Also, for the record, while you refer to the link as a colloquial expression, it is probably more properly an idiomatic expression. Sorry to be pedantic.
Been there, read that. The article did NOT answer the question. Thanks for the mini-lesson. (I do read the articles...)
Also, for the record, the "link" of which you speak is a meta-link on which site you must infer and find the link leading to the alleged "real" info to support the statement. Of course, once you find that link, you'll find it gets re-referenced to the home page of eweek, which gives you nothing regards what article you meant to see.
Fortunately, I had read that/. thread, and I had read the article, but it does little to illuminate the original poster's statement.
So, in addition to learning a little about hyperlinks and the Internet today perhaps we learned a little about hubris and humility.
I studied over the weekend, so I'm ready for my test.
Yes, a statement of fact does not and never will consist of a thesis. But the OP IMO isn't stating any fact. It seems to be a non sequitur since it doesn't qualify (let alone quantify). More people are moving away from linux doesn't sound like a fact to me -- it's too indefinite.
More people are moving away? More people are moving away than towards Linux? More people are moving away from Linux than are moving away from Windows? More people are moving away from Linux than moving towards Windows? Sheesh. Your "thesis" needs work. You've basically stated nothing.
That said, should I see a Dear Tux letter somewhere I'll post it on/..
consider my post. I don't know what wattage lasers were used that I saw, but I can attest to the reality that it can happen. It had been kind of a forgotten incident for me because I really thought it so unlikely or unbelievable as to not warrant discussion. Figured if it was something that could happen I'd stumble across it again from someone else's experience. I agree it'd seem unlikely that an OTC laser would or could cause this but wouldn't discount it.
On approach for landing in Seattle (I was just a passenger, not pilot) I was looking out the window into downtown Bellevue. From an area near the Bellevue main mall (hard to tell where exactly from 5000 feet, and 3 miles over) was some kind of laser light show, and the laser in describing its pattern for the show occasionally and momentarily came directly through the window, and directly in my eyes. Even this very brief exposure was painful, and my eyes had after-images for hours! The laser was green, so I assume an even higher energy than a red laser (don't know for sure).
Ever since that encounter I've always wondered if it was just an incredible fluke, or something that could happen easily again. Now I know.
A must read for anyone who's ever talked on the phone....
As one who was recently laid off from a telcom after 21 years of service, I would recommend this also as a must-read for any who work for a telcom (and there are many who do who aren't aware of how present VOIP is).
Then someone's got some splainin' to do about the hundreds of CD's I have circa 1982, 1983, when I first started purchasing them.... not one of them has ever failed, and many are still my favorites..... go figure.:-)
I don't know when this becomes critical mass, but I find the trend in media disturbing. But, before it does, and I don't suggest the time, place, or mechanism, I wouldn't mind seeing a mass customer revolt. It wouldn't take long for the RIAA to raise eyebrows if virtually everyone stopped purchasing music until the future of "owning" music looked less draconian. I know much of this is driven by the fear of pirating, etc., but the future does more than assure less piracy and seems more to ensure beaucoups des revenues (pardon the butchered French) for RIAA and cohorts.
If we can organize flash-mobs, we should be able to organize flash-boycotts (assuming there are others who see the trend in media control as untenable).
I am! And, it is my preferred means for buying. I think the trend of the industry stinks. It's going the way of absolute control and complete disregard for "established" uses (uses for which the unwary future customer's are accustomed) of music. The consumers in this scenario are the frogs in room temperature water. It will boil in about 4 or 5 years.
I thank goodnesss I've lived the era where I've been able to accumulate my music on CD's. At least I'll live out my years being able to listen to those (unless they start making players that won't play the "old" format (and they MIGHT)).
My biggest fear is this eventually will become the world where if you want to listen to whatever song you've "purchased" on your front room player, you pay for that. If you want to listen to it driving to work in your car, you'll pay for that.
Hopefully, there'll be some kind of backlash or revolution before that. I don't care... I've got mine.:-(
sorry this whizzed past you.... I was using anecdotal....
different example: Ludwig van Beethoven Symphony No 7
vs.
Ludwig van Beethoven Symphony No 8.
(This example came up once for me.... In this case I happened to know which symphony because I'm familiar with his symphonies. There are many more examples. And for those who are unfamiliar w/CSN vs. CSNY, the distinction would be useful.)
When I got XM radio (I've since canceled) I was disappointed when the artist/album/song titles were truncated. Figured I was up against a crummy piece of hardware but found out when I called XM it was XM's limitation.... WTF?!? Billions of bits of music streaming into my exercise room, and I can't get the few lousy extra bits to distinguish if the song I'm hearing is Crosby Stills Nash, or Crosby Still Nash Young?!?
Check out their features for on-line music. If they'll truncate the satellite feed, what other shortcuts will they take for the on-line?
This has potential. One thing I've noticed (and read about)
over the last twenty years (the explosion of the information age)
is the accelerated pace of everything. I had lived in
neighborhoods where within 200 feet of me are ten households and
potentially contacts and friends. But everyone is SO busy
working, commuting, carting children around, being paranoid....
noone has time left for socializing. So, after living in that
house for almost ten years, the only people we really became
acquainted with were our next door neighbors.
Ironically, right before moving from there, we discovered
potential new friends one block away. How? She was the bailiff
of a trial for which I participated on the jury. In a trial 30
miles from the house!
I've already created a new neighborhood for my new place.
Will be inviting people around the area. I think this could be
disruptive technology, which in this case could be very cool. My
$.02
I believe mr. ballmer is the "man" who said Janet Reno could go to Hell. Certainly a "man" with that much hubris is one to consider carefully when hearing his "thoughts".
I've read his books, I've heard him speak. He's a great cheerleader, he's a RUTHLESS businessman (maybe more than Bill), and mostly just an asshole when it comes to technology. He doesn't get it, but he's got the bully pulpit.
That said, it's unfortunate his commentary WILL carry much weight for the above reasons.
BTW, is it true MS people now wear buttons that say "Will work for FUD"?
What I was going for here was just that they may be looking for a reason, whatever that may be. If it weren't the hurricane, eventually, it would be something else. I think the program is still stinging from the crash... at least in the publicity sense and there are too many powerful forces (political and otherwise) wanting to at least shut this down... hopefully with alternate plans for better approaches.
Again, I'm thinking if it weren't the hurricane, it would/could be some other reason.
Could it be possible there are some who are looking for a reason to shut down the shuttle program? Ala a graceful exit? I won't substitue my opinion for their judgement, but I've had the hunch for a long time they are looking to shut the program down -- for whatever reason, but most notably it might be time to re-invent the shuttle program with more current and efficient (and hopefully safer) technology.
from the article: ..., Microsoft will maintain its neutral position in supporting the emerging high definition video formats, said Amir Majidimehr, corporate vice president of Microsoft's Windows Media division, in a statement.
Hmmmm, based on what previous behavior or evidence?
yeah, I've had similar experiences really meeting the "nice guys" from within MS. One time I even had a 20 minute discussion w/MS' CFO (John Connors) about the exorbitant prices for their development tools (Visual Studio, among others). He nodded his head in agreement, at the end of the conversation said, "You really have a good point about this -- I'm going to have my people look into this..." Later that day before he left the conference, he got up to announce his departure and said, "Some of you asked me about why we charge so much for our products, and you know, MS is in the business of making money, too!". Watch out for the good guys at MS. There are some, but the culture/atmosphere is such that the place virtually reeks with hubris. (I worked there, I experienced it.)
I have virtually no belief MS is in the music industry for the benefit of the customers, but instead is angling to try and insert themselves into the marketplace and if they can, get their piece of the pie. Even better, if they can do it without getting themselves in court, they'd be happy to "Netscape" Apple and iTunes.
Wasn't going for insightful.... just observing. The mouse advertised isn't that great.... I'm surprised noone has commented on the fact it isn't even wireless.
I also was not interested in evaluating their quality (see original post). It just struck me as not being news, but a freebie for MS. I know ALOT of the articles in/. are essentially free ads, but it seems to usually be for alot more newsworthy products. The mouse in the article isn't new, doesn't break ground, and is barely current technology (not great optics, not wireless, etc.).
And, yes MS OEMs some of the greatest hardware around. Not hard to do when you can buy that kind of manufacturing.
Too bad you got in on this so late -- you should've been modded informative. Thanks for the great info. Yeah, I looked at the mouse too and found it not only unattractive, but lacking in features that would qualify it as current technology (I'm surprised noone has mentioned, or least I haven't seen mention the mouse is NOT wireless, making it even MORE expensive relatively speaking (using a common trick of showing only the mouse and a tiny tiny piece of the cord...))
Good info... I'm about due to look at a new mouse, the mx1000 sounds interesting.
Yeah. But I wasn't commenting on the quality of a MS mouse. Basically they're paying someone OEM to put the imprimatur of the MS stamp on it and make it seem like MS knows hardware too (they don't)... I've used mouses (mice?) from virtually all and any mfr's, and have had mixed and similar experiences with most. With the exception of Logitech which I've found to always have price-competitive product and reliable. I would have to admit I avoid the MS stuff, not based on whether it is a good product (OEM'ed for them, it probably is), but based on my philosophical feelings MS has a big enough piece of the pie, and maybe not rightfully earned.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll buy that. Jolly good.
Also, for the record, while you refer to the link as a colloquial expression, it is probably more properly an idiomatic expression. Sorry to be pedantic.
Been there, read that. The article did NOT answer the question. Thanks for the mini-lesson. (I do read the articles...)
Also, for the record, the "link" of which you speak is a meta-link on which site you must infer and find the link leading to the alleged "real" info to support the statement. Of course, once you find that link, you'll find it gets re-referenced to the home page of eweek, which gives you nothing regards what article you meant to see.
Fortunately, I had read that /. thread, and I had read the article, but it does little to illuminate the original poster's statement.
So, in addition to learning a little about hyperlinks and the Internet today perhaps we learned a little about hubris and humility.
Funny.
I studied over the weekend, so I'm ready for my test.
Yes, a statement of fact does not and never will consist of a thesis. But the OP IMO isn't stating any fact. It seems to be a non sequitur since it doesn't qualify (let alone quantify). More people are moving away from linux doesn't sound like a fact to me -- it's too indefinite.
Gotta go, gotta get ready for my PSAT.
More people are moving away? More people are moving away than towards Linux? More people are moving away from Linux than are moving away from Windows? More people are moving away from Linux than moving towards Windows? Sheesh. Your "thesis" needs work. You've basically stated nothing.
That said, should I see a Dear Tux letter somewhere I'll post it on /..
Um, I read the fa . But thanks for the tip.
consider my post. I don't know what wattage lasers were used that I saw, but I can attest to the reality that it can happen. It had been kind of a forgotten incident for me because I really thought it so unlikely or unbelievable as to not warrant discussion. Figured if it was something that could happen I'd stumble across it again from someone else's experience. I agree it'd seem unlikely that an OTC laser would or could cause this but wouldn't discount it.
On approach for landing in Seattle (I was just a passenger, not pilot) I was looking out the window into downtown Bellevue. From an area near the Bellevue main mall (hard to tell where exactly from 5000 feet, and 3 miles over) was some kind of laser light show, and the laser in describing its pattern for the show occasionally and momentarily came directly through the window, and directly in my eyes. Even this very brief exposure was painful, and my eyes had after-images for hours! The laser was green, so I assume an even higher energy than a red laser (don't know for sure).
Ever since that encounter I've always wondered if it was just an incredible fluke, or something that could happen easily again. Now I know.
yes, I'd heard this anecdote from the 80's also.... OP got modded funny, though... sigh.
A must read for anyone who's ever talked on the phone....
As one who was recently laid off from a telcom after 21 years of service, I would recommend this also as a must-read for any who work for a telcom (and there are many who do who aren't aware of how present VOIP is).
Then someone's got some splainin' to do about the hundreds of CD's I have circa 1982, 1983, when I first started purchasing them.... not one of them has ever failed, and many are still my favorites..... go figure. :-)
I don't know when this becomes critical mass, but I find the trend in media disturbing. But, before it does, and I don't suggest the time, place, or mechanism, I wouldn't mind seeing a mass customer revolt. It wouldn't take long for the RIAA to raise eyebrows if virtually everyone stopped purchasing music until the future of "owning" music looked less draconian. I know much of this is driven by the fear of pirating, etc., but the future does more than assure less piracy and seems more to ensure beaucoups des revenues (pardon the butchered French) for RIAA and cohorts.
If we can organize flash-mobs, we should be able to organize flash-boycotts (assuming there are others who see the trend in media control as untenable).
I am! And, it is my preferred means for buying. I think the trend of the industry stinks. It's going the way of absolute control and complete disregard for "established" uses (uses for which the unwary future customer's are accustomed) of music. The consumers in this scenario are the frogs in room temperature water. It will boil in about 4 or 5 years.
I thank goodnesss I've lived the era where I've been able to accumulate my music on CD's. At least I'll live out my years being able to listen to those (unless they start making players that won't play the "old" format (and they MIGHT)).
My biggest fear is this eventually will become the world where if you want to listen to whatever song you've "purchased" on your front room player, you pay for that. If you want to listen to it driving to work in your car, you'll pay for that.
Hopefully, there'll be some kind of backlash or revolution before that. I don't care... I've got mine. :-(
sorry this whizzed past you.... I was using anecdotal....
different example: Ludwig van Beethoven Symphony No 7
vs. Ludwig van Beethoven Symphony No 8.
(This example came up once for me.... In this case I happened to know which symphony because I'm familiar with his symphonies. There are many more examples. And for those who are unfamiliar w/CSN vs. CSNY, the distinction would be useful.)
When I got XM radio (I've since canceled) I was disappointed when the artist/album/song titles were truncated. Figured I was up against a crummy piece of hardware but found out when I called XM it was XM's limitation.... WTF?!? Billions of bits of music streaming into my exercise room, and I can't get the few lousy extra bits to distinguish if the song I'm hearing is Crosby Stills Nash, or Crosby Still Nash Young?!?
Check out their features for on-line music. If they'll truncate the satellite feed, what other shortcuts will they take for the on-line?
Just an anecdotal sharing of my experience.
This has potential. One thing I've noticed (and read about) over the last twenty years (the explosion of the information age) is the accelerated pace of everything. I had lived in neighborhoods where within 200 feet of me are ten households and potentially contacts and friends. But everyone is SO busy working, commuting, carting children around, being paranoid.... noone has time left for socializing. So, after living in that house for almost ten years, the only people we really became acquainted with were our next door neighbors.
Ironically, right before moving from there, we discovered potential new friends one block away. How? She was the bailiff of a trial for which I participated on the jury. In a trial 30 miles from the house!
I've already created a new neighborhood for my new place. Will be inviting people around the area. I think this could be disruptive technology, which in this case could be very cool. My $.02
I believe mr. ballmer is the "man" who said Janet Reno could go to Hell. Certainly a "man" with that much hubris is one to consider carefully when hearing his "thoughts".
I've read his books, I've heard him speak. He's a great cheerleader, he's a RUTHLESS businessman (maybe more than Bill), and mostly just an asshole when it comes to technology. He doesn't get it, but he's got the bully pulpit.
That said, it's unfortunate his commentary WILL carry much weight for the above reasons.
BTW, is it true MS people now wear buttons that say "Will work for FUD"?
What I was going for here was just that they may be looking for a reason, whatever that may be. If it weren't the hurricane, eventually, it would be something else. I think the program is still stinging from the crash... at least in the publicity sense and there are too many powerful forces (political and otherwise) wanting to at least shut this down... hopefully with alternate plans for better approaches.
Again, I'm thinking if it weren't the hurricane, it would/could be some other reason.
Could it be possible there are some who are looking for a reason to shut down the shuttle program? Ala a graceful exit? I won't substitue my opinion for their judgement, but I've had the hunch for a long time they are looking to shut the program down -- for whatever reason, but most notably it might be time to re-invent the shuttle program with more current and efficient (and hopefully safer) technology.
Hmmmm, based on what previous behavior or evidence?
yeah, I've had similar experiences really meeting the "nice guys" from within MS. One time I even had a 20 minute discussion w/MS' CFO (John Connors) about the exorbitant prices for their development tools (Visual Studio, among others). He nodded his head in agreement, at the end of the conversation said, "You really have a good point about this -- I'm going to have my people look into this..." Later that day before he left the conference, he got up to announce his departure and said, "Some of you asked me about why we charge so much for our products, and you know, MS is in the business of making money, too!". Watch out for the good guys at MS. There are some, but the culture/atmosphere is such that the place virtually reeks with hubris. (I worked there, I experienced it.)
I have virtually no belief MS is in the music industry for the benefit of the customers, but instead is angling to try and insert themselves into the marketplace and if they can, get their piece of the pie. Even better, if they can do it without getting themselves in court, they'd be happy to "Netscape" Apple and iTunes.
I'm proxy modding you +1 Insightful... Sorry, it's all I have.
Wasn't going for insightful.... just observing. The mouse advertised isn't that great.... I'm surprised noone has commented on the fact it isn't even wireless.
I also was not interested in evaluating their quality (see original post). It just struck me as not being news, but a freebie for MS. I know ALOT of the articles in /. are essentially free ads, but it seems to usually be for alot more newsworthy products. The mouse in the article isn't new, doesn't break ground, and is barely current technology (not great optics, not wireless, etc.).
And, yes MS OEMs some of the greatest hardware around. Not hard to do when you can buy that kind of manufacturing.
Too bad you got in on this so late -- you should've been modded informative. Thanks for the great info. Yeah, I looked at the mouse too and found it not only unattractive, but lacking in features that would qualify it as current technology (I'm surprised noone has mentioned, or least I haven't seen mention the mouse is NOT wireless, making it even MORE expensive relatively speaking (using a common trick of showing only the mouse and a tiny tiny piece of the cord...))
Good info... I'm about due to look at a new mouse, the mx1000 sounds interesting.
Yeah. But I wasn't commenting on the quality of a MS mouse. Basically they're paying someone OEM to put the imprimatur of the MS stamp on it and make it seem like MS knows hardware too (they don't)... I've used mouses (mice?) from virtually all and any mfr's, and have had mixed and similar experiences with most. With the exception of Logitech which I've found to always have price-competitive product and reliable. I would have to admit I avoid the MS stuff, not based on whether it is a good product (OEM'ed for them, it probably is), but based on my philosophical feelings MS has a big enough piece of the pie, and maybe not rightfully earned.