Managing them, at least in my school system, was a nightmare.
I always wondered why they can't just give the kid an off the shelf iPad and inform the parents that it's their responsibility to ensure their child keeps it free of malware, pr0n, games, etc. My son has an iPad from his (private) school, and it's so locked down he's basically limited to accessing the sites that host his homework.
I mean, I know 1 in 10 (or whatever) is going to get malware, but isn't that cheaper than the MDM (factory reset and done)?
How wrong you are. There is a huge, HUGE advantage in running and managing a set of homogeneous devices.
"Teacher, I couldn't complete my homework because the web page wouldn't load on Internet Explorer 8 and when I tried to upgrade to Edge it said my version of Windows wasn't supported!"
Let's be real, most workplaces use Windows/Linux. So kids are better off.
Good thing OSX is certified Unix. The only thing not Unix about OSX is the equivalent of their window manager, which is the "duh anyone can use it" part of the OS.
But it's a mistake to think that you can buy a new Chromebook every year vs. a new MBP every four years
Not to mention, is a MBP so much more durable it's going to last 4 years of dropping, exposure to water, crumbs, life in a backpack? They are making Chromebooks specifically durably designed for education. Are they as quality a build as the MBP? Probably not. Will the MBP last 4x as long? No way.
My son was given an iPad for school this year. Most ridiculous decision ever. No keyboard (unless you buy it yourself), and most anything Apple is locked out anyway in favor of G-suite apps. Anything he uses on it on a daily basis is web. They could have had Chromebooks *designed* to work with Google + web for 1/2 the cost, and had a keyboard and touch pad or mouse to boot.
I caught him putting together a presentation on the iPad and told him to use the computer. The response I got was that they were told to use their iPads.
The irony of expressing how you are smart enough to consider the "context" of words and actions is either sad or hilarious when you take pause to notice that I indeed did change the "context: when I wrote, "or perhaps fondness".
It's right there for everyone to read. You made the inference that a man using his stature to "grab women by the pussy", women he doesn't even know, is analogous to you and your wife having sexual relations. You wrote this:
Welll I'll be, so when my wife does that to me, it's contempt, eh? We both thought it was kinda fun. I'll have to have her arrested for assault.
Either you are an idiot, or you are a troll. I'm guessing troll. Doesn't matter much really, we know to disregard you.
Welll I'll be, so when my wife does that to me, it's contempt, eh? We both thought it was kinda fun. I'll have to have her arrested for assault.
If that's the only interaction you have with your wife, then ya, she should be arrested. Do you really think posting ridiculous scenarios is going to get your point across? A lot of us are smart enough to consider the *context* of words and actions and evaluate them therein.
That doesn't make any sense. A man who doesn't like women would never grab them by the pussy just like a man who is a homophobe
I think the idea is that if you are talking openly about grabbing women in the pussy, on TV, when you have a wife and daughters that are going to have to hear it, that shows contempt for at least a few women.
Now, we could take our time and forever argue that being attracted to something means you hate it
There's liking the body parts of women and appreciating women as people for their actions. Most men do both. Men that do only the former aren't generally regarded as great people. Pick whatever word you want to describe them.
Note that Wu thinks the threat is private corporations attacking Earth - as if governments were not primary historical practitioners of war.
War is almost always public resources being driven by private (corporate, or the historical equivalent thereof) interests. The government fights, but it's about securing land, resources, labor, etc. to further our corporate overlords.
This has always been the case, it's just more obvious in the information age.
Actually, no I'm not being pedantic. It's great you convinced yourself such, but paying $549 (the current "all-in" plan price) for the right to download a small amount of data every week isn't a good deal.
By comparison, for $549, you could pay for a medium-tier cable plan for 6 years that includes internet and cloud DVR and slingbox-like ability to play the content anywhere.
If it has commercials, I wouldn't watch it even if it were free.
Thank god for the magical content fairy that allows people to make your content without spending any of their own time or money. Otherwise those people would have a hard time making a living!
Cable is usually limited to the home--I can watch TV on my phone while sitting in my house, but I lose pretty much all the worthwhile live channels if I'm using WiFi or Cellular service.
Comcast is pretty good these days. You can view a lot of live channels outside the home. You can watch your DVR recordings outside the home, and even pre-download them to your mobile device. You can watch / download most on demand content as well.
You can't watch most live broadcast channels outside the home (but oddly, you can watch DVR recordings of broadcast channels outside the home).
Without knowing their lineup it's impossible to answer.
Not 5 minutes ago I priced going down to internet-only service from Comcast. It was $91/mo for the same speed I get for $149 w/ a TV package. So yeah, I'm paying $60 just for TV. That being said, it's a pretty comprehensive TV package and I doubt YouTube's $35 lineup will come close. Sounds like they are aggregating content that you can already get online from different sources (ESPN, ABC, Showtime, etc).
As much as it pains me to say, Comcast is not too bad today in the cord-cutting department. You can watch live TV, DVR recordings, and on demand from mobile devices, and from the web. It even lets you pre-download content to a mobile device for offline viewing.
I know it's fun (and easy) to bash Trump, but he does pay taxes.
1. We don't know that, and you don't know that. He refused to release his returns.
2. We do know that he publicly _claimed_ to not pay taxes, and that made him, by his own words, "smart". Whether or not he actually does pay taxes, he's an insensitive, tactless clod to those of us that do pay taxes.
My distrust in others makes me want to think that Ireland (or factions in it anyway) knew or hoped this would happen all along figuring if they can lure Apple into bringing in all their money and then let the EU be the bad guy and make Apple give Ireland the money.
Common sense would lead me to believe that Apple knew exactly what risks it was taking, and had much, MUCH better legal advice than did Ireland.
Third, going through the motions can be a means to determine if one really wants to watch something, or if one is just doing it as the path of least resistance. Personally I feel I watch too much TV and spend too much time on the Internet already, without having a streaming service and without having cable or other pay-TV. It makes it a lot easier to actually go do something else besides vegetate on the couch if I find myself not able to make a choice for what to watch.
So your logic is you deny yourself of the obviously better streaming service because it's "too good" and would compel you to use it? I would suggest you apply that thinking to other aspects of your life and see how it goes. E.g., wife too good looking? Trade down to an uglier wife, because after all, you'll be less apt to waste time pursuing sex with her all the time.
And that's why you care about pros. Because they drag in non-pros with them.
Sort of like how iPads started out as the platform for pros, then become popular w/ the masses... oh wait.
That theory's great, as long as you look at only one of Apple's successful products. But I'm guessing you are going to tell me that the entirety of Apple's hundred billion dollar success is down to developers choosing OSX.
I believe in free speech, so I suppose to some extent that makes me a hypocrite
No it doesn't. It's the difference between not choosing to associate with that person (in business, or whatever), which is of course your right, and denying them the right to speak freely. He hasn't been denied free speech. He can still make YT videos or take his content somewhere else. He can even spend billions of dollars of his own money to build his own video distribution platform akin to Youtube.
Let's not get all upset about this. An idiot made a load of cash for being an idiot. He still has that cash. Lucky him.
Slashdot Mirror
Managing them, at least in my school system, was a nightmare.
I always wondered why they can't just give the kid an off the shelf iPad and inform the parents that it's their responsibility to ensure their child keeps it free of malware, pr0n, games, etc. My son has an iPad from his (private) school, and it's so locked down he's basically limited to accessing the sites that host his homework.
I mean, I know 1 in 10 (or whatever) is going to get malware, but isn't that cheaper than the MDM (factory reset and done)?
(disclaimer: I know very little about MDM).
https://www.tutorialspoint.com...
Sure there are others.
No school should accept to be vendor locked-in.
How wrong you are. There is a huge, HUGE advantage in running and managing a set of homogeneous devices.
"Teacher, I couldn't complete my homework because the web page wouldn't load on Internet Explorer 8 and when I tried to upgrade to Edge it said my version of Windows wasn't supported!"
I've seen plenty of linux servers but I have never seen a linux desktop or laptop used in a business although.
PM me I'll send a picture of desk.
Let's be real, most workplaces use Windows/Linux. So kids are better off.
Good thing OSX is certified Unix. The only thing not Unix about OSX is the equivalent of their window manager, which is the "duh anyone can use it" part of the OS.
But it's a mistake to think that you can buy a new Chromebook every year vs. a new MBP every four years
Not to mention, is a MBP so much more durable it's going to last 4 years of dropping, exposure to water, crumbs, life in a backpack? They are making Chromebooks specifically durably designed for education. Are they as quality a build as the MBP? Probably not. Will the MBP last 4x as long? No way.
My son was given an iPad for school this year. Most ridiculous decision ever. No keyboard (unless you buy it yourself), and most anything Apple is locked out anyway in favor of G-suite apps. Anything he uses on it on a daily basis is web. They could have had Chromebooks *designed* to work with Google + web for 1/2 the cost, and had a keyboard and touch pad or mouse to boot.
I caught him putting together a presentation on the iPad and told him to use the computer. The response I got was that they were told to use their iPads.
The irony of expressing how you are smart enough to consider the "context" of words and actions is either sad or hilarious when you take pause to notice that I indeed did change the "context: when I wrote, "or perhaps fondness".
It's right there for everyone to read. You made the inference that a man using his stature to "grab women by the pussy", women he doesn't even know, is analogous to you and your wife having sexual relations. You wrote this:
Welll I'll be, so when my wife does that to me, it's contempt, eh? We both thought it was kinda fun. I'll have to have her arrested for assault.
Either you are an idiot, or you are a troll. I'm guessing troll. Doesn't matter much really, we know to disregard you.
Thanks for playing though.
No problem.
Welll I'll be, so when my wife does that to me, it's contempt, eh? We both thought it was kinda fun. I'll have to have her arrested for assault.
If that's the only interaction you have with your wife, then ya, she should be arrested. Do you really think posting ridiculous scenarios is going to get your point across? A lot of us are smart enough to consider the *context* of words and actions and evaluate them therein.
That doesn't make any sense. A man who doesn't like women would never grab them by the pussy just like a man who is a homophobe
I think the idea is that if you are talking openly about grabbing women in the pussy, on TV, when you have a wife and daughters that are going to have to hear it, that shows contempt for at least a few women.
Now, we could take our time and forever argue that being attracted to something means you hate it
There's liking the body parts of women and appreciating women as people for their actions. Most men do both. Men that do only the former aren't generally regarded as great people. Pick whatever word you want to describe them.
Obviously we will use rockets to get the DU to the moon.
Hope you are being funny. Why would you expend the energy to transport tons DU to the moon? Why not just put it on an ICBM?
Note that Wu thinks the threat is private corporations attacking Earth - as if governments were not primary historical practitioners of war.
War is almost always public resources being driven by private (corporate, or the historical equivalent thereof) interests. The government fights, but it's about securing land, resources, labor, etc. to further our corporate overlords.
This has always been the case, it's just more obvious in the information age.
Actually, no I'm not being pedantic. It's great you convinced yourself such, but paying $549 (the current "all-in" plan price) for the right to download a small amount of data every week isn't a good deal.
By comparison, for $549, you could pay for a medium-tier cable plan for 6 years that includes internet and cloud DVR and slingbox-like ability to play the content anywhere.
Pays for itself over time.
Wow! You mean you make money sitting on your ass watching TV?
If it has commercials, I wouldn't watch it even if it were free.
Thank god for the magical content fairy that allows people to make your content without spending any of their own time or money. Otherwise those people would have a hard time making a living!
Cable is usually limited to the home--I can watch TV on my phone while sitting in my house, but I lose pretty much all the worthwhile live channels if I'm using WiFi or Cellular service.
Comcast is pretty good these days. You can view a lot of live channels outside the home. You can watch your DVR recordings outside the home, and even pre-download them to your mobile device. You can watch / download most on demand content as well.
You can't watch most live broadcast channels outside the home (but oddly, you can watch DVR recordings of broadcast channels outside the home).
Is $35 cheaper than cable TV?
Without knowing their lineup it's impossible to answer.
Not 5 minutes ago I priced going down to internet-only service from Comcast. It was $91/mo for the same speed I get for $149 w/ a TV package. So yeah, I'm paying $60 just for TV. That being said, it's a pretty comprehensive TV package and I doubt YouTube's $35 lineup will come close. Sounds like they are aggregating content that you can already get online from different sources (ESPN, ABC, Showtime, etc).
As much as it pains me to say, Comcast is not too bad today in the cord-cutting department. You can watch live TV, DVR recordings, and on demand from mobile devices, and from the web. It even lets you pre-download content to a mobile device for offline viewing.
I know it's fun (and easy) to bash Trump, but he does pay taxes.
1. We don't know that, and you don't know that. He refused to release his returns.
2. We do know that he publicly _claimed_ to not pay taxes, and that made him, by his own words, "smart". Whether or not he actually does pay taxes, he's an insensitive, tactless clod to those of us that do pay taxes.
My distrust in others makes me want to think that Ireland (or factions in it anyway) knew or hoped this would happen all along figuring if they can lure Apple into bringing in all their money and then let the EU be the bad guy and make Apple give Ireland the money.
Common sense would lead me to believe that Apple knew exactly what risks it was taking, and had much, MUCH better legal advice than did Ireland.
We don't have rednecks
Listening to interviews of "informed" British citizens during brexit, I beg to differ.
Third, going through the motions can be a means to determine if one really wants to watch something, or if one is just doing it as the path of least resistance. Personally I feel I watch too much TV and spend too much time on the Internet already, without having a streaming service and without having cable or other pay-TV. It makes it a lot easier to actually go do something else besides vegetate on the couch if I find myself not able to make a choice for what to watch.
So your logic is you deny yourself of the obviously better streaming service because it's "too good" and would compel you to use it? I would suggest you apply that thinking to other aspects of your life and see how it goes. E.g., wife too good looking? Trade down to an uglier wife, because after all, you'll be less apt to waste time pursuing sex with her all the time.
Don't worry. You are a special, unique snowflake. If people can't understand you, they are racist.
Ok, you are right. Jobs, alone, did most (all?) of Apple's R&D. Hope you enjoyed the (fucking) book.
Also, look at sales trends vs the presence of Jobs vs his passing.
I know right? Apple is really in the toilet right now.
And that's why you care about pros. Because they drag in non-pros with them.
Sort of like how iPads started out as the platform for pros, then become popular w/ the masses ... oh wait.
That theory's great, as long as you look at only one of Apple's successful products. But I'm guessing you are going to tell me that the entirety of Apple's hundred billion dollar success is down to developers choosing OSX.
I believe in free speech, so I suppose to some extent that makes me a hypocrite
No it doesn't. It's the difference between not choosing to associate with that person (in business, or whatever), which is of course your right, and denying them the right to speak freely. He hasn't been denied free speech. He can still make YT videos or take his content somewhere else. He can even spend billions of dollars of his own money to build his own video distribution platform akin to Youtube.
Let's not get all upset about this. An idiot made a load of cash for being an idiot. He still has that cash. Lucky him.