You don't get it. This is about assholes who just don't give a damn. This system is meant to make cars physically incapable of speeding, because some drivers have no self control or concern for others' safety.
I had thought of this before, too bad I didn't patent it. Heh.
But seriously, I really hope they go for it full steam. Or at least, if there's a nationwide speed limit, lock the cars to never go beyond that. If speeders got no one but themselves killed, I'd be all for that "motorist's freedom" shit. But since that's not the case, fuck them.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
But that's the thing: Apple is not selling "a PC". They charge premium for "a machine to run OS X".
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
But the 21" models use low end video cards that can't clearly beat my old GTS 250. So it's all about the upsell. The downside, for Apple, is that it'll likely take me much longer to decide to get the iMac.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
Since the split to Intel architecture I try to look at Apple as just another box maker since I'll probably end up wiping it and installing windows anyways.
Why pay more for a Mac if you're not using the only thing that makes it different from countless PCs out there?
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 2
Checked eBay and Amazon: those enclosures are crazy expensive, some cost more than the computer itself.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 1
Sorry if I used the wrong term - I meant a machine without a built-in screen, like a regular desktop PC, not an all-in-one like the iMac.
Re:The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 2
Play modern games on high quality at a solid 60 fps. The Intel HD Graphics 4000 is the deal killer.
The OS is good, but the hardware pushes me away
on
Inside OS X Mavericks
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've been a Mac OS user since 1997, and I love the interface (in some respects I still like Mac OS 9 better than X). I have owned two PowerPC Macs before, but when their move to Intel coincided with a little personal economic downturn, I went the hackintosh way. Sometimes I think of getting a new actual Apple, but when I look into it, they don't offer a machine that suits me.
You just can't get a headless system with good specs, except the Mac Pro, and that's crazy overkill. The mini is a complete joke, with little memory, lame Intel video, no optical drive, no expandability whatsoever. I could go for an iMac (and deal with external drives, a single 1TB disk doesn't really cut it anymore). But I'd have to go with the rather expensive 27-inch ones to get a video card that beats my rather outdated GTS 250. Seriously, I assembled this machine a couple years ago, penny-pinching all the way, and even back then I knew this video card was the bottleneck. They still sell machines with worse video. It's quite ridiculous.
So... too much money for little benefit. Maybe some other time, Apple.
Yes, it's all tax money. The difference is that, in Europe, taxes pay for public education, healthcare, infrastructure, and so on. In the US&A, taxes pay for a bloated military and a massive espionage apparatus.
Not trying to sound dismissive, but I am inclined to think of those as a different kind of device. The MessagePad eschewed the keyboard, it was all about the touch screen, so it was closer to the typical modern tablet.
With a name like that... but anyway, let me say this: hell, no! Search has poor discoverability, you have to know beforehand and remember what you have in a given computer. I'm not saying XP's menu is much better, in fact it has a deadly flaw: the applications are not properly categorized. There's no logical arrangement. Hell, it's not even consistently alphabetical. So, both are bad.
Then who gets it right? Linux does. See the hierarchy in that menu? Programs are organized neatly and logically. Similar apps go together. And there's still a search box if you want one.
MS has lost billions of $$$ on bing, x-box and other experiments funded by Windows and Office license sales which are now slowing and decreasing. microsoft has been innovating for years but not profitably.
Yet another search engine and yet another game console don't really count as major innovations. Also, consider this.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't get it. This is about assholes who just don't give a damn. This system is meant to make cars physically incapable of speeding, because some drivers have no self control or concern for others' safety.
I had thought of this before, too bad I didn't patent it. Heh.
But seriously, I really hope they go for it full steam. Or at least, if there's a nationwide speed limit, lock the cars to never go beyond that. If speeders got no one but themselves killed, I'd be all for that "motorist's freedom" shit. But since that's not the case, fuck them.
But that's the thing: Apple is not selling "a PC". They charge premium for "a machine to run OS X".
But the 21" models use low end video cards that can't clearly beat my old GTS 250. So it's all about the upsell. The downside, for Apple, is that it'll likely take me much longer to decide to get the iMac.
Since the split to Intel architecture I try to look at Apple as just another box maker since I'll probably end up wiping it and installing windows anyways.
Why pay more for a Mac if you're not using the only thing that makes it different from countless PCs out there?
Checked eBay and Amazon: those enclosures are crazy expensive, some cost more than the computer itself.
Sorry if I used the wrong term - I meant a machine without a built-in screen, like a regular desktop PC, not an all-in-one like the iMac.
Play modern games on high quality at a solid 60 fps. The Intel HD Graphics 4000 is the deal killer.
I've been a Mac OS user since 1997, and I love the interface (in some respects I still like Mac OS 9 better than X). I have owned two PowerPC Macs before, but when their move to Intel coincided with a little personal economic downturn, I went the hackintosh way. Sometimes I think of getting a new actual Apple, but when I look into it, they don't offer a machine that suits me.
You just can't get a headless system with good specs, except the Mac Pro, and that's crazy overkill. The mini is a complete joke, with little memory, lame Intel video, no optical drive, no expandability whatsoever. I could go for an iMac (and deal with external drives, a single 1TB disk doesn't really cut it anymore). But I'd have to go with the rather expensive 27-inch ones to get a video card that beats my rather outdated GTS 250. Seriously, I assembled this machine a couple years ago, penny-pinching all the way, and even back then I knew this video card was the bottleneck. They still sell machines with worse video. It's quite ridiculous.
So... too much money for little benefit. Maybe some other time, Apple.
That's what's fucked up about the US&A, you think you only have those two options: the right-wing party, and the far-right-wing party.
Id Software shit on PC by farming out Quake 4 and not doing it themselves
What? I like Quake 4. It's much more fun than Doom 3.
On the contrary, I hope they insist on it... further harming themselves.
It's "OS X" not "OS-X".
Which, incidentally, is pronounced "OS ten". Yes, the X is a roman numeral.
What about Final Fight?
Yes, it's all tax money. The difference is that, in Europe, taxes pay for public education, healthcare, infrastructure, and so on. In the US&A, taxes pay for a bloated military and a massive espionage apparatus.
The bad guys always think they are the good guys.
Apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health?
If you had clicked the link, you'd see it's a pic of Mint with Cinnamon, but other environments do the same.
Not trying to sound dismissive, but I am inclined to think of those as a different kind of device. The MessagePad eschewed the keyboard, it was all about the touch screen, so it was closer to the typical modern tablet.
With a name like that... but anyway, let me say this: hell, no! Search has poor discoverability, you have to know beforehand and remember what you have in a given computer. I'm not saying XP's menu is much better, in fact it has a deadly flaw: the applications are not properly categorized. There's no logical arrangement. Hell, it's not even consistently alphabetical. So, both are bad.
Then who gets it right? Linux does. See the hierarchy in that menu? Programs are organized neatly and logically. Similar apps go together. And there's still a search box if you want one.
To be fair, they sell non-DRM'ed music now.
MS has lost billions of $$$ on bing, x-box and other experiments funded by Windows and Office license sales which are now slowing and decreasing. microsoft has been innovating for years but not profitably.
Yet another search engine and yet another game console don't really count as major innovations. Also, consider this.
they had commercial tablets before apple
Apple launched the Newton MessagePad in 1993.
Why should they bother? Linux fans are perfectly capable of bashing Canonical on their own.
No, they did make a decent desktop OS. Then they threw it away and introduced that Unity piece of shit.
British English. I agree that it sounds wrong, but it's how they say it.