You know, your a stupid ass piece of dog shit in a sack full of horse cum festering in the inferno of stupid fucking retarded bigots. I am willing to bet that you have a penis in your butt right now, and that it's your fathers, and that you enjoy it very much. BTW, your right. Niggers are ruining the country, except that YOUR the nigger, nigger.
You know, this is getting to be very old having posts immediately marked -1 offtopic within seconds of posting it, especially when other posts that are actually offtopic get modded 5 informative. I was making a funny, and no one laughed. That's fubar, man. Just fubar.
I agree whole heartedly with you. Sex is in demand, and it will sell. Having stereotypical females in vg's is not a bad thing, it's a commercial tool used to make money. And it works. Instead of saying "Women shouldn't be portrayed as objects of weak, trashy, big titted sex toys" maybe you should be saying "Gee, since stuff with women portrayed as objects of weak, trashy, big titted sex toys sells really well, I guess I should have realized that even though there are women who buy video games, men are by and large the driving financial source in this industry and catering to them is the smart thing to do." Besides, most male characters are fucking retards too. Look at Unreal Tournament. Look at Quake. Look at Fade to Black. Look at just about any game with a male lead. I don't know anyone who smokes a cigar while wearing armor and running around shooting everything that moves and cracking one liners every 3 minutes. I also know hardly anyone (if anyone at all) who is absolutely chisled and perfect looking, with perfect hair and who can bag any woman they save from a nuclear bomb. Point is, men are JUST as stereotyped as women are, maybe more so. Games mostly portray men as either witless goons full of evil, or sarcastic buff painful-past-created-my-sense-of-evil-fighting dick heads.
Besides, I can't believe that women are still crying "stereotype" when that is not the case at all. It's more like "Hey men, here is what you want, dream about, masterbate to, drool over. Oh, and all you women out there who say stereotype, get over your jealousy and go work out/get botox/plastic surgery/wig/weave/implants, then you won't call it stereotype, you'll call it homage."
Man, I'm in total agreement with you. Religion is a farce. I'm sick of people who say "God wanted you to break your leg for a reason. It's all part of his grand design." Uh, no! I broke my leg because I was being a jackass and shouldn't have climbed so high in the tree. The biggest gripe I have with blind faithers is that many of them believe the bible is the direct literal word of god. BULLSHIT!! It was written by men, and has been changed by men hundreds of times. Nothing (well, very little) in it is literal. It is nothing but a HISTORICALLY BASED novel. And we all know that historically based means one in a thousand facts are true. I've done a bit of research on the bible (New, Old, King James, etc.) and they all have discrepencies, even through different printings of the same version. The biggest differences are obviously between 20th century prints and middle ages on back. There are whole sections erased in new versions, "important" passages completely redone to remove the contradictions, etc. Another thing that bothers me is creationists. All you people who believe Earth was created less that 40,000 years ago because the bible can be CONSTRUED to say it, are complete hipocritical retards. If god created the universe at the beginning of biblical recorded history, he is by definition a liar, which means he cannot exist according to religious doctrine. God is infallible, incapable of lying or deciet, yet he apparently does these things. The bible doesn't mention dinosaurs, yet we have their remains. The bible doesn't mention the decay of radioactive isotopes, yet we know it to be fact. We KNOW FOR AN UNDISPUTABLE FACT that the earth is billions of years old, and that many many species ruled the earth prior to man. So, if there is a god, he is a liar. If he's not a liar, then man is a shallow minded scared sadistic pile of crap for putting words in god's mouth for his own comfort. All the shit about fornication and sex being a sin was written by ugly smelly religious men who couldn't get laid if they were King Solomon, and it pissed them off, so they decided to fool their brain dead followers into not having the pleasure of sex. "Oh, Satan caused the sin of sex to be a sin." Ok, then why is it so pleasurable (assuming your not a freak who uses implements unnatural to the act)? It's because our bodies were designed to make sex pleasurable and desirable. God did that (again, if he exists) not Satan. God created man in his own image. Satan did not alter human physiology at all. Satan was incapable of that, given the definition of an angel (even a fallen one). There is so much more that proves religion is a farce and bullshit, but I don't have enough keyboards or life to sit here and spell it all out for people. Now let me say this (I realise it's a bit anathemic to what I just stated): Belief in a religion or something similar is a good thing in some ways. I don't think believing in god is bad. I personally believe in Jesus, just not they way religious people do. I simply want people to start sifting the shit from the mana. Be open to the possibility that what you believe may not be the right thing. It doesn't make you a bad person to see what is there and incorporate that into what you have faith in. For example you can believe in god, Jesus, the TEACHINGS of the bible, AND that the universe is 12 billion years old, sex is perfectly ok out of wedlock, etc. There is a church group that comes to my neighborhood as a community wellness thing. I spend hours every saturday talking to them about these things (including two priests) and they mostly agree that the bible should not be taken literally, word for word, but instead the meanings and ideas are what are important. One of the priests even changed his mind about the age of the universe after I directed him to several websites and books! He agrees that god would not make the universe seem older to us just for the hell of it (pardon the pun) or for any other reason. Just my heretical going to hell for blasphemy flamebait 20 cents.
Re:Previous attempt to avoid contamination
on
Melting Europa
·
· Score: 1
Ummm....apparantly you are not thinking correctly. If it is decontaminated here on earth, it will pick up more microbes as it is launched. Our atmosphere is packed with them, and it is unavoidable. Unless they decontaminate the probe in a hermetic chamber and seal it inside an airtight container that is launched into space, which then in turn is released from the rocket, using afterburners or the like to fry the oustide of the container while in space to remove contaminates and then finally ejecting the probe on it's route to Europa, it WILL have contaminates all over it. Of course I'm not a scientist, nor do I work for NASA, but that seems to make sense in the common sense area.
The worst work environment I have ever had to work it was...Taco Bell!! (dun dun duunnnnn!!!) Yes, Taco Bell. It was my first job when I was 16, and I worked there again for a short time when I was 23 after moving to a new city. It was dirty, rediculously understaffed, irate customers, the frier was broken and splashed hot grease on you when you removed chalupas, the toilet was backed up and made the whole building smell, and most hidiously of all: Are you ready for the horror? The sheer terror of it? I, a 23 year old decent looking male full of piss and vinegar, at the prime of my still unfolding life, was being told what to do by a zit faced, fat ass, braces wearing, pinto driving, body odor emitting, Lewis Skulnik laughing, Poindexter glasses wearing 17 year old dork!!! AAAAUUHHHHHHGGGGGHHHHH!!!! They're dogs! And they're playing poker! AAAAHAHAHAAAAHAHA!!!!
Even if the people posting the numbers might. Either way, Windows is cheaper AT THE MOMENT because Windows trained IT people are a dime a dozen, where as Linux-phites are much harder to come by, and can demand more money for their "rare" skills. In the future, this inequality will balance out, and the cost of Linux versus Windows will balance out also. At that point it will all be about who actually has a better operating system all the way around. Gee, imagine that. A comparision based on true performance merit and everything that goes along with it. What a strange concept.
You know, I myself just bought a 2500+ on the 4th for $80.00 and couldn't be happier with it. It is overclocked from 1.8Ghz to 2.1Ghz with a standard Volcano 7 heatsink and fan. This new 3400+ sounds like a fast chip, and 64 bit is the shiznit. BUT, it will probably cost $400 on release, and stay above $200 for at least a year. What I am getting at is that although chip makers obviously need to make their money, wouldn't they make more by using the best business model: sell more for less. I mean, instead of (just for demonstrative purposes) selling the 3400+ at an introductory price of $400 and selling maybe 100,000 they could sell it at an introductory price of $300 and sell 300,000 and make up the price difference in the volume, plus some. I used to work at a friends video game store, and when the X-BOX came out, instead of selling them for $299.00 and making $20.00 per box, and selling maybe 3 a day, he was selling them for $289 and selling out every day, with like 10 sales a day. It is a good example of an incremental decrease in price exponentially increasing sales/profit. Especially when the market is full of other products that are so close in feature/speed/compatibility for much less cost to the consumer.
Being as the drive is a micro drive, and the abuse it will undoubtedly recieve, are these drives up to the task? How well are they stress tested to make sure that they would be suitable for a mini-Ipod? I have heard complaints about regular Ipod drives not lasting as long as expected, so I wonder if a micro drive would fail even faster.
Jesus, that gave me a flashback! A bad one too. For a second there, I was reliving shelling out $200 for 64Mb of PC66 RAM. But seriously, what kind of seek time does a micro 2Gb drive have with no buffer and virtually no electronics? And how many platters is it/could it use?
Ok. Now your being a dildo. I am not making Windows out to be a flawless wonder, as is evident in my previous posts STATING that I know Windows is not flawless. And you have to be a total fucking idiot to believe that Market share, money made and software made for the platform have nothing to do with the quality of the platform. Are you daft? If it's not about quality, useability, or the fact that it excels, then why would anyone make software for it? Why would it have 90% market share? Jesus, you really are grasping at non-existant straws. I was simply expressing my opinion, but now you've pissed me off with your "I'm wearing magical glasses that make me blind to blatant facts, blind to other peoples posts except what I want to see, and they also make me look cool! At least, my mom says they do!" crap. If you weren't a zealot, you would be able to admit that Linux is INCONSISTANT, HARDER TO USE THAN THE AVERAGE CONSUMER WANTS, AND NEEDS TO UP THE ANTE QUITE A BIT TO BE A REAL CONTENDER!!!! And, sir, it is you who lacks debating skills. All you have done is put words in my mouth, try to put me down for my opinion, and completely closed yourself to irrefutible facts. I now quit this debacle, as I am seriously over armed and outfitted to continue in this "baby has poopy diapy so baby gonna pout" discussion. Good day, and good luck.
First of all, different distributions DO have different support and function levels.
Linux Consistency IS crappy. It's a widely known FACT (something that is provably unarguable) that Linux distributions deviate from each other enough to be almost separate OS's in some cases, and that the differences between distributions is why there ARE different distributions. By definition DIFFERENT DISTRIBUTIONS MEANS INCONSITENCY!!!!!!
So, you're gonna sit there and tell me that granma number one doesn't care if her photo collection of her grandchildren can't be recieved by her nephew who uses Linux because his distribution of said OS isn't compatible with the WINDOWS program she created the album with. Uhhh....yeah, right.
So, WINE hasn't matured enough to run some Win-only games. Well, if Linux was ready for the consumer OS market, it wouldn't need WINE now would it. That statement alone that you made about WINE not being mature (ergo Linux is not mature) SUPPORTS MY OPINION.
If money doesn't tell you that they are a better consumer OS, then what does? The fact that they have a 90% base? The fact that all the best software is made for their OS? The fact that even though that software is ported to Linux, it's support on Linux is spotty at best? There is more that proves that Windows is the best AVERAGE CONSUMER OS on the market, but i'm not gonna sit here and type it all.
Blatant falsehood. Again, you're previous comment about WINE makes your "I laugh" comment irrelevant and an obvious ploy to try and gain ground where there is none for you to gain.
"Most Linux distributions automatically detect and update hardware configuration changes, and it's been that way for over 3 years." Boy, you just love eating feet don't you. That statement right there again supports my opinion about Linux not being consistant. You argue that it is, but at the same time add support to what you are arguing against.
Again, I will say one more time, I like Linux. I am not "ProWindowsFUD". I just look at the numbers and facts. I will also say again that I would LIKE to see Linux do good and mature to a level where it IS a good AVERAGE consumer choice for an OS.
P.S. I never claimed to be a Linux expert, and you OBVIOUSLY are not either. And the "3 years ago" thing? Bullshit like there's no tomorrow. If that was all 3 years ago, then we must all have travelled back in time because it is still quite evident today.
I would favor the "talk-to-daughter-and-explain-about-retards" approach with my daughter, and the "smash-the-nuts-of-the-retards-caretakers-for-not- teaching-the-retard-about-touching-others" approach with the retards parents. And I do realise that there are some retards who can't be taught, but they are normally also unable to be in the outside world without constant supervision, so the chances of that scenario are slim to none. Either way, someone's nuts would be smashed. Offending boyfriend, retard, parent, caretaker, etc. A smashed nut ALWAYS puts things into perspective.
Uh...this topic is getting a little creepy. I don't care what the laws are, touching a child in any sexual manner is wrong morally, ethically, lawfully, religiously (although I'm not religious), and as-a-father-i-would-smash-the-nuts-of-anyone-who-t ouches-my-daughter-and-do-other-things-to-them-tha t-i-cannot-put-into-words-because-it-would-frighte n-you-to-the-point-of-a-massive-heart-attack. As far as touching themselves, big deal. All kids do it. It's part of learning about themselves. But they should be tought when it's appropriate/not appropriate, so that they don't go to McDonald's and start jerking off all over the counter when ordering a Big Mac with large fries.
It's all in the context. A nude woman standing and gazing out a window is not harmful. It's (normally) tasteful. A nude man (non-erect) sitting in a chair is not harmful. BUT, a nude man banging a nude woman, or a nude woman being raped (movies, tv) or nude teens froggin like Benjamin Franklin (every Friday the 13th) IS harmful, especially if it's not explained to them what is going on, why it's going on, consequences, when it's appropriate/not appropriate, etc. And there IS a limit. I would NOT EVER allow my 8 year old daughter to view images/video of fully exposed intercourse. I don't care if she sees the odd tit or ass, or the fast barely noticeable schlong as long as it's not distasteful or blatantly in your face. She's gonna see it anyway, and I'd rather she learn about that kinda shit from me and learn it correctly with good perspective than for her to learn it when she's 15 on her first date with Slicked Hair Johnny trying to get a bj.
Sorry, I meant to say that she paid $200 AUS for it, which with current exchange rates means she paid $51 more. I just did the currency conversion. Anyway, it's still way more expensive over there.
but maybe CD piracy in Australia doesn't affect sales because CD burners (or any technology for that matter) is outrageously expensive. My wife is Australian, and much of her family lives there. Her nanna bought a DVD player a few months ago for $300.00 that would cost $99 here. Even with exchange rates it's still like $75 dollars more expensive.
Guns don't kill people, it's the small hard metal projectiles that they release at supersonic speeds piercing through peoples soft body tissue and exploding through the other side in a spray of blood, guts, excrement, brain matter, liver tissue that kills people.
Sadaam Housein should be tied to an ant mound (fire ants) naked and have his balls smeared with honey because he is a goat flucking gizz gargling bitchbastardbuttdongdildoshitlipped rooster sucker.
I want to have sex with Paris Hilton in ways that are illegal in most countries.
So, I can't say any of the above? Ok, at least I was told before I offended anyone. Whew!!!
Gimme a break. Linux 3+ years ago was not much more than a really bad Dos Gui. Now it is a very good server-side OS. Apparently no one reads my full post or just sees what they want to see. LINUX IS NOT A GOOD CONSUMER OS RIGHT NOW!! That is the truth, and if you are too much of a Linux geek/cultist/fanatic to admit it, then thats your problem not mine. By the way, Redhat/Mandrake/etc. are not Linux. They are a derivitive of the Linux base, with better interfaces/support/coding/etc. (please don't reply to this statement's accuracy, as it is a generalization, not a definition). If Linux was a single entity with consistancy across the board for its OS, instead of 20 different OS's that don't all support/interact with/do the same stuff, then it would probably be MUCH more of a serious contender to MS Windows. But the fact remains that consumers don't want an OS that isn't gonna interact/work with everyone else's OS. What would be the point? Also, most Linux users dual boot/have another pc with Windows. Most Windows users don't even have a copy of Linux, let alone know anything about it. What does that tell you? It tells you that Linux is NOT ready to be a consumer accepted OS. It needs work, better integration, more polishing, MUCH better support, and not to be spread out over so many distributers. And yes, I know Windows is not perfect, but they have $40 billion+ dollars saying that they are better as a consumer OS. You can't argue with the figures (yes, they monopolized/cheated/marketed better, but still...). I SAID IN A PREVIOUS POST THAT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST LINUX, SO DON'T REPLY LIKE I AM A LINUX BASHER. Also, I find it relatively amusing that you pinpointed on my statement about support for the latest greatest anything. If it weren't true, people like you wouldn't get pissed off about it. IT HAS SUPPORT FOR LOTS OF STUFF, BUT NOT GOOD SUPPORT, AND NOT FOR NEARLY EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT MS HAS. It's very easy for you guys to sit back and say "Hey, Linux is great and I can do this and that with it, and lots of stuff without even recompiling the kernel." Well, you are obviously not average consumers. MOST people don't have a clue how to recompile a kernel, nor do they know what it is. They shouldn't need to know. The OS should automatically make necessary changes on it's own. You shouldn't need to know basic programming to run your computer. If you did need to know it, we'd be back in 1983 when most consumers had never even sat in front of a computer. Ease of use is everything these days, and Linux lacks that in some very important areas. Nuff' said.
"Why do you think that IBM Global Services, in cooperation with Dell and HP, just announced a major push to promote Linux on the desktop worldwide"
Because they can sell their computers cheaper to the public because Linux is basically free, ergo their production costs are less, visa vi they can sell their computers cheaper, concordantly more consumers will buy their systems. Other than that, Linux STILL isn't ready for regular consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, your a stupid ass piece of dog shit in a sack full of horse cum festering in the inferno of stupid fucking retarded bigots. I am willing to bet that you have a penis in your butt right now, and that it's your fathers, and that you enjoy it very much. BTW, your right. Niggers are ruining the country, except that YOUR the nigger, nigger.
You know, this is getting to be very old having posts immediately marked -1 offtopic within seconds of posting it, especially when other posts that are actually offtopic get modded 5 informative. I was making a funny, and no one laughed. That's fubar, man. Just fubar.
I was going to make a insightful/funny comment, but then I realized I didn't RTFA, so I will refrain from making said comment.
I agree whole heartedly with you. Sex is in demand, and it will sell. Having stereotypical females in vg's is not a bad thing, it's a commercial tool used to make money. And it works. Instead of saying "Women shouldn't be portrayed as objects of weak, trashy, big titted sex toys" maybe you should be saying "Gee, since stuff with women portrayed as objects of weak, trashy, big titted sex toys sells really well, I guess I should have realized that even though there are women who buy video games, men are by and large the driving financial source in this industry and catering to them is the smart thing to do."
Besides, most male characters are fucking retards too. Look at Unreal Tournament. Look at Quake. Look at Fade to Black. Look at just about any game with a male lead. I don't know anyone who smokes a cigar while wearing armor and running around shooting everything that moves and cracking one liners every 3 minutes. I also know hardly anyone (if anyone at all) who is absolutely chisled and perfect looking, with perfect hair and who can bag any woman they save from a nuclear bomb.
Point is, men are JUST as stereotyped as women are, maybe more so. Games mostly portray men as either witless goons full of evil, or sarcastic buff painful-past-created-my-sense-of-evil-fighting dick heads.
Besides, I can't believe that women are still crying "stereotype" when that is not the case at all. It's more like "Hey men, here is what you want, dream about, masterbate to, drool over. Oh, and all you women out there who say stereotype, get over your jealousy and go work out/get botox/plastic surgery/wig/weave/implants, then you won't call it stereotype, you'll call it homage."
How to acquire French cuisine in four simple steps:
Go to France.
Find blind man eating a sandwich.
Hit blind man with hammer.
Enjoy sandwich.
How to acquire French cuisine in 3 simple steps:
1. Go to France
2. Start a war there.
3. Enjoy French food for free while laughing at the French running away screaming for their mommys.
Man, I'm in total agreement with you. Religion is a farce. I'm sick of people who say "God wanted you to break your leg for a reason. It's all part of his grand design." Uh, no! I broke my leg because I was being a jackass and shouldn't have climbed so high in the tree.
The biggest gripe I have with blind faithers is that many of them believe the bible is the direct literal word of god. BULLSHIT!! It was written by men, and has been changed by men hundreds of times. Nothing (well, very little) in it is literal. It is nothing but a HISTORICALLY BASED novel. And we all know that historically based means one in a thousand facts are true. I've done a bit of research on the bible (New, Old, King James, etc.) and they all have discrepencies, even through different printings of the same version. The biggest differences are obviously between 20th century prints and middle ages on back. There are whole sections erased in new versions, "important" passages completely redone to remove the contradictions, etc.
Another thing that bothers me is creationists. All you people who believe Earth was created less that 40,000 years ago because the bible can be CONSTRUED to say it, are complete hipocritical retards. If god created the universe at the beginning of biblical recorded history, he is by definition a liar, which means he cannot exist according to religious doctrine. God is infallible, incapable of lying or deciet, yet he apparently does these things. The bible doesn't mention dinosaurs, yet we have their remains. The bible doesn't mention the decay of radioactive isotopes, yet we know it to be fact. We KNOW FOR AN UNDISPUTABLE FACT that the earth is billions of years old, and that many many species ruled the earth prior to man. So, if there is a god, he is a liar. If he's not a liar, then man is a shallow minded scared sadistic pile of crap for putting words in god's mouth for his own comfort. All the shit about fornication and sex being a sin was written by ugly smelly religious men who couldn't get laid if they were King Solomon, and it pissed them off, so they decided to fool their brain dead followers into not having the pleasure of sex. "Oh, Satan caused the sin of sex to be a sin." Ok, then why is it so pleasurable (assuming your not a freak who uses implements unnatural to the act)? It's because our bodies were designed to make sex pleasurable and desirable. God did that (again, if he exists) not Satan. God created man in his own image. Satan did not alter human physiology at all. Satan was incapable of that, given the definition of an angel (even a fallen one).
There is so much more that proves religion is a farce and bullshit, but I don't have enough keyboards or life to sit here and spell it all out for people.
Now let me say this (I realise it's a bit anathemic to what I just stated): Belief in a religion or something similar is a good thing in some ways. I don't think believing in god is bad. I personally believe in Jesus, just not they way religious people do. I simply want people to start sifting the shit from the mana. Be open to the possibility that what you believe may not be the right thing. It doesn't make you a bad person to see what is there and incorporate that into what you have faith in. For example you can believe in god, Jesus, the TEACHINGS of the bible, AND that the universe is 12 billion years old, sex is perfectly ok out of wedlock, etc. There is a church group that comes to my neighborhood as a community wellness thing. I spend hours every saturday talking to them about these things (including two priests) and they mostly agree that the bible should not be taken literally, word for word, but instead the meanings and ideas are what are important. One of the priests even changed his mind about the age of the universe after I directed him to several websites and books! He agrees that god would not make the universe seem older to us just for the hell of it (pardon the pun) or for any other reason.
Just my heretical going to hell for blasphemy flamebait 20 cents.
Ummm....apparantly you are not thinking correctly. If it is decontaminated here on earth, it will pick up more microbes as it is launched. Our atmosphere is packed with them, and it is unavoidable. Unless they decontaminate the probe in a hermetic chamber and seal it inside an airtight container that is launched into space, which then in turn is released from the rocket, using afterburners or the like to fry the oustide of the container while in space to remove contaminates and then finally ejecting the probe on it's route to Europa, it WILL have contaminates all over it.
Of course I'm not a scientist, nor do I work for NASA, but that seems to make sense in the common sense area.
Ha ha ha! Snake Oil!!! Good one, man!
The worst work environment I have ever had to work it was...Taco Bell!! (dun dun duunnnnn!!!) Yes, Taco Bell. It was my first job when I was 16, and I worked there again for a short time when I was 23 after moving to a new city. It was dirty, rediculously understaffed, irate customers, the frier was broken and splashed hot grease on you when you removed chalupas, the toilet was backed up and made the whole building smell, and most hidiously of all: Are you ready for the horror? The sheer terror of it? I, a 23 year old decent looking male full of piss and vinegar, at the prime of my still unfolding life, was being told what to do by a zit faced, fat ass, braces wearing, pinto driving, body odor emitting, Lewis Skulnik laughing, Poindexter glasses wearing 17 year old dork!!! AAAAUUHHHHHHGGGGGHHHHH!!!! They're dogs! And they're playing poker! AAAAHAHAHAAAAHAHA!!!!
Think of all the pr0n sites! Now instead of millions of sites full of crap, we get TRILLIONS of sites full of crap! Yippeee!!!!
Even if the people posting the numbers might. Either way, Windows is cheaper AT THE MOMENT because Windows trained IT people are a dime a dozen, where as Linux-phites are much harder to come by, and can demand more money for their "rare" skills. In the future, this inequality will balance out, and the cost of Linux versus Windows will balance out also. At that point it will all be about who actually has a better operating system all the way around.
Gee, imagine that. A comparision based on true performance merit and everything that goes along with it. What a strange concept.
You know, I myself just bought a 2500+ on the 4th for $80.00 and couldn't be happier with it. It is overclocked from 1.8Ghz to 2.1Ghz with a standard Volcano 7 heatsink and fan. This new 3400+ sounds like a fast chip, and 64 bit is the shiznit. BUT, it will probably cost $400 on release, and stay above $200 for at least a year. What I am getting at is that although chip makers obviously need to make their money, wouldn't they make more by using the best business model: sell more for less. I mean, instead of (just for demonstrative purposes) selling the 3400+ at an introductory price of $400 and selling maybe 100,000 they could sell it at an introductory price of $300 and sell 300,000 and make up the price difference in the volume, plus some. I used to work at a friends video game store, and when the X-BOX came out, instead of selling them for $299.00 and making $20.00 per box, and selling maybe 3 a day, he was selling them for $289 and selling out every day, with like 10 sales a day. It is a good example of an incremental decrease in price exponentially increasing sales/profit. Especially when the market is full of other products that are so close in feature/speed/compatibility for much less cost to the consumer.
Being as the drive is a micro drive, and the abuse it will undoubtedly recieve, are these drives up to the task? How well are they stress tested to make sure that they would be suitable for a mini-Ipod? I have heard complaints about regular Ipod drives not lasting as long as expected, so I wonder if a micro drive would fail even faster.
How the heck is it off topic to post a question about a hard drive that is PART OF THE MAIN POST? C'mon, that's a load of carp.
Jesus, that gave me a flashback! A bad one too. For a second there, I was reliving shelling out $200 for 64Mb of PC66 RAM. But seriously, what kind of seek time does a micro 2Gb drive have with no buffer and virtually no electronics? And how many platters is it/could it use?
Ok. Now your being a dildo. I am not making Windows out to be a flawless wonder, as is evident in my previous posts STATING that I know Windows is not flawless. And you have to be a total fucking idiot to believe that Market share, money made and software made for the platform have nothing to do with the quality of the platform. Are you daft? If it's not about quality, useability, or the fact that it excels, then why would anyone make software for it? Why would it have 90% market share? Jesus, you really are grasping at non-existant straws. I was simply expressing my opinion, but now you've pissed me off with your "I'm wearing magical glasses that make me blind to blatant facts, blind to other peoples posts except what I want to see, and they also make me look cool! At least, my mom says they do!" crap. If you weren't a zealot, you would be able to admit that Linux is INCONSISTANT, HARDER TO USE THAN THE AVERAGE CONSUMER WANTS, AND NEEDS TO UP THE ANTE QUITE A BIT TO BE A REAL CONTENDER!!!! And, sir, it is you who lacks debating skills. All you have done is put words in my mouth, try to put me down for my opinion, and completely closed yourself to irrefutible facts. I now quit this debacle, as I am seriously over armed and outfitted to continue in this "baby has poopy diapy so baby gonna pout" discussion. Good day, and good luck.
First of all, different distributions DO have different support and function levels.
Linux Consistency IS crappy. It's a widely known FACT (something that is provably unarguable) that Linux distributions deviate from each other enough to be almost separate OS's in some cases, and that the differences between distributions is why there ARE different distributions. By definition DIFFERENT DISTRIBUTIONS MEANS INCONSITENCY!!!!!!
So, you're gonna sit there and tell me that granma number one doesn't care if her photo collection of her grandchildren can't be recieved by her nephew who uses Linux because his distribution of said OS isn't compatible with the WINDOWS program she created the album with. Uhhh....yeah, right.
So, WINE hasn't matured enough to run some Win-only games. Well, if Linux was ready for the consumer OS market, it wouldn't need WINE now would it. That statement alone that you made about WINE not being mature (ergo Linux is not mature) SUPPORTS MY OPINION.
If money doesn't tell you that they are a better consumer OS, then what does? The fact that they have a 90% base? The fact that all the best software is made for their OS? The fact that even though that software is ported to Linux, it's support on Linux is spotty at best? There is more that proves that Windows is the best AVERAGE CONSUMER OS on the market, but i'm not gonna sit here and type it all.
Blatant falsehood. Again, you're previous comment about WINE makes your "I laugh" comment irrelevant and an obvious ploy to try and gain ground where there is none for you to gain.
"Most Linux distributions automatically detect and update hardware configuration changes, and it's been that way for over 3 years." Boy, you just love eating feet don't you. That statement right there again supports my opinion about Linux not being consistant. You argue that it is, but at the same time add support to what you are arguing against.
Again, I will say one more time, I like Linux. I am not "ProWindowsFUD". I just look at the numbers and facts. I will also say again that I would LIKE to see Linux do good and mature to a level where it IS a good AVERAGE consumer choice for an OS.
P.S. I never claimed to be a Linux expert, and you OBVIOUSLY are not either. And the "3 years ago" thing? Bullshit like there's no tomorrow. If that was all 3 years ago, then we must all have travelled back in time because it is still quite evident today.
I would favor the "talk-to-daughter-and-explain-about-retards" approach with my daughter, and the "smash-the-nuts-of-the-retards-caretakers-for-not- teaching-the-retard-about-touching-others" approach with the retards parents. And I do realise that there are some retards who can't be taught, but they are normally also unable to be in the outside world without constant supervision, so the chances of that scenario are slim to none. Either way, someone's nuts would be smashed. Offending boyfriend, retard, parent, caretaker, etc. A smashed nut ALWAYS puts things into perspective.
Uh...this topic is getting a little creepy. I don't care what the laws are, touching a child in any sexual manner is wrong morally, ethically, lawfully, religiously (although I'm not religious), and as-a-father-i-would-smash-the-nuts-of-anyone-who-t ouches-my-daughter-and-do-other-things-to-them-tha t-i-cannot-put-into-words-because-it-would-frighte n-you-to-the-point-of-a-massive-heart-attack. As far as touching themselves, big deal. All kids do it. It's part of learning about themselves. But they should be tought when it's appropriate/not appropriate, so that they don't go to McDonald's and start jerking off all over the counter when ordering a Big Mac with large fries.
It's all in the context. A nude woman standing and gazing out a window is not harmful. It's (normally) tasteful. A nude man (non-erect) sitting in a chair is not harmful. BUT, a nude man banging a nude woman, or a nude woman being raped (movies, tv) or nude teens froggin like Benjamin Franklin (every Friday the 13th) IS harmful, especially if it's not explained to them what is going on, why it's going on, consequences, when it's appropriate/not appropriate, etc. And there IS a limit. I would NOT EVER allow my 8 year old daughter to view images/video of fully exposed intercourse. I don't care if she sees the odd tit or ass, or the fast barely noticeable schlong as long as it's not distasteful or blatantly in your face. She's gonna see it anyway, and I'd rather she learn about that kinda shit from me and learn it correctly with good perspective than for her to learn it when she's 15 on her first date with Slicked Hair Johnny trying to get a bj.
Sorry, I meant to say that she paid $200 AUS for it, which with current exchange rates means she paid $51 more. I just did the currency conversion. Anyway, it's still way more expensive over there.
but maybe CD piracy in Australia doesn't affect sales because CD burners (or any technology for that matter) is outrageously expensive. My wife is Australian, and much of her family lives there. Her nanna bought a DVD player a few months ago for $300.00 that would cost $99 here. Even with exchange rates it's still like $75 dollars more expensive.
SCO is akin to gelatinous pig shit.
DRM must mean Dickless Retarded Microsoft.
Napster went from Superman to Lex Luthor.
Guns don't kill people, it's the small hard metal projectiles that they release at supersonic speeds piercing through peoples soft body tissue and exploding through the other side in a spray of blood, guts, excrement, brain matter, liver tissue that kills people.
Sadaam Housein should be tied to an ant mound (fire ants) naked and have his balls smeared with honey because he is a goat flucking gizz gargling bitchbastardbuttdongdildoshitlipped rooster sucker.
I want to have sex with Paris Hilton in ways that are illegal in most countries.
So, I can't say any of the above? Ok, at least I was told before I offended anyone. Whew!!!Gimme a break. Linux 3+ years ago was not much more than a really bad Dos Gui. Now it is a very good server-side OS. Apparently no one reads my full post or just sees what they want to see. LINUX IS NOT A GOOD CONSUMER OS RIGHT NOW!! That is the truth, and if you are too much of a Linux geek/cultist/fanatic to admit it, then thats your problem not mine. By the way, Redhat/Mandrake/etc. are not Linux. They are a derivitive of the Linux base, with better interfaces/support/coding/etc. (please don't reply to this statement's accuracy, as it is a generalization, not a definition). If Linux was a single entity with consistancy across the board for its OS, instead of 20 different OS's that don't all support/interact with/do the same stuff, then it would probably be MUCH more of a serious contender to MS Windows. But the fact remains that consumers don't want an OS that isn't gonna interact/work with everyone else's OS. What would be the point? Also, most Linux users dual boot/have another pc with Windows. Most Windows users don't even have a copy of Linux, let alone know anything about it. What does that tell you? It tells you that Linux is NOT ready to be a consumer accepted OS. It needs work, better integration, more polishing, MUCH better support, and not to be spread out over so many distributers. And yes, I know Windows is not perfect, but they have $40 billion+ dollars saying that they are better as a consumer OS. You can't argue with the figures (yes, they monopolized/cheated/marketed better, but still...). I SAID IN A PREVIOUS POST THAT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST LINUX, SO DON'T REPLY LIKE I AM A LINUX BASHER. Also, I find it relatively amusing that you pinpointed on my statement about support for the latest greatest anything. If it weren't true, people like you wouldn't get pissed off about it. IT HAS SUPPORT FOR LOTS OF STUFF, BUT NOT GOOD SUPPORT, AND NOT FOR NEARLY EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT MS HAS. It's very easy for you guys to sit back and say "Hey, Linux is great and I can do this and that with it, and lots of stuff without even recompiling the kernel." Well, you are obviously not average consumers. MOST people don't have a clue how to recompile a kernel, nor do they know what it is. They shouldn't need to know. The OS should automatically make necessary changes on it's own. You shouldn't need to know basic programming to run your computer. If you did need to know it, we'd be back in 1983 when most consumers had never even sat in front of a computer. Ease of use is everything these days, and Linux lacks that in some very important areas. Nuff' said.
"Why do you think that IBM Global Services, in cooperation with Dell and HP, just announced a major push to promote Linux on the desktop worldwide"
Because they can sell their computers cheaper to the public because Linux is basically free, ergo their production costs are less, visa vi they can sell their computers cheaper, concordantly more consumers will buy their systems. Other than that, Linux STILL isn't ready for regular consumers.