."
I wonder the same thing sometimes.
Anyway, in terms of argument or facts, where did I go wrong?
Who let this tripe get to the front page? Everyone should know that RD articles deserve to be marked down right in the Firehose. He profits directly from this exposure. Seriously, what did this article tell us? Oh, right, it told us nothing. It is useless conjecture and more silly defense of a company. The absolute best part is the author has the gall to label some bloggers as "impassioned." Hate to break it to you buddy, but who is the one Photoshopping heads of Microsoft onto movie posters? Or writing at least ten articles about a freakin MP3 player from Microsoft Or running a whole website devoted to spreading the 'truth' in this age of 'Microsoft-loving media'?
But, like everything unintentionally funny, it gets even better. He argues, and I quote, "Apple hacks the hackers." (How clever, did he think of that himself?) He issues a hand-waving argument about how the bugs weren't really in Safari (just in the shared libraries, which, *technically* isn't in Safari.exe. Yeah, let's try that argument for IE, shall we?). But, he then claims that by having the hackers find these bugs, they got free QA. I bet all those hackers are sitting around now and thinking, "BLAST! Our plans have been thoroughly foiled by Apple once again! We have been unfairly tricked! I call foul play!"
It looks like I need to up the ante when it comes to making jokes about RD. And I encourage you to do the same.
The iPhone will be responsible for my self-actualization. Just you wait and see.
Everyone knows we can't have THAT on here! Our OS is our religion!
Let me tell you, I've always wanted a Java P2P client. My biggest irk with uTorrent is it doesn't take up enough resources. Honestly, I can't believe the developers of uTorrent had the nerve to not put an entire plug-in architecture into it. They're totally missing the boat here.
Besides, everyone KNOWS that the more design patterns you use, the better your program is!
I'm really struggling with this one. Why would they put an article like this on the front page? You're pitting two of the Absolute Goods against each other, and I'm really not equipped to handle the sort of critical thinking it requires. I'm not sure what to think here, could you help me along? Next thing you'll tell me is that Google has some employees that run Windows!
Ah, so now Safari isn't running natively on Win32, so it is all okay. Got it. I'll bring that point up when someone complains about the interface on a Mac app now. It will be nice to see how the opinion is magically different.
:)
And Apple should bundle iTunes and Safari together. I don't see any issue with that. If people want to subject their machines to such ugliness, they can do so much quicker.
Why would I defend crappy products like Microsoft's? I'm not going to.
I raised several points in my comment, most of which everyone has ignore. Please, have a go at them.
That doesn't counter what I said. It is still a terrible name, regardless of whether it has an explanation behind it or not. Almost as bad as "Pidgin."
All this "but Safari is an iPhone SDK" crap is silly. It is cognitive backpedaling in the face of a less than stellar product launch by a company that people want to be the great savior of computing. How can you reconcile the fact that Apple wants the browser is mostly an SDK with the fact that Jobs himself said he wanted to increase Safari's market share? From another perspective: if Microsoft was releasing a new browser, and it flunked some of its security tests, NOBODY would allow people to get away with saying, "but, its just beta software" or "its just the SDK for people writing AJAX apps." (Sit down, junior, with the, "but the rules change when you're a convicted monopolist" rhetoric that people love around here. They do and they don't. A browser is a high-profile application, and thus should be held to a very high level of scrutiny by any company.)
The other thing that is highly amusing lies in how people took my criticism of the Safari UI. You see, every Mac user gets all whiny when an applicaton is merely 'ported' to their platform without taking into consideration the 'unique nature of the Mac'. They despise the non-standard interfaces, the disregard for Apple's human interface guidelines, and the general feeling of clunkiness. And, they are right in feeling this way. Then Apple does the same thing, merely porting Safari to Windows. And their decision to ignore look and feel standards on another platform is actually defended by people. They fail to see that the thing they hate so much is being done to other people. And this isn't a massive gap in usability we're talking about, this is small enough to be annoying. (Watch, some nit-picker will come up and say, "what's the big deal then?" Amazing how people's standards change depending on what they are discussing.)
Neo1973?! It sounds like the nickname of a way too old, over-zealous Matrix fanboy.
There is zero chance that product will succeed with its current name, I'll tell you that much. I hope they didn't choose it to be hip and trendy, because when you try that hard, you end up being the opposite of what you're going for. Although I'm sure people like iphoneshoulddie98214 and xxappleSux298123xx might think it is cool.
Or at least that is what I was told by several people numerous times in the last Safari thread. Why are end users downloading and running this "SDK" as if it is an actual browser?
Either its a browser or its an SDK. It doesn't change its role based on whether the news is good or bad.
I prefer to think of my video gaming experience as a fine dining experience, as Sony so helpfully suggested. I cannot believe they would betray my trust by discounting their truly unique console to McDonald's-level prices. They've already said it was too cheap, and now they would cheapen it further? Traitorous hounds!
Yeah, I'm well aware he gamed Digg for awhile, and that is part of the reason I actually dish out jabs at him. But I don't want to follow him around Slashdot, that seems kind of mean. I'd rather just undermine RoughlyDrafted's reputation here and there. :)
Oh bugger, nothing like a typo to totally derail snide commentary. That whole should be a hole. I hereby disqualify myself from making additional snarky comments for this thread. Enjoy!
Apple seemed to have responded *awfully* quick to a security whole in their new SDK, almost as if it was a web browser vulnerability? But, it can't be a browser, that is not what people here said it was.
Ooh, ooh, I know what'll happen!
Let's see, internal audit finds out that privacy laws were broken during an investigation. Then, it gets printed in the newspaper, but doesn't receive much discussion. Guilty parties get a slap on the wrist, and 'accidentally' make the same mistakes again in future investigations. If the matter is pressed, the official response amounts to, "Sorry everyone, but you see, we got to protect you from dem terrorists!"
In the words of Joel from MST3K: "...we're stuck in a Moebius strip of a movie!"