Yes he does.
And I wonder what kind of games he play, since he's so incredibly ANGRY all the time. It's like he's feeling guilty...
I bet he's a CS player! Hmm. Or a WoW nelf rogue. "I didn't pickpocket you! Lies! I'm suing!"
No more Hot Coffee for Mr Thompson!
I'd mark that as flamebait, but ok...
Somehow I doubt the C64 app was or will be a major selling point for the iPhone.
And considering the iPhone was launched in 2007 it'd be mildly surprising if the C64 app had been developed 3 years before the phone existed, making your Symbian comparison completely nonsensical.
Your hyperbole is silly.
This is also why you're stuck with the games the app comes hardcoded with. And the selection is abysmal. Dragon's Den, Le Mans, Jupiter Landing, Arctic Shipwreck and Jack Attack...
I'd never pay money for those terrible "games". Not even SID-music in them. Sure, they promise to add more games "later". We'll see about that. Even public domain games would've been better than the crap they bundled.
Not sure it undermines democracy. If by democracy you mean "get the counts right".
Paper ballots have to be counted by people. Lots of people. People are error-prone. And people could have agendas. Even if the risk that 1 person is making a mistake is 0.005% the risk is increased a if you have 5000 people counting votes. (It's not linear, but I can't remember enough of the statistics course to tell). This is the reason you want machines to do the counting. It's what computers do best. At least properly configured.
Using e-voting has nothing to do with "instant results", except that it's a bonus. It's to remove the uncertain, and boring, task of vote counting. I.e. people.
And is e-voting that expensive? Really? Compared to having thousands of workers and supervisors spend hours upon hours counting and recounting paper votes? I doubt that.
After the initial cost of the e-voting system, including bug fixing and so on, it's a "cheap" and re-usable system. Salaries of the error-prone workers probably outweight maintenance costs by a factor of ten. E-voting is a long term investment and staring at the initial costs is useless.
One of the greatest April's Fool jokes of all time must be the one Swedish state television ran in 1962: Place a nylon stocking over your black and white TV screen and get color reception!
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/Hoaxipedia/Instant_Color_TV/
Ask the Opera community where "fastest browser" is one of the main arguments. If not the main argument.
I know quite a few people that dislike Firefox because it's perceived as slow. And to be honest it is, especially if you have lots of addons.
If Firefox gets as fast as what they're using now, even if it's just in their head, and can convince them that the addons are good for them many disbelievers will adopt FF.
5? Informative?
It's just FUD with a non sequitur example.
Randomly downloading an executable and expecting it to be as advertised is not what this is about. He found free software for Windows, thus dismantling the OP's argument. What you did was to compare a software repository in Linux with anything randomly downloaded from the internet. That's not only inaccurate.. it's stupid.
Your example is furthermore flawed because if you'd downloaded DT from the original site (or any other repository you might trust, like Softpedia or FileForum) you wouldn't risk the trojan. There you have what you could call your precious "centralized repository". Add a rogue/unknown repository for, I don't know, MP3 support in Fedora and you're about as safe as you are downloading programs from the evil innertubes! Having a warning from the authors in the authors' site as an example of the benefits of "centralized software repository" in Linux vs freeware on the internet is *facepalm*. It's like saying communism is superior to capitalism because "it's centralized planning and thus perfectly safe and fun for the whole family". Yes. I can use stupid analogies too.
The "centralized software repository" you like is just convenience. Someone compiled software so you don't have to. It's not safe, nor is it for the greater good of the users. Don't find what you want/need in the main repo? You either do what the poor Windows users do and download a package from some evil random website, or compile yourself from some evil random website with sources. Difference being...?
Well, there is one thing. Microsoft isn't allowed to add too many freebies in it's OS because of monopoly allegations (Media Player in Europe for example). Linux just copies stuff they like from the Windows platforms and call it something funny//witty/similar and often get away with it. It's a "port" and not a "copy".
The OP argued about free software in Linux versus, what he believed, were only commercially available software in Windows. He's wrong, and your argument is too.
.. do not look like random words from a generator. They look targetted too with all the references to Microsoft software, Cisco, VPN. But then.. "train a dog to fetch" and "go go go go go go go go go go go"?
Anyone have any ideas as to why and how they made that list?
Now, wait a sec here. Confirmed?:)
There have been a lot of issues regarding upgraded XPs when it comes to user access rights (or, clean Vista installations with additional partitions/disks).
If you move/copy a file or folder that has old XP rights (where Vista cannot find the owner or believe the user access information is be corrupt) the whole menagerie of stuff kicks in. Windows Defender, UAC, Indexing, you name it. This will of course have impact on performance.
I thought this whole "Vista is slow to copy" was well documented?
I've had the slow copy crap too, when I first attached an old HDD with old XP shared folders and whatnot, but disabling UAC and changing user rights on folders and files removed the problem.
Now.. If I only could remove the 4-5 requesters when copying I'd be happy. >.
Not trying to troll here, but is it really such a success?
Compared to what? And based on what?
Is it successful because of the number of downloads or ordered CDs? We all know that is not a very reliable measure of success.
The number of searches on Google? The number of positive articles submitted on the web? Doesn't say anything about actual usage, as we all know.
For most companies support is important. You can't afford to have a desktop no one can fix if something goes wrong. Which is why Xandros could be attractive to companies, or maybe Fedora/Red Hat/SuSE. Ubunto might be solid as a rock and work out-of-the-box, but I doubt companies would use it unless you have people that can support in in-house, or from a company (that you've actually heard of before). Which is basically why people use Windows. It "works" and you can easily get support if something goes wrong. And you've got Office. (Again something most people think is exclusive to Windows).
As for users.. For most users "Linux" is just like "Windows", just more isoteric (read: difficult).. but free. (Free is not always a good thing, remember that. Free means crappy and unsupported to some.)
The distro names have no meaning to them, just like the difference between "Windows XP" and "Windows 2000" might be lost to them (except that they might know XP is newer than 2000, and newer means better.. right?). What is important to most is that they can read their mail, surf the web, write documents and play an occational game (raise your hand if you've heard of someone that don't like Linux because "games don't work").
What it all boils down to is.. this "success story" seem an awful lot like preaching to the already converted. It's "successful" to a limited community. Just like Gentoo was "successful" a while back (and still is, except that no one's talking about it anymore). Next year something else will be "successful". And people will still use Windows..:\
Slashdot Mirror
Yes he does. And I wonder what kind of games he play, since he's so incredibly ANGRY all the time. It's like he's feeling guilty... I bet he's a CS player! Hmm. Or a WoW nelf rogue. "I didn't pickpocket you! Lies! I'm suing!" No more Hot Coffee for Mr Thompson!
No it's not. They don't sound like that since that is the Blade Runner soundtrack. :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvkqEOcHFY8 at 0:30, 1:31 and 2:16 you can hear it.
I'd mark that as flamebait, but ok... Somehow I doubt the C64 app was or will be a major selling point for the iPhone. And considering the iPhone was launched in 2007 it'd be mildly surprising if the C64 app had been developed 3 years before the phone existed, making your Symbian comparison completely nonsensical. Your hyperbole is silly.
This is also why you're stuck with the games the app comes hardcoded with.
And the selection is abysmal.
Dragon's Den, Le Mans, Jupiter Landing, Arctic Shipwreck and Jack Attack...
I'd never pay money for those terrible "games". Not even SID-music in them.
Sure, they promise to add more games "later". We'll see about that.
Even public domain games would've been better than the crap they bundled.
Not sure it undermines democracy. If by democracy you mean "get the counts right".
Paper ballots have to be counted by people. Lots of people. People are error-prone. And people could have agendas. Even if the risk that 1 person is making a mistake is 0.005% the risk is increased a if you have 5000 people counting votes. (It's not linear, but I can't remember enough of the statistics course to tell). This is the reason you want machines to do the counting. It's what computers do best. At least properly configured.
Using e-voting has nothing to do with "instant results", except that it's a bonus. It's to remove the uncertain, and boring, task of vote counting. I.e. people.
And is e-voting that expensive? Really? Compared to having thousands of workers and supervisors spend hours upon hours counting and recounting paper votes? I doubt that.
After the initial cost of the e-voting system, including bug fixing and so on, it's a "cheap" and re-usable system. Salaries of the error-prone workers probably outweight maintenance costs by a factor of ten. E-voting is a long term investment and staring at the initial costs is useless.
One of the greatest April's Fool jokes of all time must be the one Swedish state television ran in 1962: Place a nylon stocking over your black and white TV screen and get color reception! http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/Hoaxipedia/Instant_Color_TV/
Ask the Opera community where "fastest browser" is one of the main arguments. If not the main argument.
I know quite a few people that dislike Firefox because it's perceived as slow. And to be honest it is, especially if you have lots of addons.
If Firefox gets as fast as what they're using now, even if it's just in their head, and can convince them that the addons are good for them many disbelievers will adopt FF.
.. and I have no idea why my CR/LFs didn't work. My apologies.
5? Informative? It's just FUD with a non sequitur example. Randomly downloading an executable and expecting it to be as advertised is not what this is about. He found free software for Windows, thus dismantling the OP's argument. What you did was to compare a software repository in Linux with anything randomly downloaded from the internet. That's not only inaccurate .. it's stupid.
Your example is furthermore flawed because if you'd downloaded DT from the original site (or any other repository you might trust, like Softpedia or FileForum) you wouldn't risk the trojan. There you have what you could call your precious "centralized repository". Add a rogue/unknown repository for, I don't know, MP3 support in Fedora and you're about as safe as you are downloading programs from the evil innertubes! Having a warning from the authors in the authors' site as an example of the benefits of "centralized software repository" in Linux vs freeware on the internet is *facepalm*. It's like saying communism is superior to capitalism because "it's centralized planning and thus perfectly safe and fun for the whole family". Yes. I can use stupid analogies too.
The "centralized software repository" you like is just convenience. Someone compiled software so you don't have to. It's not safe, nor is it for the greater good of the users. Don't find what you want/need in the main repo? You either do what the poor Windows users do and download a package from some evil random website, or compile yourself from some evil random website with sources. Difference being...?
Well, there is one thing. Microsoft isn't allowed to add too many freebies in it's OS because of monopoly allegations (Media Player in Europe for example). Linux just copies stuff they like from the Windows platforms and call it something funny//witty/similar and often get away with it. It's a "port" and not a "copy".
The OP argued about free software in Linux versus, what he believed, were only commercially available software in Windows. He's wrong, and your argument is too.
.. do not look like random words from a generator. They look targetted too with all the references to Microsoft software, Cisco, VPN. But then .. "train a dog to fetch" and "go go go go go go go go go go go"?
Anyone have any ideas as to why and how they made that list?
Now, wait a sec here. Confirmed? :)
There have been a lot of issues regarding upgraded XPs when it comes to user access rights (or, clean Vista installations with additional partitions/disks).
If you move/copy a file or folder that has old XP rights (where Vista cannot find the owner or believe the user access information is be corrupt) the whole menagerie of stuff kicks in. Windows Defender, UAC, Indexing, you name it. This will of course have impact on performance.
I thought this whole "Vista is slow to copy" was well documented?
I've had the slow copy crap too, when I first attached an old HDD with old XP shared folders and whatnot, but disabling UAC and changing user rights on folders and files removed the problem.
Now .. If I only could remove the 4-5 requesters when copying I'd be happy. >.
Is it successful because of the number of downloads or ordered CDs? We all know that is not a very reliable measure of success. The number of searches on Google? The number of positive articles submitted on the web? Doesn't say anything about actual usage, as we all know.
For most companies support is important. You can't afford to have a desktop no one can fix if something goes wrong. Which is why Xandros could be attractive to companies, or maybe Fedora/Red Hat/SuSE. Ubunto might be solid as a rock and work out-of-the-box, but I doubt companies would use it unless you have people that can support in in-house, or from a company (that you've actually heard of before). Which is basically why people use Windows. It "works" and you can easily get support if something goes wrong. And you've got Office. (Again something most people think is exclusive to Windows).
As for users .. For most users "Linux" is just like "Windows", just more isoteric (read: difficult) .. but free. (Free is not always a good thing, remember that. Free means crappy and unsupported to some.)
The distro names have no meaning to them, just like the difference between "Windows XP" and "Windows 2000" might be lost to them (except that they might know XP is newer than 2000, and newer means better .. right?). What is important to most is that they can read their mail, surf the web, write documents and play an occational game (raise your hand if you've heard of someone that don't like Linux because "games don't work").
What it all boils down to is .. this "success story" seem an awful lot like preaching to the already converted. It's "successful" to a limited community. Just like Gentoo was "successful" a while back (and still is, except that no one's talking about it anymore). Next year something else will be "successful". And people will still use Windows .. :\
(K)Ubunto is a nice distro. No need to hype it.
It's not like ALL games end up on FTPs, torrents, DC, whatnot. :P