Of course, since Dell makes so many models of laptops, you can just avoid that model, or even if it affected all Dell laptops you could buy an HP, or a Lenovo, or a Sony.
Meanwhile Apple only makes two models of laptops, each specially designed for a market segment, and there are no other makers of Mac laptops, so prospective buyers now have to consider putting purchases on hold while Apple gets its ducks in a row.
What's happened? Did we redesign something? Are they so old that the parts are wearing out and we can't replace them as well as we built them to begin with?
If I remember right, weren't the external fuel tanks on the early shuttle flights painted - over the foam insulation? I seem to recall some dicussion on the news after Columbia about the paint helping keep the foam from breaking off.
The paint added weight and (of corse) cost, especially considering the fuel tank was only used once. So they dropped it later on.
That's why "they" are working on getting it required by law.
What law (bill) is that?
I find it hard to believe they can pass a law requiring people to put copy restrictions on their own creations. If I record a song and I want to give it away to anyone, there isn't any law that can say otherwise. That sounds like a restriction on free speech. After all, what is the difference between a song and a political message?
The real issue is that almost all mainstream entertainment is held by a small number of companies, who happen to have ownership or at least major partnerships with all the mainstream distribution channels for their type of entertainment. So even if your independantly made product did appeal to the Average Joe, good luck getting wide exposure (advertising or actual distribution) unless you're part of the Good 'Ol Studio's Club. And if you don't support their view on issues like DRM, and they aren't getting any piece of your revenue pie, you're not going to get in good with them and your effort will see little light of day without it winning something at Cannes or Sundance.
The problem isn't so much the DRM or the companies that want it. It's that those companies for the immediate future hold most of the keys to consumer's doors. They artifically limit access to the alternative so they are somewhat of a necessary evil for large-scale success.
Actually, it's much worse. We *did* read about that, then Microsoft issued a clarifying statement that said they were *not* developing an iTunes/iPod competitor and that the source of the news was a badly translated foreign press release about the latest version of Windows Media Player being released.
Mike McCurry writes about how the big companies should pay their fair share [CC] for the physical upgrade of the internet. From Newmark's commentary: 'Telecommunication companies already control the pipes that carry the Internet into your home. Now they want control which sites you visit and how you experience them. They would provide privileged access for themselves and their preferred partners while charging other businesses for varying levels of service.'"
Maybe the government should sieze control over the main backbone and make the upkeep/upgrade no longer a responsibility of the major providers. ISP's would all compete for the last mile hookups/billing, allowing other companies in who don't already own part of the highway itself.
They can try to earn more of their revenue from these supposed services they are going to bring in - if the services really are all that fantastic. If they really are cooking with gas, they should have no beef with a truly level playing field with Google. If I don't like the fact I can't get (competing service) as well with ISP Alpha because they're partnered with TVIP-X, I'll just drop them and move to ISP Beta since they treat everyone the same.
There are many people who can quickly switch personalities to a work mode, many of the most intelligent are also the most eccentric as well. Passing people up because of eccentricity, quirks, or political views will harm employers in the end.
I don't think these companies are looking to avoid employees that distract others from getting work done at the office, but avoid any connection between the company and individuals with infamous political view or personal lives. A good employee who happens to moonlight as a stripper or have an S&M interest who be looked upon as a liability to the public perception in the bible-wielding consumer groups.
Given the state of "coporate ethics" I find it funny these companies are so worried about the employees sullying the company's public image.
Also, executives hardly ever look at what their actions mean "in the end" just what benifits they'll gain in the immediate.
It's sort of like accusing a congressman of creating and passing good legislation because he has a secret desire to get re-elected, or accusing someone of going to work to get paid. Imagine the nerve of some people!
There's a slight difference between writing a well informed, interesting article that sparks debate and draws reader and speading disinformation and making inflammatory statements to illict responses from others.
One type of writing is editorial journalism, the other belongs on the pages of Weekly World News
The thing that companies don't realize in foreign outsourcing is the long term impact on their business.
Oh, I'm sure they're aware of the long term impact. The problem is the people who care what happens to the company long term aren't the ones running it.
This wasn't such an issue back when more comapnies were private and their operations were lead by a small close-net group of people (i.e. a family business).
Now that everything is linked into stock price and dividends and it's no longer Edward McCabe and Sons but the totally meaningless EDE Corporation the idea a company is anything more than a money making operation have gone out the window. This as much a result of the lack of personal connection between the companies and their employees as it is the economy and shareholders. Everyone is just in it for their quick buck.
To paraphrase someone else in another article long ago: Unfortunately people treat the stock market as a federally sponsored lottery and not as a way to support the companies they like.
That's fine, but the 10Megabit service you get from cable is, in all probability shared between your entire neighbourhood. i.e. you MIGHT be able to get a 1Megabyte/second download at 4AM on a weeknight, but if everybody in the neighbourhood is trying to do a download, you might end up as low as voice modem speeds (at least that was the experience of my friends in the early dayS when cable-modem installations were delivering to obscenely large customer groups). It's just the nature of the product -- but it make for really good PR lines
I think this problam s rather overhyped, especially by people on DSL. I don't personally subsribe to the 10Mb/s service, I only use the normal 3Mb/s service, and the last time I checked, I was getting around 2.8Mbps.
And I hear plenty of people on here grouse about their speeds from oversubsrcibed DSLAMs so I don't think either service is immune to the issue.
No, it's not. Go read the article. The summary here has the label in all caps, but it is Mbps. Bits.
"...When I told her that I was going for the $44.95-a-month 15-Mbps option (Verizon recently announced plans to up this to 20 Mbps), she got even cheerier..."
Fiber-based broadband is still in a very few areas, but PCMag's Lance Ulanoff has it and he seems to really, really like all 15MBPS of it.
Gee, I'm strangely not that impressed. I can get 10Mbps cable modem service right now ($44.95/mo), and I'm in Kansas. I just checked AT&T/SBC's site and it looks like their top of the line service in my area is only 3-6mbps.
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing some company like Dell doesn't have any problems with swelling in their laptops.
Hey, check this out! http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32550
Of course, since Dell makes so many models of laptops, you can just avoid that model, or even if it affected all Dell laptops you could buy an HP, or a Lenovo, or a Sony.
Meanwhile Apple only makes two models of laptops, each specially designed for a market segment, and there are no other makers of Mac laptops, so prospective buyers now have to consider putting purchases on hold while Apple gets its ducks in a row.
Please contact your sysadmin if your computer stays up for longer than 48 hours.
Microsoft has a solution for that. And it's blue as well.
What's happened? Did we redesign something? Are they so old that the parts are wearing out and we can't replace them as well as we built them to begin with?
If I remember right, weren't the external fuel tanks on the early shuttle flights painted - over the foam insulation? I seem to recall some dicussion on the news after Columbia about the paint helping keep the foam from breaking off.
The paint added weight and (of corse) cost, especially considering the fuel tank was only used once. So they dropped it later on.
In Soviet Russia...
Wii power YOU!
What law (bill) is that?
I find it hard to believe they can pass a law requiring people to put copy restrictions on their own creations. If I record a song and I want to give it away to anyone, there isn't any law that can say otherwise. That sounds like a restriction on free speech. After all, what is the difference between a song and a political message?
The real issue is that almost all mainstream entertainment is held by a small number of companies, who happen to have ownership or at least major partnerships with all the mainstream distribution channels for their type of entertainment. So even if your independantly made product did appeal to the Average Joe, good luck getting wide exposure (advertising or actual distribution) unless you're part of the Good 'Ol Studio's Club. And if you don't support their view on issues like DRM, and they aren't getting any piece of your revenue pie, you're not going to get in good with them and your effort will see little light of day without it winning something at Cannes or Sundance.
The problem isn't so much the DRM or the companies that want it. It's that those companies for the immediate future hold most of the keys to consumer's doors. They artifically limit access to the alternative so they are somewhat of a necessary evil for large-scale success.
Actually, it's much worse. We *did* read about that, then Microsoft issued a clarifying statement that said they were *not* developing an iTunes/iPod competitor and that the source of the news was a badly translated foreign press release about the latest version of Windows Media Player being released.
Please contact your program vendor weekly to prevent this from happening to you.
Nothing for you to see here, please move along.
Looks like the site is working fine. All the information the govenerment wants accessable to the people is at my fingertips.
A new, more reliable weapon, they say, would help the nation reduce its stockpile.
Because nothing helps you reduce the number of atomic weapons you have like building more of them.
They're putting their faith in OSS!
[ducking]
BSD can't die now! Christians have experience bringing things back that everyone believes dead.
In space, no one can hear you scream...
about the lack of audio on an animated gif!
I actually checked this in the RSS fee becuase I expected it to be about what to do when you drop your iPod off a boat.
Mike McCurry writes about how the big companies should pay their fair share [CC] for the physical upgrade of the internet. From Newmark's commentary: 'Telecommunication companies already control the pipes that carry the Internet into your home. Now they want control which sites you visit and how you experience them. They would provide privileged access for themselves and their preferred partners while charging other businesses for varying levels of service.'"
Maybe the government should sieze control over the main backbone and make the upkeep/upgrade no longer a responsibility of the major providers. ISP's would all compete for the last mile hookups/billing, allowing other companies in who don't already own part of the highway itself.
They can try to earn more of their revenue from these supposed services they are going to bring in - if the services really are all that fantastic. If they really are cooking with gas, they should have no beef with a truly level playing field with Google. If I don't like the fact I can't get (competing service) as well with ISP Alpha because they're partnered with TVIP-X, I'll just drop them and move to ISP Beta since they treat everyone the same.
Except a better job or oppertunity waiting for you to be free of your current obligations?
There are many people who can quickly switch personalities to a work mode, many of the most intelligent are also the most eccentric as well. Passing people up because of eccentricity, quirks, or political views will harm employers in the end.
I don't think these companies are looking to avoid employees that distract others from getting work done at the office, but avoid any connection between the company and individuals with infamous political view or personal lives. A good employee who happens to moonlight as a stripper or have an S&M interest who be looked upon as a liability to the public perception in the bible-wielding consumer groups.
Given the state of "coporate ethics" I find it funny these companies are so worried about the employees sullying the company's public image.
Also, executives hardly ever look at what their actions mean "in the end" just what benifits they'll gain in the immediate.
It's sort of like accusing a congressman of creating and passing good legislation because he has a secret desire to get re-elected, or accusing someone of going to work to get paid. Imagine the nerve of some people!
There's a slight difference between writing a well informed, interesting article that sparks debate and draws reader and speading disinformation and making inflammatory statements to illict responses from others.
One type of writing is editorial journalism, the other belongs on the pages of Weekly World News
That the RIAA/MPAA is actually a dangerous cult completely out of touch with reality!
Look, this woman has escaped and now the effects of their brainwashing are starting to wear off.
The thing that companies don't realize in foreign outsourcing is the long term impact on their business.
Oh, I'm sure they're aware of the long term impact. The problem is the people who care what happens to the company long term aren't the ones running it.
This wasn't such an issue back when more comapnies were private and their operations were lead by a small close-net group of people (i.e. a family business).
Now that everything is linked into stock price and dividends and it's no longer Edward McCabe and Sons but the totally meaningless EDE Corporation the idea a company is anything more than a money making operation have gone out the window. This as much a result of the lack of personal connection between the companies and their employees as it is the economy and shareholders. Everyone is just in it for their quick buck.
To paraphrase someone else in another article long ago: Unfortunately people treat the stock market as a federally sponsored lottery and not as a way to support the companies they like.
That's fine, but the 10Megabit service you get from cable is, in all probability shared between your entire neighbourhood. i.e. you MIGHT be able to get a 1Megabyte/second download at 4AM on a weeknight, but if everybody in the neighbourhood is trying to do a download, you might end up as low as voice modem speeds (at least that was the experience of my friends in the early dayS when cable-modem installations were delivering to obscenely large customer groups). It's just the nature of the product -- but it make for really good PR lines
I think this problam s rather overhyped, especially by people on DSL. I don't personally subsribe to the 10Mb/s service, I only use the normal 3Mb/s service, and the last time I checked, I was getting around 2.8Mbps.
And I hear plenty of people on here grouse about their speeds from oversubsrcibed DSLAMs so I don't think either service is immune to the issue.
There also appears to be a copy in \system32\dllcache\
I wonder if it gets blocked if I add it to the program list on Windows Firewall and uncheck it.
That's megabits, not megabytes.
No, it's not.
Go read the article. The summary here has the label in all caps, but it is Mbps. Bits.
"...When I told her that I was going for the $44.95-a-month 15-Mbps option (Verizon recently announced plans to up this to 20 Mbps), she got even cheerier..."
Fiber-based broadband is still in a very few areas, but PCMag's Lance Ulanoff has it and he seems to really, really like all 15MBPS of it.
Gee, I'm strangely not that impressed. I can get 10Mbps cable modem service right now ($44.95/mo), and I'm in Kansas. I just checked AT&T/SBC's site and it looks like their top of the line service in my area is only 3-6mbps.
I wonder if it ever occured to the designers to only put in one hard drive and use the extra room for a larger battery.
If you're against piracy so much, why don't you stop copying other people's replies?