"Content" is a metaphor intended to make people think of creative works as products to be wrapped up and shipped around like any other commodity, when in fact creative works are natural expressions of our humanity and civilization.
Well said.
The problem is they've already won the battle and set the terms of the discussion. The other metaphor is that of the "consumer". If we're all consumers, we don't have natural expressions of anything. You wouldn't suggest that we're "individuals", would you?
If NYT wants to take sides and promote a certain agenda, that's their right, but they should get called on it.
Do you even know what you read when you read the article? This statement is as absurd as the one in the story summary.
Here's a tip. Suggesting that the article has anything to do with The NY Times (other than appearing in one of its sections with lots of other columns written by all sorts of people) is the equivalent of suggesting that Andy Rooney is responsible for both the reporting and editorial tone and content of ABC News.
A perverse habit that I share. My guess is that only people familiar with desktop publishing would get what they're looking at, but it's worth pointing out that while PDFs can contain interesting information, the information is never as interesting (or incriminating) as what we'd typically get from folks who "publish" Word documents, employees of Microsoft included.
this survey was printed from Mozilla on an Apple box. I just wonder why Novell could not spend 0.5 [wo]man-hour to actually make it nice.
Agreed it's pretty amateurish. Someone be sure send off a copy of Unix Text Processing to the folks at SuSE. The book is probably 20 years older than the version of Acrobat mschmidkuntz (or whoever the author is) is using, and among other things, a lot cheaper.
AT&T dumped their co-branding arrangement with Yahoo, "AT&T Yahoo DSL". It wasn't adding any useful value to their DSL service. Why at this late date does Microsoft want Yahoo?
They did?
From: "AT&T Yahoo! Member Services" Date: 03 May 2007 17:36:59 -0700 Subject: Notice: AT&T Yahoo! Mail Service Update
Dear AT&T Yahoo! Member:
AT&T and Yahoo! have a history of providing our members with award-winning, industry-leading Internet products and services at a great value.
As more members are using AT&T Yahoo! Mail to send and receive photos, videos, and music, we will begin offering unlimited email storage in May to both existing and new members. Your service will continue to include all the premium products you already enjoy including video, LAUNCHcast Plus, and an all-in-one security suite.
Additionally, within the next few weeks you will begin seeing graphical advertisements in your AT&T Yahoo! Mail service. These advertisements will be integrated into the AT&T Yahoo! Mail experience, and we hope you will find the advertisements useful. Advertising such as this allows us to continue delivering new and innovative elements to our service and helps us keep prices competitive, while we continue to provide the high level of service that you have come to know and trust.
We strive to provide you with the best online experience possible and to address all your needs on the Internet.
Sincerely,
AT&T Yahoo! Member Services
Sounds like they're still sleeping with each other, now with more advertising to offset the costs of their motel bills.
Personally, I've never understood a thing about Yahoo. I don't recall ever using their search features, their portal(s), or anything else that people go on about. I'm only aware of them because ATT (nee SBC) uses them for email, and I have to read their incessant advertising! footers! on mail lists from people who are fans of whatever they provide.
Um... in spite of Richard Stallman's rather pathetic attempt to redefine the English language, that is what the term "free software" actually means. You cannot legitimately criticize the Oracle representative for using the English language correctly.
It's always amuses to read posts from people who bandy about terms carelessly while invoking the phrase "the English language".
Allow me to put on my pedant hat for a moment. If you're looking to understand a word, you'll have to go a bit farther than picking up a random dictionary and start quoting from it. You'll have first to learn or at least be aware of its etymology before weighing traditional usage against more recent usage against a possibly more specialised usage. Then, of course, you'll have to consider its connotations. If you've done all that, you're now ready to consider the context in which it was said or written, and if you're honest with yourself (and others), the context in which you're willing to interpret it.
Sounds complicated? Life generally is.
Pop quiz. Which of the following suggests or implies that the word "free" means "without price".
a) Free at last. b) She's free. c) My dog was free. d) Free download. e) I'm free today. f) Free to use freely. g) None of the above. h) All of the above.
If you picked (h), you'd be right. And wrong. That's true even if you parsed the word "price" correctly. Put another way, I know what I mean. Do you?
Richard Stallman understands that the choice of words often defines the terms of a discussion. Irrespective of your feelings towards things of a political nature, his actions are perfectly justified. And "correct".
I found it interesting that the parts they use are no different then what HP, Compaq, IBM, and Gateway have used as well.
May true from a wide perspective, but you negelected to mention (or didn't notice during your work) that Dell is notorious for mixing and matching parts on identical models.
While that may not be a big deal for the average Windows user, if you're running something other than Windows, and discover that those servers you ordered don't all work as expected, or that the last batch of laptops contain different wireless chipsets than you ordered, you end up with a far more realistic and nuanced notion of things.
If it helps, I'm good friends with a number of very intelligent people who, while articulate in real life and able to type perfectly well, write emails that suggest they either haven't reached puberty and/or they're functionally illiterate. I guess that's the inverse of "No one on the internet knows you're a dog".
I think the point I'm trying to make about XP/Vista is that when you press the delete key, the OS assumes that you are actually trying to delete a file (quite sensibly) and respond to you accordingly.
First, we're talking about the Windows Explorer interface, on 2000/XP/Vista, not the the OS. Many apps, of course, emulate the behaviour, but we're not talking about other apps any more than we're talking about different file managers.
Second, the default action is not to delete the selected file, but to move it to the Recycle Bin. IIRC, a "real" delete is performed when the SHIFT key is held down when the delete key is pressed.
My interpretation of "sensible" behaviour is to do exactly what I say to do, not to reinterpret it and/or offer me options. Across the board, I find Windows' behaviour is pretty tiresome, but I won't quibble that the defaults are probably good for novice users.
You haven't lived until you're in the habit of using 'rm -rf *' or 'shutdown -p now'.
Windows users will buy new machines, and get Vista "real soon now." The number of users that switch will be nominal. No harm done to Microsoft.
As depressing as that is, it's probably true. That doesn't make a discussion of the alternative possibilities any less fun, though.
As much as the media may want it to be, there is no competition in a market with a Monopoly.
That's one to way to look at it. The other is looking at from a business perspective. Microsoft, like any publically held corporation, needs to demonstrate to their shareholders not only profits, but steadily increasing profits.
Newspapers typically generate a steady and profitable (more so than many businesses) revenue stream. The problem is that steady income is not good enough for Wall Street, so those papers that aren't privately hed (as they were in the past), get bought, sold, reorganised and downsized on a regular basis, with everyone standing in the wings chanting "Old Media Is Dead". That, despite that there's just as much money being today made as in the past.
Microsoft may hold onto a monopoly position while the world around them changes, but that doesn't necessarily guarantee satisfaction for their shareholders. If you can make an extra few dollars with another stock, and are convinced that you'll make even more in the near future, why wouldn't you sell your Microsoft shares and move elsewhere?
Like I said, it may be fun to talk about the "unprecedented power shifts", but the article fails to consider the the business people at Microsoft probably know what they're doing. Even if that includes fire sales and buy-one-get-two-free-with-an-extra-large-drink deals. My hope is that the regular appearance of these Vista Is A Failure articles will, at the very least, open up people's eyes (OEMs included) enough to recognise there are alternatives.
First, there's no sysctl. Second, yes, it is supposed to handle it automatically, but it's buggy, so manually doing it is the only way to be sure. Though, I could have sworn I said that the first time...
So what exactly does 'sysctl -d hw.acpi.reset_video' return on your system?. Or 'sysclt -d hw.syscons.sc_no_suspend_vtswitch'?
I don't understand the emotional aspect of your comments, but FWIW, yes, there could be improvements to default values, default configurations, but that's another issue that we could talk about endlessly. I'm content knowing that, to quote an oft-used phrase, there are tools available in place of policies. For everything else, there's a text editor, a beer, and some creativity.
I'm not sure you want an S3 state every few minutes.
You're wrong.
Well, if you do want that, go for it. I know I don't, for reasons as legitimate as why you think you do.
It would make more sense to blank the screen (and kill the backlight on a notebook) by setting the DPMS option in xorg.conf, and set your screensaver options in.Xdefaults. The CPU can be trottled using any number of methods either on a dynamic basis, or at set time. Throw ataidle into the mix and you've got most everything you need for those "every few minutes' intervals.
You've clearly never done ANY of this.
Whatever. I'm not the one with problems, am I?
Setting X to blank the screen after 10 minutes is something I've been doing on every install for the past decade now. You can't spin-down any hard disks that is mounted. File systems are too advanced these days. Whether journaling or not, they all write fs metadata every few seconds.
Blanking the screen may be fairly ordinary, until you get to notebooks (which typically aren't a decade old) and blanking isn't enough; remember that the largest power drain for a notebook is the screen and the CPU. Spinning down disks, albeit potentially problematic (disk life, for one), isn't exactly impossible. If it were, all those Mac or XP notebook users would be bitching along with you. Or are they all FAT32 installations? Or did you mean 'fs metada' on UFS1/2? Both radeontool and ataidle, for example, are both in ports. Are you suggesting that they don't work, or that there's no need for them, nobody uses them anyway, and should be removed? My point was simply that there's more options than there are reasons to complain.
Idling your CPU is good, and should be done by default everywhere by now. For comparison, my system, with CPU idled, uses 60W. In S3 Suspend, it uses 3W... That's a huge difference, and WHY everyone should suspend their systems after a few minutes of idle time, if possible.
I don't agree. I've found that routinely throttling notebooks can generally be a good idea (keeps them cool, comfortable and healthy), but outside of that limited scope, shifting CPU frequencies, etc., etc. introduces additional configuration effort along with concerns I know I don't want dangling around in the back of my head when I have more important things to worry about (like work). And if a work-related system uses less wattage than my desk lamp, I'm not not going to be apologetic for saying that I've Been There and didn't like it, or for an opinion that's contrary to yours.
That's not to say conserving energy isn't important. Only that what you think is ideal can be inappropriate in other circumstances. Just as importantly, I'd prefer deciding and implementing for myself what I consider appropriate. The alternative is what you get with Windows. Bringing this back to the article, someone decides for you how things work, and when they don't, considerable uphill effort is expended researching the obscured and undocumented cause and, if successful, undoing the decision (hello registry). Which approach is correct, I guess, depends on which side of the fence you're already on.
A bit off topic, but if anyone hasn't yet tried any of the Dr. Bonner soaps, they really should give them a try. I grew up in a household where handmade soaps (for washing clothes, personal use, etc.) were the norm. As a kid, I thought my parents were weird and chalked it up to being poor. It wasn't until years later that I discovered we were using what others bought as over-priced specialty products from from specialty stores, that's after they became fashionable. It's difficult to describe how good the Dr. Bonner line is, so you'll have to take my word for it. That, and the fact that rich yuppies, eco-terrorists and generally strange but very smart people insist on regularly buying the stuff.
As for Don Bolles, well, we used to live in the same neighbourhood. I'd describe him as someone whose name you wouldn't expect to see in the same sentence as the word soap.
I know I'm setting myself up for flames around here, but the OS with the best support for APCI S3 Suspend is FreeBSD 6.2, even though it's certainly not perfect.
Perhaps, but the issue is a lot more complicated than that. We're talking about the BIOS, the OS, and then how the two relate to each other. That said, it doesn't suprise me that the article is lame. Setting a fixed IP address and making use of WOL? What's that got to do with Windows, and what does "done right" refer to?
The only informative (and amusing) bit was the Microsoft chosen USB behaviour (hidden) that requires an "easy" registry edit to change. So much for "Oh, no, not manually editing a config file!" I guess having all the behaviour and options explicitly set forth and easily editable is the wrong approach.;-)
X.org... Since X doesn't play well with suspend, FreeBSD is supposed to switch off of X, to a virtual console before entering suspend mode. Unfortunately, I've found that, unfortunately, X 6.9.0 freezes about 1 in 3 times. Once I figured that out, it was just a matter of manually switching to a console...
I'm going by memory here, but IIRC, that's handled with a sysctl. You shouldn't need to manually do anything. Read through acpi(4) and then Google for more info, or better yet, just search the 'mobile' archives for some possible settings and the merits of each.
Of course, the drawback to X not cooperating is that I can't set my machine to auto suspend when it's been idle for a few minutes, but I'm hopeful the next release of FreeBSD will fix that.
I'm not sure you want an S3 state every few minutes. It would make more sense to blank the screen (and kill the backlight on a notebook) by setting the DPMS option in xorg.conf, and set your screensaver options in.Xdefaults. The CPU can be trottled using any number of methods either on a dynamic basis, or at set time. Throw ataidle into the mix and you've got most everything you need for those "every few minutes' intervals. How many more options could you want?
For a full suspend after x minutes, why not script your own approach? One option would be to use xscreensaver-command to invoke a count-down timer to invoke zzz(8)? Or if power usage is a Really Big Deal, make use of WOL and start/stop the system at set times. Dunno if that would work for a desktop system, but it might cut down the hours on/.
I've often wished I could wake up one morning and discover that around 70%-75% of the global population had simply disappeared during the night. The sociological improvement that would be experienced by the 25% that were left would be astronomical. Every human problem that you can think of would be either completely solved or radically reduced in severity by that one incident.
Well, I agree with your statements that CDs are rubbish as an archival medium, but this is a bit extreme, doncha think? At first glance, it reminds me of how everyone complains about all the bad drivers out there, but 80% of people proudly consider themselves good drivers.
What I do think is invariably true is that if you wait long enough, chances are you will wake up and the problems you had will have taken care of themselves. No need for disposing of anyone. If one of those problems was a concern about the longevity of CDs, for example, wait long enough and you won't remember or care what was on them. Problem? What problem?
With so many waiting until the last minute, what do people expect?
There was a story on NPR a day or so ago on the subject of tax filings. An IRS spokeswoman mentioned that more people than ever (a euphemism for "I don't remember the percentages") are filing electronically. Of those filing electronically, most file last minute like their paper counterparts.
Plus ca change, huh?
At any rate, I don't think it's fair to characterise last-minute filers as fools. Everyone hates hates filing. It's human nature to put off something so disagreeable. Ask yourself when was the last time you went to the dentist.
It doesn't make sense to have thick clients anymore, when the web apps can do everything that the desktop apps can...
A bit presumptuous, maybe?
I take for granted the following, and then some: regular expression support; being able to easily read or manage mailboxes that have tens of thousands of messages; a fully customisable and intuitive interface that corresponds with other programs I regularly use; on and off-line access to mail stores and archives; the ability to copy, move, sort, filter, munge, rewrite, extract or otherwise process any and all messages (including headers) using tools I've known for years; privacy and encryption. Should I go on?
Web apps, I think, are fine for novice users, occasional or on-the-road users, or for those with limited requirements. If you exclude certain fundamental issues like privacy and security, for example, you can, I suppose, say they work great. If that's the case, good for you. I don't fit into any of those categories, and flat out reject the premise of most web applications. Hardly a unique opinion.
Can't argue with the RIAA calling themselves a bunch of criminals... its truth in advertising.
Our chief weapon is suprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... and pretexting?
In my case for example I drive a 911, which is neither remotely fuel efficient nor inexpensive to maintain -- but it has a lot of the same disadvantages as a smart car so bear with me. It's lousy for transporting even moderately sized items, you can't haul a boat, or fill it with relatives, or bricks, etc... While I knew I'd love the car I thought I'd *really* miss having a larger vehicle. Turned out its not the big deal I thought it was.
I used to own a 911. Blew the engine and ended up with a new Jeep Cherokee. My thoughts on the convenience of the "larger" vehicle:
1. The rear hatch door is harder and slower to open than a passenger side door. Groceries, etc. end up on the seat next to me. On a Porsche, such items generally fit comfortably behind the seats without any fuss, or chance of damaging the passenger seats.
2. The Jeep appears to have more interior passenger room, but the space is not where you generally want it. From the driver's perspective, the Porsche is actually roomier, to say nothing of the ergonomics. Miatas are smaller, but they similarly feel roomier.
3. With a Jeep, yes, you can load boxes and whatnot in the rear. That's after opening the hatch door, clearing off what's sitting on any of the seats and floor, and then folding down the seats, but before you discover there's a lot less room than you think. Moreover, loading crap into what is really a passenger vehicle generally involves opening and getting in/out of the rear door and passenger doors to manipulate things. Then, of course, there's the generally overlooked item that shuffling crap around will lead to damage. My roof carpeting is torn, I have holes in the backs of both of the leather headrests of the two front seats, and scuffs just about everywhere. And I'm a careful guy.
4. Roof racks are invariably decorative only. And while empty roof racks are better than loaded ones, they have a negative effect on gas mileage. The same can be said for those two rear seats which are invariably empty of passengers.
5. On a Porsche, if you fold back the passenger seat, and roll down the passenger window, you'll be able to fit the large same item as you can in the back of a Jeep. And you can still see out the back window.
The biggest irony? The Porsche gave me better mileage. And every one of the miles I drove I had fun and was comfortable in knowing that no matter how I drove, it would be really difficult to flip the car on dry pavement.
Type this in the search box from the Vista menu:...
Ignoring the "search box" part, I think the OP point was about the organisation, layout and general obtuseness of the menuing system. Which is what typical users are familiar with and expected to use.
Running ipconfig, desk.cpl, compmgmt.msc, etc. directly is always easier, faster, and more efficient, but that's what those Linux nerds do, right? Besides, I'm not sure about Vista, but the menu entry for cmd.exe is typically buried in with the Accessories like Notepad and friends. Appropriate, perhaps, but it serves to underscore it's not The Windows Way.
I think it might unnerve them, but they may be more accepting at first. Everyone likes cute animals, right?
The problem is that the concept of rights is an evolutionary one (cough), so granting human rights implies/infers other rights. Remember we're talking about a term which has legal significance. I doubt you can confer one right and discriminate on the basis of the amount of body hair or a preference for fruit to exclude other rights.
And then, where would those rights begin and end? The right to free speech, free association, the right to vote, etc. Well, that last one might be an improvement. What would really gall the creationists is two chimps that wanted to mate. Sex outside of wedlock is A Bad Thing, so they'd have to be married first, right? And that would require redrafting the current crop of constitutional marriage amendments to read "gays or chimpanzees". And because homosexuality in chimpanzees is hardly unusual, that would leave you with "gays, chimpanzees, or gay chimpanzees", leaving the legislators to contend with anyone, gay or otherwise, who wants to enter into a union with a chimpanzee.
Today's kids are tasked with finding answers in what equates to an ocean of information compared to what was available when I was in school. Plagiarism is not good, but in this 'ocean of information' it is difficult to know what that really is. When studying, an answer from wikipedia is as good as one from another paper available on the Internet.
I think the article concerns itself with the writing itself, and not so much the information per se, which, admittedly, is somewhat akin to flotsam and jetsam.
On the one hand, he writes:
My transfer from education to the world of business has reminded me just how important it is to be able to synthesize content from multiple sources, put structure around it and edit it into a coherent, single-voiced whole. Students who are able to create convincing amalgamations have gained a valuable business skill.
All well and good, right? You take information, construct a thesis, then fashion it into a coherent form. But then he goes on to dismiss the above by saying:
So let's declare "The paper is dead" before the database makes the declaration for us.
and cites rampant plagiarism as his rationale. Frankly, I don't get it. I'm not sure it even makes sense.
His other argument about students not being able to write another original statement on the subject of Jane Eyre because so many have already done so is somehow supposed to support the assertion that the problem of plagiarism is unsurmountable and we should declare defeat and run away, but I see it as misleading. People write new melodies for pop songs every day. Are we supposed to believe that someday soon we'll be out of new melodies and that pop music as we know it is really dead?
Anyone who has stood in front of a classroom knows that students often surprise you with their ideas and can offer up new ways of looking at things. Some of those same students grow up and write books or do research on subjects that have may already been written about or researched to death, the Brontes or [insert favourite dead person] included.
Plagiarism is a problem. And originality is hard, and possibly increasingly rare. Declaring the term paper "dead" is a solution in search of some other problem.
What on Earth does anyone think contacting some organisation (that they probably have no contact with in day to day life) to tell them that they're idiots is going to achieve?
Raise public awareness? Change? Admittedly, on the face of it, I'm eager to dismiss actions are juvenile but, then again, I smirk at the folks in Starbucks buying or selling "fair trade" coffee. None of them, I'd bet, has ever travelled to Latin America or even seen a coffee bean before it's been picked and roasted, or met a coffee farmer.
More to the point, if it's not a public sector organisation and the people calling aren't shareholders, what the hell business is it of theirs?
Can't answer that one, but it's worth pointing more and more public corporations are in the habit of adopting mission statements that include deference to any number of activist concerns (baby seals, child labour, government corruption, environmental issues, political stances, etc.), and then set up internal departments to address such concerns. Many even go so far as to allow outside invidividuals as board members.
Again, I think the actions are embarrassing at best. But that's not to say I don't appreciate (or at least enjoy with everyone else) the hard work and success of all the nutjob activists who came before me, and the new ones which pop whenever an important issue presents itself. Linux isn't a religeon, but like most things in life, there is an undeniable political element to the whole discussion. Most people don't vote so it should be no surprise that those same people prefer to let others do the hard and dirty work of playing politics.
Slashdot Mirror
"Content" is a metaphor intended to make people think of creative works as products to be wrapped up and shipped around like any other commodity, when in fact creative works are natural expressions of our humanity and civilization.
Well said.
The problem is they've already won the battle and set the terms of the discussion. The other metaphor is that of the "consumer". If we're all consumers, we don't have natural expressions of anything. You wouldn't suggest that we're "individuals", would you?
My advice would be to stop anthropomorphising robots. They don't like it.
A sovereign country's citizens should be tried under that country's law, unless the US fancies an international court to handle international crimes.
They do.
Just so long as it doesn't involve US citizens. Or military personnel.
If NYT wants to take sides and promote a certain agenda, that's their right, but they should get called on it.
Do you even know what you read when you read the article? This statement is as absurd as the one in the story summary.
Here's a tip. Suggesting that the article has anything to do with The NY Times (other than appearing in one of its sections with lots of other columns written by all sorts of people) is the equivalent of suggesting that Andy Rooney is responsible for both the reporting and editorial tone and content of ABC News.
I'll have a read. Thanks.
Funny now that I think about it, I do remember seeing the changed logo on the trucks. My reaction was "Nice change. Not! at! all! spammish!"
It's a big company. My guess is it'll take them a year or two to undo all the cross-branding and redo their websites, stationery, etc.
t's always interesting to check PDF properties
A perverse habit that I share. My guess is that only people familiar with desktop publishing would get what they're looking at, but it's worth pointing out that while PDFs can contain interesting information, the information is never as interesting (or incriminating) as what we'd typically get from folks who "publish" Word documents, employees of Microsoft included.
this survey was printed from Mozilla on an Apple box. I just wonder why Novell could not spend 0.5 [wo]man-hour to actually make it nice.
Agreed it's pretty amateurish. Someone be sure send off a copy of Unix Text Processing to the folks at SuSE. The book is probably 20 years older than the version of Acrobat mschmidkuntz (or whoever the author is) is using, and among other things, a lot cheaper.
They did?
Sounds like they're still sleeping with each other, now with more advertising to offset the costs of their motel bills.
Personally, I've never understood a thing about Yahoo. I don't recall ever using their search features, their portal(s), or anything else that people go on about. I'm only aware of them because ATT (nee SBC) uses them for email, and I have to read their incessant advertising! footers! on mail lists from people who are fans of whatever they provide.
Um... in spite of Richard Stallman's rather pathetic attempt to redefine the English language, that is what the term "free software" actually means. You cannot legitimately criticize the Oracle representative for using the English language correctly.
It's always amuses to read posts from people who bandy about terms carelessly while invoking the phrase "the English language".
Allow me to put on my pedant hat for a moment. If you're looking to understand a word, you'll have to go a bit farther than picking up a random dictionary and start quoting from it. You'll have first to learn or at least be aware of its etymology before weighing traditional usage against more recent usage against a possibly more specialised usage. Then, of course, you'll have to consider its connotations. If you've done all that, you're now ready to consider the context in which it was said or written, and if you're honest with yourself (and others), the context in which you're willing to interpret it.
Sounds complicated? Life generally is.
Pop quiz. Which of the following suggests or implies that the word "free" means "without price".
a) Free at last.
b) She's free.
c) My dog was free.
d) Free download.
e) I'm free today.
f) Free to use freely.
g) None of the above.
h) All of the above.
If you picked (h), you'd be right. And wrong. That's true even if you parsed the word "price" correctly. Put another way, I know what I mean. Do you?
Richard Stallman understands that the choice of words often defines the terms of a discussion. Irrespective of your feelings towards things of a political nature, his actions are perfectly justified. And "correct".
I found it interesting that the parts they use are no different then what HP, Compaq, IBM, and Gateway have used as well.
May true from a wide perspective, but you negelected to mention (or didn't notice during your work) that Dell is notorious for mixing and matching parts on identical models.
While that may not be a big deal for the average Windows user, if you're running something other than Windows, and discover that those servers you ordered don't all work as expected, or that the last batch of laptops contain different wireless chipsets than you ordered, you end up with a far more realistic and nuanced notion of things.
Wow. Just wow.
Be kind.
If it helps, I'm good friends with a number of very intelligent people who, while articulate in real life and able to type perfectly well, write emails that suggest they either haven't reached puberty and/or they're functionally illiterate. I guess that's the inverse of "No one on the internet knows you're a dog".
I think the point I'm trying to make about XP/Vista is that when you press the delete key, the OS assumes that you are actually trying to delete a file (quite sensibly) and respond to you accordingly.
First, we're talking about the Windows Explorer interface, on 2000/XP/Vista, not the the OS. Many apps, of course, emulate the behaviour, but we're not talking about other apps any more than we're talking about different file managers.
Second, the default action is not to delete the selected file, but to move it to the Recycle Bin. IIRC, a "real" delete is performed when the SHIFT key is held down when the delete key is pressed.
My interpretation of "sensible" behaviour is to do exactly what I say to do, not to reinterpret it and/or offer me options. Across the board, I find Windows' behaviour is pretty tiresome, but I won't quibble that the defaults are probably good for novice users.
You haven't lived until you're in the habit of using 'rm -rf *' or 'shutdown -p now'.
Windows users will buy new machines, and get Vista "real soon now." The number of users that switch will be nominal. No harm done to Microsoft.
As depressing as that is, it's probably true. That doesn't make a discussion of the alternative possibilities any less fun, though.
As much as the media may want it to be, there is no competition in a market with a Monopoly.
That's one to way to look at it. The other is looking at from a business perspective. Microsoft, like any publically held corporation, needs to demonstrate to their shareholders not only profits, but steadily increasing profits.
Newspapers typically generate a steady and profitable (more so than many businesses) revenue stream. The problem is that steady income is not good enough for Wall Street, so those papers that aren't privately hed (as they were in the past), get bought, sold, reorganised and downsized on a regular basis, with everyone standing in the wings chanting "Old Media Is Dead". That, despite that there's just as much money being today made as in the past.
Microsoft may hold onto a monopoly position while the world around them changes, but that doesn't necessarily guarantee satisfaction for their shareholders. If you can make an extra few dollars with another stock, and are convinced that you'll make even more in the near future, why wouldn't you sell your Microsoft shares and move elsewhere?
Like I said, it may be fun to talk about the "unprecedented power shifts", but the article fails to consider the the business people at Microsoft probably know what they're doing. Even if that includes fire sales and buy-one-get-two-free-with-an-extra-large-drink deals. My hope is that the regular appearance of these Vista Is A Failure articles will, at the very least, open up people's eyes (OEMs included) enough to recognise there are alternatives.
So what exactly does 'sysctl -d hw.acpi.reset_video' return on your system?. Or 'sysclt -d hw.syscons.sc_no_suspend_vtswitch'?
I don't understand the emotional aspect of your comments, but FWIW, yes, there could be improvements to default values, default configurations, but that's another issue that we could talk about endlessly. I'm content knowing that, to quote an oft-used phrase, there are tools available in place of policies. For everything else, there's a text editor, a beer, and some creativity.
You're wrong.
Well, if you do want that, go for it. I know I don't, for reasons as legitimate as why you think you do.
You've clearly never done ANY of this.
Whatever. I'm not the one with problems, am I?
Setting X to blank the screen after 10 minutes is something I've been doing on every install for the past decade now. You can't spin-down any hard disks that is mounted. File systems are too advanced these days. Whether journaling or not, they all write fs metadata every few seconds.
Blanking the screen may be fairly ordinary, until you get to notebooks (which typically aren't a decade old) and blanking isn't enough; remember that the largest power drain for a notebook is the screen and the CPU. Spinning down disks, albeit potentially problematic (disk life, for one), isn't exactly impossible. If it were, all those Mac or XP notebook users would be bitching along with you. Or are they all FAT32 installations? Or did you mean 'fs metada' on UFS1/2? Both radeontool and ataidle, for example, are both in ports. Are you suggesting that they don't work, or that there's no need for them, nobody uses them anyway, and should be removed? My point was simply that there's more options than there are reasons to complain.
Idling your CPU is good, and should be done by default everywhere by now. For comparison, my system, with CPU idled, uses 60W. In S3 Suspend, it uses 3W... That's a huge difference, and WHY everyone should suspend their systems after a few minutes of idle time, if possible.
I don't agree. I've found that routinely throttling notebooks can generally be a good idea (keeps them cool, comfortable and healthy), but outside of that limited scope, shifting CPU frequencies, etc., etc. introduces additional configuration effort along with concerns I know I don't want dangling around in the back of my head when I have more important things to worry about (like work). And if a work-related system uses less wattage than my desk lamp, I'm not not going to be apologetic for saying that I've Been There and didn't like it, or for an opinion that's contrary to yours.
That's not to say conserving energy isn't important. Only that what you think is ideal can be inappropriate in other circumstances. Just as importantly, I'd prefer deciding and implementing for myself what I consider appropriate. The alternative is what you get with Windows. Bringing this back to the article, someone decides for you how things work, and when they don't, considerable uphill effort is expended researching the obscured and undocumented cause and, if successful, undoing the decision (hello registry). Which approach is correct, I guess, depends on which side of the fence you're already on.
A bit off topic, but if anyone hasn't yet tried any of the Dr. Bonner soaps, they really should give them a try. I grew up in a household where handmade soaps (for washing clothes, personal use, etc.) were the norm. As a kid, I thought my parents were weird and chalked it up to being poor. It wasn't until years later that I discovered we were using what others bought as over-priced specialty products from from specialty stores, that's after they became fashionable. It's difficult to describe how good the Dr. Bonner line is, so you'll have to take my word for it. That, and the fact that rich yuppies, eco-terrorists and generally strange but very smart people insist on regularly buying the stuff.
As for Don Bolles, well, we used to live in the same neighbourhood. I'd describe him as someone whose name you wouldn't expect to see in the same sentence as the word soap.
I know I'm setting myself up for flames around here, but the OS with the best support for APCI S3 Suspend is FreeBSD 6.2, even though it's certainly not perfect.
;-)
...
.Xdefaults. The CPU can be trottled using any number of methods either on a dynamic basis, or at set time. Throw ataidle into the mix and you've got most everything you need for those "every few minutes' intervals. How many more options could you want?
/.
Perhaps, but the issue is a lot more complicated than that. We're talking about the BIOS, the OS, and then how the two relate to each other. That said, it doesn't suprise me that the article is lame. Setting a fixed IP address and making use of WOL? What's that got to do with Windows, and what does "done right" refer to?
The only informative (and amusing) bit was the Microsoft chosen USB behaviour (hidden) that requires an "easy" registry edit to change. So much for "Oh, no, not manually editing a config file!" I guess having all the behaviour and options explicitly set forth and easily editable is the wrong approach.
X.org... Since X doesn't play well with suspend, FreeBSD is supposed to switch off of X, to a virtual console before entering suspend mode. Unfortunately, I've found that, unfortunately, X 6.9.0 freezes about 1 in 3 times. Once I figured that out, it was just a matter of manually switching to a console
I'm going by memory here, but IIRC, that's handled with a sysctl. You shouldn't need to manually do anything. Read through acpi(4) and then Google for more info, or better yet, just search the 'mobile' archives for some possible settings and the merits of each.
Of course, the drawback to X not cooperating is that I can't set my machine to auto suspend when it's been idle for a few minutes, but I'm hopeful the next release of FreeBSD will fix that.
I'm not sure you want an S3 state every few minutes. It would make more sense to blank the screen (and kill the backlight on a notebook) by setting the DPMS option in xorg.conf, and set your screensaver options in
For a full suspend after x minutes, why not script your own approach? One option would be to use xscreensaver-command to invoke a count-down timer to invoke zzz(8)? Or if power usage is a Really Big Deal, make use of WOL and start/stop the system at set times. Dunno if that would work for a desktop system, but it might cut down the hours on
I've often wished I could wake up one morning and discover that around 70%-75% of the global population had simply disappeared during the night. The sociological improvement that would be experienced by the 25% that were left would be astronomical. Every human problem that you can think of would be either completely solved or radically reduced in severity by that one incident.
Well, I agree with your statements that CDs are rubbish as an archival medium, but this is a bit extreme, doncha think? At first glance, it reminds me of how everyone complains about all the bad drivers out there, but 80% of people proudly consider themselves good drivers.
What I do think is invariably true is that if you wait long enough, chances are you will wake up and the problems you had will have taken care of themselves. No need for disposing of anyone. If one of those problems was a concern about the longevity of CDs, for example, wait long enough and you won't remember or care what was on them. Problem? What problem?
With so many waiting until the last minute, what do people expect?
There was a story on NPR a day or so ago on the subject of tax filings. An IRS spokeswoman mentioned that more people than ever (a euphemism for "I don't remember the percentages") are filing electronically. Of those filing electronically, most file last minute like their paper counterparts.
Plus ca change, huh?
At any rate, I don't think it's fair to characterise last-minute filers as fools. Everyone hates hates filing. It's human nature to put off something so disagreeable. Ask yourself when was the last time you went to the dentist.
It doesn't make sense to have thick clients anymore, when the web apps can do everything that the desktop apps can ...
A bit presumptuous, maybe?
I take for granted the following, and then some: regular expression support; being able to easily read or manage mailboxes that have tens of thousands of messages; a fully customisable and intuitive interface that corresponds with other programs I regularly use; on and off-line access to mail stores and archives; the ability to copy, move, sort, filter, munge, rewrite, extract or otherwise process any and all messages (including headers) using tools I've known for years; privacy and encryption. Should I go on?
Web apps, I think, are fine for novice users, occasional or on-the-road users, or for those with limited requirements. If you exclude certain fundamental issues like privacy and security, for example, you can, I suppose, say they work great. If that's the case, good for you. I don't fit into any of those categories, and flat out reject the premise of most web applications. Hardly a unique opinion.
Can't argue with the RIAA calling themselves a bunch of criminals ... its truth in advertising.
Our chief weapon is suprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... and pretexting?
I'll come in again.
In my case for example I drive a 911, which is neither remotely fuel efficient nor inexpensive to maintain -- but it has a lot of the same disadvantages as a smart car so bear with me. It's lousy for transporting even moderately sized items, you can't haul a boat, or fill it with relatives, or bricks, etc... While I knew I'd love the car I thought I'd *really* miss having a larger vehicle. Turned out its not the big deal I thought it was.
I used to own a 911. Blew the engine and ended up with a new Jeep Cherokee. My thoughts on the convenience of the "larger" vehicle:
1. The rear hatch door is harder and slower to open than a passenger side door. Groceries, etc. end up on the seat next to me. On a Porsche, such items generally fit comfortably behind the seats without any fuss, or chance of damaging the passenger seats.
2. The Jeep appears to have more interior passenger room, but the space is not where you generally want it. From the driver's perspective, the Porsche is actually roomier, to say nothing of the ergonomics. Miatas are smaller, but they similarly feel roomier.
3. With a Jeep, yes, you can load boxes and whatnot in the rear. That's after opening the hatch door, clearing off what's sitting on any of the seats and floor, and then folding down the seats, but before you discover there's a lot less room than you think. Moreover, loading crap into what is really a passenger vehicle generally involves opening and getting in/out of the rear door and passenger doors to manipulate things. Then, of course, there's the generally overlooked item that shuffling crap around will lead to damage. My roof carpeting is torn, I have holes in the backs of both of the leather headrests of the two front seats, and scuffs just about everywhere. And I'm a careful guy.
4. Roof racks are invariably decorative only. And while empty roof racks are better than loaded ones, they have a negative effect on gas mileage. The same can be said for those two rear seats which are invariably empty of passengers.
5. On a Porsche, if you fold back the passenger seat, and roll down the passenger window, you'll be able to fit the large same item as you can in the back of a Jeep. And you can still see out the back window.
The biggest irony? The Porsche gave me better mileage. And every one of the miles I drove I had fun and was comfortable in knowing that no matter how I drove, it would be really difficult to flip the car on dry pavement.
Type this in the search box from the Vista menu: ...
Ignoring the "search box" part, I think the OP point was about the organisation, layout and general obtuseness of the menuing system. Which is what typical users are familiar with and expected to use.
Running ipconfig, desk.cpl, compmgmt.msc, etc. directly is always easier, faster, and more efficient, but that's what those Linux nerds do, right? Besides, I'm not sure about Vista, but the menu entry for cmd.exe is typically buried in with the Accessories like Notepad and friends. Appropriate, perhaps, but it serves to underscore it's not The Windows Way.
creationists will go apeshit!
I think it might unnerve them, but they may be more accepting at first. Everyone likes cute animals, right?
The problem is that the concept of rights is an evolutionary one (cough), so granting human rights implies/infers other rights. Remember we're talking about a term which has legal significance. I doubt you can confer one right and discriminate on the basis of the amount of body hair or a preference for fruit to exclude other rights.
And then, where would those rights begin and end? The right to free speech, free association, the right to vote, etc. Well, that last one might be an improvement. What would really gall the creationists is two chimps that wanted to mate. Sex outside of wedlock is A Bad Thing, so they'd have to be married first, right? And that would require redrafting the current crop of constitutional marriage amendments to read "gays or chimpanzees". And because homosexuality in chimpanzees is hardly unusual, that would leave you with "gays, chimpanzees, or gay chimpanzees", leaving the legislators to contend with anyone, gay or otherwise, who wants to enter into a union with a chimpanzee.
I think the article concerns itself with the writing itself, and not so much the information per se, which, admittedly, is somewhat akin to flotsam and jetsam.
On the one hand, he writes:
All well and good, right? You take information, construct a thesis, then fashion it into a coherent form. But then he goes on to dismiss the above by saying:
and cites rampant plagiarism as his rationale. Frankly, I don't get it. I'm not sure it even makes sense.
His other argument about students not being able to write another original statement on the subject of Jane Eyre because so many have already done so is somehow supposed to support the assertion that the problem of plagiarism is unsurmountable and we should declare defeat and run away, but I see it as misleading. People write new melodies for pop songs every day. Are we supposed to believe that someday soon we'll be out of new melodies and that pop music as we know it is really dead?
Anyone who has stood in front of a classroom knows that students often surprise you with their ideas and can offer up new ways of looking at things. Some of those same students grow up and write books or do research on subjects that have may already been written about or researched to death, the Brontes or [insert favourite dead person] included.
Plagiarism is a problem. And originality is hard, and possibly increasingly rare. Declaring the term paper "dead" is a solution in search of some other problem.
I used to care. But I think voter apathy is contagious...
Could be that the options aren't too exciting. There's never a CowboyNeal option, is there?
What on Earth does anyone think contacting some organisation (that they probably have no contact with in day to day life) to tell them that they're idiots is going to achieve?
Raise public awareness? Change? Admittedly, on the face of it, I'm eager to dismiss actions are juvenile but, then again, I smirk at the folks in Starbucks buying or selling "fair trade" coffee. None of them, I'd bet, has ever travelled to Latin America or even seen a coffee bean before it's been picked and roasted, or met a coffee farmer.
More to the point, if it's not a public sector organisation and the people calling aren't shareholders, what the hell business is it of theirs?
Can't answer that one, but it's worth pointing more and more public corporations are in the habit of adopting mission statements that include deference to any number of activist concerns (baby seals, child labour, government corruption, environmental issues, political stances, etc.), and then set up internal departments to address such concerns. Many even go so far as to allow outside invidividuals as board members.
Again, I think the actions are embarrassing at best. But that's not to say I don't appreciate (or at least enjoy with everyone else) the hard work and success of all the nutjob activists who came before me, and the new ones which pop whenever an important issue presents itself. Linux isn't a religeon, but like most things in life, there is an undeniable political element to the whole discussion. Most people don't vote so it should be no surprise that those same people prefer to let others do the hard and dirty work of playing politics.