The bigger problem if you ever did decide to run linux is that the MS blessed distro's are as good
as dead. Go ahead and ask for some help using your new blessed linspire distro on here and see where it
get's you.
If I ever installed a Linux box at work, it had better have 24/7 tech support. I'm not asking Linux geeks for help. "Business use" means that it *has* to work. I'm not talking about some generic PC at home that may or may not play DVD movies for me so I can dick around in forums, trying this and that. It had better be as close to bulletproof as software can be, which is why I'm saying that interfacing with all of the MS stuff is the #1 requirement, as far as I'm concerned.
Apple releasing Safari for Windows will increase consumer choice and the competition will help all browsers improve.
Not if Safari doesn't improve *significantly*. Right now, Safari has been widely reviewed as crap-ola on Windows. Just releasing a browser doesn't mean that it's going to become a standard. If nobody ends up using it, then Safari won't have any impact at all.
With yet another stunningly bad decision, Red Hat puts the nails in its own coffin. I own a business that's all MS right now (plus certain important proprietary software). If I need to/want to introduce a Linux server one day, am I going to look at a version that has MS's blessing, and will work with my stuff, or would I look at a product that has no kind of guarantees that it'll work with my existing systems? Hmmm... Tough decision there.
Red Hat is going to lose some serious credibility down the line when/if more people have to make similar decisions. I have little to no reason to even *consider* software that is going to give me extra integration headaches, and I can't believe that I'm alone in my thinking.
Compared to the Wii, yes. Compared to the PS3, no. Compared to the original PS2, no. Lose one point.
I have one of both. My PS2 is about 1" tall. The Xbox is the size of a large toaster.
This is just plain false. You don't need a remote control, shitty or otherwise, for playing DVDs on the 360.
On the Xbox, you most certainly do need to buy a remote.
False. If there's nothing in the drive, in fact, the console is pretty quiet, since it's the drive that's the loud component. It doesn't make any electronic noises at all with nothing in the drive.
I'm talking about the XBox. It most certainly has stupid electronic beeping noises with no disc in the drive.
I'm talking about the XBox. If I was talking about the Xbox 360, I'd say "XBox 360". The XBox 360 would be compared to the PS3, not the PS2, anyway.
I can't compare the XBox 360 to the PS3 'cause I ain't got neither! I can't imagine that much has changed with either in the meantime, but yeah, you're right. I'm comparing the PS2 vs. the XBox.
It's big. It's loud. You have to buy a (shitty) remote control for playing DVD's. Playing DVD's sucks. The controllers are clunky. Online access costs money. If you leave it on with nothing in the drive, the damn thing has some B-grade sci-fi movie "beep and boop" sounds that are annoying as hell. Graphics seem to be a lot less sharp than on the PS2. That's just the stuff that I can think of off the top of my head. My GF got one, and those things annoyed me so much that I never used it after trying it out for a few weeks. Ugh.
I don't really know about "evil". I haven't read a fairy tale or seen a Star Wars movie in a long time. But, I loathe pretty much everything about the XBox. My point is that MS needs to improve their product, not get more titles. More titles are always good, but they're pretty pointless if the system itself sucks.
I'm a huge fan of GTA. I've played Vice City more than any game I've ever played. Still, this isn't enough to convince me to buy an XBox. Ugh. If they do the same on the Sony, I'll buy all of the content.
There isn't a lot of negative reaction to Vista. There's just some in the uber-geek, OSS community. The rest of the planet is already switching to Vista.
That's the whole problem with OSS. The people who most need to use the software are generally going to be too busy to get involved in a software creation process in any way. I'm simply too busy with my business. But if your product ever gets good enough, I'll certainly consider buying it.
As an alternative to Quickbooks? That's like saying that MS Photo Viewer is a replacement for Photoshop. Gnucash is about 10-15 years behind Intuit in terms of functionality.
I use Quickbooks, but I hate it. At the same time, there's nothing that's as easy to use, as inexpensive, and functional. I'd love to find an alternative, but it's really the best thing out there until you can afford to spend much, much more on a financial package.
I couldn't get Ubuntu running the other day, so I installed Firefox instead, and it is pretty neat. Slightly off-topic, but it seemed like a good time to mention that.
Their arrogance defies belief. I wouldn't touch software produced by those tossers with a bargepole; seriously, screwing around with someone's system, possibly damaging its integrity and very likely messing up any "non-standard" (e.g. Linux bootloader) bootsector installation is beyond the pale.
This is Quickbooks. The financial software that runs many companies. Many times, this is the most important software a company will buy. People don't care if Quickbooks "screws around with their systems", since in most cases, Quickbooks is the reason for the "system" in the first place.
iTunes is a nightmare. I know of several people (myself, my GF, several family members) that got so fed up with iTunes, that they dumped their iPods in favor of other music players that don't require the use of such a terrible piece of software. Unfortunately, trying to completely remove iTunes from a PC is also a mess, because their installer is all screwed up and leaves all kinds of crap after a "complete uninstall". It's no surprise to me that there aren't more Windows users jumping over to Macs, when their flagship software for their flagship product is such an incredible dog.
The hardware is always more expensive and you have to replace it more often.
This is a complete lie. If I'm looking at a FOSS OS, then I have a much smaller list of products I can use, INCREASING my cost compared to say, running Windows, which allows the use of whatever hardware is cheaper.
It always takes more time to keep up, so you get less for the money spent on staff.
A software beta means that the developers are reasonably sure that it's ready for the public to use. They're relatively sure they've gotten out all of the bugs found in Development and Alpha testing. Beta isn't supposed to find major crashes. It's designed to find the smaller bugs that the testing team overlooked, and tweak the user experience.
Apple does not release decent Windows software. Case in point: iTunes is a terrible mess. I'm not surprised Safari Beta is this bad.
If we really do see 200,000 every five years if a large percentage of these developing markets adopt a non-windows OS as their defacto install base it could represent a significant erosion of the Microsoft OS's position world wide.
Why would "a large percentage of these developing markets adopt a non-windows OS as their defacto install base?" It hasn't happened yet. It hasn't even begun to happen. There's no real reason to think that it will happen any time in the near future.
Dude, I don't know a single person who likes iTunes. People avoid it like the plague. I bought a SanDisk Sansa so that I didn't have to use iTunes, and after I did, several friends and family followed. iTunes makes RealPlayer look like a well thought out, efficient application by comparison. iTunes on Windows is a nightmare. Bundling more useless crap with it is likely to drive more Windows users over the edge, causing them to dump everything Apple, instead of using more Apple products.
No, Apple is not trying to replicate iTunes' success. Nobody on windows would give a crap if iTunes wasn't the main way to get things onto an iPod.
Actually, iTunes for Windows is such a steaming pile of iCrap (there's still no Vista version out... Apple... hello?), that I've known several people that have dumped their iPod just so they wouldn't have to deal with iTunes. Comparing Safari to iTunes is not a good idea, if they're actually trying to get people to use Safari on Windows. iTunes has a terrible reputation among everybody that I know.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm misinformed because I need to use software that I know is going to work with my existing software? Hmmm... OK....
The bigger problem if you ever did decide to run linux is that the MS blessed distro's are as good as dead. Go ahead and ask for some help using your new blessed linspire distro on here and see where it get's you.
If I ever installed a Linux box at work, it had better have 24/7 tech support. I'm not asking Linux geeks for help. "Business use" means that it *has* to work. I'm not talking about some generic PC at home that may or may not play DVD movies for me so I can dick around in forums, trying this and that. It had better be as close to bulletproof as software can be, which is why I'm saying that interfacing with all of the MS stuff is the #1 requirement, as far as I'm concerned.
Apple releasing Safari for Windows will increase consumer choice and the competition will help all browsers improve.
Not if Safari doesn't improve *significantly*. Right now, Safari has been widely reviewed as crap-ola on Windows. Just releasing a browser doesn't mean that it's going to become a standard. If nobody ends up using it, then Safari won't have any impact at all.
With yet another stunningly bad decision, Red Hat puts the nails in its own coffin. I own a business that's all MS right now (plus certain important proprietary software). If I need to/want to introduce a Linux server one day, am I going to look at a version that has MS's blessing, and will work with my stuff, or would I look at a product that has no kind of guarantees that it'll work with my existing systems? Hmmm... Tough decision there.
Red Hat is going to lose some serious credibility down the line when/if more people have to make similar decisions. I have little to no reason to even *consider* software that is going to give me extra integration headaches, and I can't believe that I'm alone in my thinking.
... It's called Qix!
Compared to the Wii, yes. Compared to the PS3, no. Compared to the original PS2, no. Lose one point.
I have one of both. My PS2 is about 1" tall. The Xbox is the size of a large toaster.
This is just plain false. You don't need a remote control, shitty or otherwise, for playing DVDs on the 360.
On the Xbox, you most certainly do need to buy a remote.
False. If there's nothing in the drive, in fact, the console is pretty quiet, since it's the drive that's the loud component. It doesn't make any electronic noises at all with nothing in the drive.
I'm talking about the XBox. It most certainly has stupid electronic beeping noises with no disc in the drive.
I'm talking about the XBox. If I was talking about the Xbox 360, I'd say "XBox 360". The XBox 360 would be compared to the PS3, not the PS2, anyway.
I can't compare the XBox 360 to the PS3 'cause I ain't got neither! I can't imagine that much has changed with either in the meantime, but yeah, you're right. I'm comparing the PS2 vs. the XBox.
It's big. It's loud. You have to buy a (shitty) remote control for playing DVD's. Playing DVD's sucks. The controllers are clunky. Online access costs money. If you leave it on with nothing in the drive, the damn thing has some B-grade sci-fi movie "beep and boop" sounds that are annoying as hell. Graphics seem to be a lot less sharp than on the PS2. That's just the stuff that I can think of off the top of my head. My GF got one, and those things annoyed me so much that I never used it after trying it out for a few weeks. Ugh.
I don't really know about "evil". I haven't read a fairy tale or seen a Star Wars movie in a long time. But, I loathe pretty much everything about the XBox. My point is that MS needs to improve their product, not get more titles. More titles are always good, but they're pretty pointless if the system itself sucks.
I'm a huge fan of GTA. I've played Vice City more than any game I've ever played. Still, this isn't enough to convince me to buy an XBox. Ugh. If they do the same on the Sony, I'll buy all of the content.
[such negative reaction to it why pirate it?]
There isn't a lot of negative reaction to Vista. There's just some in the uber-geek, OSS community. The rest of the planet is already switching to Vista.
That's the whole problem with OSS. The people who most need to use the software are generally going to be too busy to get involved in a software creation process in any way. I'm simply too busy with my business. But if your product ever gets good enough, I'll certainly consider buying it.
Gnucash on Linux.
As an alternative to Quickbooks? That's like saying that MS Photo Viewer is a replacement for Photoshop. Gnucash is about 10-15 years behind Intuit in terms of functionality.
I use Quickbooks, but I hate it. At the same time, there's nothing that's as easy to use, as inexpensive, and functional. I'd love to find an alternative, but it's really the best thing out there until you can afford to spend much, much more on a financial package.
I couldn't get Ubuntu running the other day, so I installed Firefox instead, and it is pretty neat. Slightly off-topic, but it seemed like a good time to mention that.
Their arrogance defies belief. I wouldn't touch software produced by those tossers with a bargepole; seriously, screwing around with someone's system, possibly damaging its integrity and very likely messing up any "non-standard" (e.g. Linux bootloader) bootsector installation is beyond the pale.
This is Quickbooks. The financial software that runs many companies. Many times, this is the most important software a company will buy. People don't care if Quickbooks "screws around with their systems", since in most cases, Quickbooks is the reason for the "system" in the first place.
That's all I have to say about this.
Open Source feeds your mind and not billionaire monopolist family.
Closed source feeds my family. Go suck an egg.
iTunes is a nightmare. I know of several people (myself, my GF, several family members) that got so fed up with iTunes, that they dumped their iPods in favor of other music players that don't require the use of such a terrible piece of software. Unfortunately, trying to completely remove iTunes from a PC is also a mess, because their installer is all screwed up and leaves all kinds of crap after a "complete uninstall". It's no surprise to me that there aren't more Windows users jumping over to Macs, when their flagship software for their flagship product is such an incredible dog.
No, that's not what he said. He said that Safari ignores most Windows conventions. That's bad.
The hardware is always more expensive and you have to replace it more often.
This is a complete lie. If I'm looking at a FOSS OS, then I have a much smaller list of products I can use, INCREASING my cost compared to say, running Windows, which allows the use of whatever hardware is cheaper.
It always takes more time to keep up, so you get less for the money spent on staff.
That's completely made up.
Thanks for spreading the FUD!
A software beta means that the developers are reasonably sure that it's ready for the public to use. They're relatively sure they've gotten out all of the bugs found in Development and Alpha testing. Beta isn't supposed to find major crashes. It's designed to find the smaller bugs that the testing team overlooked, and tweak the user experience.
Apple does not release decent Windows software. Case in point: iTunes is a terrible mess. I'm not surprised Safari Beta is this bad.
If we really do see 200,000 every five years if a large percentage of these developing markets adopt a non-windows OS as their defacto install base it could represent a significant erosion of the Microsoft OS's position world wide.
Why would "a large percentage of these developing markets adopt a non-windows OS as their defacto install base?" It hasn't happened yet. It hasn't even begun to happen. There's no real reason to think that it will happen any time in the near future.
Dude, I don't know a single person who likes iTunes. People avoid it like the plague. I bought a SanDisk Sansa so that I didn't have to use iTunes, and after I did, several friends and family followed. iTunes makes RealPlayer look like a well thought out, efficient application by comparison. iTunes on Windows is a nightmare. Bundling more useless crap with it is likely to drive more Windows users over the edge, causing them to dump everything Apple, instead of using more Apple products.
No, Apple is not trying to replicate iTunes' success. Nobody on windows would give a crap if iTunes wasn't the main way to get things onto an iPod.
Actually, iTunes for Windows is such a steaming pile of iCrap (there's still no Vista version out... Apple... hello?), that I've known several people that have dumped their iPod just so they wouldn't have to deal with iTunes. Comparing Safari to iTunes is not a good idea, if they're actually trying to get people to use Safari on Windows. iTunes has a terrible reputation among everybody that I know.