It's actually not a watch - it's a wrist-mounted TV unit. Which makes it a bit of a misnomer; as the article states, nobody would wear it on his wrist like he would a watch.
Offtopic part: I used to have a calculator watch in 7th grade. It beeped when you pushed ANY of the buttons, and I couldn't find any way to turn the beeps off. So the teacher wouldn't let me use it on my tests, because it disturbed the rest of the class. So I was taking math tests with no calculator, too many problems to do in my head or on paper, and I was no less geek than when I had it on.
Here's another, more detailed description of the 1729 thing. I didn't understand that one, so I looked it up too.
It's one of the things I look for in great TV/movies - stuff that flies over your head the first time but that you catch as you get smarter (or waste more of your time).
I agree with you. Nearly every time someone posts an honest criticism of Linux usability or compares an open source app to a commercial app, someone responds similarly. Comments like yours are generally modded down as overrated, troll, or flamebait.
In this case, it's ludicrous to argue that the middle-click is better because "it's always been done that way." If users find it easier to CTRL-C/V, then it should be done that way instead.
If Linux makes an improvement upon some usability issue, people will gravitate toward it. If it's harder to use, they will stay away (unless something else attracts them).
The interesting thing is that the email comes to you generally unsolicited. If the sender accidentally delivers it to the wrong address, then it's unsolicited. You can't force people to agree to a contract - especially by sending them an email with legal crap tacked onto the end.
If you have any reason to protect the contents of the email, use encryption (for the eavesdropper), use some verification (for the unintended recipient), and make your intended recipient sign an NDA before you send them emails with sensitive info in them.
I'll be forwarding this article to my boss, who has recently added a similar statement to his sig.
I know you probably meant that you just don't like their music enough to copy it, but... I haven't bought more than a handful in the last six years because I can't afford it. I just can't justify spending hundreds or thousands of dollars a year on music when I can simply rip or download it. $15 a CD? Only if I'm desperate and absolutely must have a real copy (quality, for instance).
As another poster (many posters, actually) have said: lower prices and we'll buy more music. I only shop in the bargain bins at Circuit City, where the CDs are about $5.
Re: (Sperm sample required, sorry ladies)
on
NYT on Spam Cops
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I think the real issue is the poster's assumption that there are females here on Slashdot.
I agree with you - some artists and some music is not better "live."
Steely Dan is a studio band. Pink Floyd, while performing some great stuff during a live performance, has songs that simply can't be reproduced live. The Beatles stopped producing 4-piece songs that can be played live, and started pushing the boundaries of what could be called "music"; the result was some more great stuff that they didn't or couldn't play live (or on a regular basis, anyway).
The grandparent is still right, to an extent - pre-packaged artists are less likely to perform well live, and they're certainly not likely to change the music for a live performance. It will sound exactly like the album.
The "different USA" thing is a good point. There's an episode where the cover of a magazine describes a future where people have FOUR fingers instead of three. They routinely make fun of the yellow skin, pointy heads, blue hair, and other ridiculous cartoon things. People want to try and place The Simpsons in our world, but the show itself is resistant to such a comparison.
"I'm willing to bet that user-supplied ROMS will make this device much more usable. With the source code available, it's certainly possible."
That's an awesome idea. Are there existing PVR devices that let you run custom ROM software/OS on them? Such as: a Tivo clone makes a box that uses a CF card for the OS - and updates could be easily downloaded from the 'net and plugged right into your box? No mod chips, no special hacking. You could effectively separate hardware from software (within reason) and create a whole new market for usability.
Ok, then we agree. I thought you were criticizing the reviewer for not setting up Linux correctly on the machine (that's why it sounded to me like you didn't read the article). A consumer device like this should be exactly as you describe - as easy as a DVD player.
Fun story time: My mom rented a DVD and, despite her usual competence with such things, called me to ask how to get it out of the machine. Apparently, she couldn't figure out how to rewind the DVD and then gave up and hit eject. When it didn't eject, she got frustrated and called me. She was hitting eject on the VCR, not the DVD player. As soon as I answered, she realized what she was doing wrong.
Does it strike you as odd that a consumer product should require that one "know what they were doing" when they purchased it? Shouldn't the product be easy to install and use?
I'm not sure you RTFA, but your response sounds like a knee-jerk to me. If I buy a Tivo, I don't want to have to spend hours and hours getting it to work. I also shouldn't need any programming or configuration expertise.
If you're producing a device like this for the general public, you'd better not make it hard to use or install. So that would be a problem with the product.
"Yes, it can do these things, but because of its awkward Linux-based operating system and sluggish response, the thing acts like it doesn't want to."
One problem with his review, though, is that he looks for "features" from other products like an OSX transition - "why not have that with the Roku?" has asks.
Nancy Cartwright (the voice of Bart) visited my university a while back and someone asked about the state... her answer was something to the effect of, "Springfield is supposed to be a city that could be in any state in the country. If you look at the episodes, and track the cluest, you will see that they've pretty much all been ruled out. There is no secret answer." </paraphrase>
Yeah, some films are obviously political (Michael Moore's are the perfect example). But mainstream Hollywood generally stays away from that. You don't want to divide your audience, after all.
I can't take this movie as anything but another disaster movie (one with great-looking effects). There are folks on both sides of the spectrum that will tell you that this (or any movie) has some political or activist agenda. It's ridiculous.
An educated person can still enjoy these movies; I really liked Independence Day because I saw it for what it was. Rarely does a film meet expectations, so keeping your expectations low for most films will help you enjoy them at the level they were likely intended. I'm not saying you should have enjoyed Kangaroo Jack, I'm just saying that you should expect a movie like Independence Day or Day After Tomorrow to be on the level of 2001: A Space Oddyssey.
As for email not being portable, I'd expect more personal domains (or permanent email addresses) as a result. Google's GMail (and other long-term, high-storage services) would let you keep your email address even if you switched ISPs. I bought a domain just so I would have an email address that I wouldn't have to worry about losing.
So... the Linux alternative to support.microsoft.com is: Google, scattered sites with information of varying accuracy, individual project homepages, mailing lists, IRC channels, and newsgroups.
I know how to get the info I need... but does the $25,000/yr help desk consultant? How about the secretary that needs to figure out how to change her computer's wallpaper? Or the professor that wants to play a.WMV for his class?
I think the problem is due to the large number of distros, the non-standard OS setups, and dissenting opinions within the Linux community. How do you create a comprehensive Linux support site if you don't know what to support?
Look at it from the perspective of a University IT department: which desktop environment(s) should you support? Which command shell environment? How about office suite? Or graphics package? Media players?
Relying on open source has its benefits... but there are problems that they'll be skeptical about. And support is one of them - not only from the OS provider, but within your own organization. It's a huge problem even for Microsoft-based companies.
Linux distro ISO = $0 Training employees = $50,000 Adding Linux support staff = $150,000/year Office space for new staff = $300,000 Overhead for new offices = $40,000/year
Microsoft is expensive, yes. Adding their support is really expensive. But if you think Linux = $0, no strings attached (or that any system is), then you're obviously not thinking from the perspective of the people with the money. And if you are the person with the money, let us know so we can be sure to sell your stock ASAP.
I'm trying to argue both sides here - but Microsoft does offer free support and such free, comprehensive Linux support doesn't exist.
Microsoft could make the argument that it would be more expensive to use Linux because you'd have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff to support Linux, their office space, their benefits, etc. Creating an IS team that doesn't exist is expensive, no doubt about it. That's one reason that many companies buy MS support.
MS also plays the training/implementation card - switching users from Win98 to Linux is hard. Switching your whole network is even harder. And expensive. With all the costs built in, over the long run, MS can easily convince a government panel that their software will be cheaper. They're not lacking in clever excuses.
Their site alone is a fairly good support tool. There aren't nearly as many resources, comprehensive or not, for Linux support. That's not a flaw of Linux - it's just history and inertia. As Linux becomes more mainstream, there will be much better free/generic support.
Mid-size and large companies often have support agreements (for a hefty price, but it's usually effective) with Microsoft. Call 'em up, get a person, and sometimes you'll get a fix just for your problem. Kinda makes you wonder what drives their patches - the future implications and risks, or the immediate buck behind the phone call?
It depends on what you spend your money on. When you install a copy of Linux, what's your support agreement? The government has to be able to support the software they use, and if they don't have a Linux support agreement then they'll have to pay additional staff to handle those duties. I'm not saying that Microsoft's right in their claims, but you can't just point at the XP=$300, Linux=$0 as evidence that OSS is cheaper or has a higher ROI. It's just not as simple as that.
You can, however, point to hidden costs like the expenses of in-house/outsourced Linux support vs. Microsoft support (those MCSEs bills are expensive!), savings from your enhanced security (the what virus? I guess I didn't get it), and the fact that Microsoft doesn't always produce the best product in a given industry - so you're not tied down to them.
Microsoft, on the other hand, can point to the negative effects on the economy of losing major employers like itself, of removing gov't income (there's no sales tax on free software), and their longevity and reliability (they've been around, and aren't going anywhere soon).
There are two sides... the people with the money will need to examine them both carefully (and hopefully make the right choice).
Slashdot Mirror
It's actually not a watch - it's a wrist-mounted TV unit. Which makes it a bit of a misnomer; as the article states, nobody would wear it on his wrist like he would a watch.
Offtopic part:
I used to have a calculator watch in 7th grade. It beeped when you pushed ANY of the buttons, and I couldn't find any way to turn the beeps off. So the teacher wouldn't let me use it on my tests, because it disturbed the rest of the class. So I was taking math tests with no calculator, too many problems to do in my head or on paper, and I was no less geek than when I had it on.
Now I don't wear a watch at all.
When you opened the message, did it feature the goatse-footed balloon man?
Here's another, more detailed description of the 1729 thing. I didn't understand that one, so I looked it up too.
It's one of the things I look for in great TV/movies - stuff that flies over your head the first time but that you catch as you get smarter (or waste more of your time).
I agree with you. Nearly every time someone posts an honest criticism of Linux usability or compares an open source app to a commercial app, someone responds similarly. Comments like yours are generally modded down as overrated, troll, or flamebait.
In this case, it's ludicrous to argue that the middle-click is better because "it's always been done that way." If users find it easier to CTRL-C/V, then it should be done that way instead.
If Linux makes an improvement upon some usability issue, people will gravitate toward it. If it's harder to use, they will stay away (unless something else attracts them).
The interesting thing is that the email comes to you generally unsolicited. If the sender accidentally delivers it to the wrong address, then it's unsolicited. You can't force people to agree to a contract - especially by sending them an email with legal crap tacked onto the end.
If you have any reason to protect the contents of the email, use encryption (for the eavesdropper), use some verification (for the unintended recipient), and make your intended recipient sign an NDA before you send them emails with sensitive info in them.
I'll be forwarding this article to my boss, who has recently added a similar statement to his sig.
I know you probably meant that you just don't like their music enough to copy it, but... I haven't bought more than a handful in the last six years because I can't afford it. I just can't justify spending hundreds or thousands of dollars a year on music when I can simply rip or download it. $15 a CD? Only if I'm desperate and absolutely must have a real copy (quality, for instance).
As another poster (many posters, actually) have said: lower prices and we'll buy more music. I only shop in the bargain bins at Circuit City, where the CDs are about $5.
I think the real issue is the poster's assumption that there are females here on Slashdot.
I agree with you - some artists and some music is not better "live."
Steely Dan is a studio band. Pink Floyd, while performing some great stuff during a live performance, has songs that simply can't be reproduced live. The Beatles stopped producing 4-piece songs that can be played live, and started pushing the boundaries of what could be called "music"; the result was some more great stuff that they didn't or couldn't play live (or on a regular basis, anyway).
The grandparent is still right, to an extent - pre-packaged artists are less likely to perform well live, and they're certainly not likely to change the music for a live performance. It will sound exactly like the album.
My headphones get me in trouble - like when the boss calls, or the phone rings, or my officemate has to throw things at me to get my attention.
Once we had a tornado warning and had to evacuate the top floors of the building - but I was blaring Jethro Tull into my Sony MDR-V600s.
I just unplug all my computer's fans. Now my computer doesn't make any noise.
At least my fiancee is happy about that.
The "different USA" thing is a good point. There's an episode where the cover of a magazine describes a future where people have FOUR fingers instead of three. They routinely make fun of the yellow skin, pointy heads, blue hair, and other ridiculous cartoon things. People want to try and place The Simpsons in our world, but the show itself is resistant to such a comparison.
"I'm willing to bet that user-supplied ROMS will make this device much more usable. With the source code available, it's certainly possible."
That's an awesome idea. Are there existing PVR devices that let you run custom ROM software/OS on them? Such as: a Tivo clone makes a box that uses a CF card for the OS - and updates could be easily downloaded from the 'net and plugged right into your box? No mod chips, no special hacking. You could effectively separate hardware from software (within reason) and create a whole new market for usability.
Ok, then we agree. I thought you were criticizing the reviewer for not setting up Linux correctly on the machine (that's why it sounded to me like you didn't read the article). A consumer device like this should be exactly as you describe - as easy as a DVD player.
Fun story time: My mom rented a DVD and, despite her usual competence with such things, called me to ask how to get it out of the machine. Apparently, she couldn't figure out how to rewind the DVD and then gave up and hit eject. When it didn't eject, she got frustrated and called me. She was hitting eject on the VCR, not the DVD player. As soon as I answered, she realized what she was doing wrong.
Good call. He worded it in a way that sounds like a Linux criticism, but his complaint is really against the implementation of it.
I'll retract my first statement... wait, I can't find the edit/delete button!
Does it strike you as odd that a consumer product should require that one "know what they were doing" when they purchased it? Shouldn't the product be easy to install and use?
I'm not sure you RTFA, but your response sounds like a knee-jerk to me. If I buy a Tivo, I don't want to have to spend hours and hours getting it to work. I also shouldn't need any programming or configuration expertise.
If you're producing a device like this for the general public, you'd better not make it hard to use or install. So that would be a problem with the product.
He does complain about the OS itself:
"Yes, it can do these things, but because of its awkward Linux-based operating system and sluggish response, the thing acts like it doesn't want to."
One problem with his review, though, is that he looks for "features" from other products like an OSX transition - "why not have that with the Roku?" has asks.
That's a great answer to a stupid question.
Nancy Cartwright (the voice of Bart) visited my university a while back and someone asked about the state... her answer was something to the effect of, "Springfield is supposed to be a city that could be in any state in the country. If you look at the episodes, and track the cluest, you will see that they've pretty much all been ruled out. There is no secret answer." </paraphrase>
Yeah, some films are obviously political (Michael Moore's are the perfect example). But mainstream Hollywood generally stays away from that. You don't want to divide your audience, after all.
I can't take this movie as anything but another disaster movie (one with great-looking effects). There are folks on both sides of the spectrum that will tell you that this (or any movie) has some political or activist agenda. It's ridiculous.
An educated person can still enjoy these movies; I really liked Independence Day because I saw it for what it was. Rarely does a film meet expectations, so keeping your expectations low for most films will help you enjoy them at the level they were likely intended. I'm not saying you should have enjoyed Kangaroo Jack, I'm just saying that you should expect a movie like Independence Day or Day After Tomorrow to be on the level of 2001: A Space Oddyssey.
As for email not being portable, I'd expect more personal domains (or permanent email addresses) as a result. Google's GMail (and other long-term, high-storage services) would let you keep your email address even if you switched ISPs. I bought a domain just so I would have an email address that I wouldn't have to worry about losing.
So... the Linux alternative to support.microsoft.com is: Google, scattered sites with information of varying accuracy, individual project homepages, mailing lists, IRC channels, and newsgroups.
.WMV for his class?
I know how to get the info I need... but does the $25,000/yr help desk consultant? How about the secretary that needs to figure out how to change her computer's wallpaper? Or the professor that wants to play a
I think the problem is due to the large number of distros, the non-standard OS setups, and dissenting opinions within the Linux community. How do you create a comprehensive Linux support site if you don't know what to support?
Look at it from the perspective of a University IT department: which desktop environment(s) should you support? Which command shell environment? How about office suite? Or graphics package? Media players?
Relying on open source has its benefits... but there are problems that they'll be skeptical about. And support is one of them - not only from the OS provider, but within your own organization. It's a huge problem even for Microsoft-based companies.
Linux distro ISO = $0
Training employees = $50,000
Adding Linux support staff = $150,000/year
Office space for new staff = $300,000
Overhead for new offices = $40,000/year
Microsoft is expensive, yes. Adding their support is really expensive. But if you think Linux = $0, no strings attached (or that any system is), then you're obviously not thinking from the perspective of the people with the money. And if you are the person with the money, let us know so we can be sure to sell your stock ASAP.
I'm trying to argue both sides here - but Microsoft does offer free support and such free, comprehensive Linux support doesn't exist.
Microsoft could make the argument that it would be more expensive to use Linux because you'd have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff to support Linux, their office space, their benefits, etc. Creating an IS team that doesn't exist is expensive, no doubt about it. That's one reason that many companies buy MS support.
MS also plays the training/implementation card - switching users from Win98 to Linux is hard. Switching your whole network is even harder. And expensive. With all the costs built in, over the long run, MS can easily convince a government panel that their software will be cheaper. They're not lacking in clever excuses.
Their site alone is a fairly good support tool. There aren't nearly as many resources, comprehensive or not, for Linux support. That's not a flaw of Linux - it's just history and inertia. As Linux becomes more mainstream, there will be much better free/generic support.
Mid-size and large companies often have support agreements (for a hefty price, but it's usually effective) with Microsoft. Call 'em up, get a person, and sometimes you'll get a fix just for your problem. Kinda makes you wonder what drives their patches - the future implications and risks, or the immediate buck behind the phone call?
It depends on what you spend your money on. When you install a copy of Linux, what's your support agreement? The government has to be able to support the software they use, and if they don't have a Linux support agreement then they'll have to pay additional staff to handle those duties. I'm not saying that Microsoft's right in their claims, but you can't just point at the XP=$300, Linux=$0 as evidence that OSS is cheaper or has a higher ROI. It's just not as simple as that.
You can, however, point to hidden costs like the expenses of in-house/outsourced Linux support vs. Microsoft support (those MCSEs bills are expensive!), savings from your enhanced security (the what virus? I guess I didn't get it), and the fact that Microsoft doesn't always produce the best product in a given industry - so you're not tied down to them.
Microsoft, on the other hand, can point to the negative effects on the economy of losing major employers like itself, of removing gov't income (there's no sales tax on free software), and their longevity and reliability (they've been around, and aren't going anywhere soon).
There are two sides... the people with the money will need to examine them both carefully (and hopefully make the right choice).