except its an old problem. there are a lot of different pieces of software that can ruin the speed and functionality of a computer(not nearly as much now, but even still..). the worry is some resource hog will really slow down the experience at random times(a POS piece of software my school required in order to get on the network was just like this, and worse, they didn't have anything I could use to uninstall it or stop it from running ever).
I don't care about the machine, I can write crap software to bug up the running experience if the user lets it run. Unlike a new mac or linux install, this is really a windows only problem(out of the 3). I always do a fresh install with a new windows box to get rid of anything that could be there. And everything runs alot smoother and quicker if I do that.
didn't know.... but does this then also require having macs or is this something that can be done for windows PC's from a Mac server? (I've never set up anything for a business, just home networking, so I have no idea). If it can, I'm betting they are like our local IT department, just completely unwilling to change a system that is currently working.
If it does, they there is the issue of paying for more expensive desktop equipment and possibly having to change business applications. 7500 bucks to change over all your computer hardware(and software) is amazingly cheap from what I've seen.
its always deserved. its the same success microsoft had/has. If you build enough of an itunes base, you are virtually set if you make your standard hard to sync with. People will pay an extra 100$ to apple for the same or even less capable hardware to do just what you said, continue integrating.
granted, I do want to see the iPhone in action. It looks interesting(though personally, I think touch screen are crap simple because after 1 week of use, they are covered in fingerprints that are hard to clean off. And of course, they teamed with Cingular.... the worst network I've ever been on. so I probably won't ever be getting one....
but isn't that a bit wasteful? neither of these guys can actually stream live HD video off the computer. Apple's website was talking about 640x480 which isn't even close to what my neighbor's(I don't own a TV right now) TV does. It would be nice to have, but first we need wireless networks that allow for live streaming of HD video(I don't think bandwidth is there). Am I missing something? I haven't seen anything about actual HD video being uploaded. Did I miss a headline?
there is one way to get them to care, make it cheaper. unfortunately, only Linux does this. and since the OS is such a small part of the price of a computer, its hard to argue that even when its free, its worth the person's time.....
actually, I was just pointing out that there are other computer systems being advertised. your exact words were: [br][br] "People are buying windows because [b]nothing else is advertised[/b]"[br] [br] I'm just saying there is quite a bit of advertisement out there. My most memorable apple commercials are the "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" commercials. I actually can't think of the last time I saw on TV an ipod commercial. Now if you were only talking about Linux, you should have just said that. [br][br] now as to why Linux isn't advertised.... I'm not really sure. Maybe no linux company actually believes they can get people to switch based on advertisements or maybe linux isn't being directed at the regular home user. or maybe these companies realize there is a ton more money to be made by targetting companies that will require lots of costly support and it is easier to concentrate on that? Your guess is as good as mine.
and this is why you have other scientists do the review, not the PR department. a foolish assumption would be to say "we can explain away the increase in temperature in the gulf stream as being due to a magma shift and therefore, global warming does not exist". This would be a great PR spin but would fail scientific review because global warming is not a local phenomenon(hence the name). To use a small locality as proof would be just as ignorant as using a small deviation from the trend as proof against.
If the information contains BS, that is the point of scientific peer review. But I don't see why a PR department(or other policy makers) require the ability to review the report first. After it passes basic scientific peer review, it should then fall to the broader community to read and make an informed decision. Worse yet would be to argue that either policy makers or PR department have a stronger grip on the science than the scientists who already reviewed the paper.
by teh way, statisitcs can't make numbers say whatever you want them to. blatant ignorance about statistics allows a person to lie about what the numbers say, incorrectly referencing statistics as a method of adding credence to a false claim. I've always found statistics to be a powerful tool that most people don't know how to use properly.
I think at heart I'm not a CLI type of guy. I know how to figure my way around one but its never felt applicable to what I do. I've done the whole all controls thing. my test subject, www.nytimes.com firefox 2.0~ at the top, there is a search bar. I want to click into the search bar, type whatever I want, then tab over to the listbox. I still can't get that to work in my mac nad I'm not sure why. but its the easiest test subject I have come across.
I don't like hte ctrl+F2 solution for the reason you stated, arrowing around it is slow. it happens to be a lot of the times, the stuff I want to access doesn't have a shortcut. a good example from today: at work, I have a kmv switch to go between my computers, both are dual screen but I only have 2 monitors. I don't like to have to switch over from one display to the next on a monitor because its a bit slow. I like the fact in windows that I can, without looking, hit alt+space bar+r to take a maximized window and shrink it followed by alt+spacebar+m + arrow key to get my mouse to jump to that window and automatically drag it(without having to hold down a left click). its a quick way to move things on and off the screen that I am using as I go between programs.
you make some very good points. but I'll just say, I'm responding purely to the question of why I use windows. and I think the "I" really needs to be driven home on some of the comments. My job has me building relatively complex sheets in excel probably 6 hours a day and most of that goes on with proprietary tool kits we have written in house or are provided.
my issue with tabbing is best shown when I try to buy something online. usually, there is a mix of check boxes, drop down boxes, and text boxes that all need ot be filled in. I hate using a mouse to move around in interfaces like this. I have yet to find a way to go from the "City " text box to the "state" drop down box to the "country" drop down box to the "credit card type" check boxes. I hope there is one and if you know it I would love to find out.
with the page file, I just don't get it. I've tried turning it off multiple times and no matter hwat, I find out that there is a page file and it is alive and well. I tried doing the simple thing and reducing it to just 5 MB and even then, windows runs a page file like I haven't changed settings at all.
I think though, there may be something wrong with my macbook. I will take it to a mac store when I get back state side next week. maybe this is a personal issue for me. but my experience so far has been that it is a slow interface. But I'm betting you might be my counter party, in that macs just run easily in your hands. I guess for me its always been the opposite.
excel (along with proprietary add-ins, 3rd party and in house), bloomberg, reuters, any game from activision I've run across(the total war series in particular), oblivion,
do you want more? these are the software I use that I know I can't get on a mac(and lots of other software I can get, but usually I have to wait 6m to a year before release). now, I know this isn't apple's fault. but that is how it is.
yeah, I know about short cuts as well. but accelerator keys make my interface with programs which have loads of options much more natural. when I'm in firefox, I just use shortcuts. when I'm in excel, there doesn't exist enough keys to have a short cut for everything I want to do(well, there are, but I don't have a memory that strong) so its nice to have a system that is quick and functional (system of shortcut-like keys that do not require lots of memorization)
I like how you dismiss someone else's knowledge out of hand without even the remote consideration that maybe the system as it is set up in windows could be highly favorable to some people. but try again......
Parrallels is piss slow and it doesn't change the fact that it would make a Mac worthless. I would still be buying windows so I might as well just skip the middle man.
Mac laptops are very competitively priced, its why I own one. OSX is alright. I'd just like to turn off all the pretty effects and have it just run quickly. I'm sure there are ways to do this. I've cut a few of them out. my first reaction when I saw how fast it ran was it take it to a mac store and have them check it. they said it ran exactly as they expected. que sera..... maybe I'm just too impatient for a mac.
Thanks for the note about the tab key. but it didn't help(honestly, thanks for the note, most people just say I'm wrong and dismiss it out of hand). specific test case: nytimes.com, in teh top is a search key with a drop down list next to it to specify where to search. I clicked with my mouse to get into the text box. tab on a windows machine moves the focus to(waht I think is) the next logical place, the drop down list. with either selection in my mac(same version of fire fox) it still won't go directly to the text box. It may work sometimes, but I'd rather it always work.
its funny how everyone on this string started calling everyone else an idiot. but still, you said it youself. To MARKET A PC you need to ship it with an OEM system installed. but to say an OS preinstalled is necesarry for a computer is incorrect. Just because you market a product to a certain group doesn't change facts about the product. and in this case, just because HP is a PC manufacturer that targets a consumer market(along with others) doesn't mean a computer requires an OS to run. It just requires a pre-installed OS.
HP is doing what is logical. they are shipping computers with everything required to run the machine out of the box. so the question is, should they be required to offer the option to get a PC without an OS(they don't necessarily have to offer a different OS, just the possibility of getting a computer without one)?
I know for the last 6 years I've wished I could get a laptop without an OS installed. Desktops are easy to build, but to get a laptop with a nice looking case generally requires a pre-built machine.
didn't know apple sucked so much ad advertising and getting its image out in public. I mean, I only see them paying for ad space in loads of movies, tv spots, and online. I mean, maybe I'm in some alternate universe. I generally see loads more advertising for macs than windows.........
because we know apple has always been about inter-operability. I mean, I love the fact that they are completely agnostic as to whether I install OS X on a piece of hardware they are profitting(greatly) from or another peice of hardware.......
wait, that's wrong. The only major OS that doesn't care is Linux. It seems apple tries to tie its OS to its hardware just like MS tied windows to its OS. Its too bad Microsoft happened to tie things together in a way that consumers tolerated, compared to the way apple tied things together.
I'm not saying what MS did wasn't bad. I'm just saying we are only complaining about it because they were successful, while everyone else didn't get far on such a model. Its not for lack of trying that other companies don't try to tie different things together to enhance sales. I love OSS stuff because its the only software that really tries to run 100% on every platform out there. But I don't hate MS for being successful at doing what everyone tries to do. I hate all the companies equally
and we all know that the justice system that decides if a foul deserves to be penalized is just filled with people knowledgable enough to know the difference.....
actually, I consider a text editor and internet browser far more basic to the USE of my computer than a network sniffer or disk imager. I use a text editor and internet browser daily for quite a bit of time. I have only used a network sniffer once nad a disk imager a handful of times. It really depends on your perspective as to what is basic and needs to be included out of the box for basic functionality
My reasons(I own a mac, had 2 different computers where I learned my way around redhat 9 and FC 1 and 2, tried the latest version but not compatible with my core 2 duo yet):
1. Excel. Nothing on Mac(even its excel) or Linux even comes close to the functionality I get out of excel(keep in mind, lots of proprietary add ins really make it worthwhile). 2. Accelerator keys that give a quick and simple way to stay off the mouse(non existant in a Mac, on par with linux in my opinion) 3. Far wider selection of software to use outside of games, many of which are applicable to my work and personal life 4. Far cheaper(only compared against a mac, I build my own machines now and roll an old harddrive image over, so costs are level with linux) 5. When I was first considering changing, my only real choices were windows or Mac before OS X,which sucked just as bad in my experience with it at school. 6. Easy ability to turn off all the bells, whistles, and pretty menu systems so I can get a fast running machine that doesn't stress my video card( I am appalled every time I use my Mac book at how slow the interface is comparable, and it is a intel core duo with a gig of ram) 7. More natural methods of interfacing(especially when I am filling out forms online. a great example is the tab key. in windows, I can tab to check boxes, text boxes, or drop down boxes and then manipulate those. I have been searching and have yet to figure out a quick way to do this on a mac, just one example) 8. hm... actually the very last reason, I can play the most recent games when my lifestyle gives me a weekend to do it. I don't have this option on either a mac or a linux box, and as I do not own a TV and only play on a very rare basis, it becomes far more economically feasible to just play on a computer.
There are 8. and the 8th is actually the least of my worries as I might play a game for 1 day each month. So I rate my OS's: XP, Linux, Mac and linux would beat windows if I could get a working virtual environment to run windows(that preserved at least 90% of the speed). Of course, if these concerns were addressed, I would no longer use windows. Why I hate it:
1. Terrible resource management (why won't the damn thing just not use a page file!!!! I didn't buy that extra ram to be wasted!) 2. Shit security record (along with a refusal to release patches, though this is in line with Macs, I guess you don't have to patch bugs when you aren't the target of attacks. both are far inferior to the shear pride the OSS community takes in its software)
Both are very severe problems in my opinion. But niether trump the lacking functionality of a mac (for me) or the lacking software apps in linux for which OSS implementations don't exist.
you're right, I was quite wrong about what these "slave" wages are doing to China. I mean, I started looking at the statistics between 1950 and 2006(because who knows, maybe you actually know more about economics than the professors I hear talk about China) just to find proof. So what I found: Life expectancy in China (1950): 32 years Life expectancy in China (2006): 73 years
Poverty Rate(1981, btw, 3 years after beginning of the major market reforms that brought about the "slave" wages you despise): 53% 2001: ~10%
So I'm sure going back to before those evil factory owners came around would be such a blessing. I mean, getting to live on average to 32, 1/3 not being able to read, and more htan 1/2 the people in poverty.
Of course, I guess you forgot that facts are important rather than making ignorant statements about what conditions are. Of course, maybe china, being a Communist country, is different. Lets try again. Test Case: largest democracy in the world, India.
Start with Today's statistics: Population below poverty line: 22% Life expectancy: 60-64 years(depending on source's reference year) Literacy: 64.8% (not youth as above for China, which is unfortunate because it doesn't give a glimpse of how people are fairing today compared to those who developed in a much different era)
Now, what about before: Life expectancy(1947): 28 years Literacy: 14% Poverty number first available for the 1970's: >50%
Now, I'm sure you must start thinking, something must be up here. How is it that while working 7 days a week, literacy went up and incomes rose.....
Simple answer: get your head out of your ass and think like most people do. Most people working 70 hours a week do it to help their children get to a better life. By working that hard, their children no longer need to work and can study and the next generation is that much better off. India is less htan 1 generation into its economic reforms and China sits closer to 2(depends on how long a generation is). Instrumental were these factory jobs you despise. Of course, maybe you are right. Maybe these workers should only have to work 4 day weeks, 8 hour days, and get paid enough to get a college education. I'm sure that is feasible. I forgot that when every other economy was developing, that is exactly how it happened.
because a random species in China(that I had already written off as having no chance under the lack of care for the environment in that country) falls so far below my mother in importance that I find it obscene to even attempt to compare the two
because we all know that all those people working in factories assembling dvd players are all dying of hunger. Of course, they have had some reason for switching to this job with is terrible in your eyes. So obviously they were doing worse than slowly dying of hunger before. I bet the alternative for them was to die of hunger quicker? But we all know that this can't be the case, because if it was, then China wouldn't be the most populous country.
Think your points through just one step further. If it wasn't better than the alternative, it wouldn't be the most popular job market to enter in their respective areas. Now, you might argue that its become the only option because of the government, but this would completely ignore the facts about the development of china(or India, or Vietnam, or South Korea, and one of the other major beneficiaries of outsourcing).
Of course no one would give up a better life to step down the economic ladder. It doesn't mean anyone should feel bad because a country's first step up that ladder isn't equivalent with the most developed economies and it definitely doesn't mean that you shouldn't even take a first step when it doesn't immediately catch you up to the rest of the world.
btw, on a purchasing power parity basis, the average person in China is about 17% what an average US consumer is(4x the population, economy about 70% the size on a PPP basis). So they are definitely well beyond other countries that don't have these slave wage jobs.
Of course, I'm betting you don't give up every luxury in your life and live at the meagerest of levels just to send charity to the rest of the world so you probably shouldn't call someone else a wanker for doing exactly what you do everyday and merely vocalizing it.
that is a poor example. even if we hit peak oil from current sources(i.e. drilling in the ground and off the coast of certain areas), there is a great deal of oil left in other areas. The tar sands and shale oil come to mind. in fact, once the price of oil per barrel stabilizes around 100$ per barrel (today's dollars) both these methods become sustainably profitable(last I heard, shales sat at about 80$ for break even, tar sands at ~50, but this coudl be wrong). At that point, we have a new source we know about ready to be tapped. Neither are easy sources and are at least 6x less efficient than current methods, but that just means they probably end up on par with other cleaner methods.
at that point, the decline will completely stop and we will hold the line again for quite a while. supposedly, hte US has 1.5 trillion barrels of oil shale deposits and the tar sands stand at 1.7 trillion barrels in canada and another reserve in venezuela of hte same size. keep in mind, the reported reserves in saudi arabia are supposed to be only about 300 billion barrels. so at high prices, we suddenly gain access to 15 saudi arabia equivalents.
I personally don't believe that is the best way forward. Its too dirty. No matter the uncertainties about global warming, the certainty of how burnt oil based fuel is destrimental to health is something I face every day. So I'm a strong supporter of something to replace it. but for me to think oil leaves the forefront of energy in my lifetime is wishful at best(barring a sudden turn in feelings on pollution in the world).
sure there are. most hybrid cars use the method he is talking about. But as you said, there aren't any that run on electricity only. I think the author just made the mistake of calling a hybrid car an electric vehicle. he made quite a few others, so its almost to be expected
there are other benefits. a localized area to produce energy is generally much more efficient than several small generators(read engines, or generators). Most mobile generators have several other severe inefficiencies. I"m not saying that is the case for a solar powered car, but it could be(I don't know enough about solar technology to know how it scales). I know that with coal, natural gas, and other materials commonly used in power plants, the scale is immensely important.
btw, the thermo laws always strictly apply, and they are very important here. Maybe a Carnot engine isn't applicable, but the non vanishing increase in entropy created in any process is the issue at hand.
Slashdot Mirror
except its an old problem. there are a lot of different pieces of software that can ruin the speed and functionality of a computer(not nearly as much now, but even still..). the worry is some resource hog will really slow down the experience at random times(a POS piece of software my school required in order to get on the network was just like this, and worse, they didn't have anything I could use to uninstall it or stop it from running ever).
I don't care about the machine, I can write crap software to bug up the running experience if the user lets it run. Unlike a new mac or linux install, this is really a windows only problem(out of the 3). I always do a fresh install with a new windows box to get rid of anything that could be there. And everything runs alot smoother and quicker if I do that.
didn't know.... but does this then also require having macs or is this something that can be done for windows PC's from a Mac server? (I've never set up anything for a business, just home networking, so I have no idea). If it can, I'm betting they are like our local IT department, just completely unwilling to change a system that is currently working.
If it does, they there is the issue of paying for more expensive desktop equipment and possibly having to change business applications. 7500 bucks to change over all your computer hardware(and software) is amazingly cheap from what I've seen.
its always deserved. its the same success microsoft had/has. If you build enough of an itunes base, you are virtually set if you make your standard hard to sync with. People will pay an extra 100$ to apple for the same or even less capable hardware to do just what you said, continue integrating.
granted, I do want to see the iPhone in action. It looks interesting(though personally, I think touch screen are crap simple because after 1 week of use, they are covered in fingerprints that are hard to clean off. And of course, they teamed with Cingular.... the worst network I've ever been on. so I probably won't ever be getting one....
but isn't that a bit wasteful? neither of these guys can actually stream live HD video off the computer. Apple's website was talking about 640x480 which isn't even close to what my neighbor's(I don't own a TV right now) TV does. It would be nice to have, but first we need wireless networks that allow for live streaming of HD video(I don't think bandwidth is there). Am I missing something? I haven't seen anything about actual HD video being uploaded. Did I miss a headline?
there is one way to get them to care, make it cheaper. unfortunately, only Linux does this. and since the OS is such a small part of the price of a computer, its hard to argue that even when its free, its worth the person's time.....
you're assuming there is something to transmit in there.....
you know, I don't know of that many things you kick with something other than your foot.......
actually, I was just pointing out that there are other computer systems being advertised. your exact words were:
[br][br]
"People are buying windows because [b]nothing else is advertised[/b]"[br]
[br]
I'm just saying there is quite a bit of advertisement out there. My most memorable apple commercials are the "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" commercials. I actually can't think of the last time I saw on TV an ipod commercial. Now if you were only talking about Linux, you should have just said that.
[br][br]
now as to why Linux isn't advertised.... I'm not really sure. Maybe no linux company actually believes they can get people to switch based on advertisements or maybe linux isn't being directed at the regular home user. or maybe these companies realize there is a ton more money to be made by targetting companies that will require lots of costly support and it is easier to concentrate on that? Your guess is as good as mine.
and this is why you have other scientists do the review, not the PR department. a foolish assumption would be to say "we can explain away the increase in temperature in the gulf stream as being due to a magma shift and therefore, global warming does not exist". This would be a great PR spin but would fail scientific review because global warming is not a local phenomenon(hence the name). To use a small locality as proof would be just as ignorant as using a small deviation from the trend as proof against.
If the information contains BS, that is the point of scientific peer review. But I don't see why a PR department(or other policy makers) require the ability to review the report first. After it passes basic scientific peer review, it should then fall to the broader community to read and make an informed decision. Worse yet would be to argue that either policy makers or PR department have a stronger grip on the science than the scientists who already reviewed the paper.
by teh way, statisitcs can't make numbers say whatever you want them to. blatant ignorance about statistics allows a person to lie about what the numbers say, incorrectly referencing statistics as a method of adding credence to a false claim. I've always found statistics to be a powerful tool that most people don't know how to use properly.
I think at heart I'm not a CLI type of guy. I know how to figure my way around one but its never felt applicable to what I do.
I've done the whole all controls thing. my test subject,
www.nytimes.com firefox 2.0~
at the top, there is a search bar. I want to click into the search bar, type whatever I want, then tab over to the listbox. I still can't get that to work in my mac nad I'm not sure why. but its the easiest test subject I have come across.
I don't like hte ctrl+F2 solution for the reason you stated, arrowing around it is slow. it happens to be a lot of the times, the stuff I want to access doesn't have a shortcut. a good example from today: at work, I have a kmv switch to go between my computers, both are dual screen but I only have 2 monitors. I don't like to have to switch over from one display to the next on a monitor because its a bit slow. I like the fact in windows that I can, without looking, hit alt+space bar+r to take a maximized window and shrink it followed by alt+spacebar+m + arrow key to get my mouse to jump to that window and automatically drag it(without having to hold down a left click). its a quick way to move things on and off the screen that I am using as I go between programs.
you make some very good points. but I'll just say, I'm responding purely to the question of why I use windows. and I think the "I" really needs to be driven home on some of the comments. My job has me building relatively complex sheets in excel probably 6 hours a day and most of that goes on with proprietary tool kits we have written in house or are provided.
my issue with tabbing is best shown when I try to buy something online. usually, there is a mix of check boxes, drop down boxes, and text boxes that all need ot be filled in. I hate using a mouse to move around in interfaces like this. I have yet to find a way to go from the "City " text box to the "state" drop down box to the "country" drop down box to the "credit card type" check boxes. I hope there is one and if you know it I would love to find out.
with the page file, I just don't get it. I've tried turning it off multiple times and no matter hwat, I find out that there is a page file and it is alive and well. I tried doing the simple thing and reducing it to just 5 MB and even then, windows runs a page file like I haven't changed settings at all.
I think though, there may be something wrong with my macbook. I will take it to a mac store when I get back state side next week. maybe this is a personal issue for me. but my experience so far has been that it is a slow interface. But I'm betting you might be my counter party, in that macs just run easily in your hands. I guess for me its always been the opposite.
excel (along with proprietary add-ins, 3rd party and in house), bloomberg, reuters, any game from activision I've run across(the total war series in particular), oblivion,
do you want more? these are the software I use that I know I can't get on a mac(and lots of other software I can get, but usually I have to wait 6m to a year before release). now, I know this isn't apple's fault. but that is how it is.
yeah, I know about short cuts as well. but accelerator keys make my interface with programs which have loads of options much more natural. when I'm in firefox, I just use shortcuts. when I'm in excel, there doesn't exist enough keys to have a short cut for everything I want to do(well, there are, but I don't have a memory that strong) so its nice to have a system that is quick and functional (system of shortcut-like keys that do not require lots of memorization)
I like how you dismiss someone else's knowledge out of hand without even the remote consideration that maybe the system as it is set up in windows could be highly favorable to some people. but try again......
Parrallels is piss slow and it doesn't change the fact that it would make a Mac worthless. I would still be buying windows so I might as well just skip the middle man.
Mac laptops are very competitively priced, its why I own one. OSX is alright. I'd just like to turn off all the pretty effects and have it just run quickly. I'm sure there are ways to do this. I've cut a few of them out. my first reaction when I saw how fast it ran was it take it to a mac store and have them check it. they said it ran exactly as they expected. que sera..... maybe I'm just too impatient for a mac.
Thanks for the note about the tab key. but it didn't help(honestly, thanks for the note, most people just say I'm wrong and dismiss it out of hand).
specific test case: nytimes.com, in teh top is a search key with a drop down list next to it to specify where to search. I clicked with my mouse to get into the text box. tab on a windows machine moves the focus to(waht I think is) the next logical place, the drop down list. with either selection in my mac(same version of fire fox) it still won't go directly to the text box. It may work sometimes, but I'd rather it always work.
its funny how everyone on this string started calling everyone else an idiot. but still, you said it youself. To MARKET A PC you need to ship it with an OEM system installed. but to say an OS preinstalled is necesarry for a computer is incorrect. Just because you market a product to a certain group doesn't change facts about the product. and in this case, just because HP is a PC manufacturer that targets a consumer market(along with others) doesn't mean a computer requires an OS to run. It just requires a pre-installed OS.
HP is doing what is logical. they are shipping computers with everything required to run the machine out of the box. so the question is, should they be required to offer the option to get a PC without an OS(they don't necessarily have to offer a different OS, just the possibility of getting a computer without one)?
I know for the last 6 years I've wished I could get a laptop without an OS installed. Desktops are easy to build, but to get a laptop with a nice looking case generally requires a pre-built machine.
didn't know apple sucked so much ad advertising and getting its image out in public. I mean, I only see them paying for ad space in loads of movies, tv spots, and online. I mean, maybe I'm in some alternate universe. I generally see loads more advertising for macs than windows.........
because we know apple has always been about inter-operability. I mean, I love the fact that they are completely agnostic as to whether I install OS X on a piece of hardware they are profitting(greatly) from or another peice of hardware.......
wait, that's wrong. The only major OS that doesn't care is Linux. It seems apple tries to tie its OS to its hardware just like MS tied windows to its OS. Its too bad Microsoft happened to tie things together in a way that consumers tolerated, compared to the way apple tied things together.
I'm not saying what MS did wasn't bad. I'm just saying we are only complaining about it because they were successful, while everyone else didn't get far on such a model. Its not for lack of trying that other companies don't try to tie different things together to enhance sales. I love OSS stuff because its the only software that really tries to run 100% on every platform out there. But I don't hate MS for being successful at doing what everyone tries to do. I hate all the companies equally
and we all know that the justice system that decides if a foul deserves to be penalized is just filled with people knowledgable enough to know the difference.....
actually, I consider a text editor and internet browser far more basic to the USE of my computer than a network sniffer or disk imager. I use a text editor and internet browser daily for quite a bit of time. I have only used a network sniffer once nad a disk imager a handful of times. It really depends on your perspective as to what is basic and needs to be included out of the box for basic functionality
My reasons(I own a mac, had 2 different computers where I learned my way around redhat 9 and FC 1 and 2, tried the latest version but not compatible with my core 2 duo yet):
1. Excel. Nothing on Mac(even its excel) or Linux even comes close to the functionality I get out of excel(keep in mind, lots of proprietary add ins really make it worthwhile).
2. Accelerator keys that give a quick and simple way to stay off the mouse(non existant in a Mac, on par with linux in my opinion)
3. Far wider selection of software to use outside of games, many of which are applicable to my work and personal life
4. Far cheaper(only compared against a mac, I build my own machines now and roll an old harddrive image over, so costs are level with linux)
5. When I was first considering changing, my only real choices were windows or Mac before OS X,which sucked just as bad in my experience with it at school.
6. Easy ability to turn off all the bells, whistles, and pretty menu systems so I can get a fast running machine that doesn't stress my video card( I am appalled every time I use my Mac book at how slow the interface is comparable, and it is a intel core duo with a gig of ram)
7. More natural methods of interfacing(especially when I am filling out forms online. a great example is the tab key. in windows, I can tab to check boxes, text boxes, or drop down boxes and then manipulate those. I have been searching and have yet to figure out a quick way to do this on a mac, just one example)
8. hm... actually the very last reason, I can play the most recent games when my lifestyle gives me a weekend to do it. I don't have this option on either a mac or a linux box, and as I do not own a TV and only play on a very rare basis, it becomes far more economically feasible to just play on a computer.
There are 8. and the 8th is actually the least of my worries as I might play a game for 1 day each month. So I rate my OS's: XP, Linux, Mac and linux would beat windows if I could get a working virtual environment to run windows(that preserved at least 90% of the speed). Of course, if these concerns were addressed, I would no longer use windows. Why I hate it:
1. Terrible resource management (why won't the damn thing just not use a page file!!!! I didn't buy that extra ram to be wasted!)
2. Shit security record (along with a refusal to release patches, though this is in line with Macs, I guess you don't have to patch bugs when you aren't the target of attacks. both are far inferior to the shear pride the OSS community takes in its software)
Both are very severe problems in my opinion. But niether trump the lacking functionality of a mac (for me) or the lacking software apps in linux for which OSS implementations don't exist.
you're right, I was quite wrong about what these "slave" wages are doing to China. I mean, I started looking at the statistics between 1950 and 2006(because who knows, maybe you actually know more about economics than the professors I hear talk about China) just to find proof. So what I found:
Life expectancy in China (1950): 32 years
Life expectancy in China (2006): 73 years
Youth literacy(1980's): 69.9%
Youth Literacy(today): 98.9%
Poverty Rate(1981, btw, 3 years after beginning of the major market reforms that brought about the "slave" wages you despise): 53%
2001: ~10%
So I'm sure going back to before those evil factory owners came around would be such a blessing. I mean, getting to live on average to 32, 1/3 not being able to read, and more htan 1/2 the people in poverty.
Of course, I guess you forgot that facts are important rather than making ignorant statements about what conditions are. Of course, maybe china, being a Communist country, is different. Lets try again. Test Case: largest democracy in the world, India.
Start with Today's statistics:
Population below poverty line: 22%
Life expectancy: 60-64 years(depending on source's reference year)
Literacy: 64.8% (not youth as above for China, which is unfortunate because it doesn't give a glimpse of how people are fairing today compared to those who developed in a much different era)
Now, what about before:
Life expectancy(1947): 28 years
Literacy: 14%
Poverty number first available for the 1970's: >50%
Now, I'm sure you must start thinking, something must be up here. How is it that while working 7 days a week, literacy went up and incomes rose.....
Simple answer: get your head out of your ass and think like most people do. Most people working 70 hours a week do it to help their children get to a better life. By working that hard, their children no longer need to work and can study and the next generation is that much better off. India is less htan 1 generation into its economic reforms and China sits closer to 2(depends on how long a generation is). Instrumental were these factory jobs you despise. Of course, maybe you are right. Maybe these workers should only have to work 4 day weeks, 8 hour days, and get paid enough to get a college education. I'm sure that is feasible. I forgot that when every other economy was developing, that is exactly how it happened.
because a random species in China(that I had already written off as having no chance under the lack of care for the environment in that country) falls so far below my mother in importance that I find it obscene to even attempt to compare the two
but that is just me.
because we all know that all those people working in factories assembling dvd players are all dying of hunger. Of course, they have had some reason for switching to this job with is terrible in your eyes. So obviously they were doing worse than slowly dying of hunger before. I bet the alternative for them was to die of hunger quicker? But we all know that this can't be the case, because if it was, then China wouldn't be the most populous country.
Think your points through just one step further. If it wasn't better than the alternative, it wouldn't be the most popular job market to enter in their respective areas. Now, you might argue that its become the only option because of the government, but this would completely ignore the facts about the development of china(or India, or Vietnam, or South Korea, and one of the other major beneficiaries of outsourcing).
Of course no one would give up a better life to step down the economic ladder. It doesn't mean anyone should feel bad because a country's first step up that ladder isn't equivalent with the most developed economies and it definitely doesn't mean that you shouldn't even take a first step when it doesn't immediately catch you up to the rest of the world.
btw, on a purchasing power parity basis, the average person in China is about 17% what an average US consumer is(4x the population, economy about 70% the size on a PPP basis). So they are definitely well beyond other countries that don't have these slave wage jobs.
Of course, I'm betting you don't give up every luxury in your life and live at the meagerest of levels just to send charity to the rest of the world so you probably shouldn't call someone else a wanker for doing exactly what you do everyday and merely vocalizing it.
that is a poor example. even if we hit peak oil from current sources(i.e. drilling in the ground and off the coast of certain areas), there is a great deal of oil left in other areas. The tar sands and shale oil come to mind. in fact, once the price of oil per barrel stabilizes around 100$ per barrel (today's dollars) both these methods become sustainably profitable(last I heard, shales sat at about 80$ for break even, tar sands at ~50, but this coudl be wrong). At that point, we have a new source we know about ready to be tapped. Neither are easy sources and are at least 6x less efficient than current methods, but that just means they probably end up on par with other cleaner methods.
at that point, the decline will completely stop and we will hold the line again for quite a while. supposedly, hte US has 1.5 trillion barrels of oil shale deposits and the tar sands stand at 1.7 trillion barrels in canada and another reserve in venezuela of hte same size. keep in mind, the reported reserves in saudi arabia are supposed to be only about 300 billion barrels. so at high prices, we suddenly gain access to 15 saudi arabia equivalents.
I personally don't believe that is the best way forward. Its too dirty. No matter the uncertainties about global warming, the certainty of how burnt oil based fuel is destrimental to health is something I face every day. So I'm a strong supporter of something to replace it. but for me to think oil leaves the forefront of energy in my lifetime is wishful at best(barring a sudden turn in feelings on pollution in the world).
sure there are. most hybrid cars use the method he is talking about. But as you said, there aren't any that run on electricity only. I think the author just made the mistake of calling a hybrid car an electric vehicle. he made quite a few others, so its almost to be expected
there are other benefits. a localized area to produce energy is generally much more efficient than several small generators(read engines, or generators). Most mobile generators have several other severe inefficiencies. I"m not saying that is the case for a solar powered car, but it could be(I don't know enough about solar technology to know how it scales). I know that with coal, natural gas, and other materials commonly used in power plants, the scale is immensely important.
btw, the thermo laws always strictly apply, and they are very important here. Maybe a Carnot engine isn't applicable, but the non vanishing increase in entropy created in any process is the issue at hand.