I really wanted to agree with your ten reasons on why macs are easier to sell. I'll be modded down, but here are my additions:
First Off you can get MS Office for the Mac. So you don't have to push OpenOffice
you are 100% correct.
Secondly a well named company. Apple has been in the news alot lately and a lot more then Linux.
I'm assuming you do not or have not worked in a corporate environment before. Name recognition is great, but all they will look at is how it affects the bottom line. Buying new hardware is NEVER and easy sell.
Third Cool hardware. If you are going to upgrade you might as well get some cool hardware out of it.
See previous response.
Forth wow factor. It is easy with Apple products to make a demostration with it and wow the execs.
Powerpoint is easy on any platform. Execs, unlike us readers of slashdot, will have no idea or care what machine was used to create the presentation - only the content.
Fifth. User friendly you can debate that linux is user friendly and perfectly good as a desktop until you are blue in the face. But the normal person will be more comfortable with Apple which has the reputation of beeing easier to use then windows for many year.
As long as we're making wild assumptions, the average person would be more comfortable working on a Windows system. Chances are, that is what they have used for their entire working and personal computing habits. People resist change. Apple IS easier to use if you are not familiar with Windows. But I would hate to work tech support for the company that switched from Windows to Apple...I can hear the countless calls "I can't find my computer...where's the start menu...etc."
Sixth knowing that it will work. Other then putting Linux on a bunch of hardware designed to run on windows and taking you chances and replacing anything that may not be compatible. Just put all the old stuff aside and go with new hardware. And many vendors who say their are linux compatible just lie to you. Like Dell but that is an other story.
Please reread what you wrote. Getting all new hardware solves no problem. THe majority of venders don't support apple or linux. replacing the hardware just sets your company back. employees need to be trained on new software(2yrs later when the vendor releases it) or need to figure out a manual way to do it. basically, you spend countless dollars on training and other worthless setbacks. Loss of productivity.
Seventh. Forced uniformaty. If you put Linux on all the systems it will be only a mater of time untill someone who doesn't like Linux will bring there copy of XP from home and reinstall it on their system. And shortly after that the network is invaded with a virus again
Why does an employee have access rights to do this in the first place?! Virus protection is my least favorite argument for switching away from Windows. Once Apple or Linux becomes a more mainstream OS, mark my words, there will be countless virii for them.
Eighth. Looks good to share holders. You will look a lot more professional when you have an iMacs or PowerMac in every cubical. Apple is as much a part of interior design as functionality thus it makes your company look uptodate and modern.
You are correct. Apple computers DO look nicer. However, shareholders look at the financial position of the company. Once they see a massive reinvestment into hardware and cash flows locked up, investors will sell off their shares. The plumetting stock price means the CEO fires the person responisble for the hardware switch and lays of an assload of employees to cut costs, rectifying the financial statments.
Ninth. Becides secuity most people working on Apples are more productive. The interface is clean and doesn't get in the way like windows or most Linux WMs
You are probally right. THe reason my department missed its sales goa
From the article: "The problem is that the iPod only works with either songs that you buy from the on-line Apple iTunes store or songs that you rip from your own CD's."
but aren't those the only leagal digital means of songs anyway? now the IRAA is complaining - my pirated songs don't work on my ipod, boo hoo.
PROFIT is the biggest catalyst for cell virii. National Do Not Call lists have limited several marketers from spamming cells with text & calls. THere are, however, many companies who it is not beneath to promote their product (ie, the numerous enlarge your penis/free prescription drugs/etc e-mails i get) through less than leagal means.
Maybe I should break out the tin foil hat, but perhaps it is the so called virus protection industry we really should be watching out for. With the cell phone market growing by the minute, this is one of the largest untapped markets for these companies. THink of the profits and markets they would reap if a few virii started attacking phones. Just look at the response the general populace has given simple virus protection software. This could mean add on packages for your cell, subscriptions for updates, and huge contracts with wireless service providers and manufactuers.
actually, i wish i would have thought of this first....
1. Unlimited resource based. The resource base on Earth is limited. Finding a cost-effective way to live, work, mine, etc. in space allows us access to an essentially unlimited resource base. There's no reason in the long term, why the bulk of Earth's manufacturing, research, and maybe even bulk food growth can't be done in orbit once we have developed a cost-effective way to get enough material into orbit.
Starcraft is a GAME. besides, in the event we find these unlimited revolutionary resources, the chances of developing a "cost-effective way to get enough material into orbit"is slim. seriously, we are still using a oil based combustion engine on earth. we can't even develope a more efficient/safer/cleaner means of an engine.
2. "New technologies. The space program to date has stimulated the development of useful versions of thousands of new technologies. Think where you would be today without: Flu, cold, allergy medicines, microwave ovens, tinfoil, satelittes for weather, television, cell phones, microcomputers, new materials, etc. The development of these, and thousands of other technologies has been funded and driven at least in part by the space program."
yes, we've covered the development of new tech - espeicallly Tang. THe intial space race did provide a few great techs. i find it difficult to believe that without the space race that the "...Flu, cold, allergy medicines..." would not have been discovered.
3. "Also, not having a space program wouldn't necessarily help solve the population/resource probelms."
perhaps a more important question is why is teh earth on a track to overpopulation. maybe we should control earth's pop. before we colonize and overpopulate another. if we cant afford to feed and house earth's pop, why should we repeat our mistakes on another planet? "Also, not having a space program wouldn't necessarily help solve the population/resource probelms." -you're right. perhaps we should take those billions of $ allocated for space to fixing this problem.
iknow you only had 3 points, but let me add of 4th: why is the US shouldering the bulk of the bill? If overpopulation is a katalyst for researching space exploration, shouldn't the countries with the huge populations be footing the bill? How about it China & India?
What if we discover that the vaccine for AIDS or the cure for Cancer is an antibody so complex it can only be grown slowly in a weightless environment?
unlikely. besides, i don't have cancer. As for AIDS, i generally avoid sharing fluids with people I don't know or going to 3rd rate medical institutions. As I only have one body, I make a pretty good point about keeping track of what goes into my body.
I agree that we need to question how and why we're trying to move forward in Space, on the ground, and in the Oceans. We should spend our money wisely, to good effect, and with a long term view regarding payoff.
well said.
The one that got us communication, weather (and yes, Spy) satellites? The one that enables you to determine where you are anywhere on the planet using a GPS?
ahh, touche. you are absolutely right. i do enjoy those technologies. i stand corrected.
You are abosolutely correct. The space race did provide some interesting materials(velcro, tang, jello..). My concern is that it came at such a huge price. For the sake of not dragging this out any longer, let's agree to disagree.
to find what? we don't the moon is nothing but dust. they proved that in the '60's. we aren't going to live there. it should never come to that. i'm still going with waste on taxpayers money.
I realize that Slashdot, with its many space afficianados, is the last place I should ask this question...but the more important question: Why are we still wasting money on the space program?
especially going to the moon again. it is a worthless rock. I believe tax payers should not have to finance MORE fruitless moon trips. We beat the commies to the moon, what else do we have to prove? Except that NASA is a drain on taxpayers...
my college campus found itself in a similar situation. They just dropped all the culprit computers in a "black hole network." The black hole only displayed a single webpage and blocked all other network traffice. That page basically said come get our FREE virus protection and windows updates if you want to ever use internet again. If you were a repeat offender, you must PROVE to someone(admin, help staff, etc) that you have purged and safeguarded your computer to ever use network resources. It has proven to be quite effective.
agreed. many of these kids will not reach college. even the most basic of office jobs now require intermediate use of "office software." I'm an advocate for keeping MSOffice as it is most prevelent in the business world. however, i think what sd diamond said was great. we also need to be teaching kids how to adapt to other software.
i agree with you. thank you for your support. i do agree that environmental factors play a role in homosexuality - which does not disprove my theory that it is/could be choice.
if you want to draw parrallels with other mammals, we can. i think many biologists or whoever studies mammals would agree that they have the capacity to make decisions/choices given different environmental factors. different environments lead to different behaviors. I am not speculating on the sexuality of rams, simply because i do not care. i'm merely suggesting, as your post reaffirms, homosexuality is likely a choice. by choice i mean a decision made by a free will over time, given varring circumstances, or enviroments as you say. homosexuality, imo, is developed after dealing with several life decisions. while not scientific, friends in the field of early childhood development have rarley seen homosexual behavior out of their preschool classes. this has helped me to believe that is a choice/adaptation over time - not from birth.
as for the genetic aspect, i have not formulated an opinion. i know so little about genetics. more importantly, i have read conflicting articles on both sides of the subject. the few articles i have read seem to affirm the environmental influences rather than born traits.
finally, as i mentioned in my previous post, this is merely my speculation & opinion. i respect the right for us to disagree & welcome further discussion.
"If you feel it would devalue "normal" marriages, then you need to take a close look at mariage statistics. They really can't get much more devalued than they already are"
check your statistics again. homosexual marriages have a greater failure(ie, divorce) rate than heterosexual marriages. look at amsterdame & canada, two places where gay marriage is legal. not trolling, just telling you the facts.
second, it is my opinion that laws are based upon shared morals. i'm generalizing, but it is the majority of americans who are morally opposed to murder. hence, it is illeagal. it is my opinion, due to the rapid increase of laws banning gay marriage state to state & based on the population size of the gay community(2% of US population - USWorld news) that the majority of americans are morally opposed to gay marriage.
finally, i do not believe that it is fair to equate the gay marriage controversy to the civil rights movement. the civil rights movement was to allow basic rights for all. more importantly, the civil rights movement was there to stop discrimination against people who could not control certain circumstances(ie, skin color). it is unfair to equate these two movements as, IMHO, homosexuals CAN control the circumstances. I believe that homosexuality is a CHOICE not an uncontrolable factor such as skin color, place of birth, etc.
i know this will invite an attack, but i believe that we need to find some common ground. while i do not support homosexual marriage, it is important to make sure that gays are not treated as second class citizens. perhaps some sort of common law marriage or something.
Sorry, not to flame, but....
This is all assuming that she is genuinely interested in learning to code. My mom showed a direct interest into my first person shooters. I didn't have her pack up the family pc and send her to the closest LAN party. The point is, mom's show interest in many things their seed does. In the case of my mother, and many others i know, the interst is largely on the surface. I guess I think we, the readers of/., are once again, going too deep into the issue.
Slashdot Mirror
mod me down, but who the fuck wants to go to mars anyway?
did you know you could get dysentary from crawling down to the bottom of a port-a-potty?
that's why i don't go down there....the same with mars. let's save our government's money for foreign wars!
live in some Bizzaro World im pretty sure just about every 17 year old has either had sex or seen porn...
this is slashdot. most of us have seen, hosted, and archived porn. Sex, that's something most of us can only dream and read about....
"Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"
I bet he calls it HDTV PC HTPC/PVRbert. HAHAHAHA!!!!!11 (ala Catbert, Dogbert, etc)
ohh shit. i just realized that was Scott Adams. I'm a 'tard. i'll save you guys the time and punch myself in the nuts....
"Archiving Digital History at the NARA"
You'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands!
Ohhhh, NARA, not NRA....
"Conveniently split into two PDFs for your reading pleasure"
so many things wrong with this sentence....
I really wanted to agree with your ten reasons on why macs are easier to sell. I'll be modded down, but here are my additions:
First Off you can get MS Office for the Mac. So you don't have to push OpenOffice
you are 100% correct.
Secondly a well named company. Apple has been in the news alot lately and a lot more then Linux.
I'm assuming you do not or have not worked in a corporate environment before. Name recognition is great, but all they will look at is how it affects the bottom line. Buying new hardware is NEVER and easy sell.
Third Cool hardware. If you are going to upgrade you might as well get some cool hardware out of it.
See previous response.
Forth wow factor. It is easy with Apple products to make a demostration with it and wow the execs.
Powerpoint is easy on any platform. Execs, unlike us readers of slashdot, will have no idea or care what machine was used to create the presentation - only the content.
Fifth. User friendly you can debate that linux is user friendly and perfectly good as a desktop until you are blue in the face. But the normal person will be more comfortable with Apple which has the reputation of beeing easier to use then windows for many year.
As long as we're making wild assumptions, the average person would be more comfortable working on a Windows system. Chances are, that is what they have used for their entire working and personal computing habits. People resist change. Apple IS easier to use if you are not familiar with Windows. But I would hate to work tech support for the company that switched from Windows to Apple...I can hear the countless calls "I can't find my computer...where's the start menu...etc."
Sixth knowing that it will work. Other then putting Linux on a bunch of hardware designed to run on windows and taking you chances and replacing anything that may not be compatible. Just put all the old stuff aside and go with new hardware. And many vendors who say their are linux compatible just lie to you. Like Dell but that is an other story.
Please reread what you wrote. Getting all new hardware solves no problem. THe majority of venders don't support apple or linux. replacing the hardware just sets your company back. employees need to be trained on new software(2yrs later when the vendor releases it) or need to figure out a manual way to do it. basically, you spend countless dollars on training and other worthless setbacks. Loss of productivity.
Seventh. Forced uniformaty. If you put Linux on all the systems it will be only a mater of time untill someone who doesn't like Linux will bring there copy of XP from home and reinstall it on their system. And shortly after that the network is invaded with a virus again
Why does an employee have access rights to do this in the first place?! Virus protection is my least favorite argument for switching away from Windows. Once Apple or Linux becomes a more mainstream OS, mark my words, there will be countless virii for them.
Eighth. Looks good to share holders. You will look a lot more professional when you have an iMacs or PowerMac in every cubical. Apple is as much a part of interior design as functionality thus it makes your company look uptodate and modern.
You are correct. Apple computers DO look nicer. However, shareholders look at the financial position of the company. Once they see a massive reinvestment into hardware and cash flows locked up, investors will sell off their shares. The plumetting stock price means the CEO fires the person responisble for the hardware switch and lays of an assload of employees to cut costs, rectifying the financial statments.
Ninth. Becides secuity most people working on Apples are more productive. The interface is clean and doesn't get in the way like windows or most Linux WMs
You are probally right. THe reason my department missed its sales goa
From the article: "The problem is that the iPod only works with either songs that you buy from the on-line Apple iTunes store or songs that you rip from your own CD's."
but aren't those the only leagal digital means of songs anyway? now the IRAA is complaining - my pirated songs don't work on my ipod, boo hoo.
PROFIT is the biggest catalyst for cell virii. National Do Not Call lists have limited several marketers from spamming cells with text & calls. THere are, however, many companies who it is not beneath to promote their product (ie, the numerous enlarge your penis/free prescription drugs/etc e-mails i get) through less than leagal means.
Maybe I should break out the tin foil hat, but perhaps it is the so called virus protection industry we really should be watching out for. With the cell phone market growing by the minute, this is one of the largest untapped markets for these companies. THink of the profits and markets they would reap if a few virii started attacking phones. Just look at the response the general populace has given simple virus protection software. This could mean add on packages for your cell, subscriptions for updates, and huge contracts with wireless service providers and manufactuers.
actually, i wish i would have thought of this first....
just my 2 cents.
It's great that mathematicians are involved in Hollywood. Unfortunately, it still doesn't make math cool.
Yea, this is interesting. You should cover it in your blog.
1. Unlimited resource based. The resource base on Earth is limited. Finding a cost-effective way to live, work, mine, etc. in space allows us access to an essentially unlimited resource base. There's no reason in the long term, why the bulk of Earth's manufacturing, research, and maybe even bulk food growth can't be done in orbit once we have developed a cost-effective way to get enough material into orbit.
Starcraft is a GAME. besides, in the event we find these unlimited revolutionary resources, the chances of developing a "cost-effective way to get enough material into orbit"is slim. seriously, we are still using a oil based combustion engine on earth. we can't even develope a more efficient/safer/cleaner means of an engine.
2. "New technologies. The space program to date has stimulated the development of useful versions of thousands of new technologies. Think where you would be today without: Flu, cold, allergy medicines, microwave ovens, tinfoil, satelittes for weather, television, cell phones, microcomputers, new materials, etc. The development of these, and thousands of other technologies has been funded and driven at least in part by the space program."
yes, we've covered the development of new tech - espeicallly Tang. THe intial space race did provide a few great techs. i find it difficult to believe that without the space race that the "...Flu, cold, allergy medicines..." would not have been discovered.
3. "Also, not having a space program wouldn't necessarily help solve the population/resource probelms."
perhaps a more important question is why is teh earth on a track to overpopulation. maybe we should control earth's pop. before we colonize and overpopulate another. if we cant afford to feed and house earth's pop, why should we repeat our mistakes on another planet? "Also, not having a space program wouldn't necessarily help solve the population/resource probelms." -you're right. perhaps we should take those billions of $ allocated for space to fixing this problem.
iknow you only had 3 points, but let me add of 4th: why is the US shouldering the bulk of the bill? If overpopulation is a katalyst for researching space exploration, shouldn't the countries with the huge populations be footing the bill? How about it China & India?
What if we discover that the vaccine for AIDS or the cure for Cancer is an antibody so complex it can only be grown slowly in a weightless environment?
unlikely. besides, i don't have cancer. As for AIDS, i generally avoid sharing fluids with people I don't know or going to 3rd rate medical institutions. As I only have one body, I make a pretty good point about keeping track of what goes into my body.
I agree that we need to question how and why we're trying to move forward in Space, on the ground, and in the Oceans. We should spend our money wisely, to good effect, and with a long term view regarding payoff.
well said.
The one that got us communication, weather (and yes, Spy) satellites? The one that enables you to determine where you are anywhere on the planet using a GPS?
ahh, touche. you are absolutely right. i do enjoy those technologies. i stand corrected.
You are abosolutely correct. The space race did provide some interesting materials(velcro, tang, jello..). My concern is that it came at such a huge price. For the sake of not dragging this out any longer, let's agree to disagree.
....what about the guide horses?
Think about the horses!
Oh the humanity!
to find what? we don't the moon is nothing but dust. they proved that in the '60's. we aren't going to live there. it should never come to that. i'm still going with waste on taxpayers money.
This is assuming that any of us are capable of getting girlfriends......hence the need for videogames and books about said topic.
I realize that Slashdot, with its many space afficianados, is the last place I should ask this question...but the more important question: Why are we still wasting money on the space program?
especially going to the moon again. it is a worthless rock. I believe tax payers should not have to finance MORE fruitless moon trips. We beat the commies to the moon, what else do we have to prove? Except that NASA is a drain on taxpayers...
will this still work in future databases?
1. On a new Worksheet, Press F5
2. Type X97:L97 and hit enter
3. Press the tab key
4. Hold Ctrl-Shift
5. Click on the Chart Wizard toolbar button
6. Use mouse to fly around - Right button forward/ Left button reverse
Yes, i AM aware that excel is a SPREADSHEET. it's my feeble attempt at a joke you vultures.
my college campus found itself in a similar situation. They just dropped all the culprit computers in a "black hole network." The black hole only displayed a single webpage and blocked all other network traffice. That page basically said come get our FREE virus protection and windows updates if you want to ever use internet again. If you were a repeat offender, you must PROVE to someone(admin, help staff, etc) that you have purged and safeguarded your computer to ever use network resources. It has proven to be quite effective.
agreed. many of these kids will not reach college. even the most basic of office jobs now require intermediate use of "office software." I'm an advocate for keeping MSOffice as it is most prevelent in the business world. however, i think what sd diamond said was great. we also need to be teaching kids how to adapt to other software.
i agree with you. thank you for your support. i do agree that environmental factors play a role in homosexuality - which does not disprove my theory that it is/could be choice.
if you want to draw parrallels with other mammals, we can. i think many biologists or whoever studies mammals would agree that they have the capacity to make decisions/choices given different environmental factors. different environments lead to different behaviors. I am not speculating on the sexuality of rams, simply because i do not care. i'm merely suggesting, as your post reaffirms, homosexuality is likely a choice. by choice i mean a decision made by a free will over time, given varring circumstances, or enviroments as you say. homosexuality, imo, is developed after dealing with several life decisions. while not scientific, friends in the field of early childhood development have rarley seen homosexual behavior out of their preschool classes. this has helped me to believe that is a choice/adaptation over time - not from birth.
as for the genetic aspect, i have not formulated an opinion. i know so little about genetics. more importantly, i have read conflicting articles on both sides of the subject. the few articles i have read seem to affirm the environmental influences rather than born traits.
finally, as i mentioned in my previous post, this is merely my speculation & opinion. i respect the right for us to disagree & welcome further discussion.
"If you feel it would devalue "normal" marriages, then you need to take a close look at mariage statistics. They really can't get much more devalued than they already are"
check your statistics again. homosexual marriages have a greater failure(ie, divorce) rate than heterosexual marriages. look at amsterdame & canada, two places where gay marriage is legal. not trolling, just telling you the facts.
second, it is my opinion that laws are based upon shared morals. i'm generalizing, but it is the majority of americans who are morally opposed to murder. hence, it is illeagal. it is my opinion, due to the rapid increase of laws banning gay marriage state to state & based on the population size of the gay community(2% of US population - USWorld news) that the majority of americans are morally opposed to gay marriage.
finally, i do not believe that it is fair to equate the gay marriage controversy to the civil rights movement. the civil rights movement was to allow basic rights for all. more importantly, the civil rights movement was there to stop discrimination against people who could not control certain circumstances(ie, skin color). it is unfair to equate these two movements as, IMHO, homosexuals CAN control the circumstances. I believe that homosexuality is a CHOICE not an uncontrolable factor such as skin color, place of birth, etc.
i know this will invite an attack, but i believe that we need to find some common ground. while i do not support homosexual marriage, it is important to make sure that gays are not treated as second class citizens. perhaps some sort of common law marriage or something.
just my 2 cents
Sorry, not to flame, but.... This is all assuming that she is genuinely interested in learning to code. My mom showed a direct interest into my first person shooters. I didn't have her pack up the family pc and send her to the closest LAN party. The point is, mom's show interest in many things their seed does. In the case of my mother, and many others i know, the interst is largely on the surface. I guess I think we, the readers of /., are once again, going too deep into the issue.
bah! what endorsement? are we forgetting that the NYT is part of the liberal media. who needs 'em.
I invented the word 'Microsopht' to represent a pile of suck. However, I didn't sue the giant......