To most people the GUI is synonymous with the OS, but they're two separate things.
This is what is holding Linux back on the desktop though. The public wants a consistent, intuitive, and responsive interface with their computer. The major aim of Canonical is to simplify Linux for the common user. That means working on configuring Gnome (as that is their GUI of choice) to meet those requirements. So a review meant for the public of the latest Ubuntu is going to focus on how it will look and act to a general user. While the bulk of it may be Gnome, the underlying system has to get everything right as well.
As we've noted in earlier articles, Microsoft has also brought its best to the table with Windows 7. However, it's a pity that Apple didn't seem to do so with Leopard.
Ubuntu comments aside (I use and enjoy it myself), this hardly seems like a well written piece. The author talks up Windows 7 and complains about the current version of Mac OS X. It seems a bit biased to ignore the Vista debacle, talk up Windows 7 before its release, then complain about Leopard without doing more than mentioning Snow Leopard. It's not like Apple is being secretive about what they have in store for Snow Leopard. Apple seems to be addressing just about every complaint the author made about the current version of Mac OS X. Both Windows 7 and Mac OS X v10.6 are most likely due out sometime this year, so comparing them would be much fairer than comparing a future version of Windows to the current version of Mac OS X.
I read that article in my latest Pop Sci issue. It was very interesting that many of the Chinese hackers were not explicitly sponsored by the government, but do it for the fame and nationalistic pride. The hacker that the article zeroed in on seemed to disappear after college, but it was fairly obvious he was hired by some level of the government. It's like the Chinese government lets these young hackers learn on their own (so long as they aren't hacking their sites), then offers them jobs once they get skilled enough. The more direct damage from Chinese hackers is more likely from these uncontrollable hobby hackers than from the government sponsored and controlled ones.
They probably will still lose a lot of customers for this. This is just an extension of their initial tests. They want to see how hard they can squeeze before losing too many customers. The markets they're planning to roll this out in have limited competition. They aren't likely to lose too many customers, but they can use that data to project what would happen in an area with more competition. If they cannot be convinced to either put reasonable caps in place or abandon capping at all, I think the best response would be to let them know you are canceling and why. Then switch to their biggest competitor in your area.
True, but most of Clinton's presidency was firmly within the dot com bubble (before the burst). Plenty of money changing hands to tax during that period. I would bet the reasons we didn't see those effects with the growing housing bubble was because of 9/11 and the expensive wars we've been fighting.
It is relevant as the domain names are the name of the company. Now if you want to get into why they chose company names that make no sense and don't seem readily marketable, that's a different argument.
I think you'll see the fastest shift from remote power generation to local ever. While it would take a long time to replace all the transformers, that's not to say everyone would sit around and twiddle their thumbs waiting for the power to get turned back on.
Who would complain about things like wind power being an eyesore when there is suddenly a great need for power production in the immediate vicinity? I think it would spell the end of any smaller towns out away from large cities and the cities will be the only communities large and close enough together to put up their own local power infrastructure.
You realize that in most of your responses, only either Windows or Linux was a match. If Mac OS X can do all of those when Windows and Linux only a partial list each, wouldn't it follow that it is worth it to the GP to pay a little more for a computer that does everything he wants out of the box?
Actually there are people in these companies that do this. I remember a professor who also worked for Kodak. He worked in their digital camera R&D group (presumably on UI design as that is what he taught). He would tell us that Kodak was paying him to play with everyone else's cool toys.
The issue with something like that happening at the board room level is that it makes the company look weak. "Oh look, not even the CEO will use their products." "He must not have that much faith in the company."
This isn't much different than the Megahertz wars. Chips were getting faster, but at a cost of ignoring just about everything else (plus other bottlenecks prevented the speed from being effective past a point). Now we have plenty of Megapixels (at least enough to be better than consumer grade film was) but the demand has shifted to actually being capable of taking decent pictures.
Lithium supply is very limited and takes quite a toll on the environment to produce. We would be trading one limited, environmentally un-friendly fuel for another.
Because diesel in the US is taxed higher than regular gasoline. Therefore, it won't make economic sense for someone to purchase a diesel engine vehicle in the US. Until the government changes that situation, diesel will remain a small niche in the consumer market.
Well, he did say if anyone has the right to, he does. Unless his label is a sole proprietorship, I doubt there is any one person from the label who has that right. So being the creator and performer, I would say he'd be at the top of this imaginary list of people who should be allowed to download the album for free. But the point is moot as there most likely is no one with the right to download it for free.
I don't see how it could be bad. While competition is good, too much competition, from an open source perspective especially, dilutes the effectiveness. How many different groups do we need reinventing the wheel?
It's also Bill's "fault" that Windows enjoyed a 95% market share for a decade.
That's more IBM's fault than anyone else. Bill just happened to be in the right place at the right time (like not out flying an airplane when they called).
So long as you were always connected a high speed network, it would work fine. It seems like we're moving back to the mainframe idea, but with a less than dedicated connection between the terminal and mainframe.
Because it looks hypocritical to accept free stuff from the company while boycotting products. Also, while it does not mean it won't get to that point, I don't see how replying to an exemption from the DMCA constitutes calling in "jackbooted thugs" and suing.
Well, from the standpoint that you can get a Windows machine made by a plethora of manufacturers, but you can only buy a Mac as made by Apple, the Apple hardware (running MacOS X) is a proprietary final product built from open hardware parts. Granted you can build a Hackintosh, but from the perspective of the mass market, the do-it-yourself and gray markets do not exist.
So if you were from Iowa and Iowa's popular vote was different from the national popular vote, your vote counts even less. How would this make someone from Iowa, or any state adopting this, feel like their vote counts more?
If this is where we are heading, we may as well drop the whole State charade as it's just one more layer of bureaucracy when all the real power is being consolidated in the Federal government.
I don't think that those contracts even matter as it would be a given that her parents set up the computer for her.
What I do find interesting is that when they cut to show her clicking on the interface, I thought that it did not look intuitive at all. There were buttons everywhere. I doubt a 4 year old would find their way through that interface themselves without someone at least showing them how to do it the first time.
Slashdot Mirror
To most people the GUI is synonymous with the OS, but they're two separate things.
This is what is holding Linux back on the desktop though. The public wants a consistent, intuitive, and responsive interface with their computer. The major aim of Canonical is to simplify Linux for the common user. That means working on configuring Gnome (as that is their GUI of choice) to meet those requirements. So a review meant for the public of the latest Ubuntu is going to focus on how it will look and act to a general user. While the bulk of it may be Gnome, the underlying system has to get everything right as well.
As we've noted in earlier articles, Microsoft has also brought its best to the table with Windows 7. However, it's a pity that Apple didn't seem to do so with Leopard.
Ubuntu comments aside (I use and enjoy it myself), this hardly seems like a well written piece. The author talks up Windows 7 and complains about the current version of Mac OS X. It seems a bit biased to ignore the Vista debacle, talk up Windows 7 before its release, then complain about Leopard without doing more than mentioning Snow Leopard. It's not like Apple is being secretive about what they have in store for Snow Leopard. Apple seems to be addressing just about every complaint the author made about the current version of Mac OS X. Both Windows 7 and Mac OS X v10.6 are most likely due out sometime this year, so comparing them would be much fairer than comparing a future version of Windows to the current version of Mac OS X.
I read that article in my latest Pop Sci issue. It was very interesting that many of the Chinese hackers were not explicitly sponsored by the government, but do it for the fame and nationalistic pride. The hacker that the article zeroed in on seemed to disappear after college, but it was fairly obvious he was hired by some level of the government. It's like the Chinese government lets these young hackers learn on their own (so long as they aren't hacking their sites), then offers them jobs once they get skilled enough. The more direct damage from Chinese hackers is more likely from these uncontrollable hobby hackers than from the government sponsored and controlled ones.
They probably will still lose a lot of customers for this. This is just an extension of their initial tests. They want to see how hard they can squeeze before losing too many customers. The markets they're planning to roll this out in have limited competition. They aren't likely to lose too many customers, but they can use that data to project what would happen in an area with more competition. If they cannot be convinced to either put reasonable caps in place or abandon capping at all, I think the best response would be to let them know you are canceling and why. Then switch to their biggest competitor in your area.
Yes. The plan is to let existing users see their usage for a couple of months then let them pick which tier to sign up for at the end of the summer.
"We'll give you the same access you have now, just for three times the cost."
Well, I guess they finally figured out how to make pirates pay. And the artist still gets no money.
True, but most of Clinton's presidency was firmly within the dot com bubble (before the burst). Plenty of money changing hands to tax during that period. I would bet the reasons we didn't see those effects with the growing housing bubble was because of 9/11 and the expensive wars we've been fighting.
It is relevant as the domain names are the name of the company. Now if you want to get into why they chose company names that make no sense and don't seem readily marketable, that's a different argument.
I think you'll see the fastest shift from remote power generation to local ever. While it would take a long time to replace all the transformers, that's not to say everyone would sit around and twiddle their thumbs waiting for the power to get turned back on.
Who would complain about things like wind power being an eyesore when there is suddenly a great need for power production in the immediate vicinity? I think it would spell the end of any smaller towns out away from large cities and the cities will be the only communities large and close enough together to put up their own local power infrastructure.
You realize that in most of your responses, only either Windows or Linux was a match. If Mac OS X can do all of those when Windows and Linux only a partial list each, wouldn't it follow that it is worth it to the GP to pay a little more for a computer that does everything he wants out of the box?
Actually there are people in these companies that do this. I remember a professor who also worked for Kodak. He worked in their digital camera R&D group (presumably on UI design as that is what he taught). He would tell us that Kodak was paying him to play with everyone else's cool toys.
The issue with something like that happening at the board room level is that it makes the company look weak. "Oh look, not even the CEO will use their products." "He must not have that much faith in the company."
I think it's a pretty well known fact that lasers can solve all problems.
This isn't much different than the Megahertz wars. Chips were getting faster, but at a cost of ignoring just about everything else (plus other bottlenecks prevented the speed from being effective past a point). Now we have plenty of Megapixels (at least enough to be better than consumer grade film was) but the demand has shifted to actually being capable of taking decent pictures.
It's only really useful in comparison with other models. Your actual mileage (or battery time) can and will vary depending on usage and maintenance.
Not if they are smart environmentalists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Production_and_world_supply
Lithium supply is very limited and takes quite a toll on the environment to produce. We would be trading one limited, environmentally un-friendly fuel for another.
Because diesel in the US is taxed higher than regular gasoline. Therefore, it won't make economic sense for someone to purchase a diesel engine vehicle in the US. Until the government changes that situation, diesel will remain a small niche in the consumer market.
Well, he did say if anyone has the right to, he does. Unless his label is a sole proprietorship, I doubt there is any one person from the label who has that right. So being the creator and performer, I would say he'd be at the top of this imaginary list of people who should be allowed to download the album for free. But the point is moot as there most likely is no one with the right to download it for free.
I don't see how it could be bad. While competition is good, too much competition, from an open source perspective especially, dilutes the effectiveness. How many different groups do we need reinventing the wheel?
It's also Bill's "fault" that Windows enjoyed a 95% market share for a decade.
That's more IBM's fault than anyone else. Bill just happened to be in the right place at the right time (like not out flying an airplane when they called).
But at least that means we're only about 40 years away from fusion power.
So long as you were always connected a high speed network, it would work fine. It seems like we're moving back to the mainframe idea, but with a less than dedicated connection between the terminal and mainframe.
Because it looks hypocritical to accept free stuff from the company while boycotting products. Also, while it does not mean it won't get to that point, I don't see how replying to an exemption from the DMCA constitutes calling in "jackbooted thugs" and suing.
Well, from the standpoint that you can get a Windows machine made by a plethora of manufacturers, but you can only buy a Mac as made by Apple, the Apple hardware (running MacOS X) is a proprietary final product built from open hardware parts. Granted you can build a Hackintosh, but from the perspective of the mass market, the do-it-yourself and gray markets do not exist.
So if you were from Iowa and Iowa's popular vote was different from the national popular vote, your vote counts even less. How would this make someone from Iowa, or any state adopting this, feel like their vote counts more?
If this is where we are heading, we may as well drop the whole State charade as it's just one more layer of bureaucracy when all the real power is being consolidated in the Federal government.
I don't think that those contracts even matter as it would be a given that her parents set up the computer for her.
What I do find interesting is that when they cut to show her clicking on the interface, I thought that it did not look intuitive at all. There were buttons everywhere. I doubt a 4 year old would find their way through that interface themselves without someone at least showing them how to do it the first time.