The problem with personal experience stories is that they can differ. At the print company I freelance for they are split 50/50 in terms of platforms for production (Mac/Windows). The Macs are very problematic, particularly with crashing (and yes they are running OS X.)
That said, I've freelanced for other companies where there Windows boxes have been equally problematic.
My Windows box hasn't any problems.
The strength of personal experience is that you use what you like, and you're productive with whatever platform works for you and suits your personal preferences. Fortunately, where I freelance, there is no animosity or tension based on what platform someone uses. It's the people that count. I'm not sure Bill realizes that either.
As for the nuclear waste generated aftewards there are a number of clever idea's about how to deal with it including one which disposes of it in the giant fusion reaction that is our Sun.
This is a clever idea? Sounds like something a 12-year old would come up with.
I remember the series and wonder why SPACE, the Imagination Station, or as I like to call it, SPACE, the Cancellation Station has not run it. They ran Battlestar Galatica, but not for long, and for good reason.
And I'm still using a Mac from ten years ago, and my parents have gone through three PCs in as many years. What's your point?
Isn't it obvious? The Macs last longer argument is tired. PCs last just as long. That people choose to upgrade doesn't mean the older components have suddenly failed. I've gone through as many PCs in the last 5 years (2) as my friend has Macs (2). The older PCs and Macs are being used by someone else now.
Anybody who pays any attention to these things knows that the "useful life" of a Mac is about 30-50 percent longer than a PC. You go dig up the TCO stats.
And if the useful life of the stats differs from what you consider useful life than what relevance is it? I could speculate and say if Mac hardware has anywhere near the development pace of PC hardware and the modularity of upgrading and the pricing than the useful life might be the same. Of course you could speculate otherwise and I respect that. None of this has to do with the quality of components. My Amiga still works and guess what, I can write on it. I choose not to. Quite subjective isn't it...
He's a Windows user: he's certainly not going to do it for himself.
The penguins are stealing my Sanity one piece at a time.
Ah yes, argument by insult, a wonderful tactic. Of course I won't be an ass and attribute your aholery to being "not a Windows" user but really, please, do you know how idiotic you appear? A good joke has a grain of truth, and in this case, with what, millions and millions of Windows users, painting them with such a broad and insulting brush really shows your colours. I know plenty of intelligent Windows, Mac, Linux and computerless users. I do. Really.
And if games is what you're into, buy a box that plugs into your TV and get on with it.
But I don't care for console games and consoles. The resolution of my television is considerably poor compared to the computer and I can't get mods as easily for the games as I can on the computer.
I'm not wasting thousands of dollars of computer hardware on games when it could be doing something productive and earning money instead.
And I have the ability to live a life that involves both work and leisure, and though the majority of the work is done on the computer some leisure is as well. Why would I waste money buying console games when the equivalent (or better) title is available for my computer at often half the price? I've already spent thousands of dollars on computer hardware to use for my print, web, marketing, communications, video, etc. work and guess what, as a bonus it runs games that are cheaper than their console counterparts and I save money as a result. Plus I don't have to spend more money to buy a console.
To each their own, but to imply that you can't work and play is quite insulting not to mention the argument is tired and unoriginal. And oh yeah, a copout. Nice effort.
Want to play games? Buy a PC. Want to do work with your computer, instead of working on your computer? Buy a Mac.
I work with my computer, on my computer, and play games (on occassion) on my computer and I bought a PC. I don't need both. Perfect solution. I use Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Vegas, etc. every day to develop print, web, video related type work. Why would I spend even more money on another system unless, oh yeah, to each their own.
It's great that we can all have our own perfect solutions since we are each individuals.
The software may have flaws but how is MS or any other vendor responsible for how others exploit a product? Have their been class action lawsuits against gun companies? Have there been class action lawsuits against auto manufacturers for creating cars that can kill people in accidents?
I don't believe any software vendors would like to see that they are made responsible, by law, for the damage that hackers do by way of flaws found in their products. It may punish MS, but it may punish them all as well.
I saw a bit yesterday when he asked that congressman if he'd be willing to let his kids sign up to go to war (the point being that those in power don't mind sacrificing the lives of other peoples' children). The congressman declined and that made it into the movie. However, in an interview with someone else, the congressman stated that Moore cut off the part of the interview where he said his nephew just got shipped off to Afghanistan.
His nephew is still someone else's child, not his own. The question was about the congressman's children, not the children of any of his relatives.
OK... He claimed Bush let some Bin Laden family members out of the country during the air lockdown. This is not true. They were clearly let out of the country after the air restrictions were lifted. And yes, they are the same Bin Laden family is the infamous Osama belongs to, but just because one family member is evil doesn't have to mean the rest are evil.
Definitely. And on this point I'd disagree with Moore on the significance of flying out Bin Laden family members during and/or after the restrictions. People will make dubious associations and point the finger at people who have nothing to do with the behaviour of someone they have an association with. I am not responsible or accountable for whatever any of my family members do (excepting perhaps my kids if I had them and they lived under my roof). In this case, the "administration" may well have just done the sensible thing and protected these people from such accusations and their possible consequences. My conclusion differs from Moore's.
Having said that, disagreeing with one point does not automatically call for the dismissal of the subsequent points in this film. I think that would be absurd and shortsighted. I have friends with whom I totally disagree about some things and agree on others. To be fair and sensible you'd have to hear them all judge each of them accordingly. Not to mention take all the points together and judge if it makes for a coherent concern.
Finally, let's not forget how Bush himself and members of his administration have made an equally dubious connection to Al Queida and the Iraqi government. One official met another official. Wow! They're working together! Not. And was this dubious connection put to use? Of course it was. Is this connection still contested amongst the general public? Of course it is. Does this call for the automatic dismissal of all the Bush has ever done? Or should we look at each event and statement in turn to get the entire picture?
"I believe Senna, Fangio and Prost are currently tied on the number of GP championships won (5). Senna is ahead of everyone on the number of actual races won, to the best of my knowledge. He certainly wins outright on the best all-weather driver."
Micheal has the most race victories of any drivers, with Alain Prost second. Micheal is at 77 and counting.
"To claim one driver is "the best" is to forget a lot of history. There were drivers better than Schumacher, and there will be again."
It is very difficult to compare drivers across eras, but clearly, I'd say these drivers are all in the same league. I'm a little surprised you didn't mention Jimmy Clark, but so be it. You could argue that Fangio's cars, though more primitive, were less stressful physically, not to mention slower than modern F1 cars and thus argue that the latest drivers are better, etc. But such arguments cannot be won and indeed, seem to me to be ridiculous. I'm not sure why people are fascinated with defining "the best".
"I am not really much of a formula one fan due in large part to schummy's dominance."
I don't understand why people aren't much of F1 fans because of Schuey's dominance.
I'd can understand a statement like: I'm not much of a formula one fan due to most of the teams and drivers not being able to rise to the level of Schumacher and Ferrari.
I don't understand how Schumacher or Ferrari are the major factors or have anything to do with the mediocrity (in contrast) of the other teams. If F1 is boring, it's not Ferrari's fault. Indeed, they are the best of example of what the other teams should strive for. The failure of the other teams is the problem.
Ferrari also designs and builds their own engine (as does Toyota) whereas the other teams do not. Is this factor included in the budgets? For example, say BAR's budget is $10/year and Honda's engine budget is $8 dollars a year is the BAR budget then $18/year?
People want vinyl records. They see it as a format from simpler times. They hate CDs for any number of reasons and vinyl lets them just listen to music.
I'd be interested in hearing about, until the recent nonsense, CDs don't let people just listen to music?
"Mozilla is for the masses who either a) don't understand that email and web browsing are 2 different things (never-mind ftp etc etc). These are the people who think that a browser IS the internet. Or b) People who are irked by the fact that they have to run IE _and_ Outlook Express."
Sorry, but I understand full well that web browsing and email are different things but I prefer Mozilla over Firefox/Thunderbird. Imagine that...
Fortunately, Mozilla offers both alternatives to people. Because, you know, we all have our preferences and they're just that, preferences. If they are different than yours they're most certainly not, in all cases, for the reasons you list. I also don't have to run IE or Outlook Express, save for testing the web pages I develop.
"Unfortunately if the designer doesn't understand HTML then its a moot point."
And fortunately if the designer does understand HTML and CSS than it's great that Dreamweaver doesn't have to decide for them... But hey, if a bad driver smashes a car, let's blame the car.
In an interesting note (at least to me), Keith Schengli-Roberts actually took one of my Dreamweaver 4 courses back when Dreamweaver 4 was the current release. He was very nice and generously gave me a copy of the first edition of his book.
Slashdot Mirror
So you berate so called "Perl bigots" and then follow up in the same paragraph iwht "G-d forbid, ASP." Classy that.
The problem with personal experience stories is that they can differ. At the print company I freelance for they are split 50/50 in terms of platforms for production (Mac/Windows). The Macs are very problematic, particularly with crashing (and yes they are running OS X.) That said, I've freelanced for other companies where there Windows boxes have been equally problematic. My Windows box hasn't any problems. The strength of personal experience is that you use what you like, and you're productive with whatever platform works for you and suits your personal preferences. Fortunately, where I freelance, there is no animosity or tension based on what platform someone uses. It's the people that count. I'm not sure Bill realizes that either.
As for the nuclear waste generated aftewards there are a number of clever idea's about how to deal with it including one which disposes of it in the giant fusion reaction that is our Sun.
This is a clever idea? Sounds like something a 12-year old would come up with.
I'm 5 years over the limit and haven't been comfortable since I turned 30.
This is a site for nerds right?
I remember the series and wonder why SPACE, the Imagination Station, or as I like to call it, SPACE, the Cancellation Station has not run it. They ran Battlestar Galatica, but not for long, and for good reason.
I take all my photographs in RAW format. Which on the Olympus C8080 tends to come out to 12MB each... High capacity cards are a wonderful help.
And I'm still using a Mac from ten years ago, and my parents have gone through three PCs in as many years. What's your point?
Isn't it obvious? The Macs last longer argument is tired. PCs last just as long. That people choose to upgrade doesn't mean the older components have suddenly failed. I've gone through as many PCs in the last 5 years (2) as my friend has Macs (2). The older PCs and Macs are being used by someone else now.
Anybody who pays any attention to these things knows that the "useful life" of a Mac is about 30-50 percent longer than a PC. You go dig up the TCO stats.
And if the useful life of the stats differs from what you consider useful life than what relevance is it? I could speculate and say if Mac hardware has anywhere near the development pace of PC hardware and the modularity of upgrading and the pricing than the useful life might be the same. Of course you could speculate otherwise and I respect that. None of this has to do with the quality of components. My Amiga still works and guess what, I can write on it. I choose not to. Quite subjective isn't it...
He's a Windows user: he's certainly not going to do it for himself. The penguins are stealing my Sanity one piece at a time.
Ah yes, argument by insult, a wonderful tactic. Of course I won't be an ass and attribute your aholery to being "not a Windows" user but really, please, do you know how idiotic you appear? A good joke has a grain of truth, and in this case, with what, millions and millions of Windows users, painting them with such a broad and insulting brush really shows your colours. I know plenty of intelligent Windows, Mac, Linux and computerless users. I do. Really.
And if games is what you're into, buy a box that plugs into your TV and get on with it.
But I don't care for console games and consoles. The resolution of my television is considerably poor compared to the computer and I can't get mods as easily for the games as I can on the computer.
I'm not wasting thousands of dollars of computer hardware on games when it could be doing something productive and earning money instead.
And I have the ability to live a life that involves both work and leisure, and though the majority of the work is done on the computer some leisure is as well. Why would I waste money buying console games when the equivalent (or better) title is available for my computer at often half the price? I've already spent thousands of dollars on computer hardware to use for my print, web, marketing, communications, video, etc. work and guess what, as a bonus it runs games that are cheaper than their console counterparts and I save money as a result. Plus I don't have to spend more money to buy a console.
To each their own, but to imply that you can't work and play is quite insulting not to mention the argument is tired and unoriginal. And oh yeah, a copout. Nice effort.
Want to play games? Buy a PC. Want to do work with your computer, instead of working on your computer? Buy a Mac.
I work with my computer, on my computer, and play games (on occassion) on my computer and I bought a PC. I don't need both. Perfect solution. I use Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Vegas, etc. every day to develop print, web, video related type work. Why would I spend even more money on another system unless, oh yeah, to each their own. It's great that we can all have our own perfect solutions since we are each individuals.
And I'm the proud owner of a computer too, that is not a Mac. And I happily use Photoshop professionally. To each their own really.
I assumed it was a fake, although it was a very good one.
If it's very good than it has to be fake I'd say. It's been nonsense since episode 6 so...
The software may have flaws but how is MS or any other vendor responsible for how others exploit a product? Have their been class action lawsuits against gun companies? Have there been class action lawsuits against auto manufacturers for creating cars that can kill people in accidents?
I don't believe any software vendors would like to see that they are made responsible, by law, for the damage that hackers do by way of flaws found in their products. It may punish MS, but it may punish them all as well.
I saw a bit yesterday when he asked that congressman if he'd be willing to let his kids sign up to go to war (the point being that those in power don't mind sacrificing the lives of other peoples' children). The congressman declined and that made it into the movie. However, in an interview with someone else, the congressman stated that Moore cut off the part of the interview where he said his nephew just got shipped off to Afghanistan. His nephew is still someone else's child, not his own. The question was about the congressman's children, not the children of any of his relatives.
OK... He claimed Bush let some Bin Laden family members out of the country during the air lockdown. This is not true. They were clearly let out of the country after the air restrictions were lifted. And yes, they are the same Bin Laden family is the infamous Osama belongs to, but just because one family member is evil doesn't have to mean the rest are evil.
Definitely. And on this point I'd disagree with Moore on the significance of flying out Bin Laden family members during and/or after the restrictions. People will make dubious associations and point the finger at people who have nothing to do with the behaviour of someone they have an association with. I am not responsible or accountable for whatever any of my family members do (excepting perhaps my kids if I had them and they lived under my roof). In this case, the "administration" may well have just done the sensible thing and protected these people from such accusations and their possible consequences. My conclusion differs from Moore's.
Having said that, disagreeing with one point does not automatically call for the dismissal of the subsequent points in this film. I think that would be absurd and shortsighted. I have friends with whom I totally disagree about some things and agree on others. To be fair and sensible you'd have to hear them all judge each of them accordingly. Not to mention take all the points together and judge if it makes for a coherent concern.
Finally, let's not forget how Bush himself and members of his administration have made an equally dubious connection to Al Queida and the Iraqi government. One official met another official. Wow! They're working together! Not. And was this dubious connection put to use? Of course it was. Is this connection still contested amongst the general public? Of course it is. Does this call for the automatic dismissal of all the Bush has ever done? Or should we look at each event and statement in turn to get the entire picture?
Ah yes, that is right. Renault have become an all in one team as well. I have to rid myself of the Benetton association.
"but the Saubers have last year's Ferrari engine"
Actually, they have this year's Ferrari engine.
"I believe Senna, Fangio and Prost are currently tied on the number of GP championships won (5). Senna is ahead of everyone on the number of actual races won, to the best of my knowledge. He certainly wins outright on the best all-weather driver."
Micheal has the most race victories of any drivers, with Alain Prost second. Micheal is at 77 and counting.
As for Championships:
Schumacher: 6 (and counting)
Fangio: 5
Prost: 4
Senna: 3
"To claim one driver is "the best" is to forget a lot of history. There were drivers better than Schumacher, and there will be again." It is very difficult to compare drivers across eras, but clearly, I'd say these drivers are all in the same league. I'm a little surprised you didn't mention Jimmy Clark, but so be it. You could argue that Fangio's cars, though more primitive, were less stressful physically, not to mention slower than modern F1 cars and thus argue that the latest drivers are better, etc. But such arguments cannot be won and indeed, seem to me to be ridiculous. I'm not sure why people are fascinated with defining "the best".
"I am not really much of a formula one fan due in large part to schummy's dominance."
I don't understand why people aren't much of F1 fans because of Schuey's dominance.
I'd can understand a statement like: I'm not much of a formula one fan due to most of the teams and drivers not being able to rise to the level of Schumacher and Ferrari.
I don't understand how Schumacher or Ferrari are the major factors or have anything to do with the mediocrity (in contrast) of the other teams. If F1 is boring, it's not Ferrari's fault. Indeed, they are the best of example of what the other teams should strive for. The failure of the other teams is the problem.
Ferrari also designs and builds their own engine (as does Toyota) whereas the other teams do not. Is this factor included in the budgets? For example, say BAR's budget is $10/year and Honda's engine budget is $8 dollars a year is the BAR budget then $18/year?
Actually, viewership is up this year so though they had lost some viewers in recent years now they are gaining some.
People want vinyl records. They see it as a format from simpler times. They hate CDs for any number of reasons and vinyl lets them just listen to music.
I'd be interested in hearing about, until the recent nonsense, CDs don't let people just listen to music?
"Mozilla is for the masses who either a) don't understand that email and web browsing are 2 different things (never-mind ftp etc etc). These are the people who think that a browser IS the internet. Or b) People who are irked by the fact that they have to run IE _and_ Outlook Express."
Sorry, but I understand full well that web browsing and email are different things but I prefer Mozilla over Firefox/Thunderbird. Imagine that...
Fortunately, Mozilla offers both alternatives to people. Because, you know, we all have our preferences and they're just that, preferences. If they are different than yours they're most certainly not, in all cases, for the reasons you list. I also don't have to run IE or Outlook Express, save for testing the web pages I develop.
"Unfortunately if the designer doesn't understand HTML then its a moot point."
And fortunately if the designer does understand HTML and CSS than it's great that Dreamweaver doesn't have to decide for them... But hey, if a bad driver smashes a car, let's blame the car.
In an interesting note (at least to me), Keith Schengli-Roberts actually took one of my Dreamweaver 4 courses back when Dreamweaver 4 was the current release. He was very nice and generously gave me a copy of the first edition of his book.
Not happy with FLAC?