Actually, I created mine as I went, used nothing complicated (wildcards but no regular expressions), have less than 20 rules, and I rarely see an ad. I have not tried to block text ads or small, out-of-the way ads; I'm really only after the annoying inline and banner ads.
And they don't have to. Firefox doesn't include Adblock, but the ability to integrate custom extensions permitted someone to create it. Considering that it is the second-most popular extension on the mozilla site (over 900,000 downloads), it appears a few users know how to use it and they like it.
This is perhaps a little OT but I do share the parent's frustration with so much focus on tabs in IE. I converted to Firefox on 1.0.2 and I've never looked back. I love it and only use IE (at home or work) for a few ActiveX-only sites. However, I could take or leave tabbed browsing. I stay with Firefox because of the wonderful extensions and better pop-up blocking.
I look forward to how Microsoft will respond to the recent challenge to their browser dominance, but anything short of Adblock for IE will keep me with Firefox. I can't believe how much nicer the Internet is with Firefox and this single extension.
I can imagine a lot of people wanting a cheap server or another pc in the home hopping on this, even if they already have broadband. Hell, if I needed another machine, I'd do it in a heatbeat. And I'd never log into the Earthlink account, and would cancel after a year.
The cheap computer would hardly be worth the cost for a server. This is a 1.5 GHz AMD Sempron, cheapo motherboard (with an SIS chipset, and only two PCI slots), 256 mb of generic RAM, a 40 Gb hard drive, and a one-year return-to-the-manufacturer-without-cross-shipping POS warranty. You would do better to buy a used machine on eBay for the same cost.
You would have to be completely braindead to do this for the computer only. As detailed above, it is not a nice machine. It also does not include a monitor at this price. And, if you aren't using the Earthlink service, you are now paying over $330 for a computer that you can order without Earthlink for $219.
You: If someone gets to know your university id, not much they can do with it, at max they can get your real name, but the rest is optional (user-selectable) to disclose, like email address, etc.
Me: That depends on which system they can access once they have your university ID. If you can use it to register for courses and such, then it must tie back to the main student information system (SIS), which stores all of your informaion (including SSNs, here in the States). But, at least the ID itself reveals little or nothing, unlike systems that use the SSN as the ID.
My point was that just because your school uses a less obvious student ID does not mean that all of your data is safe. Your post made it sound like this ID gives you complete anonymity, with your name being the most sensitive information available to someone who learns your ID. I agreed that a seemingly random ID number is better because it has no obvious data in it (unlike an SSN). Yet, the reality is that employees trust student workers more than they should when the same student has worked with them for several years. I am the IT director at a university and I've known of too many offices where a student was entrusted (in violation of policy) with an employee's SIS username and password.
The hardware vendors offer an instant rebate when you sign up for a one-year Earthlink account, which means they get their money back from Earthlink (likely at nearly 100% of the discount). They also get significant exposure and advertising, mostly on Earthlink's dime (they probably pay a small kickback to Earthlink for each sell that includes the Earthlink service).
Earthlink has a new twist to differentiate themselves, charges enough for the service to break even on the additional expense in the first year, and makes a nice mark up after the first year. They probably hope to lure the large and still growing segment of middle age people who just want to send email and get on the Internet occasionally.
Even Xandros gets additional exposure for the non-free version of their OS. Given the fuzzy marketing write up on Microtel's site, what great aunt isn't going to agree that it's a great deal for only $20 more?
Of course, many people have been saying for years that computers would one fday be like cellphones. When I bought my first one, I spent $1500 on the phone and another $100 a month for fuzzy local service. Last year I replaced both mine and my wifes phones for $0 and a promise to maintain $50 monthly service for two years. The phones themselves have become a commodity and are no longer a profit center...they're simply used to drive subscriptions.
Your analogy holds on the other side of it too. There are still plenty of nicer cell phones that are not free (or even cheap). If you need a basic phone just to be on the network, then get the free one and give up your choice of network. If you care about the network you use, desire the flexibility to change later, or need that kick ass phone, then this doesn't work for you. You pay $200 for a phone and shop for service on it.
Hardware needed to run HL6 will not be free from AOL with your membership. Yet, I do agree with your basic premise - the cost of some cheap hardware often is worthwhile overhead for a long term subscriber.
I just dug up some more of the details and they lock you in to at least one year of Earthlink and charge you $70 for the basic desktop. So, even if you bolt after the first year, you've still paid over $200 for the box. I can buy the thing without the Earthlink membership for $219, so this isn't a free (as in beer) computer. After that first year, you are less likely to change ISPs simply because of the hassle of changing email addresses and such, so they continue to sell you marked up dial-up service.
Let's do some math. They could get a standard cheap dial-up account for $9.99/month or they could pay $22/month for this one. That comes out to $12 more each month, or $144 each year. If you keep this service for three years (the average PC cycle), you've paid over $400 for the computer. Earthlink certainly didn't lose money on that box and they gained a subscriber that they may not have gotten otherwise.
Didn't PeoplePC try and fail at this just a few years ago? I don't remember if they were using Windows on the boxes, but the business model of dial-up and "free" computers didn't pan out then. What has changed?
Christ. What exactly do you think "access" meant? Unfortunately, it isn't uncommon to find student workers who know the SIS username and password of the faculty or staff member they assist.
If someone gets to know your university id, not much they can do with it, at max they can get your real name, but the rest is optional (user-selectable) to disclose, like email address, etc.
That depends on which system they can access once they have your university ID. If you can use it to register for courses and such, then it must tie back to the main student information system (SIS), which stores all of your informaion (including SSNs, here in the States). But, at least the ID itself reveals little or nothing, unlike systems that use the SSN as the ID.
OOo 1.9 betas start much faster, especially if you install the preloader (as Microsoft Office does). I'm running 1.9m104 on a PIII 500 with Windows 2000 and it is somewhat slow to start, but still lauches much quicker than Firefox.
TFA actually mentioned issues with existing PowerPoint files and said they installed the free viewer provided by Microsoft as an interim solution. OOo 2.0 is supposed to have improved support for PowerPoint files so they hope the viewer can go away soon.
I run OOo beta (1.9m104) at work and home without trouble, but I rarely use PowerPoint. As a heavy user of Access, I am looking forward to a stable version of Base.
Unless perhaps if someone buys *everything* from Dell, but I can't ever see that as likely.
For companies of any size (such as the one unfortunate enough to employ the "writer" being discussed) it is very likely that they could and would buy all machines from Dell or another quality OEM. If a company is going to cut corners and buy the cheapest computers available, do you really think they are going to pass over dependable PCs and pay even more for Macs?
I really don't disagree with his overall point that in general Macs are more stable and that the average WinTel user would see an improvement if they switched (assuming the Mac will support their hardware and software needs). I just couldn't believe the total lack of intelligence and technical knowledge displayed in his writing. But, I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day...
Too many variations; nearly impossible to build two identical boxes unless you specifically do so at the outset.
I'll assume that you mean build as a substitute for purchase, since it would be meaningless otherwise (have you built yourself an iMac lately?). This may be true if you buy your computers from the local corner store, but not quite so with someone like Dell. Do you really think Dell randomly changes motherboards in the middle of a run of Latitude 840s? Sure, you may find different brands of RAM across different batches of machines, but Apple is no different. The real difference is that the "WinTel" world permits significant variation and does quite well at supporting it, while Apple dictates what you will use and how much you will pay. This certainly does make OS design simpler.
That Apple controls the H/W in their boxes to a greater degree may mean less choice and higher price, but with that comes greater overall reliability. I'm officially saving some cash to buy that reliability for myself/family.
It 100% means significantly less choice and somewhat higher prices. And, yes, it also make reliability easier to maintain. I can just hear the outcry on/. were Microsoft to say they were entering the PC hardware market and would support Windows on their platform only. Apple can get away with stuff because they are small and trendy.
The difference is that cheap RAM is the default for consumers on Windows. Apple tends to use better-quality RAM.
Perhaps this is true for a Wal-Mart $300 PC versus a $3,000 PowerMac, but there are high quality PCs as well. Do you think Apple will be immune to this if they ever get any real market share? Do you remember the third-party Mac-compatible machines from the past?
First of all, he wasn't bashing Windows, but the WinTel mindset, culture, and marketplace.
He had no idea what he was bashing. As other posters have pointed out, this was a terrible excuse for a technology article. He bashes the "WinTel" world, wanders aimlessly during his unsupported "rational points", then proposes a solution that couldn't solve any of his problems.
Apple's products are a step above what you get in the PC world. [They are] manufactured to a higher specification. I don't know this for sure, but it certainly seems to be the case...
At least you admit that you have no idea of the validity of what you just claimed. This is marginally better than TFA. But, I must ask why you insist on making these statements when you know that you are pulling them out of your ass.
When you buy a Mac, you don't have to ask yourself, "is this going to work reliably?" or "is this going to work like I expect it to?"
As a niche product, Apple can afford to strictly limit the hardware with which their software will work. The "WinTel" world provides choice.
I have two Windows boxes, a PowerMac running Jaguar, and a FreeBSD server at home, and I'm constantly looking for excuses to use something other than Windows. However, the original article was complete trash and should not have been published by anyone; I would have considered it unworthy of a blog post.
In reality, you could buy off the shelf Dell or compaq machines with Office installed for $500 each and roll out 300 of them each year with no extra costs over your $15,000 maintenance.
Other than the logistical impossibilities (we can't replace all 300 machines immediately so we're without licenses as soon as we cancel our Campus Agreement), this also puts us right back where we were just a few years ago. What happens when Office XL 2007+ comes out in a few years? What happens when we replace a machine? OEM licenses are not transferable and offer no upgrade protection. Also, your wonderful $500 machines usually have one year warranties, use shared video RAM, include the lowest end processors available, and generally are not built for the enterprise. What's the real cost of buying a slightly cheaper machine that has a significantly shorter lifespan? I'm sorry, but that is actually a much worse suggestion than our status quo.
You're getting Windows and Office on 200+ desktops for only $15,000 and you consider that too much? Are you on CRACK?
It seems that the Mods are the ones on crack. $15,000 may be peanuts to Anonymous Cowards, Inc, but it is significant to a small university. Our department lost one of our four technical positions last year due to budget cuts and we're staring at two years of not replacing a single server. We've cycled out less than 30% of our desktops in the past two years (combined, not per year). Don't tell me about peanuts.
You are talking about 1/5 of an FTE for full support of your desktops.
Welcome to the world of higher education - $15,000 is 1/2 of an FTE on average, not 1/5. And this money does not provide full support of our desktops. It is software licensing and nothing more. We still have a desktop support person who removes spyware, Ghosts machines, troubleshoots Outlook, etc, and a systems administrator who (among other things) manages a SUS server and GPOs to push down software and updates. If we could switch to FOSS solutions without increasing the workloads of these two folks, that money would go a long ways towards other needs.
You are getting a great deal.
Compared to standard Microsoft pricing, we sure are. Yet, there are other schools and businesses providing similar functionality with significantly lower software licensing costs. So, the great deal is quite relative. While I don't see us jumping to Linux on the desktop in the near future, such a change would also save us nearly $20,000/year in antivirus, antispyware, and DeepFreeze licenses.
I'm sure that sounds wonderful from the blissful world outside of a small private university, but it simply doesn't work that well. Even if you get the administration and faculty on board (a big if), good luck finding students who want to do it or can do it. The more time I spend in higher education, the more I worry about getting old (someone from this generation will be caring for me?!).
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I created mine as I went, used nothing complicated (wildcards but no regular expressions), have less than 20 rules, and I rarely see an ad. I have not tried to block text ads or small, out-of-the way ads; I'm really only after the annoying inline and banner ads.
And they don't have to. Firefox doesn't include Adblock, but the ability to integrate custom extensions permitted someone to create it. Considering that it is the second-most popular extension on the mozilla site (over 900,000 downloads), it appears a few users know how to use it and they like it.
This is perhaps a little OT but I do share the parent's frustration with so much focus on tabs in IE. I converted to Firefox on 1.0.2 and I've never looked back. I love it and only use IE (at home or work) for a few ActiveX-only sites. However, I could take or leave tabbed browsing. I stay with Firefox because of the wonderful extensions and better pop-up blocking.
I look forward to how Microsoft will respond to the recent challenge to their browser dominance, but anything short of Adblock for IE will keep me with Firefox. I can't believe how much nicer the Internet is with Firefox and this single extension.
You: If someone gets to know your university id, not much they can do with it, at max they can get your real name, but the rest is optional (user-selectable) to disclose, like email address, etc.
Me: That depends on which system they can access once they have your university ID. If you can use it to register for courses and such, then it must tie back to the main student information system (SIS), which stores all of your informaion (including SSNs, here in the States). But, at least the ID itself reveals little or nothing, unlike systems that use the SSN as the ID.
My point was that just because your school uses a less obvious student ID does not mean that all of your data is safe. Your post made it sound like this ID gives you complete anonymity, with your name being the most sensitive information available to someone who learns your ID. I agreed that a seemingly random ID number is better because it has no obvious data in it (unlike an SSN). Yet, the reality is that employees trust student workers more than they should when the same student has worked with them for several years. I am the IT director at a university and I've known of too many offices where a student was entrusted (in violation of policy) with an employee's SIS username and password.
Earthlink has a new twist to differentiate themselves, charges enough for the service to break even on the additional expense in the first year, and makes a nice mark up after the first year. They probably hope to lure the large and still growing segment of middle age people who just want to send email and get on the Internet occasionally.
Even Xandros gets additional exposure for the non-free version of their OS. Given the fuzzy marketing write up on Microtel's site, what great aunt isn't going to agree that it's a great deal for only $20 more?
Your analogy holds on the other side of it too. There are still plenty of nicer cell phones that are not free (or even cheap). If you need a basic phone just to be on the network, then get the free one and give up your choice of network. If you care about the network you use, desire the flexibility to change later, or need that kick ass phone, then this doesn't work for you. You pay $200 for a phone and shop for service on it.
Hardware needed to run HL6 will not be free from AOL with your membership. Yet, I do agree with your basic premise - the cost of some cheap hardware often is worthwhile overhead for a long term subscriber.
I just dug up some more of the details and they lock you in to at least one year of Earthlink and charge you $70 for the basic desktop. So, even if you bolt after the first year, you've still paid over $200 for the box. I can buy the thing without the Earthlink membership for $219, so this isn't a free (as in beer) computer. After that first year, you are less likely to change ISPs simply because of the hassle of changing email addresses and such, so they continue to sell you marked up dial-up service.
Let's do some math. They could get a standard cheap dial-up account for $9.99/month or they could pay $22/month for this one. That comes out to $12 more each month, or $144 each year. If you keep this service for three years (the average PC cycle), you've paid over $400 for the computer. Earthlink certainly didn't lose money on that box and they gained a subscriber that they may not have gotten otherwise.
Didn't PeoplePC try and fail at this just a few years ago? I don't remember if they were using Windows on the boxes, but the business model of dial-up and "free" computers didn't pan out then. What has changed?
Christ. What exactly do you think "access" meant? Unfortunately, it isn't uncommon to find student workers who know the SIS username and password of the faculty or staff member they assist.
That depends on which system they can access once they have your university ID. If you can use it to register for courses and such, then it must tie back to the main student information system (SIS), which stores all of your informaion (including SSNs, here in the States). But, at least the ID itself reveals little or nothing, unlike systems that use the SSN as the ID.
Everything I've seen for the last two months has said June or July. However, I believe they were shooting for a final RC in May.
OOo 1.9 betas start much faster, especially if you install the preloader (as Microsoft Office does). I'm running 1.9m104 on a PIII 500 with Windows 2000 and it is somewhat slow to start, but still lauches much quicker than Firefox.
I run OOo beta (1.9m104) at work and home without trouble, but I rarely use PowerPoint. As a heavy user of Access, I am looking forward to a stable version of Base.
For companies of any size (such as the one unfortunate enough to employ the "writer" being discussed) it is very likely that they could and would buy all machines from Dell or another quality OEM. If a company is going to cut corners and buy the cheapest computers available, do you really think they are going to pass over dependable PCs and pay even more for Macs?
I really don't disagree with his overall point that in general Macs are more stable and that the average WinTel user would see an improvement if they switched (assuming the Mac will support their hardware and software needs). I just couldn't believe the total lack of intelligence and technical knowledge displayed in his writing. But, I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day...
I'll assume that you mean build as a substitute for purchase, since it would be meaningless otherwise (have you built yourself an iMac lately?). This may be true if you buy your computers from the local corner store, but not quite so with someone like Dell. Do you really think Dell randomly changes motherboards in the middle of a run of Latitude 840s? Sure, you may find different brands of RAM across different batches of machines, but Apple is no different. The real difference is that the "WinTel" world permits significant variation and does quite well at supporting it, while Apple dictates what you will use and how much you will pay. This certainly does make OS design simpler.
That Apple controls the H/W in their boxes to a greater degree may mean less choice and higher price, but with that comes greater overall reliability. I'm officially saving some cash to buy that reliability for myself/family.
It 100% means significantly less choice and somewhat higher prices. And, yes, it also make reliability easier to maintain. I can just hear the outcry on /. were Microsoft to say they were entering the PC hardware market and would support Windows on their platform only. Apple can get away with stuff because they are small and trendy.
Perhaps this is true for a Wal-Mart $300 PC versus a $3,000 PowerMac, but there are high quality PCs as well. Do you think Apple will be immune to this if they ever get any real market share? Do you remember the third-party Mac-compatible machines from the past?
First of all, he wasn't bashing Windows, but the WinTel mindset, culture, and marketplace.
He had no idea what he was bashing. As other posters have pointed out, this was a terrible excuse for a technology article. He bashes the "WinTel" world, wanders aimlessly during his unsupported "rational points", then proposes a solution that couldn't solve any of his problems.
Apple's products are a step above what you get in the PC world. [They are] manufactured to a higher specification. I don't know this for sure, but it certainly seems to be the case...
At least you admit that you have no idea of the validity of what you just claimed. This is marginally better than TFA. But, I must ask why you insist on making these statements when you know that you are pulling them out of your ass.
When you buy a Mac, you don't have to ask yourself, "is this going to work reliably?" or "is this going to work like I expect it to?"
As a niche product, Apple can afford to strictly limit the hardware with which their software will work. The "WinTel" world provides choice.
I have two Windows boxes, a PowerMac running Jaguar, and a FreeBSD server at home, and I'm constantly looking for excuses to use something other than Windows. However, the original article was complete trash and should not have been published by anyone; I would have considered it unworthy of a blog post.
Other than the logistical impossibilities (we can't replace all 300 machines immediately so we're without licenses as soon as we cancel our Campus Agreement), this also puts us right back where we were just a few years ago. What happens when Office XL 2007+ comes out in a few years? What happens when we replace a machine? OEM licenses are not transferable and offer no upgrade protection. Also, your wonderful $500 machines usually have one year warranties, use shared video RAM, include the lowest end processors available, and generally are not built for the enterprise. What's the real cost of buying a slightly cheaper machine that has a significantly shorter lifespan? I'm sorry, but that is actually a much worse suggestion than our status quo.
It seems that the Mods are the ones on crack. $15,000 may be peanuts to Anonymous Cowards, Inc, but it is significant to a small university. Our department lost one of our four technical positions last year due to budget cuts and we're staring at two years of not replacing a single server. We've cycled out less than 30% of our desktops in the past two years (combined, not per year). Don't tell me about peanuts.
Welcome to the world of higher education - $15,000 is 1/2 of an FTE on average, not 1/5. And this money does not provide full support of our desktops. It is software licensing and nothing more. We still have a desktop support person who removes spyware, Ghosts machines, troubleshoots Outlook, etc, and a systems administrator who (among other things) manages a SUS server and GPOs to push down software and updates. If we could switch to FOSS solutions without increasing the workloads of these two folks, that money would go a long ways towards other needs.
You are getting a great deal.
Compared to standard Microsoft pricing, we sure are. Yet, there are other schools and businesses providing similar functionality with significantly lower software licensing costs. So, the great deal is quite relative. While I don't see us jumping to Linux on the desktop in the near future, such a change would also save us nearly $20,000/year in antivirus, antispyware, and DeepFreeze licenses.
Apology accepted. I come from within but still preach that we are but a means to an end.
Finally, someone who understands "make the stupid users update their own machines" doesn't work in the real world.
I'm sure that sounds wonderful from the blissful world outside of a small private university, but it simply doesn't work that well. Even if you get the administration and faculty on board (a big if), good luck finding students who want to do it or can do it. The more time I spend in higher education, the more I worry about getting old (someone from this generation will be caring for me?!).