The patches for SELinux have the same goal as UAC (and vice versa). That is, they provide a means of controlling what various applications can actually access on a PC.
No, that's not what UAC does at all. UAC has nothing to do what that applications can access, it has everything to do with USERS can access. It's exactly the same as trying to do something in Gnome that requires administrator access when you're only a normal user and prompting you. The difference is that if you're a normal user in Windows, you need an admin username / password. If you're user account is already a member of Adminstrators, you just need to click a confirmation dialog. But it's the same concept and doesn't doing anything based on what the application is or wants to do.
Moron. He's not using it for business purposes. He has no company, he's not taking profit or loss. He's working on his hobby. That's residential use. Business use would be some venture that is making him money (or attempting to). Being a software developer does not automatically mean he's using his connection for business reasons. Ask the IRS if you don't believe me.
Someone running 250 GB per month is probably using more bandwidth than their fees cover buying.
Well I thought the whole idea was that it averaged out, from all the people paying for that same bandwidth but not really using it at all.
That's part of my point; they're changing people's service after they've already signed up. Sounds like a bait and switch to me. I'm just glad I have actual competition (by way of city project) in my area, and am not paying those bloodsucking assholes another cent.
Speed limits not set according to civil engineering standards actually increase rates of accidents. RLC change accidents from one type to another, even though lenghting yellow light time would result in an overall decrese in accidents. Of course insurance companies are all for it; if accident rates get too low they must lower permiums. So they want "just enough risk" to justify higher premiums for everyone.
That's what happens when you let goverment control your life though; lots of power and money are irresistable to those rigging these systems.
Expect more cops out; when states get into revenue crunches, they step up enforcement to write more tickets.
considering that the thread started with my commenting on dyslexia, yes.
And you're accusing me of being evasive?
No, they're not. They're a "talking point," which is different. They're there to demonstrate a principle, and nothing else. Your attacks on them are nothing more or less than an attempt to evade the issue.
No, talking points are facts, not made up numbers. You continue to completely miss my point, which is that if you change the numbers you can change the validity of either of our arguments.
You pulled numbers on how long it takes children to read using phonics; yet your point is that kids aren't getting enough time in the classroom from teachers, and that's why they can't read. You haven't shown at all that 1) kids are not learning to read because teachers are not devoting time to them and 2) that the kids aren't getting reasonable time to begin with.
Again, you're being evasive, not me. I'm not going to discuss what only "could be" a problem. Provide evidence that kids aren't learning to read specifically because teachers are saying "oh, they have a learning disability, I'm giving up." That's the main focus of your argument, and you've never even proven your premise... and yet you continue to push your "solution."
That's your opinion, not an established fact. I doubt very much that you'd find any educator to agree with you.
I never said it was a fact. Yes, that's how schools should be run. I think educators agree, as they are often quick to point out they need to remove disruptive students to do their job. A child with a learning disability is a different kind of disruption. If, at the end of the day, the class as a whole would be at a higher reading standard if one child is removed then if they weren't, I don't really think anyone would argue that the kid should seek the EXTRA help elsewhere.
I believe that it's the school's job to teach all the children
I have to ask; do you think mentally retarded kids should be taught in the same class as other kids?
Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe that your objections to spending the time to get slow readers up to grade level is the money it costs, considering your complaints earlier about how you're being charged for education even though you have no children in the school system.
I freely admit I don't like paying for educating other's kids. I also think that if I am going to pay for something, I want to get the most out of it. I'd rather 9 out of 10 kids having a 6th grade reading level instead of having 10 out of 10 having a 5th grade one, since that seems to be what you're advocating. I'm also pointing out how we can get the 10 out of 10... but that it's the parents of the 10th child that are responsible to get their kid the extra help it needs... not mine.
I have similar feelings about parents that know their kid will have Downs when born, but choose to have the kid anyway. They, and only they, should pay for the extra cost of raising that kid. They shouldn't expect insurance to help. If we cut the extemes out, we can help more people for less. What we're doing right now by trying to save everyone is making things so expensive only the rich can afford good education or healthcare.
No, Linux contains everything in a single directory namely the users home directory. Whereas Windows likes to spread itself around. Hence UAC is dumb since it cannot be easily applied to Windows.
Where applications are installed has nothing to do with UAC. Also, I've found Linux more scattered. Is it in/bin?/sbin?/var/bin?/var/sbin?/opt/bin?/opt/sbin? Windows doesn't force where applications can install files, but MS has been saying for quite some time that applications go in \Program Files, and configuration settings in the user's profile directory. Installing programs to the profile directory makes sense if you're not the owner of the machine... but I'd rather install a program once and make it available to my wife and guests as well without telling them to install it (and have the same program in three different locations which need to be managed).
Yes it is an HP problem, but the fact that Windows does a screen flash to show the problem is dumb! They could just as easily have created a dialog box with red color around it. I have three screens, and doing a screen flash to a single screen is not easy on the eyes.
It sounds like the kernel crashed because of the driver; at that point, you're done anyway. Also, Linux does the same thing for a kernel panic.
Then obviously you are not using Vista because with Vista you can't make it go away for anything longer than 3 hours. I run trading systems, and Monte Carlo simulations. And more often than not I get back to my system and Vista has told me, "oh look I rebooted to make you safe."
Ya, I disagree, therefore must be lying. No, I run Vista Business all day at work, and Ultimate at home on my deskop or my wife's laptop. I already told you how to make it do what you want, and you ignore me. So either you're part of a domain and need to talk to your network admin, or you're a dolt that can't adjust a simple setting (yet seem to know quite a bit about linux).
Again the issue here is that my Multi-media edition of Vista requires a wireless. If wireless is not available I could buy an adaptor. My beef is that why do I have to buy something so that I can see the satellite screen? In the configuration of the feed the screen shows up fine.
What "multi-media edition" are you refering to? Home Premium? I doubt that requires wireless... It still sounds like something with your sat. equipment, which you've still yet to name.
I type in a file name and want to add extra bits. With XP I had a little sidebar where I could specify everything. I have a terrabyte of data and it is very hard to search.
If you're talking about the search on the start menu, you're limited. Of course all you have to do is press F3 on your desktop. There's an expander to show you other criteria. Looking at it, I don't see any options that were there in XP that aren't in Vista.
Now, to say that UAC is inferior to the unix security arrangement is another matter entirely.
How so? The only difference is that if you're in the Administrators group you don't need a password. Since the prompt is on a secure desktop, there's no chance of a rogue program "clicking" for you. The effects end up being almost identical, so I'm not sure why one would claim it inferior.
Linux is much better in the realms of indexing, disk/memory usage, and file fragmentation. These things drastically affect HDD usage and general system performance.
No, it's not. That's bleated blindly often, but I found it not to be the case. I was running Linux on the same machine I previously ran XP, and currently run Vista. I believe the worst offender in Linux was the slocate which would run.. and run, and run, and run, and grind. It hurt performance quite a bit... as did some other things. Also, nothing was more fun that something with my DVD burner causing linux to hard freeze. In XP it would cause a freeze, but after a while the drive vanished. Haven't had any issue since going to Vista though.
Yes, it is an HP problem. It is also a problem with Windows; there's no reason a printer driver should fuck up the display subsystem.
IIRC, it caused a blue screen. In other words, it caused the kernel to crash. And the same can happen in Linux too.. I've experienced it... with an HP print driver no less. Also, in the late 90s, I seem to remember Linux crashing with a kernel panic just because it got an IPX packet, and at the time didn't understand them. So let's not pretend that Linux is somehow immune to bad drivers; it's not.
You may also have a slight misunderstanding about the warning you refer to. You should not file bug reports regarding that system; you are free to apply to any other resource for technical support.
Yes, the oh so helpful Linux community. Their advice: don't use the driver, and then come back and we'll help you. Even for stupid userland services / programs. Trust me, I tried to use Linux on the desktop.
I'd imagine that if you paid for support services, you could get assistance with almost anything.
Well, if I have to pay, what was the point of using Linux? Also, I think the paid support was more expensive than a license for Windows.
The only difference between that level of support and Microsoft's is that you can't file a bug report with Microsoft.
Also, each time I've contacted support, they resolved my issue. It was using the support phone / email option for MS Money.
Actually, for most Windows installations you have zero expectation of support from M$ anyway; OEM installs are handled by the manufacturer or vendor.
Who better, since the OEM likely did some customizations to Windows before they shipped it? Does it matter if support comes directly from MS or the vendor that sold you the computer?
That's your opinion. The example of restraunts is very humorous to me, becauce many of the higher end ones care very much about presentation, and HTML lacks the ability to provide that.
In short.. you're an idiot. Just because YOU don't like Flash and think "all flash sites" are useless doesn't make it so. Don't like it, don't go to the sites.
But also don't expect anyone to care about your opinion.
Why shouldn't they pay the same? They are paying for speed, not the amount of bandwidth they are using. Will the price drop for those with capped connections? Because after all, now that all the "higher need" users are paying more, those that doesn't use a lot should pay less, right?
Well, that's just plain stupid. Flash is a lightweight way to make the content much more interesting. Everything on the web gets abused to advertise, singling out flash doesn't make any sense.
This is what MS has been trying for all along; to make hardware a commodity, and all the value is in the software. That's exactly what's happening here. I've used both Windows and Linux (as a primary desktop for years). I ended up back on Windows. Why? I'd rather pay for something that works REALLY easily than get something for free I needed to devote hours to making work like I wanted. Mac is a lifestyle, as evidenced by the braindead people that dispite all the iPods problems, go out and buy a new one.
I'd be very suprised if they didn't share much code. The only thing that needs to be abstracted are calls to the OS. The UI can be completely replaced. The middle tier is where the guts of the program lives, and that should be highly portable.
The fact that there's a problem is irrelevent. The issue here is that it becomes an order of magnitude easier for the nutjob to find the person of his / her obsession. Yes, real time tracking IS more of a problem becaues the technology makes it easier.
The only type of person that thinks 90 different Linux versions is "cool" are geeks. No one else cares. That's the point Linus is missing, and I think that's a great reason why Linux on the desktop isn't going anywhere.
Of course the same / similar functionality in Linux is great!
2) Hard disk action as Vista constantly wants to search my hard disk. I have a quad core machine, but because the hard disk is single access or restricted all too often I have the issue of not being able to do anything because the hard disk is being searched.
Hmm.. I have only a lowley dual core machine, with an AGP card to boot. The disk doesn't constantly run, and I have the indexing turned on. I've never been able to "not do anything" just because the disk is being accessed. Depending on what's going on, some things might slow.. but that's normal if the disk is heavily loaded. Linux was no better in this regard.
3) Bug in lower level drivers distributed by vendors causes a screen switch, which with multiple screens is hard. This occured to me with the HP driver when the printer was not on the network.
Sounds like an HP problem to me. I seem to recall a warning when I was using linux... what was it... oh ya.. the kernel is tainted because of a non-OSS module (nvidia), so if your system crashes, don't even BOTHER to report it to anyone.
4) Reboots when unwanted. I run trading strategies and having a forced reboot, while you are in a trade is brain dead!!!
Huh? The only time a reboot is forced is if you're on a domain and your network admin has forced the install of an update. Otherwise there's always the "go away" option. There's also the option that lets you only download updates and you can pick when or if to install them. Unless like I said, you're on a domain that is forcing that upon you.
5) Forcing me to buy a converter from IR to Wireless so that I can watch my satellite is ABSOLUTELY brain dead.
Huh? What are you talking about, specifically? I have IR working on Vista fine. Without anything else to go on, I again suspect the 3rd party driver / software is to blame.
6) search is dumb since it assumes things and if you don't enter the search to MS's standard things wont work.
What's dumb about Business and Home Premium having a different set of features? One is has the things a home user would want (Media Center, etc) and lacks features they wouldn't need (the ablitity to join a domain), and the other doesn't have things you wouldn't expect in a business setting (Media Center) and has more "enterprise" features (like the abilitity to join a domain).
It's just a prudish attitude that is proabably unhealthy. The US is the most restrictive as far as restricting porn goes, and we also have one of the highest number of sexual crimes.
Also, how explicit do you really think a commercial on broadcast TV can be anyway?
No. He's a geek, a developer. He's not a business analyst, he's not in touch with what companies need. Nothing wrong with catering to niche markets, but don't be suprised when that's all you have.
You're assuming that every child who doesn't learn to read at the same rate as the rest of the class is dyslexic, and I'm not.
Oh, so you refer to dyslexia as the original point of this topic when it suits you, and then drop it again when it doesn't. I get it.
And, my main issue is that teachers are "diagnosing" children as dyslexic simply because they're slow learning to read, and without proper testing.
Really? They are? They write a note to the parents saying as much? And the parents don't go to a qualified professional for a diagnosis? Please cite your proof that this is happening on a consistent basis, and thus is a problem that needs addressing. I know you won't... you have no basis in reality, just your gut feeling that we aren't doing enough for the children.
Good teachers don't, of course, they do what they can to get their students going properly, but not all teachers are good.
So maybe you should focus your efforts on removing bad teachers.
And, of course, once a child's been "diagnosed" this way, they never do learn to read unless they're lucky enough either to have parents who are capable of doing something about it, or run across a teacher who doesn't agree and puts a bit of effort into it. There was a time when almost all children who reached sixth grade could read; why can't we do that now?
Parents have made it impossible to actually teach their children. They bitch and complain if little Johnny gets anything less than an A. Even threatening the teachers. These morons continue this behavior even when their retard kid is admitted into college based on the false grades given by teachers being threatened. Parents are the main problem today, and until they are called to task, nothing will get better.
I picked those numbers for a reason, not at random. At one point I linked to a program that teaches reading through phonics. It consists of a set of 30 minute lessons, and is very effective. I wanted my example to be slightly less per month than using that program would give. You can argue all you want about how accurate the numbers are, and I won't disagree.
In other words, you know your numbers are made up garbage. So you're inventing a problem that likely isn't even there.
I notice, however, that you're avoiding actually discussing the principle behind my suggestion. I'm not suggesting, mind you, that you're trying to avoid it; you've already made it very clear that you don't think it's the schools responsibility to teach anything to children, except, possibly, by accident.
Again, you fail at reading comprehension. My point was that one child shouldn't slow up the rest of the class. It is the schools job to teach the average child. Those that fall outside that average are NOT it's responsiblity. I've been very clear to that and my reasons why.
You keep claiming the problem is teachers not spending enough time on students. You never cite any evidence of this. You meander around and imply other reasons. Unless you have evidence that the problem is teachers not spending enough time with students, and that other factors are not causing problems, you really don't have a point. Cite your proof; put up or shut up.
Slashdot Mirror
The patches for SELinux have the same goal as UAC (and vice versa). That is, they provide a means of controlling what various applications can actually access on a PC.
No, that's not what UAC does at all. UAC has nothing to do what that applications can access, it has everything to do with USERS can access. It's exactly the same as trying to do something in Gnome that requires administrator access when you're only a normal user and prompting you. The difference is that if you're a normal user in Windows, you need an admin username / password. If you're user account is already a member of Adminstrators, you just need to click a confirmation dialog. But it's the same concept and doesn't doing anything based on what the application is or wants to do.
Moron. He's not using it for business purposes. He has no company, he's not taking profit or loss. He's working on his hobby. That's residential use. Business use would be some venture that is making him money (or attempting to). Being a software developer does not automatically mean he's using his connection for business reasons. Ask the IRS if you don't believe me.
Someone running 250 GB per month is probably using more bandwidth than their fees cover buying.
Well I thought the whole idea was that it averaged out, from all the people paying for that same bandwidth but not really using it at all.
That's part of my point; they're changing people's service after they've already signed up. Sounds like a bait and switch to me. I'm just glad I have actual competition (by way of city project) in my area, and am not paying those bloodsucking assholes another cent.
No, it's not news because the sole purpose of any RLC is to generate revenue.
In fact, most traffic safetly laws are just ways to bilk honest citizens of their money. See this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_re_us/seat_belt_laws
Speed limits not set according to civil engineering standards actually increase rates of accidents. RLC change accidents from one type to another, even though lenghting yellow light time would result in an overall decrese in accidents. Of course insurance companies are all for it; if accident rates get too low they must lower permiums. So they want "just enough risk" to justify higher premiums for everyone.
That's what happens when you let goverment control your life though; lots of power and money are irresistable to those rigging these systems.
Expect more cops out; when states get into revenue crunches, they step up enforcement to write more tickets.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/yourmoney/story/7788F79C1BEA1C52862575360005B4AD?OpenDocument
Vista just caught a lot of flak because it was a worthless, intrusive piece of junk that got in the way of word processing, email, and video watching.
Um, I don't think Vista ever got in the way of those particular tasks.
KDE4 lets people do the tasks that they want to do
Until they pop in the RA3 disc, and need to take some extra steps to make it run.
considering that the thread started with my commenting on dyslexia, yes.
And you're accusing me of being evasive?
No, they're not. They're a "talking point," which is different. They're there to demonstrate a principle, and nothing else. Your attacks on them are nothing more or less than an attempt to evade the issue.
No, talking points are facts, not made up numbers. You continue to completely miss my point, which is that if you change the numbers you can change the validity of either of our arguments.
You pulled numbers on how long it takes children to read using phonics; yet your point is that kids aren't getting enough time in the classroom from teachers, and that's why they can't read. You haven't shown at all that 1) kids are not learning to read because teachers are not devoting time to them and 2) that the kids aren't getting reasonable time to begin with.
Again, you're being evasive, not me. I'm not going to discuss what only "could be" a problem. Provide evidence that kids aren't learning to read specifically because teachers are saying "oh, they have a learning disability, I'm giving up." That's the main focus of your argument, and you've never even proven your premise... and yet you continue to push your "solution."
That's your opinion, not an established fact. I doubt very much that you'd find any educator to agree with you.
I never said it was a fact. Yes, that's how schools should be run. I think educators agree, as they are often quick to point out they need to remove disruptive students to do their job. A child with a learning disability is a different kind of disruption. If, at the end of the day, the class as a whole would be at a higher reading standard if one child is removed then if they weren't, I don't really think anyone would argue that the kid should seek the EXTRA help elsewhere.
I believe that it's the school's job to teach all the children
I have to ask; do you think mentally retarded kids should be taught in the same class as other kids?
Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe that your objections to spending the time to get slow readers up to grade level is the money it costs, considering your complaints earlier about how you're being charged for education even though you have no children in the school system.
I freely admit I don't like paying for educating other's kids. I also think that if I am going to pay for something, I want to get the most out of it. I'd rather 9 out of 10 kids having a 6th grade reading level instead of having 10 out of 10 having a 5th grade one, since that seems to be what you're advocating. I'm also pointing out how we can get the 10 out of 10... but that it's the parents of the 10th child that are responsible to get their kid the extra help it needs... not mine.
I have similar feelings about parents that know their kid will have Downs when born, but choose to have the kid anyway. They, and only they, should pay for the extra cost of raising that kid. They shouldn't expect insurance to help. If we cut the extemes out, we can help more people for less. What we're doing right now by trying to save everyone is making things so expensive only the rich can afford good education or healthcare.
No, Linux contains everything in a single directory namely the users home directory. Whereas Windows likes to spread itself around. Hence UAC is dumb since it cannot be easily applied to Windows.
Where applications are installed has nothing to do with UAC. Also, I've found Linux more scattered. Is it in /bin? /sbin? /var/bin? /var/sbin? /opt/bin? /opt/sbin? Windows doesn't force where applications can install files, but MS has been saying for quite some time that applications go in \Program Files, and configuration settings in the user's profile directory. Installing programs to the profile directory makes sense if you're not the owner of the machine... but I'd rather install a program once and make it available to my wife and guests as well without telling them to install it (and have the same program in three different locations which need to be managed).
Yes it is an HP problem, but the fact that Windows does a screen flash to show the problem is dumb! They could just as easily have created a dialog box with red color around it. I have three screens, and doing a screen flash to a single screen is not easy on the eyes.
It sounds like the kernel crashed because of the driver; at that point, you're done anyway. Also, Linux does the same thing for a kernel panic.
Then obviously you are not using Vista because with Vista you can't make it go away for anything longer than 3 hours. I run trading systems, and Monte Carlo simulations. And more often than not I get back to my system and Vista has told me, "oh look I rebooted to make you safe."
Ya, I disagree, therefore must be lying. No, I run Vista Business all day at work, and Ultimate at home on my deskop or my wife's laptop. I already told you how to make it do what you want, and you ignore me. So either you're part of a domain and need to talk to your network admin, or you're a dolt that can't adjust a simple setting (yet seem to know quite a bit about linux).
Again the issue here is that my Multi-media edition of Vista requires a wireless. If wireless is not available I could buy an adaptor. My beef is that why do I have to buy something so that I can see the satellite screen? In the configuration of the feed the screen shows up fine.
What "multi-media edition" are you refering to? Home Premium? I doubt that requires wireless... It still sounds like something with your sat. equipment, which you've still yet to name.
I type in a file name and want to add extra bits. With XP I had a little sidebar where I could specify everything. I have a terrabyte of data and it is very hard to search.
If you're talking about the search on the start menu, you're limited. Of course all you have to do is press F3 on your desktop. There's an expander to show you other criteria. Looking at it, I don't see any options that were there in XP that aren't in Vista.
Vista = garbage!
So don't use it.
Now, to say that UAC is inferior to the unix security arrangement is another matter entirely.
How so? The only difference is that if you're in the Administrators group you don't need a password. Since the prompt is on a secure desktop, there's no chance of a rogue program "clicking" for you. The effects end up being almost identical, so I'm not sure why one would claim it inferior.
Linux is much better in the realms of indexing, disk/memory usage, and file fragmentation. These things drastically affect HDD usage and general system performance.
No, it's not. That's bleated blindly often, but I found it not to be the case. I was running Linux on the same machine I previously ran XP, and currently run Vista. I believe the worst offender in Linux was the slocate which would run.. and run, and run, and run, and grind. It hurt performance quite a bit... as did some other things. Also, nothing was more fun that something with my DVD burner causing linux to hard freeze. In XP it would cause a freeze, but after a while the drive vanished. Haven't had any issue since going to Vista though.
Yes, it is an HP problem. It is also a problem with Windows; there's no reason a printer driver should fuck up the display subsystem.
IIRC, it caused a blue screen. In other words, it caused the kernel to crash. And the same can happen in Linux too.. I've experienced it... with an HP print driver no less. Also, in the late 90s, I seem to remember Linux crashing with a kernel panic just because it got an IPX packet, and at the time didn't understand them. So let's not pretend that Linux is somehow immune to bad drivers; it's not.
You may also have a slight misunderstanding about the warning you refer to. You should not file bug reports regarding that system; you are free to apply to any other resource for technical support.
Yes, the oh so helpful Linux community. Their advice: don't use the driver, and then come back and we'll help you. Even for stupid userland services / programs. Trust me, I tried to use Linux on the desktop.
I'd imagine that if you paid for support services, you could get assistance with almost anything.
Well, if I have to pay, what was the point of using Linux? Also, I think the paid support was more expensive than a license for Windows.
The only difference between that level of support and Microsoft's is that you can't file a bug report with Microsoft.
http://connect.microsoft.com/
Also, each time I've contacted support, they resolved my issue. It was using the support phone / email option for MS Money.
Actually, for most Windows installations you have zero expectation of support from M$ anyway; OEM installs are handled by the manufacturer or vendor.
Who better, since the OEM likely did some customizations to Windows before they shipped it? Does it matter if support comes directly from MS or the vendor that sold you the computer?
That's your opinion. The example of restraunts is very humorous to me, becauce many of the higher end ones care very much about presentation, and HTML lacks the ability to provide that.
In short.. you're an idiot. Just because YOU don't like Flash and think "all flash sites" are useless doesn't make it so. Don't like it, don't go to the sites.
But also don't expect anyone to care about your opinion.
Why shouldn't they pay the same? They are paying for speed, not the amount of bandwidth they are using. Will the price drop for those with capped connections? Because after all, now that all the "higher need" users are paying more, those that doesn't use a lot should pay less, right?
Well, that's just plain stupid. Flash is a lightweight way to make the content much more interesting. Everything on the web gets abused to advertise, singling out flash doesn't make any sense.
Which just shows what an overractive, stupid society the UK is. Not that the US is much better.
I really have to disagree.
This is what MS has been trying for all along; to make hardware a commodity, and all the value is in the software. That's exactly what's happening here. I've used both Windows and Linux (as a primary desktop for years). I ended up back on Windows. Why? I'd rather pay for something that works REALLY easily than get something for free I needed to devote hours to making work like I wanted. Mac is a lifestyle, as evidenced by the braindead people that dispite all the iPods problems, go out and buy a new one.
I'd be very suprised if they didn't share much code. The only thing that needs to be abstracted are calls to the OS. The UI can be completely replaced. The middle tier is where the guts of the program lives, and that should be highly portable.
The fact that there's a problem is irrelevent. The issue here is that it becomes an order of magnitude easier for the nutjob to find the person of his / her obsession. Yes, real time tracking IS more of a problem becaues the technology makes it easier.
You just explained the problem.
The only type of person that thinks 90 different Linux versions is "cool" are geeks. No one else cares. That's the point Linus is missing, and I think that's a great reason why Linux on the desktop isn't going anywhere.
No... I bought Vista Ultimate retail, and both the 32bit and 64bit were on the same dvd.
UAC
Of course the same / similar functionality in Linux is great!
2) Hard disk action as Vista constantly wants to search my hard disk. I have a quad core machine, but because the hard disk is single access or restricted all too often I have the issue of not being able to do anything because the hard disk is being searched.
Hmm.. I have only a lowley dual core machine, with an AGP card to boot. The disk doesn't constantly run, and I have the indexing turned on. I've never been able to "not do anything" just because the disk is being accessed. Depending on what's going on, some things might slow.. but that's normal if the disk is heavily loaded. Linux was no better in this regard.
3) Bug in lower level drivers distributed by vendors causes a screen switch, which with multiple screens is hard. This occured to me with the HP driver when the printer was not on the network.
Sounds like an HP problem to me. I seem to recall a warning when I was using linux... what was it... oh ya.. the kernel is tainted because of a non-OSS module (nvidia), so if your system crashes, don't even BOTHER to report it to anyone.
4) Reboots when unwanted. I run trading strategies and having a forced reboot, while you are in a trade is brain dead!!!
Huh? The only time a reboot is forced is if you're on a domain and your network admin has forced the install of an update. Otherwise there's always the "go away" option. There's also the option that lets you only download updates and you can pick when or if to install them. Unless like I said, you're on a domain that is forcing that upon you.
5) Forcing me to buy a converter from IR to Wireless so that I can watch my satellite is ABSOLUTELY brain dead.
Huh? What are you talking about, specifically? I have IR working on Vista fine. Without anything else to go on, I again suspect the 3rd party driver / software is to blame.
6) search is dumb since it assumes things and if you don't enter the search to MS's standard things wont work.
Example, please?
What's dumb about Business and Home Premium having a different set of features? One is has the things a home user would want (Media Center, etc) and lacks features they wouldn't need (the ablitity to join a domain), and the other doesn't have things you wouldn't expect in a business setting (Media Center) and has more "enterprise" features (like the abilitity to join a domain).
Hell, if you paid for Ultimate or Enterprise, I'm pretty sure both versions come on the same DVD.
It's just a prudish attitude that is proabably unhealthy. The US is the most restrictive as far as restricting porn goes, and we also have one of the highest number of sexual crimes.
Also, how explicit do you really think a commercial on broadcast TV can be anyway?
Christ, grow up, and pull the stick out of your ass already.
That's the stupidist argument I've ever heard. Building tension / anger has lead to violence long before video games were ever created.
No. He's a geek, a developer. He's not a business analyst, he's not in touch with what companies need. Nothing wrong with catering to niche markets, but don't be suprised when that's all you have.
You're assuming that every child who doesn't learn to read at the same rate as the rest of the class is dyslexic, and I'm not.
Oh, so you refer to dyslexia as the original point of this topic when it suits you, and then drop it again when it doesn't. I get it.
And, my main issue is that teachers are "diagnosing" children as dyslexic simply because they're slow learning to read, and without proper testing.
Really? They are? They write a note to the parents saying as much? And the parents don't go to a qualified professional for a diagnosis? Please cite your proof that this is happening on a consistent basis, and thus is a problem that needs addressing. I know you won't... you have no basis in reality, just your gut feeling that we aren't doing enough for the children.
Good teachers don't, of course, they do what they can to get their students going properly, but not all teachers are good.
So maybe you should focus your efforts on removing bad teachers.
And, of course, once a child's been "diagnosed" this way, they never do learn to read unless they're lucky enough either to have parents who are capable of doing something about it, or run across a teacher who doesn't agree and puts a bit of effort into it. There was a time when almost all children who reached sixth grade could read; why can't we do that now?
Parents have made it impossible to actually teach their children. They bitch and complain if little Johnny gets anything less than an A. Even threatening the teachers. These morons continue this behavior even when their retard kid is admitted into college based on the false grades given by teachers being threatened. Parents are the main problem today, and until they are called to task, nothing will get better.
I picked those numbers for a reason, not at random. At one point I linked to a program that teaches reading through phonics. It consists of a set of 30 minute lessons, and is very effective. I wanted my example to be slightly less per month than using that program would give. You can argue all you want about how accurate the numbers are, and I won't disagree.
In other words, you know your numbers are made up garbage. So you're inventing a problem that likely isn't even there.
I notice, however, that you're avoiding actually discussing the principle behind my suggestion. I'm not suggesting, mind you, that you're trying to avoid it; you've already made it very clear that you don't think it's the schools responsibility to teach anything to children, except, possibly, by accident.
Again, you fail at reading comprehension. My point was that one child shouldn't slow up the rest of the class. It is the schools job to teach the average child. Those that fall outside that average are NOT it's responsiblity. I've been very clear to that and my reasons why.
You keep claiming the problem is teachers not spending enough time on students. You never cite any evidence of this. You meander around and imply other reasons. Unless you have evidence that the problem is teachers not spending enough time with students, and that other factors are not causing problems, you really don't have a point. Cite your proof; put up or shut up.