Well I'm no computer expert by any means. If its a tuning problem, then Ubuntu isn't ready for the big time because I have no such problem with Windows. If Windows did, I'd have no idea how to fix it.
Considering many sources say the number of online Windows 98 users is around 1%, I somehow doubt that. But don't let that stop you from making assumptions.
When you're going from an inferior product (I found IE lacked many features I like, including a built in dictionary) to a superior product (Firefox has many more features and also has extensions for those it lacks) then yes, I'd call it an upgrade.
You wouldn't have called me a troll. Quite amusing considering they're both factually true (as they're talking about real experiences for me) and both make the same point.
It isn't a matter of whose fault it is, its a matter of constantly getting your computer compromised forcing you to have to spend time fixing it. Although for people who think their time is worth nothing, using Windows 95/98 makes perfect sense.
When you're going from an inferior product (I found Ubuntu Linux slowed my internet connection considerably, probably due to a driver issue. Although I can't say for sure) to a superior product (my internet connection is considerably faster in Windows XP) then yes, I'd call it an upgrade.
The less sales company X makes, the less profit they make, the more they need to charge per copy. Software comes with a piracy tax included, where everyone who pays for it, also has to pay for you using it without paying. If people didn't pirate, software would be cheaper.
I refuse to help my friends with their computers. They're going to let it be trashed, they can clean up the mess. I also won't go over my friends house on a regular basis to clean their shower and toilet. I'm a friend, not their personal slave.
Wow, lucky her. Unfortunately for me there was a driver problem (we're assuming that anyway because I know of no other possible cause) that would make my internet slower when used in Ubuntu Linux compared with when I used it in Windows XP. Had you "fixed" my computer, you'd have one very ungrateful friend.
So that means its okay for me and everyone else to pirate? Yay! I'm sure it won't hurt the software developers.
Or it could be that because we as a society say its wrong to pirate, the rest of society is subsidising your illegal practices. That doesn't sound okay to me. Either we should accept everyone pirating or no-one pirating. In the former software companies aren't going to be able to continue business as usual.
it is illogical and detrimental to society for him to NOT pirate it (assuming he will actually use it)
Actually the developers of GIMP would benefit if he followed the law and used that instead. The more people who use software the more traction it gains. This is why piracy is bad to society.
I'm not naive. You're ignorant. I cited one example on where the government stepping in improved things in Australia. Your paranoid insistence that it can never help is proved shallow when faced with actual facts.
If Americans actually get good service from the power companies (and I'm not going to take your word for it as you might be slightly biased;)) then there is no reason to nationalise it. But for a lot of things, that's a pretty massive assumption. For example in the banking industry in Australia the customers are getting screwed over left, right and centre. It began when the government owned bank was privatised. So while full nationalising isn't always good, having a government run alternative has always been good in Australia.
If a leader I'm electing changes his opinion dramatically in a short amount of time (which this wouldn't count. However if he changed it back within a few days that would count) I want to know. I can't think of anything more important then ensuring my country's future leader actually knows what he's doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Because while IE was implementing Firefox's old features, Firefox was implementing new features (some of them from Opera). So IE is still behind.
Well I'm no computer expert by any means. If its a tuning problem, then Ubuntu isn't ready for the big time because I have no such problem with Windows. If Windows did, I'd have no idea how to fix it.
If there was a piracy tax, we'd see DRM software cheaper than non-DRM
This assumes DRM works which it doesn't.
It was poor for 7 months. I was trying to put up with it and I also blamed the person who moved the cables through as well.
Considering many sources say the number of online Windows 98 users is around 1%, I somehow doubt that. But don't let that stop you from making assumptions.
HA! Had I said.....
You wouldn't have called me a troll. Quite amusing considering they're both factually true (as they're talking about real experiences for me) and both make the same point.
It isn't a matter of whose fault it is, its a matter of constantly getting your computer compromised forcing you to have to spend time fixing it. Although for people who think their time is worth nothing, using Windows 95/98 makes perfect sense.
When you're going from an inferior product (I found Ubuntu Linux slowed my internet connection considerably, probably due to a driver issue. Although I can't say for sure) to a superior product (my internet connection is considerably faster in Windows XP) then yes, I'd call it an upgrade.
The less sales company X makes, the less profit they make, the more they need to charge per copy. Software comes with a piracy tax included, where everyone who pays for it, also has to pay for you using it without paying. If people didn't pirate, software would be cheaper.
So yes, you are leeching on my wallet.
Yes after spending 7 months on one Linux distro, I sure am keen on trying another one straight away!
Its wrong because I'm subsidising other people's illegal practices. I don't want to support you any longer you leech.
I refuse to help my friends with their computers. They're going to let it be trashed, they can clean up the mess. I also won't go over my friends house on a regular basis to clean their shower and toilet. I'm a friend, not their personal slave.
Wow, lucky her. Unfortunately for me there was a driver problem (we're assuming that anyway because I know of no other possible cause) that would make my internet slower when used in Ubuntu Linux compared with when I used it in Windows XP. Had you "fixed" my computer, you'd have one very ungrateful friend.
So that means its okay for me and everyone else to pirate? Yay! I'm sure it won't hurt the software developers.
Or it could be that because we as a society say its wrong to pirate, the rest of society is subsidising your illegal practices. That doesn't sound okay to me. Either we should accept everyone pirating or no-one pirating. In the former software companies aren't going to be able to continue business as usual.
it is illogical and detrimental to society for him to NOT pirate it (assuming he will actually use it)
Actually the developers of GIMP would benefit if he followed the law and used that instead. The more people who use software the more traction it gains. This is why piracy is bad to society.
Because i say i am. You don't have to like it or even agree. But screw you. I want sex. And if I can't get it legally, I'll get it illegally (rape).
Just because something CAN be done, doesn't mean we as a society should tolerate people doing it.
It is compared with Linux. I had to switch to XP after several months of Linux because it didn't do as well as XP.
I sorely wished one of the guys who coded this would sue. I know it'd mean the end of their lives, but it'd be worth it for me :P
Considering I need to buy an entire computer for MacOS, I wasn't prepared to do that. Once MacOS removes the DRM, I'll give it a try.
I spoke with several people before buying Windows XP a couple of months ago. They all recommended XP over Vista.
So instead of raping little children, you want to view movies of other people raping little children? Or do you support this attempted eradication?
Cheers to PJ for keeping us informed
Don't you mean Cheers to IBM for keeping us informed?
I'm not naive. You're ignorant. I cited one example on where the government stepping in improved things in Australia. Your paranoid insistence that it can never help is proved shallow when faced with actual facts.
If Americans actually get good service from the power companies (and I'm not going to take your word for it as you might be slightly biased ;)) then there is no reason to nationalise it. But for a lot of things, that's a pretty massive assumption. For example in the banking industry in Australia the customers are getting screwed over left, right and centre. It began when the government owned bank was privatised. So while full nationalising isn't always good, having a government run alternative has always been good in Australia.
If a leader I'm electing changes his opinion dramatically in a short amount of time (which this wouldn't count. However if he changed it back within a few days that would count) I want to know. I can't think of anything more important then ensuring my country's future leader actually knows what he's doing.