That's true, but so is the statement that "it isn't their duty to take the trash out for you.", however I don't see your point. If you are trying to send a barb at DRM, it doesn't tell you what you can watch and what you can't. It limits how you can watch it and might make you buy it again to shift format (which sucks and all that - I am against DRM). However, you really aren't making a point by saying they are telling you what you can and can't watch - that is what the government and FCC do.
It's hard to believe an entirely slantedopinion piece on some random website (sorry, I never heard of sianews and don't have any reason to trust them). The one link they give at the bottom of the page is to a PDF supposedly filed against this proposal, and it comes from some site I never heard of too. Couldn't either the submitter, editor, or the site themselves point to one lousy thing that supports that this is more than some joke on a larger scale than maybe the Onion does? I mean, I can easily believe that this could be true, but how about a document on a site that at least ends in.gov or something? The way it sits, I could have made the whole thing up - so why should I trust that someone else didn't?
BTW, if it IS true, then damn that sucks. Maybe they should also have pointed us to where we can help fight the proposal?
Actually I use FF mostly because of adblock plus at this point. I've been using Vista (with IE7 ) as my primary machine for months and I only continue to install FF on it and use FF as my main browser because of adblock. Other than that, for the features that I actually use, the two are about the same.
Not only that, but also - why would I pay $300 for a notebook that nobody with $300 would ever want? I mean the specs on this thing are terrible. It is designed for people with no money, not people with $300 to pretty much donate for a clunker junker. They probably would have gotten a better response if they just called it a donation and allowed you to pledge whatever amount you wanted (and not expect any computer).
I must disagree; it was the easiest thing to find. The first page that comes up when you open IE has on it the radio buttons for either keeping your search engine the default or selecting from others. If you choose to select from others it lists most of the known search engines and you just pick one. That really IS easy.
It's funny about who is changing what here. I generally keep IE as the default browser because I get email with links for some admin tasks (approvals) that only work in IE. My main browser is FF, but I want these links to work right so IE stays the "default". However, installing FF 2.0 changed the default to FF without bothering to ask first! That was not appreciated at all. I repeated the install on another machine and it did the same. I did not see anywhere where it asked "would you like to make Firefox your default browser (recommended)". LAME. I like the browser, but that is reprehensible behavior.
That 50% number is probably pretty close. I know for us, with 70,000 XP SP2 machines we are concentrating our planning and energy on Vista with Office 2007 and not on updating XP to IE7. Besides, most of our internal websites need updated CSS to render properly in IE7 and it is taking awhile for that to happen. Pushing out IE7 to the users would make them unhappy until the CSS updates get done. That all said, my main machine is Vista with (of course IE7) and Firefox 2.0 (which I am using to write this as I prefer FF - mainly due to adblock).
Totally agree with you. I even heard on the "wrong" stuff on the news yesterday from a "tech guy" on the radio. And then this morning from more normal radio news. They must have all read the stuff from these people who don't understand what DVDJ is up to.
Agreed. I understand the whole "monopolies are bad" thing; but Symantec's AV sucks - they were on their way out well before this. They've lost sales for the last several quarters on AV because others do it better. I've honestly never tried McAfee myself, but I have heard it used to be good and is on its way to becoming a Symantec. I know a year or so ago I had reason to visit their website and thought they looked very amateurish and not enterprise at all with all the ads they had on the page. Maybe this is cleaned up now, but at the time I thought I wouldn't want to use their stuff. I have used Symantec a lot and it is crap.
I guess they should both step up with good products that people want and they will probably still get decent sales.
But it sounds like you are paying for it in time and frustration if not directly out of your wallet. I hate that! My time is worth something to me when I am off work - and at work it definitely has value to the employer. They charge it out at a high rate, so if it is spent trying to get action on a bug like this it is not very productive time.
Good points. I'd also point out that the summary doesn't include the cost of the Windows support contract. Not that I think it would outweigh what is listed for the OSS things, but it would be fair to have that too since you don't really get any support from MS for Windows unless you pay for support. The $140 listed doesn't include it.
I'd also imagine you could kill the RFID chip on the DVD although I'm not up to speed enough on the tech to know how. I'd guess either a large magnetic field or a high power radio signal or something should knock it out - maybe without damaging the DVD. There must be some way to kill the thing.
I guess I missed the easier to install part. Honestly; not trying to argue. I've only installed Fedora Core (and the older Red Hat 7.1) and SuSe. But none of those came close to the ease of installing Windows XP or Windows Vista.
Is it Ubuntu that I should have installed for it to be easier than installing Windows?
Honestly, when someone asks me which distro to have their mother install - which is it that is "easiest" (and easier than Windows)?
So far Gor is just classed as a "fiction". But since we are changing the definitions of things, why not promote "fictitious planets" to just "planets". It's quicker to type and to say.
That's why they have several options for the auto-updates. I've never had the problem you did because mine is set to download, the notify. I then run them when I want to. Seems pretty simple.
Slashdot Mirror
That's true, but so is the statement that "it isn't their duty to take the trash out for you.", however I don't see your point. If you are trying to send a barb at DRM, it doesn't tell you what you can watch and what you can't. It limits how you can watch it and might make you buy it again to shift format (which sucks and all that - I am against DRM). However, you really aren't making a point by saying they are telling you what you can and can't watch - that is what the government and FCC do.
It's hard to believe an entirely slanted opinion piece on some random website (sorry, I never heard of sianews and don't have any reason to trust them). The one link they give at the bottom of the page is to a PDF supposedly filed against this proposal, and it comes from some site I never heard of too. Couldn't either the submitter, editor, or the site themselves point to one lousy thing that supports that this is more than some joke on a larger scale than maybe the Onion does? I mean, I can easily believe that this could be true, but how about a document on a site that at least ends in .gov or something? The way it sits, I could have made the whole thing up - so why should I trust that someone else didn't?
BTW, if it IS true, then damn that sucks. Maybe they should also have pointed us to where we can help fight the proposal?
Actually I use FF mostly because of adblock plus at this point. I've been using Vista (with IE7 ) as my primary machine for months and I only continue to install FF on it and use FF as my main browser because of adblock. Other than that, for the features that I actually use, the two are about the same.
Without the crank it won't be very useful in a lot of the target locations.
Not only that, but also - why would I pay $300 for a notebook that nobody with $300 would ever want? I mean the specs on this thing are terrible. It is designed for people with no money, not people with $300 to pretty much donate for a clunker junker. They probably would have gotten a better response if they just called it a donation and allowed you to pledge whatever amount you wanted (and not expect any computer).
I must disagree; it was the easiest thing to find. The first page that comes up when you open IE has on it the radio buttons for either keeping your search engine the default or selecting from others. If you choose to select from others it lists most of the known search engines and you just pick one. That really IS easy.
Except for the fact that MS isn't bundling their anti-virus software with the OS. It isn't free either. Oops!
So I take it that the garbage company is not certified under DPA rules? If they were, then release to them would be OK, right?
It's funny about who is changing what here. I generally keep IE as the default browser because I get email with links for some admin tasks (approvals) that only work in IE. My main browser is FF, but I want these links to work right so IE stays the "default". However, installing FF 2.0 changed the default to FF without bothering to ask first! That was not appreciated at all. I repeated the install on another machine and it did the same. I did not see anywhere where it asked "would you like to make Firefox your default browser (recommended)". LAME. I like the browser, but that is reprehensible behavior.
That 50% number is probably pretty close. I know for us, with 70,000 XP SP2 machines we are concentrating our planning and energy on Vista with Office 2007 and not on updating XP to IE7. Besides, most of our internal websites need updated CSS to render properly in IE7 and it is taking awhile for that to happen. Pushing out IE7 to the users would make them unhappy until the CSS updates get done. That all said, my main machine is Vista with (of course IE7) and Firefox 2.0 (which I am using to write this as I prefer FF - mainly due to adblock).
If it gets too expensive, Larry hires a hit man to end your lifetime. Problem solved.
Totally agree with you. I even heard on the "wrong" stuff on the news yesterday from a "tech guy" on the radio. And then this morning from more normal radio news. They must have all read the stuff from these people who don't understand what DVDJ is up to.
I broke that ice cube encryption long ago.
Agreed. I understand the whole "monopolies are bad" thing; but Symantec's AV sucks - they were on their way out well before this. They've lost sales for the last several quarters on AV because others do it better. I've honestly never tried McAfee myself, but I have heard it used to be good and is on its way to becoming a Symantec. I know a year or so ago I had reason to visit their website and thought they looked very amateurish and not enterprise at all with all the ads they had on the page. Maybe this is cleaned up now, but at the time I thought I wouldn't want to use their stuff. I have used Symantec a lot and it is crap.
I guess they should both step up with good products that people want and they will probably still get decent sales.
Yes, he did - but why did he have to use TUBES?
Maybe it was only red spray paint from PETA after they got mad at Moses for breaking the pet rock.
Not really true; the hardware will come with a Vista license when you buy it.
But it sounds like you are paying for it in time and frustration if not directly out of your wallet. I hate that! My time is worth something to me when I am off work - and at work it definitely has value to the employer. They charge it out at a high rate, so if it is spent trying to get action on a bug like this it is not very productive time.
Good points. I'd also point out that the summary doesn't include the cost of the Windows support contract. Not that I think it would outweigh what is listed for the OSS things, but it would be fair to have that too since you don't really get any support from MS for Windows unless you pay for support. The $140 listed doesn't include it.
I'd also imagine you could kill the RFID chip on the DVD although I'm not up to speed enough on the tech to know how. I'd guess either a large magnetic field or a high power radio signal or something should knock it out - maybe without damaging the DVD. There must be some way to kill the thing.
I guess I missed the easier to install part. Honestly; not trying to argue. I've only installed Fedora Core (and the older Red Hat 7.1) and SuSe. But none of those came close to the ease of installing Windows XP or Windows Vista.
Is it Ubuntu that I should have installed for it to be easier than installing Windows?
Honestly, when someone asks me which distro to have their mother install - which is it that is "easiest" (and easier than Windows)?
I guess the sugar makes it one sweet PDA?
So far Gor is just classed as a "fiction". But since we are changing the definitions of things, why not promote "fictitious planets" to just "planets". It's quicker to type and to say.
Nah, just check the http headers and if it is FF, Konquerer, Opera, Safari, etc. they are "undesireables" so cut the bandwidth.
That's why they have several options for the auto-updates. I've never had the problem you did because mine is set to download, the notify. I then run them when I want to. Seems pretty simple.