As I understand it, the FBSD packages/ports collection is substantially larger than Net/OpenBSD. I could be thinking only of OpenBSD, however, as NetBSD may be precisely the same or in fact larger than FreeBSD. If this is the case, I apologize.
Sure, anyone can -use- UNIX, but what about anything above using? Installing software? Removing it? upgrading? You can't go to the store and just buy any old software. There's no hardware that has a 'Linux certified!' logo on the side. It's not that easy yet. Maybe it will be eventually (I honestly don't care), but right now, it's not.
But what about buying software? When people want to read Word documents, they have to use one of a few substandard options, andwhen they want to write, it's a whole new nightmare.
What if they want games? THey can't buy them off-the-shelf. Same with software. Will hardware work? Can they get a new gamepad?
There are just too many issues that need to be dealt with in the usability area before Linux can really make it as a desktop OS.
If you want UNIX on the desktop, get OS X. Nicer interface, less confusion, easy for newbies, powerful for power users, commercial software support, open source software support, awesome hardware, and if you REALLY want Linux, you can install it.
With thousands of FreeBSD ports already set up, why should I or anyone switch to this new system?
To add to your point, the only reason anyone would use this is because FBSD ports doesn't come with Linux. If you must run Linux though, run Debian, as it's just as easy as FreeBSD.
apt-get install gnupg
If you use Linux, use Debian, if you use BSD, use FBSD. This new package system is useless.
--Dan
Re:Confusion and wasted effort is not *okay*
on
OpenPKG 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
It's *good* that there is more than one way to do it. I'm glad that open source not only provides for the possibility of multiple approaches (the built-in allowances for forking), it has a long history of such.
Choice is good, yes, but there comes a point where you have to realize that choice that creates incompatibilities is not really choice at all.
RedHat is still going to use RPMs, they won't switch to the new format. Neither will Debian. FreeBSD has ports already, and frankly, it's probably better than this option. OS X has apt, ports, AND its own package format, plus purchasable software.
Why do we need another option just to have another option? The only way to make it truly universal is to make it source, and that basically gives you FBSD.
Sure, maybe i'm totally wrong about what this new package system is like, but I don't really care. It's more confusion thrown into the mix, and yet another package format for people to support. It's not worth it. If people are going to duplicate effort, why can' they write software people will use and care about?
There's no reason for anyone to switch from.deb, and if someone was going to switch from RPM, why not switch TO deb and have a huge base of packages and tons of mirrors to choose from?
If they're going to provide computers to everyone, then they need an OS everyone can use. That breaks down into two possibilities: Windows and MacOS.
Personally, I'd try and strike a deal with Apple. Jobs would be glad to lose money on every computer, if it got him a foothold in every household in belgium, and it means good hardware, good software, and a not-so-unpleasant software company.
If I go to sleep at 22.00 and wake up at 02.00, I will be somewhat recharged. I won't be 'up and at 'em', but if I need to do something I will be able to.
Ideally, I need at least four hours to be functional for the rest of the day, six to be recharged, and eight to be energetic and optimistic, but sleeping two hours will let me keep doing whatever I was doing for a few hours more.
On my last vacation, I had the priviledge of going to Jerusalem via Amsterdam - a total of 58 hours sleepless, since I cannot sleep on planes or in public areas, and I was kept active in Amsterdam by visiting with a friend.
While I didn't get to 112 for certain, and I didn't go barking mad, I definitely had some interesting experiences - I had a 2-hour nap at about 44-46 hours, and when I woke, I was more fucked up than I'd ever been. I'd had a dream about Hebrew having some weird grammatical rule, and it scared the bejeezus out of me; I ended up not being able to eat anything for a few hours, and I was pretty strung out (coffee helped).
I found that I sort of sine-waved my way through those last 33 hours or so - I would go from fully conscious, aware, everything I am when I get enough sleep, into drowsy, and then more-than-drowsy - I think I passed out for a few minutes on the flight to Tel Aviv, and I nearly passed out (and cracked my head open on the pretty stone floor) of the hallway of the apt/condo I was staying at. Either way, I have some large gaps in my memory.
Sleep is definitely good, though I'd be interested to hit 112 hours and see how it affects me. After 25-28 hours, it seems, sleep isn't a pressing issue if I can't afford to let it be, but still, it'd be fun.
When you're asleep, the brain's level of consciousness (it's not that, but we'll call it that), swings up and down like a cross between a sine wave and a seismograph, something like so:
When you first fall asleep, the brain goes into deep deep REM sleep, and you have your first dream. The brain's levels then swing back up towards non-REM sleep, but not necessarily leaving it, and then dip back down deeper into REM - but not as deep as the first time.
The brain undergoes several such swings, each time rising higher out of REM sleep (you're pretty much guaranteed to leave REM sleep the second time at least), and then not sinking as low. Eventually, it gets to the point where you're not even going into REM sleep, at which point you wake up.
Now, the trick is that if you wake up while in REM sleep, the body gets all mussed up. You feel like crap all day, you're tired, cranky, and whatnot. Effects may vary, but generally, this is the case.
If you wake up OUT of REM sleep, however, you will feel rested - perhaps not totally so, but you will be rested to some degree, and recharged.
The trick then is to catch yourself outside of these cycles. Ideally, you need to find a good time to go to sleep (for me, it's between 10 and 10:30 PM), and then see when you wake up. A few years ago, I found myself conscious enough to look at my clock and check the time every 2 hours - I would go to bed at 10-10:30, fall asleep at 11, and then wake up at 1, 3, 5, and 7 AM. At any of those times, I could have, if I'd wanted to, gotten up, gone to the bathroom, went online, gone to the store, or anything else - I was perfectly capable of doing whatever I wanted to do. My cycle is 2 hours then, and thus, I need sleep in 2-hour increments. I recall one time falling asleep at 2 AM, and waking up at 6 AM, and getting right back up and doing what I was doing before.
It has to be good sleep though - comfortable temperature, not sick, comfortable bed - and it has to be reliable (staying up until 1:30 AM screws me up big time for days to come), and you can't be malnourished - there are a few great ways to eat well, but that's a whole other Ask Slashdot.;>
Anyway, I suggest you experiment. Find a good time to sleep, and then see when you can wake up. Perhaps you'll need to get to sleep at 10 PM like I did, but perhaps you can wake up at 2 AM and study, prepare, mail letters, or code for the rest of the day afterwards.
Also, don't discount siestas. Lying down for half an hour in the middle of the day, even if you don't sleep, can be a great recharger. And don't touch sleeping pills, or anything, organic or not, to help you sleep better. The last thing you need is to get dependant on something for sleep, and then have it run out the night before your final.
So somehow you're saying that not being held accountable for your actions is a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but if someone's had a ton of DUI convictions and had his license taken away, I would WANT the DMV where I live to know about it.
Too many Americans seem to think that their 'right' to the priviledge of a driver's license override the rights to safety of the person of the other people on the road.
Come on. Avoiding the consequences of your actions is cowardly at best, and should hardly be considered a bad thing to lose.
Your classic error is assuming that any alarmist scenario is worthless. I'm sure there were once people like you telling the German Jews that things couldn't get any worse too!
If you honestly think that the situations between Pre-WW2 Germany and today's United States are similar, then I suggest you do more than whine about it on forums.
If you're just throwing that around for shock value, you could use lessons in taste.
The only part of Rogers Communications that makes money is the cable. The rest all lose money, and will lose more soon.
Currently, they have deals with Telus for roaming of their cellular customers. Telus and Bell just signed an agreement, however, so that, after their networks are fully upgraded to whatever they're upgrading them to, they'll be fully operational and interoperable.
Meaning? Telus' roaming deal with Rogers will be a waste for Telus. Rogers will likely be on its own, meaning it will have to implement more physical network (not that it doesn't have somethign like three physical networks already).
You cannot get a card at one Rogers Video store and then rent from another store (in my experience). You cannot use your VIP card to rent at a Rogers Video store (or at least, you couldn't in Mission, back when we were stuck with Rogers). Their selection is horrid, their prices high, and some of the three-year-old playstation games they have are still 2-day 'new releases'. Blockbuster will let you use any Blockbuster card in any store, anywhere (I could've used it in Israel, but we couldn't find any movies we wanted to watch).
Rogers Cable recently traded BC for Ontario. Why? Because they tried to screw all of their BC customers over by forcing new channels and packages upon then, and making the new (drastically expensive) changes 'opt-out'. Customers, irate at the sudden changes they didn't ask for and the sudden billing they didn't want to pay, switched in droves to StarChoice or Bell Expressvu.
AT&T may own 45% of Rogers, but I think that's worse for them than it is for us.
Which pay for things like health care, roadwork, welfare programs, education... It's not taken and kept you know. Compare Canadian tuitions to American tuitions, for example. $8000 USD/yr compared to $2100 CDN/yr was a comparison I showed to a friend of mine, who was complaining about the low quality of his education.
government regulation
You mean the thing that makes sure monopolies do good things, and not bad? Or that telcos provide reasonable levels of service, or that standards are upheld in all sorts of areas? The thing that keeps prices low and service quality high? Yeah, man, I really hate that.
lack of opportunity
This is about as vague as one can get. Opportunity to do what? Buy donuts? Commit war crimes? Come on, if you're going to make weak points, at least make clear weak points.
no free speech
This one's just downright laughable. Are you saying American free speech, where someone can get arrested for talking about how to bypass security, is better than Canadian? I can say whatever I want, but no one has to listen.
no right to self defense
No need for self defence...
big brother government database on all citizens
1) It was dismantled, 2) They have that data anyway, it's just spread out across tons of ministries at the moment
and what's more the postal service opens and photocopies a certain percentage of mail without a warrant as a matter of policy.
I'd be interested to hear your source on this.
Apart from hockey and donuts, what's superior?
Our (apparant) socialist philosophy of 'help others', compared to the American 'help yourself, screw others' Big Business philosophy?
Shouldn't that be "boot"?
Oh that's clever, did you think that up yourself?
Absolutely not. Anything that would prevent the Liberal party from imposing anything from requiring all packets to be sent to Shawinigan for analysis to censorship laws prohibiting the denigration of Pierre Eliot Trudeau is to be BANNED and CURSED by the CBC.
It's amazing. You speak as though you know what you're talking about, but all you're doing is taking random events, throwing some names in with them, and then making up accusations with no basis in reality. Truly a fascinating habit.
Don't like it? Build your own military
To do what? Defend us from the results of our own foreign policy? We don't take on the world, they haven't got it out for us like they do for you.
Unfortunately, that would involve you lowering taxes
I don't see what taxes has to do with anything. Most European countries (Germany, for example) are far more socialist than Canada, and they've got even better economies. In fact, there are a huge number of great economies in the world, and of all of them, the United States is the only one without state-sponsored health care, and the only one with the death penalty. The US seems to be the exception, not the rule.
that would impede Chretien's ability to pave Shawinigan with gold and sell a few of his golf courses on the public ticket, so forget it.
You know, this is getting quite lame. Everyone involved in the issue agreed - in sworn statements - that Chretien had sold his shares in that hotel that he owned (yes, he owned no part of the golf course, only a hotel) before having done anything to help the golf course, and had not yet gotten paid.
Unlike some countries I could mention, we don't look for scandals to sensationalize, we don't elect leaders and then spend 4 years distrusting them, and we don't blame the government for selling out after we let them pass laws letting them sell out - oh, wait, we've never done that. But the US has.
Canada, its government, its philosophies, and its economy value people over money. If that, to you, is a bad thing, well then so be it. If you're going to be so arrogant as to put the dollar before social welfare, then honestly, your opinion matters not to me.
I'm aware of the existance of such a thing, but we don't have it yet. Hopefully, any changes that are made will at least be reasonable ones, and not taken to the extreme that the DCMA was.
Dunno what the normal US/Canada speeds are, but I assume they're comparable or better.
In my area (near Vancouver), I've gotten historically between 3 and 5 megabits download, and 400 kbits upload.
Typical speeds are usually lower - 2.5 megabits for cable, I believe, and 1.5 megabits for entry-level DSL (download), and usually between 256k and 640k upload.
The standard cable TV set top box has a cable modem so all customers are broadband-ready.
See, now that is cool. We have to have a cable modem for our internet separate from our (digital) cable box. Fortunately we don't pay to rent the cable modem, but many other places do. The cable box is another thing however.
Not to sound like I have some sort of superiority complex about Canada (though I do), but...
Does Canada need this sort of thing? Any censorship done by our government is done to keep peace with American companies (RIAA) and the American government. In order to maintain our trade with the US, we have to pretend to like their priorities.
If you really want to help, you have a few options.
You could start a group petitioning the Canadian government to stop following US policy. Canadian governmental policy regarding the internet is excellent, there's just a few little glitches now and then. In fact, there haven't been any big things - we don't have a DCMA-like law in Canada, and it would probably be overturned by the supreme court pretty soon if we did have one - so I don't know if we even need something like this right now.
If you really want to help the state of the world, help the US - donate to the EFF and pay taxes anyway. I think it's a lost cause, but if enough people donate, then it might cease to be one.
If you really want to get a tax break, donate to one of the many hundreds of other charities out there. Medical charities like the cancer foundation (or whatever), Heart and Stroke Foundation, Crohn's and Colitis, things like that, can all use our help. Or, if you think Canadians can buck it up, then donate to one of the foreign charities - personally, I wouldn't donate to any of the ones driven specifically by religion, but if you have no such qualms, then donate to the Christian Children's Fund of Canada, or check out the website of the Canadian Council for International Co-operation for a whole slew of interesting info.
Hmm... Didn't see SimNeighborhood (or whatever the hell it was that EA & Maxis were going to call the game on the scale in-between SimCity and The Sims) mentioned anywhere. Seems good for at least an honorable mention, no?
No, that was apparantly cancelled. If so, it's not really vapour.
Microsoft will demonstrate on Monday a tablet-shaped device that will serve as a bridge between the TV, the PC and the company's.Net services, according to sources familiar with the plans. These sources also say that no one will care, as everyone is watching theMacworld Keynote after Sunday's press leak of the new iMac.
There's something you don't seem to understand. In a manufacturing business, you have overhead, cost of goods, and price of goods.
price of goods - cost of goods = gross profit
gross profit - overhead = net profit
They have to make enough on the machines they do sell to pay for their overhead. Dropping their prices dramatically would not make most people switch over - and, in fact, for what you get, Apple's hardware is amazingly cheap (as long as you don't buy ram from them). How many other places can you get a 15" TFT monitor, DVD burner, G4 power, UNIX-based operating system, firewire, USB, 802.11 ethernet, gigabit ethernet (at least on all their other computer models they have now), plus a ton of great software (iDVD, iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto), for $1300?
If they controlled 15% of the market, they could afford to have more lower profit margins, but as it is, their best bet is less higher profit margins.
Notice how the costs of most of their hardware dropped substantially after the iMac boom? More users, more cash, easier to pay for the overhead.
And one last note. People said 'drop your prices!' when the iPod came out - until they found out that the hard drive in the iPod costs as much as the iPod itself does, and you get way cooler stuff with it too (MP3 playback, namely).
This isn't really about tech journalism - in fact, it's barely about tech at all.
The article, like the iMac itself, is not about technology, but what you DO with the technology. This is the big thing that makes Apple great - they avoid 'technology for technology's sake'.
The article is about what you can DO with the iMac, how it was invented, and the philosophy behind it.
Come on, it's not bad for Apple that people see this a few hours earlier than they would.
One of the things Steve Jobs relies on is the 'OH... MY... GOD...' factor - that is, pulling something totally out of left field that people start liking just because it's different, cute, abstract, or whatever (like the iMac; I can count on no hands the number of people that could have predicted that).
He's the shock DJ of the personal computer world, bringing you the last and most inappropriate thing you'd ever expect, and making you love every word he utters.
Releasing the surprise early is like getting someone the most awesome birthday present and then telling them about it the night before, but not giving it to them. The effect fades off, and fast, especially overnight.
3) Reveal the/real/ new machine, far more slick and appealing than the old machine or the clay-blob-stick-panel (Apple has a good sense of aesthetics, why would they make something look silly?)
Er... Have you seen an iMac? It was the silliest thing I've ever seen in my life. It also brought them back from the brink of disaster and filled their pockets with untold riches.
They'll release something that looks silly because it's insanely great, and it will sell for that. Apple provides value, not just looks.
I disagree totally. Consider the following points.
If Steve Jobs were an idiot, he wouldn't have asked when the article would hit shelves. Jobs is not an idiot, ergo he knew, as does C|Net , that this is also in this week's Time (US) magazine - which hit newsstands on Sunday in New York.
Jobs probably had a tough debate with himself. Either he could deny a story for Time until after the launch - meaning waiting until next Sunday when it would've been to late - or he could let Time put it on shelves and websites, and let a few people see it (but not as many as will see it tomorrow), and have their new product front and centre on every newsstand on the continent come Monday morning. I'd hate to leak it early, but I'd hate more to sensationalize late. I'm sure Jobs felt the same.
What could Apple possibly do, other than deny interviews from Time Magazine? Unless they had a contract (which I doubt), then this is perfectly acceptible reporting. It's not slander or libel, it's an article as true as can be accepted. If Apple doesn't like it, they can lump it.
I sincerely doubt there's a single webmaster that controls this sort of thing. Likely the webmasters write/debug the scripts that drive the page, and the editors and so on are the ones that actually do the posting/managing.
Time isn't in trouble, and Apple will be more glad than not. Jobs knows how to work the media - and people in general - and I'm sure that Time/Warner will be happy - people are probably going to snap up Time Magazine like it's going out of style.
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, the FBSD packages/ports collection is substantially larger than Net/OpenBSD. I could be thinking only of OpenBSD, however, as NetBSD may be precisely the same or in fact larger than FreeBSD. If this is the case, I apologize.
--Dan
Sure, anyone can -use- UNIX, but what about anything above using? Installing software? Removing it? upgrading? You can't go to the store and just buy any old software. There's no hardware that has a 'Linux certified!' logo on the side. It's not that easy yet. Maybe it will be eventually (I honestly don't care), but right now, it's not.
--Dan
But what about buying software? When people want to read Word documents, they have to use one of a few substandard options, andwhen they want to write, it's a whole new nightmare.
What if they want games? THey can't buy them off-the-shelf. Same with software. Will hardware work? Can they get a new gamepad?
There are just too many issues that need to be dealt with in the usability area before Linux can really make it as a desktop OS.
If you want UNIX on the desktop, get OS X. Nicer interface, less confusion, easy for newbies, powerful for power users, commercial software support, open source software support, awesome hardware, and if you REALLY want Linux, you can install it.
Seems like the ideal solution to me.
--Dan
With thousands of FreeBSD ports already set up, why should I or anyone switch to this new system?
To add to your point, the only reason anyone would use this is because FBSD ports doesn't come with Linux. If you must run Linux though, run Debian, as it's just as easy as FreeBSD.
apt-get install gnupg
If you use Linux, use Debian, if you use BSD, use FBSD. This new package system is useless.
--Dan
It's *good* that there is more than one way to do it. I'm glad that open source not only provides for the possibility of multiple approaches (the built-in allowances for forking), it has a long history of such.
.deb, and if someone was going to switch from RPM, why not switch TO deb and have a huge base of packages and tons of mirrors to choose from?
Choice is good, yes, but there comes a point where you have to realize that choice that creates incompatibilities is not really choice at all.
RedHat is still going to use RPMs, they won't switch to the new format. Neither will Debian. FreeBSD has ports already, and frankly, it's probably better than this option. OS X has apt, ports, AND its own package format, plus purchasable software.
Why do we need another option just to have another option? The only way to make it truly universal is to make it source, and that basically gives you FBSD.
Sure, maybe i'm totally wrong about what this new package system is like, but I don't really care. It's more confusion thrown into the mix, and yet another package format for people to support. It's not worth it. If people are going to duplicate effort, why can' they write software people will use and care about?
There's no reason for anyone to switch from
--Dan
If they're going to provide computers to everyone, then they need an OS everyone can use. That breaks down into two possibilities: Windows and MacOS.
Personally, I'd try and strike a deal with Apple. Jobs would be glad to lose money on every computer, if it got him a foothold in every household in belgium, and it means good hardware, good software, and a not-so-unpleasant software company.
--Dan
If I go to sleep at 22.00 and wake up at 02.00, I will be somewhat recharged. I won't be 'up and at 'em', but if I need to do something I will be able to.
Ideally, I need at least four hours to be functional for the rest of the day, six to be recharged, and eight to be energetic and optimistic, but sleeping two hours will let me keep doing whatever I was doing for a few hours more.
--Dan
On my last vacation, I had the priviledge of going to Jerusalem via Amsterdam - a total of 58 hours sleepless, since I cannot sleep on planes or in public areas, and I was kept active in Amsterdam by visiting with a friend.
While I didn't get to 112 for certain, and I didn't go barking mad, I definitely had some interesting experiences - I had a 2-hour nap at about 44-46 hours, and when I woke, I was more fucked up than I'd ever been. I'd had a dream about Hebrew having some weird grammatical rule, and it scared the bejeezus out of me; I ended up not being able to eat anything for a few hours, and I was pretty strung out (coffee helped).
I found that I sort of sine-waved my way through those last 33 hours or so - I would go from fully conscious, aware, everything I am when I get enough sleep, into drowsy, and then more-than-drowsy - I think I passed out for a few minutes on the flight to Tel Aviv, and I nearly passed out (and cracked my head open on the pretty stone floor) of the hallway of the apt/condo I was staying at. Either way, I have some large gaps in my memory.
Sleep is definitely good, though I'd be interested to hit 112 hours and see how it affects me. After 25-28 hours, it seems, sleep isn't a pressing issue if I can't afford to let it be, but still, it'd be fun.
--Dan
When you're asleep, the brain's level of consciousness (it's not that, but we'll call it that), swings up and down like a cross between a sine wave and a seismograph, something like so:
;>
When you first fall asleep, the brain goes into deep deep REM sleep, and you have your first dream. The brain's levels then swing back up towards non-REM sleep, but not necessarily leaving it, and then dip back down deeper into REM - but not as deep as the first time.
The brain undergoes several such swings, each time rising higher out of REM sleep (you're pretty much guaranteed to leave REM sleep the second time at least), and then not sinking as low. Eventually, it gets to the point where you're not even going into REM sleep, at which point you wake up.
Now, the trick is that if you wake up while in REM sleep, the body gets all mussed up. You feel like crap all day, you're tired, cranky, and whatnot. Effects may vary, but generally, this is the case.
If you wake up OUT of REM sleep, however, you will feel rested - perhaps not totally so, but you will be rested to some degree, and recharged.
The trick then is to catch yourself outside of these cycles. Ideally, you need to find a good time to go to sleep (for me, it's between 10 and 10:30 PM), and then see when you wake up. A few years ago, I found myself conscious enough to look at my clock and check the time every 2 hours - I would go to bed at 10-10:30, fall asleep at 11, and then wake up at 1, 3, 5, and 7 AM. At any of those times, I could have, if I'd wanted to, gotten up, gone to the bathroom, went online, gone to the store, or anything else - I was perfectly capable of doing whatever I wanted to do. My cycle is 2 hours then, and thus, I need sleep in 2-hour increments. I recall one time falling asleep at 2 AM, and waking up at 6 AM, and getting right back up and doing what I was doing before.
It has to be good sleep though - comfortable temperature, not sick, comfortable bed - and it has to be reliable (staying up until 1:30 AM screws me up big time for days to come), and you can't be malnourished - there are a few great ways to eat well, but that's a whole other Ask Slashdot.
Anyway, I suggest you experiment. Find a good time to sleep, and then see when you can wake up. Perhaps you'll need to get to sleep at 10 PM like I did, but perhaps you can wake up at 2 AM and study, prepare, mail letters, or code for the rest of the day afterwards.
Also, don't discount siestas. Lying down for half an hour in the middle of the day, even if you don't sleep, can be a great recharger. And don't touch sleeping pills, or anything, organic or not, to help you sleep better. The last thing you need is to get dependant on something for sleep, and then have it run out the night before your final.
--Dan
So get a monthly bus pass/transit pass/whatever (usually cheaper anyway), or use change.
--Dan
So somehow you're saying that not being held accountable for your actions is a bad thing?
I don't know about you, but if someone's had a ton of DUI convictions and had his license taken away, I would WANT the DMV where I live to know about it.
Too many Americans seem to think that their 'right' to the priviledge of a driver's license override the rights to safety of the person of the other people on the road.
Come on. Avoiding the consequences of your actions is cowardly at best, and should hardly be considered a bad thing to lose.
--Dan
Your classic error is assuming that any alarmist scenario is worthless. I'm sure there were once people like you telling the German Jews that things couldn't get any worse too!
If you honestly think that the situations between Pre-WW2 Germany and today's United States are similar, then I suggest you do more than whine about it on forums.
If you're just throwing that around for shock value, you could use lessons in taste.
--Dan
I see Rogers as being doomed.
The only part of Rogers Communications that makes money is the cable. The rest all lose money, and will lose more soon.
Currently, they have deals with Telus for roaming of their cellular customers. Telus and Bell just signed an agreement, however, so that, after their networks are fully upgraded to whatever they're upgrading them to, they'll be fully operational and interoperable.
Meaning? Telus' roaming deal with Rogers will be a waste for Telus. Rogers will likely be on its own, meaning it will have to implement more physical network (not that it doesn't have somethign like three physical networks already).
You cannot get a card at one Rogers Video store and then rent from another store (in my experience). You cannot use your VIP card to rent at a Rogers Video store (or at least, you couldn't in Mission, back when we were stuck with Rogers). Their selection is horrid, their prices high, and some of the three-year-old playstation games they have are still 2-day 'new releases'. Blockbuster will let you use any Blockbuster card in any store, anywhere (I could've used it in Israel, but we couldn't find any movies we wanted to watch).
Rogers Cable recently traded BC for Ontario. Why? Because they tried to screw all of their BC customers over by forcing new channels and packages upon then, and making the new (drastically expensive) changes 'opt-out'. Customers, irate at the sudden changes they didn't ask for and the sudden billing they didn't want to pay, switched in droves to StarChoice or Bell Expressvu.
AT&T may own 45% of Rogers, but I think that's worse for them than it is for us.
--Dan
High taxes,
Which pay for things like health care, roadwork, welfare programs, education... It's not taken and kept you know. Compare Canadian tuitions to American tuitions, for example. $8000 USD/yr compared to $2100 CDN/yr was a comparison I showed to a friend of mine, who was complaining about the low quality of his education.
government regulation
You mean the thing that makes sure monopolies do good things, and not bad? Or that telcos provide reasonable levels of service, or that standards are upheld in all sorts of areas? The thing that keeps prices low and service quality high? Yeah, man, I really hate that.
lack of opportunity
This is about as vague as one can get. Opportunity to do what? Buy donuts? Commit war crimes? Come on, if you're going to make weak points, at least make clear weak points.
no free speech
This one's just downright laughable. Are you saying American free speech, where someone can get arrested for talking about how to bypass security, is better than Canadian? I can say whatever I want, but no one has to listen.
no right to self defense
No need for self defence...
big brother government database on all citizens
1) It was dismantled, 2) They have that data anyway, it's just spread out across tons of ministries at the moment
and what's more the postal service opens and photocopies a certain percentage of mail without a warrant as a matter of policy.
I'd be interested to hear your source on this.
Apart from hockey and donuts, what's superior?
Our (apparant) socialist philosophy of 'help others', compared to the American 'help yourself, screw others' Big Business philosophy?
Shouldn't that be "boot"?
Oh that's clever, did you think that up yourself?
Absolutely not. Anything that would prevent the Liberal party from imposing anything from requiring all packets to be sent to Shawinigan for analysis to censorship laws prohibiting the denigration of Pierre Eliot Trudeau is to be BANNED and CURSED by the CBC.
It's amazing. You speak as though you know what you're talking about, but all you're doing is taking random events, throwing some names in with them, and then making up accusations with no basis in reality. Truly a fascinating habit.
Don't like it? Build your own military
To do what? Defend us from the results of our own foreign policy? We don't take on the world, they haven't got it out for us like they do for you.
Unfortunately, that would involve you lowering taxes
I don't see what taxes has to do with anything. Most European countries (Germany, for example) are far more socialist than Canada, and they've got even better economies. In fact, there are a huge number of great economies in the world, and of all of them, the United States is the only one without state-sponsored health care, and the only one with the death penalty. The US seems to be the exception, not the rule.
that would impede Chretien's ability to pave Shawinigan with gold and sell a few of his golf courses on the public ticket, so forget it.
You know, this is getting quite lame. Everyone involved in the issue agreed - in sworn statements - that Chretien had sold his shares in that hotel that he owned (yes, he owned no part of the golf course, only a hotel) before having done anything to help the golf course, and had not yet gotten paid.
Unlike some countries I could mention, we don't look for scandals to sensationalize, we don't elect leaders and then spend 4 years distrusting them, and we don't blame the government for selling out after we let them pass laws letting them sell out - oh, wait, we've never done that. But the US has.
Canada, its government, its philosophies, and its economy value people over money. If that, to you, is a bad thing, well then so be it. If you're going to be so arrogant as to put the dollar before social welfare, then honestly, your opinion matters not to me.
I'm aware of the existance of such a thing, but we don't have it yet. Hopefully, any changes that are made will at least be reasonable ones, and not taken to the extreme that the DCMA was.
We'll see, I guess.
--Dan
Dunno what the normal US/Canada speeds are, but I assume they're comparable or better.
In my area (near Vancouver), I've gotten historically between 3 and 5 megabits download, and 400 kbits upload.
Typical speeds are usually lower - 2.5 megabits for cable, I believe, and 1.5 megabits for entry-level DSL (download), and usually between 256k and 640k upload.
The standard cable TV set top box has a cable modem so all customers are broadband-ready.
See, now that is cool. We have to have a cable modem for our internet separate from our (digital) cable box. Fortunately we don't pay to rent the cable modem, but many other places do. The cable box is another thing however.
--Dan
I almost forgot - here are the links to the french versions of those government pages.
L'Agence des douance et du revenu du Canada
la section de ce website au sujet des
impôts - Organismes de bienfaisance
La liste - rechercheable et downloadable (3,7 Mo délimité par des tabulations)
I would have translated the whole comment, but my French, quite frankly, sucks.
--Dan
Not to sound like I have some sort of superiority complex about Canada (though I do), but...
:>
Does Canada need this sort of thing? Any censorship done by our government is done to keep peace with American companies (RIAA) and the American government. In order to maintain our trade with the US, we have to pretend to like their priorities.
If you really want to help, you have a few options.
You could start a group petitioning the Canadian government to stop following US policy. Canadian governmental policy regarding the internet is excellent, there's just a few little glitches now and then. In fact, there haven't been any big things - we don't have a DCMA-like law in Canada, and it would probably be overturned by the supreme court pretty soon if we did have one - so I don't know if we even need something like this right now.
If you really want to help the state of the world, help the US - donate to the EFF and pay taxes anyway. I think it's a lost cause, but if enough people donate, then it might cease to be one.
If you really want to get a tax break, donate to one of the many hundreds of other charities out there. Medical charities like the cancer foundation (or whatever), Heart and Stroke Foundation, Crohn's and Colitis, things like that, can all use our help. Or, if you think Canadians can buck it up, then donate to one of the foreign charities - personally, I wouldn't donate to any of the ones driven specifically by religion, but if you have no such qualms, then donate to the Christian Children's Fund of Canada, or check out the website of the Canadian Council for International Co-operation for a whole slew of interesting info.
If all that fails, you can always check yourself. The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, in their Tax/Charities section of their website, has a list of all registered charities in Canada. If you don't feel like searching, you can download it in zip file format.
I hope this helps you, and any other Canucks who feel like helping others. Lord knows the world needs more helping hands.
--Dan
Hmm... Didn't see SimNeighborhood (or whatever the hell it was that EA & Maxis were going to call the game on the scale in-between SimCity and The Sims) mentioned anywhere. Seems good for at least an honorable mention, no?
No, that was apparantly cancelled. If so, it's not really vapour.
--Dan
Microsoft will demonstrate on Monday a tablet-shaped device that will serve as a bridge between the TV, the PC and the company's .Net services, according to sources familiar with the plans. These sources also say that no one will care, as everyone is watching theMacworld Keynote after Sunday's press leak of the new iMac.
--Dan
There's something you don't seem to understand. In a manufacturing business, you have overhead, cost of goods, and price of goods.
price of goods - cost of goods = gross profit
gross profit - overhead = net profit
They have to make enough on the machines they do sell to pay for their overhead. Dropping their prices dramatically would not make most people switch over - and, in fact, for what you get, Apple's hardware is amazingly cheap (as long as you don't buy ram from them). How many other places can you get a 15" TFT monitor, DVD burner, G4 power, UNIX-based operating system, firewire, USB, 802.11 ethernet, gigabit ethernet (at least on all their other computer models they have now), plus a ton of great software (iDVD, iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto), for $1300?
If they controlled 15% of the market, they could afford to have more lower profit margins, but as it is, their best bet is less higher profit margins.
Notice how the costs of most of their hardware dropped substantially after the iMac boom? More users, more cash, easier to pay for the overhead.
And one last note. People said 'drop your prices!' when the iPod came out - until they found out that the hard drive in the iPod costs as much as the iPod itself does, and you get way cooler stuff with it too (MP3 playback, namely).
--Dan
This isn't really about tech journalism - in fact, it's barely about tech at all.
The article, like the iMac itself, is not about technology, but what you DO with the technology. This is the big thing that makes Apple great - they avoid 'technology for technology's sake'.
The article is about what you can DO with the iMac, how it was invented, and the philosophy behind it.
--Dan
It looks like a lamp post?
--Dan
Come on, it's not bad for Apple that people see this a few hours earlier than they would.
/real/ new machine, far more slick and appealing than the old machine or the clay-blob-stick-panel (Apple has a good sense of aesthetics, why would they make something look silly?)
One of the things Steve Jobs relies on is the 'OH... MY... GOD...' factor - that is, pulling something totally out of left field that people start liking just because it's different, cute, abstract, or whatever (like the iMac; I can count on no hands the number of people that could have predicted that).
He's the shock DJ of the personal computer world, bringing you the last and most inappropriate thing you'd ever expect, and making you love every word he utters.
Releasing the surprise early is like getting someone the most awesome birthday present and then telling them about it the night before, but not giving it to them. The effect fades off, and fast, especially overnight.
3) Reveal the
Er... Have you seen an iMac? It was the silliest thing I've ever seen in my life. It also brought them back from the brink of disaster and filled their pockets with untold riches.
They'll release something that looks silly because it's insanely great, and it will sell for that. Apple provides value, not just looks.
--Dan
Time isn't in trouble, and Apple will be more glad than not. Jobs knows how to work the media - and people in general - and I'm sure that Time/Warner will be happy - people are probably going to snap up Time Magazine like it's going out of style.
--Dan