I know of a similar large company that likes to do things a particular way, and it's *never* described as "being respected for having a vision and going for it", in fact it's almost universally reviled.
I'm tempted to think you are being ironic, because otherwise you've completely lost the plot. Apple not "respected for having a vision and going for it"? A company with the tens of millions of rabid fans "almost universally reviled"? Please tell me you are joking.
I've come to the opposite opinion on options. I think often they seem like good things initially, but actually result in death-by-a-thousand-cuts type complexity in design and use.
I honestly have no idea who would pick a tablet over netbook if ultraportable is what they need, unless it's a public image issue (which is what most people I've seen with tablets seem to be getting them for).
Err, because laptops actually completely suck for using in your lap? Showing people photos? Reading anywhere? Heck, just picking up and putting down?
Honestly man, you may think not understanding this makes you part of the technological elite, but instead shows that you have more interest in looking cool to tech geeks than understanding technology. It's the worst kind of pretension.
They have got the content and they can tell Apple et al to go jump and basically distribute direct.
At which point, the cash-rich Apple will buy out huge chunks of their industry (Apple could buy Comcast, Time Warner, Disney, or the entire music industry with the cash they have now), leaving big content with disastrously incomplete catalogues.
It any case, I think you're wrong in your assumption that tablets are or will remain content-consuption devices only. I think phones and tablets will soon be most people's main computer. They will dock them with big screens and keyboards when they want to work on something that requires it.
Once people shift to using cloud-based software, the very reason for people to use Linux on the desktop (software freedom) is lost in any case. It will be a case of getting past the post after the race is over.
Yeah, obviously I'm brainwashed, no reasonable person could come to the conclusion that stupid old sexist jokes that weren't that funny fifty years ago might be rude. Actually, I'm going to leave the sarcasm aside for a second, it's my natural reaction when someone insults me, but it's not going get the results I want.
I have come to the conclusions I have based on my experience of talking to women about how this stuff affects them, reading what women write about how this stuff affects them, trying to put myself in their shoes. It's a considered opinion, and while you might disagree, dismissing me as 'brainwashed' is ridiculously arrogant. As I have said to another commenter, I agree sexism and racism can be funny, but they require context and (at least some) originality. Recycling sexist old jokes as some sort of knee-jerk reaction to being presented with any sort of gender issue is so tiresome it has become plain old offensive.
And yes, you have the right to be offensive. Just as I have the to call you a fucker for being so. However, if slashdotters are going to continue to make this dumb jokes and up-mod them, Slashdot will remain a hostile place for women (is that what you want?).
Yes I'm married, almost the exact opposite situation. The joke above is just sexist.
But let me put this straight: sexism can be funny, but it requires good context and some originality. But, really, hur-hur-woman-spends-all my-money jokes stopped being funny in a long time ago. Slashdoters consistently regurgitate this stuff, and it's boring, stupid, and getting offensively hostile to women.
Yeah, sexist jokes. They are no different to racist jokes. Try this on this joke above: replace 'woman' with 'black' and 'spending man's money' with $racial_stereotype. If you can't see why this is sexist, you're a long way gone.
Yeah, it's crazy on the face of it. Especially when it comes to Europe. The UK video predicted radically new housing, even though this would require destroying the majority of every town and city. I think most London housing is over a hundred years old, and mostly it will be slightly modified over the next hundred years, not replaced.
What the fuck is it with slashdotters and this endlessly sexist shit? It makes me wonder what sort of women you're a all hooked up with... then I remember: pretend ones.
I don't actually think that's the case. Plenty of religiously motivated people, as well as young people with a newly found passion for dinosaurs, tend to massively overestimate the extent of their knowledge. They come and go, and probably complain that I'm part of the 'cabal', but the truth is that most of these edits are factually wrong, and nearly never have appropriate citations.
I don't really know what's going on, but I suspect that a lot of the complainers on Slashdot are smart people that are used to having their opinion accepted, and the kind of debate that generally goes on Wikipedia's controversial pages frustrates them.
So you're editing a page about a politician involved in child pornography charges with the complication of a legal embargo, and you're bitching that there was a long debate about it that went your way eventually? I'm shocked! SHOCKED I tells you! Cabals everywhere!
You know, everyone on slashdot keeps saying stuff like this, but in my corner of the Wikipedia (palaeontology), most pages are under-edited. If anyone comes along and adds relevant, cited information, the edits are most certainly kept. If you cite a real paper that you've read and understood, we'll be pressing that love button!
There is a lot of reverting, but most of it is reverting popular misconceptions that have no citation, or ideologically driven edits (usually creationists, again with no citations).
Is this because people are going and trying to edit the Mohammed or Jesus pages or something? Because I really don't get what you're all on about. Maybe my interests are esoteric, but I've never had a real problem getting edits to stick on any subject, even on controversial fringe topics like cryptozoology.
Yeah, and the platform environment is ridiculously easy to use, and tools people are familiar with. Text editor -> save with extension.html -> open in browser (reload to see changes). Just about anything else is nightmarish by comparison.
Huh? Why? I don't use Python, but I just don't see any basis for your assertion. Whitespace is how we arrange natural languages when written, so why not programming languages? It's perfectly intuitive, especially to visual thinkers.
As the omnivorous partner of a vegetarian, I've always argued that it's clearly got to do with mental capacity. Some animals (actually most, because most are wormy type things and insects) just don't have the mental capacity to be worth moral consideration in and of themselves in my opinion. Clearly there's a grade--we should consider our treatment of dogs more carefully than flies, for example. I see this as hard to deny, even if we are uncomfortable with its ramifications for humans (are stupid people less worthy of moral consideration than smart ones?).
Slashdot Mirror
I know of a similar large company that likes to do things a particular way, and it's *never* described as "being respected for having a vision and going for it", in fact it's almost universally reviled.
I'm tempted to think you are being ironic, because otherwise you've completely lost the plot. Apple not "respected for having a vision and going for it"? A company with the tens of millions of rabid fans "almost universally reviled"? Please tell me you are joking.
I've come to the opposite opinion on options. I think often they seem like good things initially, but actually result in death-by-a-thousand-cuts type complexity in design and use.
I honestly have no idea who would pick a tablet over netbook if ultraportable is what they need, unless it's a public image issue (which is what most people I've seen with tablets seem to be getting them for).
Err, because laptops actually completely suck for using in your lap? Showing people photos? Reading anywhere? Heck, just picking up and putting down?
Honestly man, you may think not understanding this makes you part of the technological elite, but instead shows that you have more interest in looking cool to tech geeks than understanding technology. It's the worst kind of pretension.
They have got the content and they can tell Apple et al to go jump and basically distribute direct.
At which point, the cash-rich Apple will buy out huge chunks of their industry (Apple could buy Comcast, Time Warner, Disney, or the entire music industry with the cash they have now), leaving big content with disastrously incomplete catalogues.
It any case, I think you're wrong in your assumption that tablets are or will remain content-consuption devices only. I think phones and tablets will soon be most people's main computer. They will dock them with big screens and keyboards when they want to work on something that requires it.
I'm genuinely curious, what is it that everyone hates so much about the Finder?
Once people shift to using cloud-based software, the very reason for people to use Linux on the desktop (software freedom) is lost in any case. It will be a case of getting past the post after the race is over.
On the other hand, chances of them having been arrested before: good.
You mean they texted each other as to where to meet up? Diabolical! Criminal genius!
GP is right, most of the rioters were probably "morons", in that they don't think too hard about this stuff.
Blackberrys are the phone of choice for the "youth" of the UK. I'd guess they have a significant majority market share in the segment.
You may have a point, but I'm no expert so I don't know, and you comment hasn't helped me to know. Try being less of an arsehole next time.
Actually I think it's because Apple seems to be mostly interested in human-computer interaction. Servers are very peripheral to that focus.
Might as well get rid of HR, accounting, payroll and other departments who enforce company policy too!
Wait a second... we can do that?!
Yeah, obviously I'm brainwashed, no reasonable person could come to the conclusion that stupid old sexist jokes that weren't that funny fifty years ago might be rude. Actually, I'm going to leave the sarcasm aside for a second, it's my natural reaction when someone insults me, but it's not going get the results I want.
I have come to the conclusions I have based on my experience of talking to women about how this stuff affects them, reading what women write about how this stuff affects them, trying to put myself in their shoes. It's a considered opinion, and while you might disagree, dismissing me as 'brainwashed' is ridiculously arrogant. As I have said to another commenter, I agree sexism and racism can be funny, but they require context and (at least some) originality. Recycling sexist old jokes as some sort of knee-jerk reaction to being presented with any sort of gender issue is so tiresome it has become plain old offensive.
And yes, you have the right to be offensive. Just as I have the to call you a fucker for being so. However, if slashdotters are going to continue to make this dumb jokes and up-mod them, Slashdot will remain a hostile place for women (is that what you want?).
Yes I'm married, almost the exact opposite situation. The joke above is just sexist.
But let me put this straight: sexism can be funny, but it requires good context and some originality. But, really, hur-hur-woman-spends-all my-money jokes stopped being funny in a long time ago. Slashdoters consistently regurgitate this stuff, and it's boring, stupid, and getting offensively hostile to women.
Yeah, sexist jokes. They are no different to racist jokes. Try this on this joke above: replace 'woman' with 'black' and 'spending man's money' with $racial_stereotype. If you can't see why this is sexist, you're a long way gone.
Yeah, it's crazy on the face of it. Especially when it comes to Europe. The UK video predicted radically new housing, even though this would require destroying the majority of every town and city. I think most London housing is over a hundred years old, and mostly it will be slightly modified over the next hundred years, not replaced.
What the fuck is it with slashdotters and this endlessly sexist shit? It makes me wonder what sort of women you're a all hooked up with... then I remember: pretend ones.
Flash games aren't CPU intensive? What planet are you from?
Case 4
You have have one hand on the mouse so you can't reach the shift key?
I don't actually think that's the case. Plenty of religiously motivated people, as well as young people with a newly found passion for dinosaurs, tend to massively overestimate the extent of their knowledge. They come and go, and probably complain that I'm part of the 'cabal', but the truth is that most of these edits are factually wrong, and nearly never have appropriate citations.
I don't really know what's going on, but I suspect that a lot of the complainers on Slashdot are smart people that are used to having their opinion accepted, and the kind of debate that generally goes on Wikipedia's controversial pages frustrates them.
So you're editing a page about a politician involved in child pornography charges with the complication of a legal embargo, and you're bitching that there was a long debate about it that went your way eventually? I'm shocked! SHOCKED I tells you! Cabals everywhere!
You know, everyone on slashdot keeps saying stuff like this, but in my corner of the Wikipedia (palaeontology), most pages are under-edited. If anyone comes along and adds relevant, cited information, the edits are most certainly kept. If you cite a real paper that you've read and understood, we'll be pressing that love button!
There is a lot of reverting, but most of it is reverting popular misconceptions that have no citation, or ideologically driven edits (usually creationists, again with no citations).
Is this because people are going and trying to edit the Mohammed or Jesus pages or something? Because I really don't get what you're all on about. Maybe my interests are esoteric, but I've never had a real problem getting edits to stick on any subject, even on controversial fringe topics like cryptozoology.
Car brakes. Mud on the emitter error... or more likely "Error 5007, unable to proceed. Please consult your car vendor."
Yeah, and the platform environment is ridiculously easy to use, and tools people are familiar with. Text editor -> save with extension .html -> open in browser (reload to see changes). Just about anything else is nightmarish by comparison.
Huh? Why? I don't use Python, but I just don't see any basis for your assertion. Whitespace is how we arrange natural languages when written, so why not programming languages? It's perfectly intuitive, especially to visual thinkers.
As the omnivorous partner of a vegetarian, I've always argued that it's clearly got to do with mental capacity. Some animals (actually most, because most are wormy type things and insects) just don't have the mental capacity to be worth moral consideration in and of themselves in my opinion. Clearly there's a grade--we should consider our treatment of dogs more carefully than flies, for example. I see this as hard to deny, even if we are uncomfortable with its ramifications for humans (are stupid people less worthy of moral consideration than smart ones?).