I'm not sure what your Bush comment has to do with anything. (I voted for the other guy both times).
>You DO realize that, to get a voice mail, you actually make a phone call to do so?
I'm not sure why you assume that I checked my voice mail, noticed it was a dollar down and assumed it was not from that day. Actually, I turned on my phone, which had been OFF for two days and found that my account was now TWO dollars less than the last time it had been on. Thereby leading me to conclude that my account was charged for two days' activation. Since my phone had received a voicemail the previous day (a day it was not ON) I took this to mean that GETTING A CALL (even with the phone turned off) counted as an ACTIVATION.
Sorry for the caps, that's how I'm thinking. Feel free to ignore my emphasis, I'm just a little frustrated by your assumptions and your suggestions that I'm an idiot.
>Do you really think the phone companies were just going to stand still and keep things the way they were...?
Well from what you said about those two go-phone plans nothing has changed.
>So, I should take what you are telling me as proof instead of what is actually on AT&T's web page?
Well the only way I know is from having used the service, so I guess maybe first-hand experience counts? I suppose you'll have to take my word that I actually had a phone, but whatever.
This was a few years ago when it was Cingular. Does that still exist? Heck, maybe it's all changed. I'm just relaying the experience I had where I was definitely charged for a day where I made no calls, and the only activity was getting a voice mail.
very good research, except there's more to it than what you've said. That dollar-per-day activated is not at your sole discretion. It gets applied if someone calls you, even if you never make a call that day. (Your phone was still "activated"). Even if you turn your phone off, you can still get charged. So, what, never give your number out?
I still think phone companies in the U.S. are greedy and are out to squeeze every penny out of their customers possible.
I just signed up for a Verizon plan, which came with a free month of the premium services. Also known as: Web access, expensive video downloads and shitty resolutions, and actual use of the GPS which is there anyway.
I've actually tried the web access, but quickly decided that the only reason I would use it is if I'm nowhere near a computer and feel like checking my email. In other words, wasting idle time. In fact the web experience has been so dismal that the only web pages I've visited have been Google pages. Because they take the mobile thing into account. I've stayed away from Verizon's built-in pages because they're too gimmicky.
If Google plans to be a big player in the "mobile web access" field, at least they've got the right mind-set.
Does this mean I should switch my home-brew moonshine still to using compost instead of sugar? Will I get more "bang for my buck" fermenting some cellulose? Or am I missing the point completely?
According to the article, all the kid did was post links to the video. I can understand suspending the kids who were causing trouble in the room, but also suspending people for just posting links (for the same amount of time, anyway) seems a little over the top.
Of course, as a teacher, if you're so oblivious of what's going on in your classroom that a kid can walk around behind you and give you bunny ears and make rude gestures, then this kind of thing is no surprise. I say that as a high school teacher, by the way. Bad classroom management creates way more problems than bad students.
I also thought it was funny that the video that was making fun of their english teacher had several spelling/grammar mistakes.
MySQL is the second most popular database behind Microsoft SQL Server, according to a winter 2006 report from Evans Data. Oracle comes in second if you combine its database offerings. The situation is similar among wireless developers, almost 30% of who use Microsoft SQL Server compared to the 20% who use MySQL.
What exactly does Oracle offer besides database offerings? How do you not include its "database offerings" when you're ranking the most popular databases? Is information week retarded? The vague reference to "wireless developers" is also weird.
Wouldn't the Google page be more worth reading and more coherent?
They're not really the same thing, though. The point of a free OS (I'm assuming this was an attempted clever barb directed towards Linux) is that it's not just free of charge but you have freedom to use it and change it. The email service was free of charge, but obviously is not completely 'free' as in the case of open source software.
I think Microsoft will have the easiest time adapting at this point. They can clearly throw almost any amount of dollars at whatever new trend comes along. Look at what they're doing with the on-line music store. They seem to be waiting to see where the other people are going and then creating their version of it.
So given that they've got a pretty solid grip on the desktop end, it's not too hard to imagine them taking their 'live' stuff further until it all blends together. Google will have a longer way to go to get a web-desktop blend.
So... All they did to the Nano was shrink the memory? There's no mention of whether there were any other "improvements". I've been holding off on getting a Nano (despite how much I want one) because of the rumors about the screen getting scratched easily. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/23/ipod_nano _scratching/)
Were those rumors overblown? And if not, I wonder why Apple didn't promote a solution to that along with these changes.
From the article it sounds like the brokerage is taking responsibility for getting the shares back. It doesn't seem like the software was at fault since someone put the right value in the wrong field.
I wonder how much will come out of the pocket of the guy who put 600,000 in the 'quantity' field instead of the 'price' field.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish I had a mod point and the +1 awesome option. Bravo!
I'm not sure what your Bush comment has to do with anything. (I voted for the other guy both times).
>You DO realize that, to get a voice mail, you actually make a phone call to do so?
I'm not sure why you assume that I checked my voice mail, noticed it was a dollar down and assumed it was not from that day. Actually, I turned on my phone, which had been OFF for two days and found that my account was now TWO dollars less than the last time it had been on. Thereby leading me to conclude that my account was charged for two days' activation. Since my phone had received a voicemail the previous day (a day it was not ON) I took this to mean that GETTING A CALL (even with the phone turned off) counted as an ACTIVATION.
Sorry for the caps, that's how I'm thinking. Feel free to ignore my emphasis, I'm just a little frustrated by your assumptions and your suggestions that I'm an idiot.
>Do you really think the phone companies were just going to stand still and keep things the way they were...?
Well from what you said about those two go-phone plans nothing has changed.
>So, I should take what you are telling me as proof instead of what is actually on AT&T's web page?
Well the only way I know is from having used the service, so I guess maybe first-hand experience counts? I suppose you'll have to take my word that I actually had a phone, but whatever.
This was a few years ago when it was Cingular. Does that still exist? Heck, maybe it's all changed. I'm just relaying the experience I had where I was definitely charged for a day where I made no calls, and the only activity was getting a voice mail.
very good research, except there's more to it than what you've said. That dollar-per-day activated is not at your sole discretion. It gets applied if someone calls you, even if you never make a call that day. (Your phone was still "activated"). Even if you turn your phone off, you can still get charged. So, what, never give your number out?
I still think phone companies in the U.S. are greedy and are out to squeeze every penny out of their customers possible.
interesting, but...
I just signed up for a Verizon plan, which came with a free month of the premium services. Also known as: Web access, expensive video downloads and shitty resolutions, and actual use of the GPS which is there anyway.
I've actually tried the web access, but quickly decided that the only reason I would use it is if I'm nowhere near a computer and feel like checking my email. In other words, wasting idle time. In fact the web experience has been so dismal that the only web pages I've visited have been Google pages. Because they take the mobile thing into account. I've stayed away from Verizon's built-in pages because they're too gimmicky.
If Google plans to be a big player in the "mobile web access" field, at least they've got the right mind-set.
that's my $0.02
Does this mean I should switch my home-brew moonshine still to using compost instead of sugar? Will I get more "bang for my buck" fermenting some cellulose? Or am I missing the point completely?
According to the article, all the kid did was post links to the video. I can understand suspending the kids who were causing trouble in the room, but also suspending people for just posting links (for the same amount of time, anyway) seems a little over the top.
Of course, as a teacher, if you're so oblivious of what's going on in your classroom that a kid can walk around behind you and give you bunny ears and make rude gestures, then this kind of thing is no surprise. I say that as a high school teacher, by the way. Bad classroom management creates way more problems than bad students.
I also thought it was funny that the video that was making fun of their english teacher had several spelling/grammar mistakes.
Bravo, sir. I wish I had mod points right now.
does it run Lin- errr... Does it run jav- errr... Will it let me see pr0n?
So will we now start seeing tinfoil underwear to go with the hats?
They're not really the same thing, though. The point of a free OS (I'm assuming this was an attempted clever barb directed towards Linux) is that it's not just free of charge but you have freedom to use it and change it. The email service was free of charge, but obviously is not completely 'free' as in the case of open source software.
is pretty obvious.
I think Microsoft will have the easiest time adapting at this point. They can clearly throw almost any amount of dollars at whatever new trend comes along. Look at what they're doing with the on-line music store. They seem to be waiting to see where the other people are going and then creating their version of it.
So given that they've got a pretty solid grip on the desktop end, it's not too hard to imagine them taking their 'live' stuff further until it all blends together. Google will have a longer way to go to get a web-desktop blend.
So... All they did to the Nano was shrink the memory? There's no mention of whether there were any other "improvements". I've been holding off on getting a Nano (despite how much I want one) because of the rumors about the screen getting scratched easily. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/23/ipod_nano _scratching/)
Were those rumors overblown? And if not, I wonder why Apple didn't promote a solution to that along with these changes.
From the article it sounds like the brokerage is taking responsibility for getting the shares back. It doesn't seem like the software was at fault since someone put the right value in the wrong field.
I wonder how much will come out of the pocket of the guy who put 600,000 in the 'quantity' field instead of the 'price' field.