Part of the problem is the question of, "Which *nix?" There are a bazillion distros. If you're a developer, you don't want to develop for and test on all of them. It's one thing when it's open source and you can just write it and rely on someone else to fix it if it doesn't work on a given distro. Otherwise, you're going to want one platform to target.
I was hoping SteamOS would solve that problem. It had the potential to bring together the best things about the PC gaming world (i.e. buy whatever hardware you want) with the best thing of the console world (a single platform optimized for gaming). I'm not sure why SteamOS hasn't come together. Is it just the chicken and the egg problem (i.e. developers won't develop for it until their are enough users, and users won't use it until developers are making games for it)? Is it that Windows is easier to develop for? Or is Microsoft bribing and strong-arming developers into sticking with Windows?
I have no real insight here, as I'm not in the industry. However, I would switch to SteamOS in a heartbeat if my games would run on it.
The problem is that the PC Desktop is a dead market, it has gone to the Tablets and Phones for a normal personal computing... For our Workstations, we don't need a Table OS, or a Server OS. But a work station OS...
These two points don't really make sense together. There's no market for workstations, but we need an OS focussed on workstations.
The problem isn't that Microsoft developed an OS UI aimed at tablets. They could easily have (and in fact *do* have) a UI that looks and behaves slightly differently on a tablet vs a workstation. The problem is that Microsoft intentionally tried to make their workstation OS look and work like a tablet OS in an attempt to railroad people into using their tablet OS. They did it because they weren't doing well in competing for the tablet OS market, and they looked at it as a way of leveraging their dominance in the workstation market to push the for dominance in the tablet market. It didn't work, but it made their workstation UI much worse. They also forced that UI onto the server OS for some inexplicable reason.
If they need a workstation OS, that'd be easy enough for them to do. Take Windows 10 and strip out the junk. I'm not even sure why they don't do that, other than possibly that they're betting the farm on everyone buying Surface Pros, and they don't want their tablet UI to be too different from their workstation UI. Also, they want to force everyone to use the Windows Store so they can collect royalties. However, if you're willing to live with that kind of limited choice and lack of backward compatibility, I don't know why you wouldn't migrate to using a Mac.
One of the unfortunate things about Microsoft's new upgrade cycle is that the major releases are no longer obvious. Some updates are just patches, and many of the patches fall into a cumulative roll-up patch, sort of like a little service pack. And then a couple times a year, they release a new version that's almost like a totally new version of the OS. There are major functional and UI changes.
When those major releases come out, Microsoft resets a lot of system settings. Sometimes they introduce entirely new settings that didn't exist before, which may overlap with previous settings. For example, Windows 10 did have an option to "defer updates". Later, they changes it so that you could change your system to use the CBB branch, which behaves similar to deferring updates, and then in addition they introduced an option to defer updates by X days. I had my system set to defer updates, and I manually installed an update, which neither moved my system into using CBB or deferring updates. I don't know if that's how it was supposed to work, but it seemed like a bit of a whacky choice.
I guess part of my point here is that, in addition to introducing new options and ditching existing options without making an attempt to map the old options to new ones in order to preserve existing behavior, the change came in an update that you might not know was coming. Your computer might just decide to update one day, and then the behavior of your OS has changed significantly. That's not what I want out of an OS.
The real shame of it is, they know how to fix it all. They could just turn the crap off. Stop trying to force people to use Cortana, Edge, and Bing. Stop trying to force people to use live tiles, or Metro/Modern apps. Stop trying to force people to use Microsoft accounts (Outlook.com or Live or Passport or whatever). Stop forcing advertising into the system, or covertly taking metrics on usage.
They won't do it. They don't care whether users are happy. They know that the people using Windows are pretty much stuck using Windows, and will accept whatever abuse they decide to dish out.
You still haven't presented any kind of counter-argument, or even a description of how my post includes a straw-man. I have to conclude that you don't actually understand the concept of a "straw man".
Really, the precise role of any position within the IT department, and indeed the role of the IT department as a whole, depends a fair bit on the company you work for. I've seen companies where most employees were fairly technical, and basic helpdesk support was rare. I've seen companies where most employees were supposed to be extremely technical, but people still needed help logging into their computers on an almost daily basis. I've seen companies where the IT department is largely about development and server work, and I've see companies where it's all desktop and VoIP support. I've seen companies where that have one role (even if they have multiple instances) of "IT guy", and it's a never-ending barrage of different kinds of work covering anything remotely associated with computers, but I've also been in companies with highly specialized roles, including some where a guy sits around waiting, in case some particular thing breaks.
There is only one unifying factor of all the IT positions I've seen: You will get shit on. People within the company will treat you like a servant. Management will treat you as a cost center with no productive value. When things are working well, the executives will be angry that they're spending money on your department because they assume you're not doing anything. When things aren't working well, the executives will be angry that they're spending money on your department because they assume you're ineffective.
I have yet to work in a place where IT personnel are treated as respectable hard-working skilled experts.
It's not a straw man simply because I make a position sound stupid and small-minded and bigoted, and you don't like that characterization. I have to be misrepresenting the position. I have to be making a counter-argument that assumes someone is taking a position which they are not taking.
I don't pay any attention to Vox or Think Progress. This position can be gleaned by listening to the President's speeches and watching a little Fox and Friends.
What you're saying is true enough, but I don't think it's the "underlying cause". The underlying cause is deep and longstanding propaganda and manipulation. The Republican party decided decades ago that they'd gain power by stoking the flames of angry ignorant impotence among rural racists. Now they're reaping what they've sowed.
I disagree somewhat with both you and the person you're responding to. I don't think it's explicitly the engineering or math that is upsetting them, and I don't think it's "brainwashing". The real problem is that, when you get a broad education and actually learn about the world we live in, modern Republican ideology is revealed to be complete insanity.
Evolution and global warming are real. Government isn't inherently evil. You can't always increase tax revenue by cutting taxes. The American "founding fathers" were not trying to create a "Christian nation". The Constitution does not work the way Republicans say it does. Muslims do have the right to practice their religion. There's no "historical proof" that Jesus was a real guy who was really the Messiah. The Bible doesn't say, "Poor people are just lazy. Fuck'em."
So these ignorant morons send their kids to college, and their kids come back saying, "Ummm... Yeah, so... that part of the Bible that says you should kill gay people...? That's roughly the same part of the Bible that says you can't eat bacon. So since you're not completely adhering to the rules in the Bible, maybe it's ok to not-kill gay people?"
And now they're upset. Their kids are using big words, and talking like murdering gay people isn't cool. The only conclusion their tiny minds can reach is that college is evil, and brainwashing their kids against "good ol'fashioned 'Merican values!" At some point, we might just need to find a way to stop listening to those people.
Meh. I don't think that cartoon is particularly apt or relevant. Apple products continue to get full support for at least a few years (depending on the product line), which is better than some manufacturers. How many Android phones get their updates late, or don't get the latest version of Android at all?
This cartoon seems to be implying the same old idea that, "Apple users are dumb and fall for marketing/branding. They think that the brand of electronics you own defines you as a person." The irony is, that's an idea spread by their competitors' marketing, and in saying it, it shows that *you* think that the brand of electronics you own defines you as a person.
And as for dumb phones, they're fine if that's what you want and need. Having access to email, a browser, mapping, etc. on your phone is all enormously useful and practical, though. I'm not necessarily a fan of how people use the technology, but I think it's downright silly to suggest that smart phones aren't sensible.
Yeah... I don't know, I think it's mostly fine in this case. I've been using the app in question for a while. I used the old version. I'm using the new version. The old one had a bunch of problems. The new one has new and different problems. Mostly they do the same things, sort of, except the UI is a little more flat an minimalist in the new version.
Given some of the problems I was having with the old one, I wouldn't be surprised if they took one look at it and thought, "Yeesh. We're going to have to redo some of this from scratch." It was flaky. It crashed a fair amount. Sometimes it wouldn't connect to the devices. Sometimes it would take a long time to connect. So beyond wanting to re-brand and leave their own mark, the app just needed some work.
I'm not saying it couldn't have been handled better, but I don't think it's as big a deal as some are making it out to be, and it does seem like they're working on it.
I hope you enjoy ads then. All indications are that Microsoft intends to push people toward buying Windows Enterprise by disabling professional features and including extensive advertising in all non-Enterprise versions.
And still, people won't consider dropping Microsoft.
Agreed. Facebook used to be fine. I was never in love with it, but they gave you a feed of your friends' posts, which works fine. They keep adding ads and click-bait. They won't let you see a chronological feed, probably because it was determined that it increased time spent on Facebook if you couldn't figure out whether there were new posts. Between the movies that start on their own, and the tricks Facebook tries to do to make sure it updates constantly, it uses far more data and battery than any two other apps on my phone. And I don't even check it that much. In fact, I've been checking it less and less because the experience is so poor.
I'm on the verge of trying to close the account, but I have to take some time to figure out which Facebook friends I want to keep in touch with, and how I'll keep in touch with them.
Listen, to some extent, you could make that argument about any class. There are people who graduate from high school without being able to perform simple arithmetic or string a grammatically correct sentence together. That doesn't mean there's no point in having math or English classes.
Also, for something like programming classes in particular, I don't think it's terribly important that every kid leaves those classes being able to program. Even if it increases the number of kids who vaguely understand some programming concepts, it'll probably be worthwhile. Even having a few experiences in writing some basic scripts is helpful in improving logic.
Also, it's worth noting that the Republicans have greatly contributed to increased insurance costs. First, they removed some of the subsidies that were part of "Obamacare", and insurance companies had to raise prices to compensate.
Second, Trump announced that he would not enforce the mandate, which lead to a lot of young healthy people dropping insurance. As healthy people leave the market, the price of coverage for the remaining customers will increase.
Essentially, prices would probably have gone up anyway, but they've gone up a lot more than they would have if Obamacare had stayed completely in place.
It's definitely not new. Decades ago, computer experts were all hired based on their skills rather than the CS degrees, because CS wasn't really a major yet. I've had a whole career in IT without a CS degree, and in fact without any formal training or certifications at all. When I've hired people, I've never hired based on certs or majors.
The focus on official certifications (including college degrees) is much more common among large companies, particularly when the candidate search is being performed by HR people who don't have knowledge/experience in the domain of the position being hired. If you work in HR and you're asked to get candidates for any kind of job, you're going to want to come up with some objective criteria to judge the candidates by. You receive 5,000 resumes and you need to bring the number down to 10 candidates worth considering. You'll look for a handful of skills and some known-good certifications, because you don't have the expertise to delve any deeper.
People receiving fewer resumes and having more expertise can afford to base their criteria on more meaningful things.
Then maybe Apple shouldn't advertise the fact that this device should replace your laptop.
I mostly agree with you there. For some people, an iPad can replace their laptop. I think what they're trying to advertise is that the hardware is becoming powerful enough to compete with laptops in terms of processing power, not necessarily in terms of total functionality. However, the claim is vague and potentially misleading, at best.
What is a review if not an opinion of a person? The fact he's angry has no bearing on it.
Well, first, if a review of a new product goes beyond pointing out flaws in the product, into a realm where you can tell the reviewer is angry, it's no longer really a product review. But that's not really where my emphasis was. I was pointing out that this is a disjointed series of tweets, and not a coherent article.
Yes, Apple users should get an entire review dedicated to them. *Dons my asbestos overcoat*
I mean, there actually have been whole articles written about people's dedication to the Apple Brand. You want to write about that? That's fine. It just shouldn't be confused with an honest and unbiased review of a specific Apple product.
And if you buy food to eat elsewhere that would be a valid WTF comment about the review. But a restaurant is far more than just its food.
Er... of course you can buy food elsewhere. I'm not sure what that really has to do with anything.
But yes, a restaurant is more than just its food. Still, let's not pretend that the quality of the food isn't a big component of it. But what's funny about this argument is, you're actually missing the point entirely. I think it might be worth explaining that my view is-- and I don't really want to get into a whole side argument here-- that complaining that hipsters like a restaurant is kind of a stupid, petty complaint. "At this restaurant, the food is good, the service is good. Really everything is good. It's just that I'm afraid that the other patrons don't think I'm cool, so this restaurant is stupid and I hate it!" It's dumb. Maybe I should have explained that much, but I was assuming it went without saying.
So with that viewpoint, you have a review written by someone who is determined to hate the thing he's reviewing. His reasons for hating it are stupid and petty. And still, even that guy is admitting that the food is great? That must be some really great food. I'm sold.
So that was my point. This guy is just looking for reasons to hate the latest iPad. His big complaints are "I don't like Apple fans" and "I want a laptop and don't want to work on a tablet." Still, his experience leads him to say that it's "a step in the right direction"? In context, that sounds like praise to me.
If you want to write your own review, then do so.
I haven't used the new iPad yet. That's why I was interested to read someone's review. From the review, it sounds like it's a nice, though perhaps only incremental, update. That's helpful.
It's like me responding to your post with "So you're saying Apple's* are tasty**"?
I would never say that "Apple's are tasty". If only because I know that you use apostrophes to show possession or in a contraction, and not to make a noun plural.
Anyhow good to know there are still Apple fanboys who get mad if you insult their products.
First, a statement like this has no place in a technology review. Even if we were to assume this is true, it's a criticism of people, not the product.
Second, this just isn't a review. It's some guy's angry twitter rant.
Third, his complaints seem to be that the iPad isn't a laptop. And he's right. It's not a laptop. If you want a laptop, you should get a laptop.
Finally, his assessment is that iOS 11 is "a step in the right direction.
Given all of his complaining, I think the take-away here is strangely positive. It reminds me of a review that I read once that gave a Brooklyn restaurant zero stars, saying, "Although the food was really great, it was filled with a bunch of young hipsters, and I hate hipsters." -- to which I wanted to respond, "So you're saying food is great?"
Well this guy is saying that although it's a step in the right direction, he doesn't like working on tablets because he wants a good physical keyboard. -- to which I want to respond, "So you're saying it's an improvement over previous iPads? Like... for anyone who thought that previous iPads were pretty good, this one is even better?"
You can't just go to the store and buy one at or below MSRP. You either have to sleep outside the stores for when they open, or buy one online at inflated prices.
I can understand not being able to walk into a store and buy one. Each store has a certain number in stock at any given time, and once they run out, they run out.
What I don't understand is, why don't they let you order in online, and then let Nintendo fill the orders on a first-come, first-serve basis? Like... ok, I get it, you don't have any in stock right now. But then when you get a shipment in two weeks, you'll just run out immediately because scalpers are making a job out of buying up all available inventory, immediately, for resale. Why can't I just backorder the product, and be put on the waiting list to receive a unit when they next come available?
That's what other companies do, and it means you can place an order and get an ETA for the shipment right away. It might not completely prevent scalpers, but it means that you only need to pay the scalper's inflated price if you're impatient and you want the product *right now*. Therefore, it would diminish the ability of scalpers to ask for ridiculous prices, reducing their profits, in turn reducing the incentive to buy up all the existing supply, which would reduce wait times. In the meantime, Nintendo would have a better idea of the demand for their products, and they could scale production accordingly.
Well I'm sure there are all kinds of things you could do to improve various problems. My point was more, why not keep all the possible solutions in mind, and then use a mixture of the solutions that make sense in whatever situation you come across?
Maybe spraying a coating onto existing asphalt is a good partial solution that can be used in some circumstances. Maybe planting trees is a good partial solution. It also seems to me that there might be a replacement material for asphalt that wouldn't need an additional coating. Maybe there are places where it makes sense to make some kind of shelter or another to provide shade.
So I don't think I'm necessarily arguing with you. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't really make sense to be dismissive of this idea just because there might also be other potential solutions that would work better in certain circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
Why can't *nix seem to get past that one?
Part of the problem is the question of, "Which *nix?" There are a bazillion distros. If you're a developer, you don't want to develop for and test on all of them. It's one thing when it's open source and you can just write it and rely on someone else to fix it if it doesn't work on a given distro. Otherwise, you're going to want one platform to target.
I was hoping SteamOS would solve that problem. It had the potential to bring together the best things about the PC gaming world (i.e. buy whatever hardware you want) with the best thing of the console world (a single platform optimized for gaming). I'm not sure why SteamOS hasn't come together. Is it just the chicken and the egg problem (i.e. developers won't develop for it until their are enough users, and users won't use it until developers are making games for it)? Is it that Windows is easier to develop for? Or is Microsoft bribing and strong-arming developers into sticking with Windows?
I have no real insight here, as I'm not in the industry. However, I would switch to SteamOS in a heartbeat if my games would run on it.
The problem is that the PC Desktop is a dead market, it has gone to the Tablets and Phones for a normal personal computing... For our Workstations, we don't need a Table OS, or a Server OS. But a work station OS...
These two points don't really make sense together. There's no market for workstations, but we need an OS focussed on workstations.
The problem isn't that Microsoft developed an OS UI aimed at tablets. They could easily have (and in fact *do* have) a UI that looks and behaves slightly differently on a tablet vs a workstation. The problem is that Microsoft intentionally tried to make their workstation OS look and work like a tablet OS in an attempt to railroad people into using their tablet OS. They did it because they weren't doing well in competing for the tablet OS market, and they looked at it as a way of leveraging their dominance in the workstation market to push the for dominance in the tablet market. It didn't work, but it made their workstation UI much worse. They also forced that UI onto the server OS for some inexplicable reason.
If they need a workstation OS, that'd be easy enough for them to do. Take Windows 10 and strip out the junk. I'm not even sure why they don't do that, other than possibly that they're betting the farm on everyone buying Surface Pros, and they don't want their tablet UI to be too different from their workstation UI. Also, they want to force everyone to use the Windows Store so they can collect royalties. However, if you're willing to live with that kind of limited choice and lack of backward compatibility, I don't know why you wouldn't migrate to using a Mac.
These regressions seem to occur after updates.
One of the unfortunate things about Microsoft's new upgrade cycle is that the major releases are no longer obvious. Some updates are just patches, and many of the patches fall into a cumulative roll-up patch, sort of like a little service pack. And then a couple times a year, they release a new version that's almost like a totally new version of the OS. There are major functional and UI changes.
When those major releases come out, Microsoft resets a lot of system settings. Sometimes they introduce entirely new settings that didn't exist before, which may overlap with previous settings. For example, Windows 10 did have an option to "defer updates". Later, they changes it so that you could change your system to use the CBB branch, which behaves similar to deferring updates, and then in addition they introduced an option to defer updates by X days. I had my system set to defer updates, and I manually installed an update, which neither moved my system into using CBB or deferring updates. I don't know if that's how it was supposed to work, but it seemed like a bit of a whacky choice.
I guess part of my point here is that, in addition to introducing new options and ditching existing options without making an attempt to map the old options to new ones in order to preserve existing behavior, the change came in an update that you might not know was coming. Your computer might just decide to update one day, and then the behavior of your OS has changed significantly. That's not what I want out of an OS.
On what are you basing these numbers?
The real shame of it is, they know how to fix it all. They could just turn the crap off. Stop trying to force people to use Cortana, Edge, and Bing. Stop trying to force people to use live tiles, or Metro/Modern apps. Stop trying to force people to use Microsoft accounts (Outlook.com or Live or Passport or whatever). Stop forcing advertising into the system, or covertly taking metrics on usage.
They won't do it. They don't care whether users are happy. They know that the people using Windows are pretty much stuck using Windows, and will accept whatever abuse they decide to dish out.
Your straw man conception...
and
You made up a Boogeyman that doesn't really exist...
You still haven't presented any kind of counter-argument, or even a description of how my post includes a straw-man. I have to conclude that you don't actually understand the concept of a "straw man".
Really, the precise role of any position within the IT department, and indeed the role of the IT department as a whole, depends a fair bit on the company you work for. I've seen companies where most employees were fairly technical, and basic helpdesk support was rare. I've seen companies where most employees were supposed to be extremely technical, but people still needed help logging into their computers on an almost daily basis. I've seen companies where the IT department is largely about development and server work, and I've see companies where it's all desktop and VoIP support. I've seen companies where that have one role (even if they have multiple instances) of "IT guy", and it's a never-ending barrage of different kinds of work covering anything remotely associated with computers, but I've also been in companies with highly specialized roles, including some where a guy sits around waiting, in case some particular thing breaks.
There is only one unifying factor of all the IT positions I've seen: You will get shit on. People within the company will treat you like a servant. Management will treat you as a cost center with no productive value. When things are working well, the executives will be angry that they're spending money on your department because they assume you're not doing anything. When things aren't working well, the executives will be angry that they're spending money on your department because they assume you're ineffective.
I have yet to work in a place where IT personnel are treated as respectable hard-working skilled experts.
Maybe you should go to college and learn what a straw-man argument is. It's not, "You made me feel stupid and I don't like it."
Do you even know what a stream-man argument is?
It's not a straw man simply because I make a position sound stupid and small-minded and bigoted, and you don't like that characterization. I have to be misrepresenting the position. I have to be making a counter-argument that assumes someone is taking a position which they are not taking.
I don't pay any attention to Vox or Think Progress. This position can be gleaned by listening to the President's speeches and watching a little Fox and Friends.
What you're saying is true enough, but I don't think it's the "underlying cause". The underlying cause is deep and longstanding propaganda and manipulation. The Republican party decided decades ago that they'd gain power by stoking the flames of angry ignorant impotence among rural racists. Now they're reaping what they've sowed.
I disagree somewhat with both you and the person you're responding to. I don't think it's explicitly the engineering or math that is upsetting them, and I don't think it's "brainwashing". The real problem is that, when you get a broad education and actually learn about the world we live in, modern Republican ideology is revealed to be complete insanity.
Evolution and global warming are real. Government isn't inherently evil. You can't always increase tax revenue by cutting taxes. The American "founding fathers" were not trying to create a "Christian nation". The Constitution does not work the way Republicans say it does. Muslims do have the right to practice their religion. There's no "historical proof" that Jesus was a real guy who was really the Messiah. The Bible doesn't say, "Poor people are just lazy. Fuck'em."
So these ignorant morons send their kids to college, and their kids come back saying, "Ummm... Yeah, so... that part of the Bible that says you should kill gay people...? That's roughly the same part of the Bible that says you can't eat bacon. So since you're not completely adhering to the rules in the Bible, maybe it's ok to not-kill gay people?"
And now they're upset. Their kids are using big words, and talking like murdering gay people isn't cool. The only conclusion their tiny minds can reach is that college is evil, and brainwashing their kids against "good ol'fashioned 'Merican values!" At some point, we might just need to find a way to stop listening to those people.
Meh. I don't think that cartoon is particularly apt or relevant. Apple products continue to get full support for at least a few years (depending on the product line), which is better than some manufacturers. How many Android phones get their updates late, or don't get the latest version of Android at all?
This cartoon seems to be implying the same old idea that, "Apple users are dumb and fall for marketing/branding. They think that the brand of electronics you own defines you as a person." The irony is, that's an idea spread by their competitors' marketing, and in saying it, it shows that *you* think that the brand of electronics you own defines you as a person.
And as for dumb phones, they're fine if that's what you want and need. Having access to email, a browser, mapping, etc. on your phone is all enormously useful and practical, though. I'm not necessarily a fan of how people use the technology, but I think it's downright silly to suggest that smart phones aren't sensible.
Yeah... I don't know, I think it's mostly fine in this case. I've been using the app in question for a while. I used the old version. I'm using the new version. The old one had a bunch of problems. The new one has new and different problems. Mostly they do the same things, sort of, except the UI is a little more flat an minimalist in the new version.
Given some of the problems I was having with the old one, I wouldn't be surprised if they took one look at it and thought, "Yeesh. We're going to have to redo some of this from scratch." It was flaky. It crashed a fair amount. Sometimes it wouldn't connect to the devices. Sometimes it would take a long time to connect. So beyond wanting to re-brand and leave their own mark, the app just needed some work.
I'm not saying it couldn't have been handled better, but I don't think it's as big a deal as some are making it out to be, and it does seem like they're working on it.
I hope you enjoy ads then. All indications are that Microsoft intends to push people toward buying Windows Enterprise by disabling professional features and including extensive advertising in all non-Enterprise versions.
And still, people won't consider dropping Microsoft.
Agreed. Facebook used to be fine. I was never in love with it, but they gave you a feed of your friends' posts, which works fine. They keep adding ads and click-bait. They won't let you see a chronological feed, probably because it was determined that it increased time spent on Facebook if you couldn't figure out whether there were new posts. Between the movies that start on their own, and the tricks Facebook tries to do to make sure it updates constantly, it uses far more data and battery than any two other apps on my phone. And I don't even check it that much. In fact, I've been checking it less and less because the experience is so poor.
I'm on the verge of trying to close the account, but I have to take some time to figure out which Facebook friends I want to keep in touch with, and how I'll keep in touch with them.
Meh.
Listen, to some extent, you could make that argument about any class. There are people who graduate from high school without being able to perform simple arithmetic or string a grammatically correct sentence together. That doesn't mean there's no point in having math or English classes.
Also, for something like programming classes in particular, I don't think it's terribly important that every kid leaves those classes being able to program. Even if it increases the number of kids who vaguely understand some programming concepts, it'll probably be worthwhile. Even having a few experiences in writing some basic scripts is helpful in improving logic.
Also, it's worth noting that the Republicans have greatly contributed to increased insurance costs. First, they removed some of the subsidies that were part of "Obamacare", and insurance companies had to raise prices to compensate.
Second, Trump announced that he would not enforce the mandate, which lead to a lot of young healthy people dropping insurance. As healthy people leave the market, the price of coverage for the remaining customers will increase.
Essentially, prices would probably have gone up anyway, but they've gone up a lot more than they would have if Obamacare had stayed completely in place.
It's definitely not new. Decades ago, computer experts were all hired based on their skills rather than the CS degrees, because CS wasn't really a major yet. I've had a whole career in IT without a CS degree, and in fact without any formal training or certifications at all. When I've hired people, I've never hired based on certs or majors.
The focus on official certifications (including college degrees) is much more common among large companies, particularly when the candidate search is being performed by HR people who don't have knowledge/experience in the domain of the position being hired. If you work in HR and you're asked to get candidates for any kind of job, you're going to want to come up with some objective criteria to judge the candidates by. You receive 5,000 resumes and you need to bring the number down to 10 candidates worth considering. You'll look for a handful of skills and some known-good certifications, because you don't have the expertise to delve any deeper.
People receiving fewer resumes and having more expertise can afford to base their criteria on more meaningful things.
Then maybe Apple shouldn't advertise the fact that this device should replace your laptop.
I mostly agree with you there. For some people, an iPad can replace their laptop. I think what they're trying to advertise is that the hardware is becoming powerful enough to compete with laptops in terms of processing power, not necessarily in terms of total functionality. However, the claim is vague and potentially misleading, at best.
What is a review if not an opinion of a person? The fact he's angry has no bearing on it.
Well, first, if a review of a new product goes beyond pointing out flaws in the product, into a realm where you can tell the reviewer is angry, it's no longer really a product review. But that's not really where my emphasis was. I was pointing out that this is a disjointed series of tweets, and not a coherent article.
Yes, Apple users should get an entire review dedicated to them. *Dons my asbestos overcoat*
I mean, there actually have been whole articles written about people's dedication to the Apple Brand. You want to write about that? That's fine. It just shouldn't be confused with an honest and unbiased review of a specific Apple product.
And if you buy food to eat elsewhere that would be a valid WTF comment about the review. But a restaurant is far more than just its food.
Er... of course you can buy food elsewhere. I'm not sure what that really has to do with anything.
But yes, a restaurant is more than just its food. Still, let's not pretend that the quality of the food isn't a big component of it. But what's funny about this argument is, you're actually missing the point entirely. I think it might be worth explaining that my view is-- and I don't really want to get into a whole side argument here-- that complaining that hipsters like a restaurant is kind of a stupid, petty complaint. "At this restaurant, the food is good, the service is good. Really everything is good. It's just that I'm afraid that the other patrons don't think I'm cool, so this restaurant is stupid and I hate it!" It's dumb. Maybe I should have explained that much, but I was assuming it went without saying.
So with that viewpoint, you have a review written by someone who is determined to hate the thing he's reviewing. His reasons for hating it are stupid and petty. And still, even that guy is admitting that the food is great? That must be some really great food. I'm sold.
So that was my point. This guy is just looking for reasons to hate the latest iPad. His big complaints are "I don't like Apple fans" and "I want a laptop and don't want to work on a tablet." Still, his experience leads him to say that it's "a step in the right direction"? In context, that sounds like praise to me.
If you want to write your own review, then do so.
I haven't used the new iPad yet. That's why I was interested to read someone's review. From the review, it sounds like it's a nice, though perhaps only incremental, update. That's helpful.
It's like me responding to your post with "So you're saying Apple's* are tasty**"?
I would never say that "Apple's are tasty". If only because I know that you use apostrophes to show possession or in a contraction, and not to make a noun plural.
I want the ports of the Macbook Pro, but I want a physical escape key like the Macbook.
FYI, you can still get a Macbook Pro with a physical ESC key.
Anyhow good to know there are still Apple fanboys who get mad if you insult their products.
First, a statement like this has no place in a technology review. Even if we were to assume this is true, it's a criticism of people, not the product.
Second, this just isn't a review. It's some guy's angry twitter rant.
Third, his complaints seem to be that the iPad isn't a laptop. And he's right. It's not a laptop. If you want a laptop, you should get a laptop.
Finally, his assessment is that iOS 11 is "a step in the right direction.
Given all of his complaining, I think the take-away here is strangely positive. It reminds me of a review that I read once that gave a Brooklyn restaurant zero stars, saying, "Although the food was really great, it was filled with a bunch of young hipsters, and I hate hipsters." -- to which I wanted to respond, "So you're saying food is great?"
Well this guy is saying that although it's a step in the right direction, he doesn't like working on tablets because he wants a good physical keyboard. -- to which I want to respond, "So you're saying it's an improvement over previous iPads? Like... for anyone who thought that previous iPads were pretty good, this one is even better?"
You can't just go to the store and buy one at or below MSRP. You either have to sleep outside the stores for when they open, or buy one online at inflated prices.
I can understand not being able to walk into a store and buy one. Each store has a certain number in stock at any given time, and once they run out, they run out.
What I don't understand is, why don't they let you order in online, and then let Nintendo fill the orders on a first-come, first-serve basis? Like... ok, I get it, you don't have any in stock right now. But then when you get a shipment in two weeks, you'll just run out immediately because scalpers are making a job out of buying up all available inventory, immediately, for resale. Why can't I just backorder the product, and be put on the waiting list to receive a unit when they next come available?
That's what other companies do, and it means you can place an order and get an ETA for the shipment right away. It might not completely prevent scalpers, but it means that you only need to pay the scalper's inflated price if you're impatient and you want the product *right now*. Therefore, it would diminish the ability of scalpers to ask for ridiculous prices, reducing their profits, in turn reducing the incentive to buy up all the existing supply, which would reduce wait times. In the meantime, Nintendo would have a better idea of the demand for their products, and they could scale production accordingly.
Well I'm sure there are all kinds of things you could do to improve various problems. My point was more, why not keep all the possible solutions in mind, and then use a mixture of the solutions that make sense in whatever situation you come across?
Maybe spraying a coating onto existing asphalt is a good partial solution that can be used in some circumstances. Maybe planting trees is a good partial solution. It also seems to me that there might be a replacement material for asphalt that wouldn't need an additional coating. Maybe there are places where it makes sense to make some kind of shelter or another to provide shade.
So I don't think I'm necessarily arguing with you. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't really make sense to be dismissive of this idea just because there might also be other potential solutions that would work better in certain circumstances.
Why not both? Planting trees is a good thing for various reasons, but it doesn't seem like a reason not to make other kinds of improvements.