In terms of resale value, you can get a lot more on the black market for your used Vista CD than your used Ubuntu CD, so Vista has a better Total Value of Ownership.
I don't see how that changes my advice. I wasn't specifically my advice at her. My point was that you should not get annoyed by what other people say... about your operating system, your car, or anything. Who cares. Getting annoyed about things like that is pointless and achieves nothing.
> I get anoyed at people saying how secure OS-X is or Linux or what ever.
Why do you get annoyed? Does it make you feel inferior or something?
Here's a quick lesson: learn to ignore it and get on with your life. If you don't have the time figure out Linux, or you don't have the money to spend on a Mac, no-one will begrudge you that. Just be proud with what you have and don't let anyone get you down. Seriously, it's not worth getting annoyed over.
Tax? Microsoft is no longer the monopoly it once was. It's now easy to avoid paying for Windows, so calling it a tax is unfair.
If you buy from a reputable manufacturer such as Dell, it is easy to get your money back. Just make sure that the disc is still in its packaging and send it back, and you should have your refund within a few days. There are also many manufacturers that sell laptops with an alternative OS installed (or completely blank if you would rather install an OS yourself).
> I can't however understand why you would criticize Ionescu for enlightening us to the flaws in Vista's security/DRM strategy.
In which part of my post did I criticize Ionescu? I think his work is admirable, though I hardly find it surprising that a flaw was found in such a complex and new piece of software as Windows Vista. All complex software contains flaws.
I think that claiming that DRM is 'broken' is an overstatement. Its not broken, it still works fine. The security I accept needs more work, but the DRM works. It is a misleading summary.
The DRM in Vista is not intended to lock down your computer so that evil companies can control what you watch. This is impossible to do without a TPM chip. Microsoft knows this.
The addition of DRM in Vista allows you to play DRM-encrypted files on your computer. Without this feature, you would not be able to play DRM'd songs. Now at least you have the choice.
'Cracking' DRM is on about the same level as downloading illegal copies online. Useful in some cases (such as when you bought a DRM'd song by mistake and wish to play it on your MP3 player/iPod), but still illegal (in the US at least).
I'd have thought SCO would be bust by now, given the amount of money they must be spending on lawyers, and on how fast their customers must be running from them. Does anyone how they are still able to make money?
> I dispute this nonsense, since as we all know, the Earth is only a few thousand years old, not the 42,000 years old that this skellington is supposed to be!
It really is that old. On the 8th day, god created a 40,000 year old skeleton and then buried it somewhere he knew we would find it. he does this to test our faith. god can do anything. Even impossible things or things that make no logical sense.
> I think you've confused "right and wrong" with "legal right" here.
I think that was is legally right is usually the same as what the majority believe is morally right, (after all they voted/campaigned for it). If the majority of people thought smoking cocaine was morally acceptable, it would soon become legally acceptable too.
I don't think that's the way it should be, but I do think it's the way it is today. Maybe you think I'm confused, but more likely, you just disagree with me. That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I wonder how many people that complain about Vista have actually tried it. It's a vast improvement over XP, and represents five years of work.
> there are some virulent MS fanboi's here.
Mac fanbois are worse in my experience.
> Add in the DRM'd OS, and there's no reason to run it at all.
This is a common misconception. DRM doesn't lock you out of your system. The addition of DRM to Vista *enables* you to play DRM'd media, which you would otherwise be unable to play on XP or Mac.
> the main point in running a Mac isn't to run OSX [...] but rather to run the things that run on it.
More software works on Windows than on a Mac.
> OMG, I just heard a blood vessel pop!
Oh, that sounds nasty. You shouldn't take SlashDot so seriously.;)
Basically, I'm fed up of people saying how great SpotLight is when they haven't even tried any competing products. Just give Vista a try and tell us what you think.
To be honest, I give up. I can see you aren't willing to try it. That's your choice and I respect that. I can't see how suggesting alternative products from Microsoft is trolling but suggesting alternatives from Apple is not, but I can see I am in the minority here so I will go back to my cave now. Have a nice day.
You missed my point entirely. My point was that if you can say 'Why use this product when I already have Spotlight?' and get modded up, why can't use say 'Why use this product when I already have Vista?' There is nothing wrong with Vista.
The copy of Vista that comes with most PCs is good enough for the average user and it's absorbed into the price of the system so you won't even notice paying for it. Hardware prices for Vista capable machines are dropping all the time, but even now a PC with Vista is much cheaper than a Mac. There are many improvements from XP to Vista so forget everything you know about XP. Once you have tried Vista, I doubt you will want to use a Mac again. Don't take my word for it though. You should just try it for yourself.
> We have the same thing in the human world, where some humans don't respect the rights of others.
*All* humans and animals respect the rights of others. We just differ greatly on what is considered right.
Some animals think that killing other animals is OK. Some humans think killing animals OK. Some humans think killing other humans is OK. Most humans think killing animals is OK, but killing humans is not (except sometimes).
In the end it comes down to what the majority think, but this constantly changes with time, and there is no evidence that what we currently think is more 'right' or 'wrong' than in the past and who knows what we will think is 'right' in the future. I think the easiest is to just vote on it, and if we vote that animals have rights, then everyone must give them their rights or else go to jail.
Slashdot Mirror
> That'd be legal too, seeing as we7.com is paying the copyright trolls.
It's not legal, because you are making an unauthorized derived work.
Not everyone though. Many people think that stealing from thieves is a kind of moral justice.
Ubuntu vs Vista was on the front page yesterday:
/ 1337246
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/27
I guess Bill Gates is going to stop criticizing the project now that it supports Windows...
In terms of resale value, you can get a lot more on the black market for your used Vista CD than your used Ubuntu CD, so Vista has a better Total Value of Ownership.
> Maybe you didn't notice, but she's a Mac user.
I don't see how that changes my advice. I wasn't specifically my advice at her. My point was that you should not get annoyed by what other people say... about your operating system, your car, or anything. Who cares. Getting annoyed about things like that is pointless and achieves nothing.
> I get anoyed at people saying how secure OS-X is or Linux or what ever.
Why do you get annoyed? Does it make you feel inferior or something?
Here's a quick lesson: learn to ignore it and get on with your life. If you don't have the time figure out Linux, or you don't have the money to spend on a Mac, no-one will begrudge you that. Just be proud with what you have and don't let anyone get you down. Seriously, it's not worth getting annoyed over.
It's going to cost a lot more than $100 so you should stop calling it the $100 (or $103) laptop.
> How do you figure the US is lagging behind?
Exactly! The US never lags behind! It is leading!
Leading in upholding American values and fighting communism by not defecting away from Internet Explorer.
Are you with us or against us?
Tax? Microsoft is no longer the monopoly it once was. It's now easy to avoid paying for Windows, so calling it a tax is unfair.
If you buy from a reputable manufacturer such as Dell, it is easy to get your money back. Just make sure that the disc is still in its packaging and send it back, and you should have your refund within a few days. There are also many manufacturers that sell laptops with an alternative OS installed (or completely blank if you would rather install an OS yourself).
> I can't however understand why you would criticize Ionescu for enlightening us to the flaws in Vista's security/DRM strategy.
In which part of my post did I criticize Ionescu? I think his work is admirable, though I hardly find it surprising that a flaw was found in such a complex and new piece of software as Windows Vista. All complex software contains flaws.
I think that claiming that DRM is 'broken' is an overstatement. Its not broken, it still works fine. The security I accept needs more work, but the DRM works. It is a misleading summary.
I think you misunderstood me.
> Why can XP and Windows 2000 play encrypted files?
The ability to play some DRM'd files was also added to XP and Windows 2000. I assume you already knew that though...
> Not only threatening Vista DRM and friends
The DRM in Vista is not intended to lock down your computer so that evil companies can control what you watch. This is impossible to do without a TPM chip. Microsoft knows this.
The addition of DRM in Vista allows you to play DRM-encrypted files on your computer. Without this feature, you would not be able to play DRM'd songs. Now at least you have the choice.
'Cracking' DRM is on about the same level as downloading illegal copies online. Useful in some cases (such as when you bought a DRM'd song by mistake and wish to play it on your MP3 player/iPod), but still illegal (in the US at least).
Now mod me down, Vista bashers!
I'd have thought SCO would be bust by now, given the amount of money they must be spending on lawyers, and on how fast their customers must be running from them. Does anyone how they are still able to make money?
> I dispute this nonsense, since as we all know, the Earth is only a few thousand years old, not the 42,000 years old that this skellington is supposed to be!
It really is that old. On the 8th day, god created a 40,000 year old skeleton and then buried it somewhere he knew we would find it. he does this to test our faith. god can do anything. Even impossible things or things that make no logical sense.
The Novell - Microsoft deal was the best thing that could have happened to encourage free software developers to switch to using GPL v3.
> I think you've confused "right and wrong" with "legal right" here.
I think that was is legally right is usually the same as what the majority believe is morally right, (after all they voted/campaigned for it). If the majority of people thought smoking cocaine was morally acceptable, it would soon become legally acceptable too.
I don't think that's the way it should be, but I do think it's the way it is today. Maybe you think I'm confused, but more likely, you just disagree with me. That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
> Yes, /. it pretty much anti-MS
;)
I wonder how many people that complain about Vista have actually tried it. It's a vast improvement over XP, and represents five years of work.
> there are some virulent MS fanboi's here.
Mac fanbois are worse in my experience.
> Add in the DRM'd OS, and there's no reason to run it at all.
This is a common misconception. DRM doesn't lock you out of your system. The addition of DRM to Vista *enables* you to play DRM'd media, which you would otherwise be unable to play on XP or Mac.
> the main point in running a Mac isn't to run OSX [...] but rather to run the things that run on it.
More software works on Windows than on a Mac.
> OMG, I just heard a blood vessel pop!
Oh, that sounds nasty. You shouldn't take SlashDot so seriously.
Basically, I'm fed up of people saying how great SpotLight is when they haven't even tried any competing products. Just give Vista a try and tell us what you think.
To be honest, I give up. I can see you aren't willing to try it. That's your choice and I respect that. I can't see how suggesting alternative products from Microsoft is trolling but suggesting alternatives from Apple is not, but I can see I am in the minority here so I will go back to my cave now. Have a nice day.
I guess you're right. At least Apple's shackles have padding.
You missed my point entirely. My point was that if you can say 'Why use this product when I already have Spotlight?' and get modded up, why can't use say 'Why use this product when I already have Vista?' There is nothing wrong with Vista.
Is this site just anti-Microsoft, or what?
> high end copy of Vista $300+
The copy of Vista that comes with most PCs is good enough for the average user and it's absorbed into the price of the system so you won't even notice paying for it. Hardware prices for Vista capable machines are dropping all the time, but even now a PC with Vista is much cheaper than a Mac. There are many improvements from XP to Vista so forget everything you know about XP. Once you have tried Vista, I doubt you will want to use a Mac again. Don't take my word for it though. You should just try it for yourself.
> I'm not exactly sure what they want with a robotic slug though. The design request seems pretty weird to me.
It's not meant for men.
Why should I get a Mac when I can do the exact same thing on Vista?
Paying for movies is so old-fashioned. I don't think people do it any more. If you are downloading more the 5GB then you are definitely a pirate.
But take comfort in the fact that you are helping stop global warming.
> We have the same thing in the human world, where some humans don't respect the rights of others.
*All* humans and animals respect the rights of others. We just differ greatly on what is considered right.
Some animals think that killing other animals is OK. Some humans think killing animals OK. Some humans think killing other humans is OK. Most humans think killing animals is OK, but killing humans is not (except sometimes).
In the end it comes down to what the majority think, but this constantly changes with time, and there is no evidence that what we currently think is more 'right' or 'wrong' than in the past and who knows what we will think is 'right' in the future. I think the easiest is to just vote on it, and if we vote that animals have rights, then everyone must give them their rights or else go to jail.