That is my point. I think that children do not learn languages faster. They just have better resources, and a greater imperative to learn the language.
That was my evaluation when I got it. I thought that it was a really neat toy, but by version 3 or maybe 4, it would be the kind of thing I might want to run as a real tool.
Now get him to go into the network device settings and disable TCP offloading. Or change the IP. Or remove a rogue program from the context menu when you right-click files.
There are outside the ability of 99% of all Windows users. Whether Metro is good or bad, it is silly to suggest that MS develop their OS for 1% of the users instead of 99%.
Most adults don't do much if any more than rjr162's son on a computer. The fact that you do more puts you in the minority, and just because someone doesn't use their computer for the same things as you doesn't mean that they are not using the computer. I know that you like to boast about your snot-nosed self, but that doesn't mean that you use a computer in the same manner as the vast majority of adults.
If you were dropped into an all Chinese speaking country, and had 1, 2 or more people who would be with you 24/7, constantly trying to teach you the language, you would likely learn it faster than a small child.
That is the real answer. The common excuse of "I don't understand computers", while valid in 1980 is no longer a valid excuse, and the "Metro is hard to understand" is just another version of that. For normal users, any inability to be able to learn how to use their computer is strictly an issue of willingness.
Actually, there are far more adults that will use their computer like a 3 year old than adults that want to use hex editors. Metro may very well suck, but if it does, it isn't because most adult actually do 'more' with their computers.
That is a common excuse that doesn't really hold water. A week after my son turned two, I formatted his hard drive and handed him an Ubuntu install disk. He had no problem installing the OS. To this day I still hear people claiming that installing Linux is 'too hard'. The same thing very likely could be said for Windows 8.
I have no trouble looking at laser printer output and telling the difference between 600dpi and 1200dpi. The problem isn't that it's pointless for human vision, it's that many people have uncorrected or inadequately corrected bad vision, and the rest just don't pay attention. Consider seeing an optometrist.
Life became a lot easier and cheaper for me when I realized that I fell into the second category for hearing. I found that I really didn't care if my audio was perfect. Good enough was good enough. Now instead of having hot expensive fiddly equipment loaded up under my TV, I just have a TV and I am perfectly happy with the crappy speakers that are built in.
With video, I explicitly avoided HD. I could see the improved picture. I just knew that while I was happy with my SD picture, that once I started watching HD, there would be no going back. I didn't get an HD TV until most of my media was available in greater than SD quality.
If you really don't know the answer to that, it just might be fast enough to run all of the same stuff that your 2 year old quad core i7 desktop ran. Your biggest problem wont be speed, but OS compatibility.
My father used to own a computer shop, and it would drive me crazy hearing him recommend to people that they buy the slow crappy computer for their kids because they didn't need anything powerful just to play games.
That reminds me of the many early adopters of widescreen TVs that I knew. They would show off how cool their TV was by playing a 4:3 DVD on their 16:9 TV. Many of the early wide screen TVs wouldn't keyhole the picture. They would just stretch everything to fit the 16:9 format. The early adopters would marvel at how good their TV was wall watching a show where everyone looked like they just came out of a Mario Bros. game.
Maybe Apple users just think different, but everyone I know that are buying 7" tablets are not doing it for price. (Although they really like the price) They are doing it because they want a tablet that fits in their large pockets or purses. Large tablets are dandy for places that you can set them down and walk away from them, but they suck for carrying around all of the time. Jobs didn't understand this, and it is sounding like his replacement doesn't either.
Hopefully, the refueling robot isn't being launched over and over. Much better would be to put a spacecraft up there that can pull fuel from a big dumb lumbering tanker and deliver it to the specific satellites. This way, the craft being launched full of fuel can carry more fuel/parts/whatever, and doesn't need to carry all of the equipment for performing the more detailed work.
Apparently, in your world the racist is the guy that sees the media reporting inaccurate information, and thus concludes it is impossible for people that are getting their information from the inaccurate reports to tell who was the aggressor. And, the non-racist is the one that just chooses the person with the correct colored skin. Oh what a topsy turvy world you live in....
You have it backwards. It isn't an attempt to make white people afraid of blacks, it is an attempt to get blacks outraged against whites. If it was an attempt to scare white people, they would not have misreported Trayvon as a young child. They would have made shown him as being as big and menacing as possible. Instead, the media has portrayed Martin as being a lose cannon, and Trayvon as being a defenseless child. The fact that you call him a child shows that you have fallen for it hook line and sinker. The media even went so far as to splice the audio tapes together in a way to try and vilify Martin.
Which ever one is the aggressor (could even be both), it is clear that the media is not trying to rally white people up against blacks.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems Nintendo made the right choice.
Number of Wii Games I have purchased and launch conveniently from a hard drive? 35
Number of PS3 Games I have purchased for use in any way at all? 0
That is my point. I think that children do not learn languages faster. They just have better resources, and a greater imperative to learn the language.
The personal computer industry has never really been about who did things right, and more about who shot themselves in the foot with the fewest times.
That was my evaluation when I got it. I thought that it was a really neat toy, but by version 3 or maybe 4, it would be the kind of thing I might want to run as a real tool.
The desktop has one use, to stop my applications from falling into the monitor.
Now get him to go into the network device settings and disable TCP offloading. Or change the IP. Or remove a rogue program from the context menu when you right-click files.
There are outside the ability of 99% of all Windows users. Whether Metro is good or bad, it is silly to suggest that MS develop their OS for 1% of the users instead of 99%.
Most adults don't do much if any more than rjr162's son on a computer. The fact that you do more puts you in the minority, and just because someone doesn't use their computer for the same things as you doesn't mean that they are not using the computer. I know that you like to boast about your snot-nosed self, but that doesn't mean that you use a computer in the same manner as the vast majority of adults.
If you were dropped into an all Chinese speaking country, and had 1, 2 or more people who would be with you 24/7, constantly trying to teach you the language, you would likely learn it faster than a small child.
Probably about as well as most adults.
That is the real answer. The common excuse of "I don't understand computers", while valid in 1980 is no longer a valid excuse, and the "Metro is hard to understand" is just another version of that. For normal users, any inability to be able to learn how to use their computer is strictly an issue of willingness.
Actually, there are far more adults that will use their computer like a 3 year old than adults that want to use hex editors. Metro may very well suck, but if it does, it isn't because most adult actually do 'more' with their computers.
That is why complaints that MS is making their UI worse is valid, but saying that it is hard is not valid.
Don't jump to conclusions. Three year olds that can read are not that uncommon.
That is a common excuse that doesn't really hold water. A week after my son turned two, I formatted his hard drive and handed him an Ubuntu install disk. He had no problem installing the OS. To this day I still hear people claiming that installing Linux is 'too hard'. The same thing very likely could be said for Windows 8.
I have no trouble looking at laser printer output and telling the difference between 600dpi and 1200dpi. The problem isn't that it's pointless for human vision, it's that many people have uncorrected or inadequately corrected bad vision, and the rest just don't pay attention. Consider seeing an optometrist.
Life became a lot easier and cheaper for me when I realized that I fell into the second category for hearing. I found that I really didn't care if my audio was perfect. Good enough was good enough. Now instead of having hot expensive fiddly equipment loaded up under my TV, I just have a TV and I am perfectly happy with the crappy speakers that are built in.
With video, I explicitly avoided HD. I could see the improved picture. I just knew that while I was happy with my SD picture, that once I started watching HD, there would be no going back. I didn't get an HD TV until most of my media was available in greater than SD quality.
If you really don't know the answer to that, it just might be fast enough to run all of the same stuff that your 2 year old quad core i7 desktop ran. Your biggest problem wont be speed, but OS compatibility.
My father used to own a computer shop, and it would drive me crazy hearing him recommend to people that they buy the slow crappy computer for their kids because they didn't need anything powerful just to play games.
That reminds me of the many early adopters of widescreen TVs that I knew. They would show off how cool their TV was by playing a 4:3 DVD on their 16:9 TV. Many of the early wide screen TVs wouldn't keyhole the picture. They would just stretch everything to fit the 16:9 format. The early adopters would marvel at how good their TV was wall watching a show where everyone looked like they just came out of a Mario Bros. game.
You would be surprised how many people think that they are saving face by quitting.
Maybe Apple users just think different, but everyone I know that are buying 7" tablets are not doing it for price. (Although they really like the price) They are doing it because they want a tablet that fits in their large pockets or purses. Large tablets are dandy for places that you can set them down and walk away from them, but they suck for carrying around all of the time. Jobs didn't understand this, and it is sounding like his replacement doesn't either.
Hopefully, the refueling robot isn't being launched over and over. Much better would be to put a spacecraft up there that can pull fuel from a big dumb lumbering tanker and deliver it to the specific satellites. This way, the craft being launched full of fuel can carry more fuel/parts/whatever, and doesn't need to carry all of the equipment for performing the more detailed work.
Wow, you are a pretty hard core racist.
Apparently, in your world the racist is the guy that sees the media reporting inaccurate information, and thus concludes it is impossible for people that are getting their information from the inaccurate reports to tell who was the aggressor. And, the non-racist is the one that just chooses the person with the correct colored skin. Oh what a topsy turvy world you live in....
I don't know why you say that. If it is water that makes DNA degrade, Mars seems like a better place than Earth.
You have it backwards. It isn't an attempt to make white people afraid of blacks, it is an attempt to get blacks outraged against whites. If it was an attempt to scare white people, they would not have misreported Trayvon as a young child. They would have made shown him as being as big and menacing as possible. Instead, the media has portrayed Martin as being a lose cannon, and Trayvon as being a defenseless child. The fact that you call him a child shows that you have fallen for it hook line and sinker. The media even went so far as to splice the audio tapes together in a way to try and vilify Martin.
Which ever one is the aggressor (could even be both), it is clear that the media is not trying to rally white people up against blacks.