Well, the machines CAN run better versions of Vista... just not with Aero.
The original requirements are what MS would have perfered to do.. but just because that's what they originally planned doesn't mean they had to stick to it.
Funny, you'd think all that steel and concrete would be sufficent to block the signal. Especially when I can't get a signal in the parking lot of my grocery store...
Funny, I bought a Viao laptop with only 2GB of RAM, and Vista Business. I wiped it of course and installed a fresh copy of Business, which I later upgraded to Ultimate. It runs just fine, she's had no complaints. I've used it as well.
In some respects you're right. There is a reason though that things are setup like this; I don't really think we want 20 different companies stringing wires all of the place. Scroll down and look at the image of Mahatten Street in 1890. (http://www.copper.org/applications/telecomm/evolution.html) I doubt you really suggest we "deregulate" and allow this to happen, but with even MORE wires.
The solution is to seperate the owning and operating of the wires from the services they provide. This is where you likely disagree, but I think data lines should be fully owned an operated by local government. Companies can then compete to offer services over those wires.
First off I think you might want to learn to express yourself without the insults.
Sure, as soon as you step out of your alternate universe.
Secondly 400x300 = $120,000 not $12,000.
Sorry, I missed a 0 when typing. Not that catching this mistake helps your case.
As for the rest do you have any evidence for your speculation that consumers set a fix cost based on some external factor and then buy the most they can for that fixed cost?
Yes, most consumers are limited in the amount of money they can spend on such things. As for evidence, simply look at the rise of Walmart. They make money hand over fist, because they will save you $0.10 on an item. Also, given our current economic situation, people are MUCH more likely to choose the lower priced computer now. Again, look at Walmart. Their sales have been skyrocketing, while many other places are worrying about bankruptcy. If consumers can enough to go to Walmart to save $0.10, you don't think they'll notice a 20% difference in price?
Also any evidence for the theory that they don't depreciate but rather (essentially) apply a very high rate of interest and consider the computer only for the short term?
Look at the various "services" to "help" consumers buy computers. They might not know what a Mhz is, but when they see Apple offers the same for more, they'll likely choose the latter. Some invariably will be duped by the "it just works" nonsense... but given the number of people using Apple, that bubble will soon burst.
Having thought about it, the submitter is disappointed that they must continually develop new, better software products?
Yes, because its a cost to develop, plan, design and then finally code and test new features. The other OSS guys only need do the last part.. so of course they can do it quicker. This greatly cuts the amount of time the for-profit company can sell the add-on, and thus puts them at a disadvantage.
The problem is that OSS doesn't innovate anything; they just re-implement other people's ideas. It's much easier to reverse engineer something than to think it up from scratch. Given that, the submitter's company can't possibly hope to keep going. They have the cost of thinking of new features and designing them... and then OSS guys just copy them before they can make back their investment.
For what it's worth, though, nothing would be different if your software were closed source, except that your user base would probably be smaller and, depending on how necessary your software is, open source competitors would be even more eager to push you out.
Do you have any proof to back that up, or are you just speaking out of your ass?
Ya, that's why I can't take libertarians. For individuals, their ideas work... but once you create a legal fiction that blocks most liability for individuals, things break down. Individials leading their private lives should be left alone; corporations need to be closely watched.
You can look at the mac threads from around 2003,4. Usually when a new system came out these comparisons were made and generally the mac came in 10-15% below the comparable Dells.
What complete nonsense. No one cares what the prices were in 2003 or 2004, as no one has a time machine they could use to buy a machine with those prices.
As for 20% being a big deal, no I don't think that matters too much. At 8 hrs usage 200 days a year for 3 years that comes out to $.07 / hr.
Well, you're an idiot. Consumers don't price computers that way. They don't plan on replacing them in a set amount of time, nor are they writing off depreciation. They want the most they can get now, and likely don't even worry about whether or not the computer will last them in the near future. 20% is a big deal for consumers. I would even argue it's a big deal for business; $400 per laptop when you're buying 300 laptops is $12,000. That's not something to sneeze at.
You're kidding right? "Within 20%?" So you think people won't care about the difference between a $2000 mac and a $1600 Windows machine? At that point, I may as well throw my extra $400 at upgrading the hardware on the Windows machine. As for "sometimes the mac is cheaper," please, be my guest and show me.
But you can't just get the hardware. Compare the same hardware specs between some Intel based Apple and another vendor which installs Windows, and the Windows machine will be cheaper overall.
Apple's hardware restriction means every piece of hardware you buy is way overpriced. Maybe some are ok with paying more... but when they find out the EXACT same hardware is much more expensive, they may feel cheated... especially with the economy in the toliet.
Where MS has succeeded is that it does work with many pieces of crap, and you don't have to be savvy to get it going.
Well, your quip is fine, except that we're using English, not Latin. English also have a good bit of German roots as well, yet for some reason no one ever raises that.
I was under the impression that the VRC was part of the other organization on the page.
However, you never addressed my other concern, where the IIHS influences policy.. policy which directly contradicts civil engineering findings and safety suggestions. Such as my example of yellow light time vs. red light cameras.
No, you go to court and sue for damages when you're fired, not to keep your crappy job. You also work with the state departments to get your company fined. If they can't prove that you were dismissed for a good cause, the state would likely assume you were fired for reporting their illegal activity.
Then you and your wife are rubes. Cleaning the store is work, and you get paid for your work. If you're supposed to clean while it's open, but they have policies that you can't clean while customers are their, then they need to pay you. Otherwise you're cleaning their store for free... and why on earth would any sane person do that?
Slashdot Mirror
The ALF, which is funded by PETA? Or perhaps I'm actually talking about actual PETA assaults on people?
Take your pick. I have no problem with treating animials humanely, but not by a group that wants to force me to be a vegitarian through violence.
Ya, they're nuts, but you're belief in an invisible being that cares on which days we eat pork is perfectly rational.
They are yet another violent bunch of wackjobs that want to force their beliefs onto everyone. The more you ignore them the better.
Well, the machines CAN run better versions of Vista... just not with Aero.
The original requirements are what MS would have perfered to do.. but just because that's what they originally planned doesn't mean they had to stick to it.
Funny, you'd think all that steel and concrete would be sufficent to block the signal. Especially when I can't get a signal in the parking lot of my grocery store...
So should the suit be that Basic should have included Aero? I don't understand your point.
Cars are sold like this all the time "starting at $X, optional equipment shown."
Funny, I bought a Viao laptop with only 2GB of RAM, and Vista Business. I wiped it of course and installed a fresh copy of Business, which I later upgraded to Ultimate. It runs just fine, she's had no complaints. I've used it as well.
Your post would be great ironic humor, except that I'm not quite sure you meant it to be...
In some respects you're right. There is a reason though that things are setup like this; I don't really think we want 20 different companies stringing wires all of the place. Scroll down and look at the image of Mahatten Street in 1890. (http://www.copper.org/applications/telecomm/evolution.html) I doubt you really suggest we "deregulate" and allow this to happen, but with even MORE wires.
The solution is to seperate the owning and operating of the wires from the services they provide. This is where you likely disagree, but I think data lines should be fully owned an operated by local government. Companies can then compete to offer services over those wires.
First off I think you might want to learn to express yourself without the insults.
Sure, as soon as you step out of your alternate universe.
Secondly 400x300 = $120,000 not $12,000.
Sorry, I missed a 0 when typing. Not that catching this mistake helps your case.
As for the rest do you have any evidence for your speculation that consumers set a fix cost based on some external factor and then buy the most they can for that fixed cost?
Yes, most consumers are limited in the amount of money they can spend on such things. As for evidence, simply look at the rise of Walmart. They make money hand over fist, because they will save you $0.10 on an item. Also, given our current economic situation, people are MUCH more likely to choose the lower priced computer now. Again, look at Walmart. Their sales have been skyrocketing, while many other places are worrying about bankruptcy. If consumers can enough to go to Walmart to save $0.10, you don't think they'll notice a 20% difference in price?
Also any evidence for the theory that they don't depreciate but rather (essentially) apply a very high rate of interest and consider the computer only for the short term?
Look at the various "services" to "help" consumers buy computers. They might not know what a Mhz is, but when they see Apple offers the same for more, they'll likely choose the latter. Some invariably will be duped by the "it just works" nonsense... but given the number of people using Apple, that bubble will soon burst.
Having thought about it, the submitter is disappointed that they must continually develop new, better software products?
Yes, because its a cost to develop, plan, design and then finally code and test new features. The other OSS guys only need do the last part.. so of course they can do it quicker. This greatly cuts the amount of time the for-profit company can sell the add-on, and thus puts them at a disadvantage.
The problem is that OSS doesn't innovate anything; they just re-implement other people's ideas. It's much easier to reverse engineer something than to think it up from scratch. Given that, the submitter's company can't possibly hope to keep going. They have the cost of thinking of new features and designing them... and then OSS guys just copy them before they can make back their investment.
For what it's worth, though, nothing would be different if your software were closed source, except that your user base would probably be smaller and, depending on how necessary your software is, open source competitors would be even more eager to push you out.
Do you have any proof to back that up, or are you just speaking out of your ass?
Ya, that's why I can't take libertarians. For individuals, their ideas work... but once you create a legal fiction that blocks most liability for individuals, things break down. Individials leading their private lives should be left alone; corporations need to be closely watched.
Not at all.
Tragedy + Time = Comedy.
You can look at the mac threads from around 2003,4. Usually when a new system came out these comparisons were made and generally the mac came in 10-15% below the comparable Dells.
What complete nonsense. No one cares what the prices were in 2003 or 2004, as no one has a time machine they could use to buy a machine with those prices.
As for 20% being a big deal, no I don't think that matters too much. At 8 hrs usage 200 days a year for 3 years that comes out to $.07 / hr.
Well, you're an idiot. Consumers don't price computers that way. They don't plan on replacing them in a set amount of time, nor are they writing off depreciation. They want the most they can get now, and likely don't even worry about whether or not the computer will last them in the near future. 20% is a big deal for consumers. I would even argue it's a big deal for business; $400 per laptop when you're buying 300 laptops is $12,000. That's not something to sneeze at.
You're kidding right? "Within 20%?" So you think people won't care about the difference between a $2000 mac and a $1600 Windows machine? At that point, I may as well throw my extra $400 at upgrading the hardware on the Windows machine. As for "sometimes the mac is cheaper," please, be my guest and show me.
But you can't just get the hardware. Compare the same hardware specs between some Intel based Apple and another vendor which installs Windows, and the Windows machine will be cheaper overall.
Well, I got mine for $300 USD.. not sure what currency you wanted to use though. It's dropped even more since then apperently: http://software.pricegrabber.com/windows-operating-system/m/64918692/st=sort/qlty=n/sort_type=bottomline
Apple's hardware restriction means every piece of hardware you buy is way overpriced. Maybe some are ok with paying more... but when they find out the EXACT same hardware is much more expensive, they may feel cheated... especially with the economy in the toliet.
Where MS has succeeded is that it does work with many pieces of crap, and you don't have to be savvy to get it going.
Well, your quip is fine, except that we're using English, not Latin. English also have a good bit of German roots as well, yet for some reason no one ever raises that.
I was under the impression that the VRC was part of the other organization on the page.
However, you never addressed my other concern, where the IIHS influences policy.. policy which directly contradicts civil engineering findings and safety suggestions. Such as my example of yellow light time vs. red light cameras.
Heh.. glad to hear people stand up for themselves, and treat others fairly. Although.. maybe you should consider fruit instead of donuts.. :-P
No, you go to court and sue for damages when you're fired, not to keep your crappy job. You also work with the state departments to get your company fined. If they can't prove that you were dismissed for a good cause, the state would likely assume you were fired for reporting their illegal activity.
Then you and your wife are rubes. Cleaning the store is work, and you get paid for your work. If you're supposed to clean while it's open, but they have policies that you can't clean while customers are their, then they need to pay you. Otherwise you're cleaning their store for free... and why on earth would any sane person do that?
Crappy job or not, you can demand your pay.
Right. And that's why Linux outsells Windows on Dell's offerings.