Except that you're in the minority. McDs own research showed that 1) the majority of thier customers wanted to drink the coffee immdediately and 2) the temp. they served it at would cause 3rd degree burns and 3) didn't care. That's why they lost the lawsuit.. that the woman shouldn't have had an open cup of coffee between her legs to begin with was why the award was halved.
Ya, I know this will blow your mind, but my dad grew up without computers, and managed to learn to use one. So having the technology in the school is not a prerequisite to learning about said technology.
Giving the students laptops is stupid; that's what computer labs are for. Low end desktops with the software you describe will be cheaper in the long run... because the computers will stay in the school and be available to the incoming students.
But the only proven method for shutting them up tends to be frowned upon in most legal circles.
What, you mean parents actually being in control of thier children? Or not taking them on a plane until they are able to do so?
However, the constant nattering of someone on the phone does not need to be added to the situation.
Sorry, if you want to ban phones, I want to ban kids.
I fail to see how VoIP and screaming kids are even close to analogous.
You're right; the screaming kids are far more irritating.
There's factors such as "kid's ticket was paid for, person being chatted with did not purchase ticket."
And you're not hearing the person on the other end of the phone; just the person who actually bought the ticket. This point is just plain stupid, I think you'll have to admit. Buying a ticket doesn't give a kid any right to be annoying, and if you're going to complain about one, I don't see why I can't complain about the other.
Thus, it's in their interests to keep things as quiet as possible for the people who have actual tickets.
I agree; don't allow small children on planes, and I'll go with your ban on phones. Unless you're willing to do that, I'm going to push to allow phones. Don't like it? Though, I bought a ticket, and I didn't get to kick your screaming kid off the plane.
I'm not sure I agree that it was my unwillingness to learn or how my brain is wired. I WANTED it to work. What I found though was that the "Linux way" is simply tedious tasks added into the workflow to do what I wanted. That you have friends that can do what I want is kinda irrelevent; statistically they don't matter.
People would rather pay for Windows on a netbook than Linux. That's the bottom line.. and the problem with Linux developers is that they say "well, if we let you do things that way you can get into a lot of trouble." And technically they are right... but people would rather it be easier, just like you can get better gas milage in a car with manual transmission (and save on the price of the car and maintence as well), but people STILL opt to pay more for an automatic transmission.
That's the problem with Linux, and why desktop linux is a waste of time; until Linux developers get off their high horse and offer automatic transmissions, desktop linux IS a waste of time, because people aren't going to move to it. And I'm speaking as someone that does like to tweak things occasionally.. the problem was with Linux it didn't give me any option for "occasionally."
So, that's fine if your friends are happy with Linux... and yes, different people want different things from their computer. But if Linux ever really wants to break into the desktop / mainstream market, it needs ALOT of improvement. I mean, check out some of the other posters saying "it works just fine for me! (after I did a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, then boom! works perfectly!)"
Xplorer2 by default shows the file names but when you click rename it highlights ONLY the part BEFORE the dot3, allowing me to quickly rename without having to constantly type.txt,.jpg,etc
Vista does this now as well, so I suspect Win7 continues this behavior.
Another useful feature in Vista is that if you hit the Rename, type a new name and then hit tab (or shift tab, to reverse direction) instead of enter, it will move to the next file and put that into rename mode... very useful if you have to rename a bunch of files at once.
Stop... it has nothing to do with "not getting used to Linux." I used UNIX all through college, I ran a Linux server for years before trying it on the desktop, and once I had it on the desktop I ran it for a couple of years as well. As I said, I am a software engineer, degree and all, and my first exposure to *nix was overwhelming positive.
When I decided to switch back, it was because I felt like I was fighting Linux to get it to do what I wanted (usually upgrading something), found the "free" software lacking (GNUCash is total garbage), and the community not very helpful. Unix worked well in the labs because I wasn't the one that had to maintain it. Linux made everything more difficult than it should have been, and the simplist task started ending in frustration.
I should clarify my statement though; as a mainstream desktop OS, Linux is a total failure. And just read some of the people that responded to me.. the first one said I had to be either lazy or a troll. That's a pretty common response to anyone that dare criticize Linux, so much that we just had an article a few weeks ago titled "Why Linux Needs Critics." So it certainly seems to me that nothing really has changed. All that (duplicated) effort on desktop linux, going to waste.
Hmm... expecting a computer to work easily is lazy? I'm neither lazy nor a troll, I just have more important things to do than fight to update Linux when I want to install a new program or update an existing one.
Unfortantely morons like you can't possibly fathom how someone that actually gave Linux a shot (and indeed, was on the antiMS bandwagon) decided it wasn't worth the hassle and that it didn't work for me.
This is why Linux has gotten nowhere since I dumped it; you refuse to admit it has any faults, and any complaints are dismissed as the user being "stupid and / or lazy."
It would be, if the accident was caused by a design flaw that requireed unusual constant maintenance.
First, unusual constant maintence does not indicate a flaw in the design; that's just how the design works out. Second, as long as the manual says "this is the maintence schedule you must follow," how often it occurs becomes irrelevent. The owner knows the car will take a lot of maintence, it says so right in the manual. Finally, saying that Windows requires "unusual constant maintence" is just plain stupid. It doesn't. A user running a virus is no different than someone putting diseal in their unleaded gas only car.
If your Honda needed to have the rear wheel bearings adjusted every thousand miles, and you didn't do it and caused an accident, there would be a pretty good case to take Honda to court - "Why the hell do the bearings need adjusted all the time? No-one else has that!"
No, that would not get anywhere in court. The manual indicates the maintience schedule, and there's no law saying manufactors have to build cars with certain schedules. Throwing out whatever you consider to be "too frequent," I'm sure we already have cases of people that were in accidents because they failed to properly maintain their car... yet no one is suing the manufacturer, they are correctly blaming the driver for failing to maintain their car. It's the owners responsiblity, not the manufacturer's.
Both Linux and Mac OSX are getting to be somewhat mainstream now
Mac yes, Linux no.
when my deeply non-technical mother could identify an Ubuntu boot screen on one of the office computers in CSI, I figured it was making an impression
She likely knows because I'm sure you're constantly going on about it, and like all mom's, she takes some interest in your interests.
and one thing that people like about both of them is the fact that you never need to use antivirus software, and updates are pretty painless.
Updates on Windows are painless. We have an update server, and most updates are auto-approved. We've never had a problem, nor do most.
Linux doesn't have many viruses because nobody is using Linux. Same as Mac although that is changing.
There's an argument to be made that an operating system that needs constant updating, extreme care in use and expensive third-party software to keep it from turning into a spam cannon is fundamentally defective, just as a car sold with inadequately-secured wheel bearings would be.
Ya, that's why Linux doesn't have updates all the time, and 10.0 was the last version of OSX released. The fact is that if Joe sixpack starts using linux, linux will get more viruses. And if Linux never gets a mail client that can easily open a movie attachment, Joe sixpack won't even move to Linux, because they see it as too hard.
Big iron? Like my old ass computer that's a 1.2 x2, only a gb of ram, and an old agp nvidia 5700 fx card? It runs just fine on that, and the only reason I upgraded the harddrive recently was because the old one started making clicking sounds...
Installing Linux is not the problem. Having to use it afterwards is.
I build software for a living, but when I want to go home and just USE my computer, Linux failed miserably. Switching back to Windows let me focus on the things important to me at home; my finances, email, games, watching movies / listening to music, wireless networking JUST WORKS. And since I opted for SBS, I also have what I need for a server and managing the network easily.
Personally I'd like to see enforcement of jaywalking laws stepped up. Everyone acts like peds should be able to be as stupid as they want and break any rules they want, and the driver is expected to magically avoid everything.
So.. I agree we need more enforcement, but aimed at people that think the crosswalk signals are there for decoration only.
Actually, it pales in comparison to the #1 advance for "pedestrian protection", DON'T F-ING HIT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I agree, and it would be of great help if more peds actually listened to crossing signals and / or LOOKED before entering the roadway. Here it seems that peds think they have the right to step out whenever, where ever they want to cross the street, oncoming traffic be damned.
By that logic you can even justify murder. Don't glorify it, this is horrible. This is just as bad as McDonalds employees spitting in your food. I don't understand how people can be so easilly manipulated to accept these things
I dunno, maybe because this ISN'T equivolent to murder or people spitting in your food? Really, if this is your biggest concern, get a life.
The problem is that most people only want to hear A. Everyone knows being fat causes health problems... yet I don't see a whole lot of people changing their ways, do you?
So it should be Hondas fault if I don't maintain my car and that leads to an accident? Windows is secure, the viruses being spread are doing so though user action.
It would be no different... the damage is already done, her son got too much and suffered ill effects. Had it been OTC, she would have had to take her son in anyway, and they'd have caught the mistake.
In other words, stupid people are always going to be stupid, and trying to shield them from the consequence of this stupidity doesn't force them to learn anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it is negligent. The fact that more people weren't burned doesn't change the fact that they were taking an unjustifable risk.
Just because nobody is hurt doesn't mean you aren't being negligent; it means you're getting lucky.
Except that you're in the minority. McDs own research showed that 1) the majority of thier customers wanted to drink the coffee immdediately and 2) the temp. they served it at would cause 3rd degree burns and 3) didn't care. That's why they lost the lawsuit.. that the woman shouldn't have had an open cup of coffee between her legs to begin with was why the award was halved.
Ya, I know this will blow your mind, but my dad grew up without computers, and managed to learn to use one. So having the technology in the school is not a prerequisite to learning about said technology.
Giving the students laptops is stupid; that's what computer labs are for. Low end desktops with the software you describe will be cheaper in the long run... because the computers will stay in the school and be available to the incoming students.
But the only proven method for shutting them up tends to be frowned upon in most legal circles.
What, you mean parents actually being in control of thier children? Or not taking them on a plane until they are able to do so?
However, the constant nattering of someone on the phone does not need to be added to the situation.
Sorry, if you want to ban phones, I want to ban kids.
I fail to see how VoIP and screaming kids are even close to analogous.
You're right; the screaming kids are far more irritating.
There's factors such as "kid's ticket was paid for, person being chatted with did not purchase ticket."
And you're not hearing the person on the other end of the phone; just the person who actually bought the ticket. This point is just plain stupid, I think you'll have to admit. Buying a ticket doesn't give a kid any right to be annoying, and if you're going to complain about one, I don't see why I can't complain about the other.
Thus, it's in their interests to keep things as quiet as possible for the people who have actual tickets.
I agree; don't allow small children on planes, and I'll go with your ban on phones. Unless you're willing to do that, I'm going to push to allow phones. Don't like it? Though, I bought a ticket, and I didn't get to kick your screaming kid off the plane.
I'm not sure I agree that it was my unwillingness to learn or how my brain is wired. I WANTED it to work. What I found though was that the "Linux way" is simply tedious tasks added into the workflow to do what I wanted. That you have friends that can do what I want is kinda irrelevent; statistically they don't matter.
People would rather pay for Windows on a netbook than Linux. That's the bottom line.. and the problem with Linux developers is that they say "well, if we let you do things that way you can get into a lot of trouble." And technically they are right... but people would rather it be easier, just like you can get better gas milage in a car with manual transmission (and save on the price of the car and maintence as well), but people STILL opt to pay more for an automatic transmission.
That's the problem with Linux, and why desktop linux is a waste of time; until Linux developers get off their high horse and offer automatic transmissions, desktop linux IS a waste of time, because people aren't going to move to it. And I'm speaking as someone that does like to tweak things occasionally.. the problem was with Linux it didn't give me any option for "occasionally."
So, that's fine if your friends are happy with Linux... and yes, different people want different things from their computer. But if Linux ever really wants to break into the desktop / mainstream market, it needs ALOT of improvement. I mean, check out some of the other posters saying "it works just fine for me! (after I did a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, then boom! works perfectly!)"
Xplorer2 by default shows the file names but when you click rename it highlights ONLY the part BEFORE the dot3, allowing me to quickly rename without having to constantly type .txt,.jpg,etc
Vista does this now as well, so I suspect Win7 continues this behavior.
Another useful feature in Vista is that if you hit the Rename, type a new name and then hit tab (or shift tab, to reverse direction) instead of enter, it will move to the next file and put that into rename mode... very useful if you have to rename a bunch of files at once.
powershell
I don't get this; your screaming brats are a-ok, but someone talking on the phone is not? As if all people that talk on their phone end up screaming.
Stop... it has nothing to do with "not getting used to Linux." I used UNIX all through college, I ran a Linux server for years before trying it on the desktop, and once I had it on the desktop I ran it for a couple of years as well. As I said, I am a software engineer, degree and all, and my first exposure to *nix was overwhelming positive.
When I decided to switch back, it was because I felt like I was fighting Linux to get it to do what I wanted (usually upgrading something), found the "free" software lacking (GNUCash is total garbage), and the community not very helpful. Unix worked well in the labs because I wasn't the one that had to maintain it. Linux made everything more difficult than it should have been, and the simplist task started ending in frustration.
I should clarify my statement though; as a mainstream desktop OS, Linux is a total failure. And just read some of the people that responded to me.. the first one said I had to be either lazy or a troll. That's a pretty common response to anyone that dare criticize Linux, so much that we just had an article a few weeks ago titled "Why Linux Needs Critics." So it certainly seems to me that nothing really has changed. All that (duplicated) effort on desktop linux, going to waste.
Hmm... expecting a computer to work easily is lazy? I'm neither lazy nor a troll, I just have more important things to do than fight to update Linux when I want to install a new program or update an existing one.
Unfortantely morons like you can't possibly fathom how someone that actually gave Linux a shot (and indeed, was on the antiMS bandwagon) decided it wasn't worth the hassle and that it didn't work for me.
This is why Linux has gotten nowhere since I dumped it; you refuse to admit it has any faults, and any complaints are dismissed as the user being "stupid and / or lazy."
It would be, if the accident was caused by a design flaw that requireed unusual constant maintenance.
First, unusual constant maintence does not indicate a flaw in the design; that's just how the design works out. Second, as long as the manual says "this is the maintence schedule you must follow," how often it occurs becomes irrelevent. The owner knows the car will take a lot of maintence, it says so right in the manual. Finally, saying that Windows requires "unusual constant maintence" is just plain stupid. It doesn't. A user running a virus is no different than someone putting diseal in their unleaded gas only car.
If your Honda needed to have the rear wheel bearings adjusted every thousand miles, and you didn't do it and caused an accident, there would be a pretty good case to take Honda to court - "Why the hell do the bearings need adjusted all the time? No-one else has that!"
No, that would not get anywhere in court. The manual indicates the maintience schedule, and there's no law saying manufactors have to build cars with certain schedules. Throwing out whatever you consider to be "too frequent," I'm sure we already have cases of people that were in accidents because they failed to properly maintain their car... yet no one is suing the manufacturer, they are correctly blaming the driver for failing to maintain their car. It's the owners responsiblity, not the manufacturer's.
Both Linux and Mac OSX are getting to be somewhat mainstream now
Mac yes, Linux no.
when my deeply non-technical mother could identify an Ubuntu boot screen on one of the office computers in CSI, I figured it was making an impression
She likely knows because I'm sure you're constantly going on about it, and like all mom's, she takes some interest in your interests.
and one thing that people like about both of them is the fact that you never need to use antivirus software, and updates are pretty painless.
Updates on Windows are painless. We have an update server, and most updates are auto-approved. We've never had a problem, nor do most.
Linux doesn't have many viruses because nobody is using Linux. Same as Mac although that is changing.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12537279/
There's an argument to be made that an operating system that needs constant updating, extreme care in use and expensive third-party software to keep it from turning into a spam cannon is fundamentally defective, just as a car sold with inadequately-secured wheel bearings would be.
Ya, that's why Linux doesn't have updates all the time, and 10.0 was the last version of OSX released. The fact is that if Joe sixpack starts using linux, linux will get more viruses. And if Linux never gets a mail client that can easily open a movie attachment, Joe sixpack won't even move to Linux, because they see it as too hard.
Hmm... except I've installed VS2005 SP1, and it didn't take hours. It didn't take any longer than it did when I was on Xp, actually.
stop poopooing windows 7's speed and start focusing on the gains that free os is making in the netbook arena
Except that Linux is losing in the netbook arena...
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-279551.html
Big iron? Like my old ass computer that's a 1.2 x2, only a gb of ram, and an old agp nvidia 5700 fx card? It runs just fine on that, and the only reason I upgraded the harddrive recently was because the old one started making clicking sounds...
Installing Linux is not the problem. Having to use it afterwards is.
I build software for a living, but when I want to go home and just USE my computer, Linux failed miserably. Switching back to Windows let me focus on the things important to me at home; my finances, email, games, watching movies / listening to music, wireless networking JUST WORKS. And since I opted for SBS, I also have what I need for a server and managing the network easily.
Personally I'd like to see enforcement of jaywalking laws stepped up. Everyone acts like peds should be able to be as stupid as they want and break any rules they want, and the driver is expected to magically avoid everything.
So.. I agree we need more enforcement, but aimed at people that think the crosswalk signals are there for decoration only.
No, the driver ended up dying, around the same time one of the other survivers died.
No. The minute this is available rates for everyone will go up; buying a car with this "feature" brings you down to what you were paying before.
Dude, the streets AREN'T A PLACE TO STAND WHILE TALKING. They are for motor vehicle NOT SOCIAL GATHERINGS.
There needs to be a balance, and peds are ALSO responsible for their own safety. And that means NOT standing in the road.
Actually, it pales in comparison to the #1 advance for "pedestrian protection", DON'T F-ING HIT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I agree, and it would be of great help if more peds actually listened to crossing signals and / or LOOKED before entering the roadway. Here it seems that peds think they have the right to step out whenever, where ever they want to cross the street, oncoming traffic be damned.
By that logic you can even justify murder. Don't glorify it, this is horrible. This is just as bad as McDonalds employees spitting in your food. I don't understand how people can be so easilly manipulated to accept these things
I dunno, maybe because this ISN'T equivolent to murder or people spitting in your food? Really, if this is your biggest concern, get a life.
The problem is that most people only want to hear A. Everyone knows being fat causes health problems... yet I don't see a whole lot of people changing their ways, do you?
Perhaps that's because they found they can no longer easily use their computer? :-)
So it should be Hondas fault if I don't maintain my car and that leads to an accident? Windows is secure, the viruses being spread are doing so though user action.
It would be no different... the damage is already done, her son got too much and suffered ill effects. Had it been OTC, she would have had to take her son in anyway, and they'd have caught the mistake.
In other words, stupid people are always going to be stupid, and trying to shield them from the consequence of this stupidity doesn't force them to learn anything.