Why does this matter? It's much more likely that the problems are down to poorly specified, poorly designed or poorly implemented software, which is by no means an exclusive preserve of Windows...
If you had bothered to read the post you responded to, you'd realize that not only did the GP not mention Windows, he's in fact making a point very similar to yours.
OMFG. So many things wrong with your post, I'm not even sure whether you're being serious.
You do realize that you're apparently arguing in favor of Firefox , and then claiming that a single browser should have a monopoly. Wait a second... I seem to remember a particular browser already having a near monopoly. Forget Firefox! Maybe we should all go use that other one. Then, since it'd have no competition, it could be the de facto standard!
Next on the list: Opera is at least, probably more, standards compliant than Firefox. Oops.
Third, just to be picky, Firefox isn't avaliable for all platforms. How many cell phones run Firefox? How many run Opera?
Fourth, your idiotic attitude is what puts a lot of people off of Firefox. I stopped using Firefox as my primary browser not only because it's inferior to Opera, but also because 99% of the people who recommend it are mindless zealots. Listening to them, you would think Firefox is the best thing since sliced bread (which they'd probably claim Firefox had first). Is Firefox nice? Yeah, it's not too bad. Is using it the orgasmic experience the zealots make it out as? No, not really.
To use a lame joke: 1998 called, they want their version of Linux back.
Suse 9.3 does everything you mentioned except DVDs. You need to buy software for that, just like under Windows. It even recognized my wireless card. I have no reason to believe it's different under any other recently released major distro.
People who say Linux is too hard for regular people to install have never seen regular people use a computer. The idea of regular people installing anything makes me shudder.
It really sucks to be in the same division as Stanford, UC Berkeley, and British Columbia.
Why? If you beat them, it's an accomplishment, and if you lose, nobody cares because it's mostly expected. (no offense)
If your chapter had only shitty community colleges and schools known for their poor computer science skills, if you won, nobody would care because it was expected. And losing would be embaressing.
My salary? Try dividing $56000 by two. Then subtracting some.
I can't complain too much, it's enough for rent, car payment, insurance, and food where I live, barely. And they don't complain too much that I frequently show up an hour late. (I stay late everyday, so I make up the time)
But considering the lowest numbers I've seen mentioned so far are about $14K higher than me, maybe it's time to seriously start looking for another job. I hate waking up early, but for that much money, I can manage.
But are most of "us" excited about Google? I usually don't even read Google articles anymore. This one is a little different, because it's actually news.
But there's GMail, their IPO, Google Maps, Google Earth, the chat thing, and this. Aren't those the big "OMFG!!!11!" things Google has done lately? At most, that should be 5 or 6 stories. But there are single days where Google gets more articles than that.
From all the attention they're getting, you'd think they invented all that stuff. They didn't even make all of it better.
Did the Slashdot crew buy a lot of Google stock or something?
I hate how people get all pissed off and offended by "controversial" studies like this. If the study was done correctly, then there's really nothing you can do except shutup and live with it or do your own study that proves it wrong.
If the study was done correctly, then getting offended by the results is like getting offended when somebody says "The sky is blue." You just look like an idiot, no matter what gender you are.
When it comes to reading, I do most of it on the computer, and the majority of people from my generation do most of their reading online. The library just isnt as cool as it once was simply because no one wants books anymore. We outnumber folks like you so if you dont like it, go to Barnes and Nobles or hit up Amazon.
Way to go. You've managed to say the stupidest thing I've heard in days.
You're "argument", if it can be called that, could just as well be used to argue for black people moving back to Africa (bye bye karma:), everyone in the U.S. believing in God, and any other majority totalling trumping the minority. And guess what? It'd still be a stupid argument in any of those cases.
It has nothing to do with the majority of people. The majority of people will never step foot into a physics laboratory. But most schools still have one. Strange, huh?
It also has nothing to do with being cool. If there was ever a time when the library was the cool place to hang out, I haven't heard of it.
Just because you, and some people you know, don't find libraries useful, doesn't mean universities and colleges should get rid of them for everyone. There's still a large number of people, even if they're a minority) who prefer reading books to reading online. I'm thinking about going to graduate school, and not having a traditional library would rule out a school immediately, no questions asks.
Changes the current "first to invent" standard to "first to file," which means patent rights go to the first inventor to file for a patent who can provide sufficient evidence for a claimed invention.
Biggest mistake, in my opinion. All of the patent infringement cases that I have heard of in the news as of late have not been by an inventor that has thought that another person had stolen his idea, but rather
by companies, with questionably vague patents, suing infringers, or rightful blatant patent infringement, usually perpetrated by larger companies.
I was initially inclined to agree with you, but then realized that it's really not too bad. There are several examples in physics where two people discover the same thing, but the one who published first got the credit. This is a little different, but similar.
The only way I see this as a problem is if it overrides prior art. In which case, I agree, it's a really bad idea.
Not only that, but one of the big benefits of console systems is that it usually simplifies things. On the computer, I have to check a game's memory, CPU, and video card requirements before I can buy it. For the PS2, I just have to look in the PS2 section.
Granted, it's not rocket science, but if they're going to radically change the hardware, maybe they should just release a new system.
And I can't say I envy the MS tech support people. "But it said XBOX 360", "Oh, sorry sir, that game is for XBOX 360 service pack 2" "Oh. Well can I have my money back?" "Oh, haha... yea, about that... um no." Click.
Yes but it is more of an issue if the better programmer costs twice as much as the sub par programmer could you make more profit with the sub-par programer. Will his affordability out weigh the costs of poor quality.
And it's been well known for years that the better programmer is almost always a better value than the sub-par programmer.
Why the hell is this even on slashdot? Steve McConnell has pointed this out this very fact in Rapid Development, possibly even Code Complete, and there's more evidence in the references for Rapid Development. Hell, I think this might even be hinted at in The Mythical Man Month, and that's over 25 years old.
Shit, and those are just the popular books that point it out.
Bullshit. Visiting a website is absolutely nothing like entering someone's house. If you had said entering someone's house is like accessing your hard drive or personal network without your permission, you'd have a point.
But the entire internet is based partly on the fact that if you put up a website, any idiot and their mom can look at it, link to it, etc. In fact, that used to be one of the big selling points of personal homepages and websites.
If you have something you don't want the general population or certain members of it to see then don't put it on your personal home page, or require some kind of validated login. I'm sorry, but that's what the internet is for.
How the hell did you get modded up? Are people really that clueless?
Actually, if you would've taken 30 seconds to actually load the link in IE, you would see that it does, in fact, work.
If you remember when Google Maps came out, you might also remember people being surprised the directions showed up in IE, because they also used PNG transparency.
But, of course, I'm sure you're super L337 and using Linux and couldn't load the link in IE, so why do you even care?
Actually this is bs. The majority of us OSS folk are writing ***PORTABLE*** tools that work anywhere. This is why you see firefox on mac, win32, bsd, linux, beos, etc...
And by portable of course you mean that it runs on any Linux.
I really don't think most of the people who claim OSS is written portably have actually tried compiling anything non-trivial on non-Linux platforms. If you're lucky the only Linux/Unix dependancy is the build tools.
Re:yeah, like the ads-if-you-don't-pay feature
on
The Future of Firefox
·
· Score: 1
This always confuses me: the unobtrusive text ads on Google are good, but the unobtrusive text ads in Opera are bad?
Also, yes, I think Omniweb did have tabs before Opera.
Innovating is coming up with something new based on something else. Firefox copied almost everything it's popular for from Opera, then zipped past it in userbase, and claimed Opera's innovations for its own. No matter what the fanboys try to tell you, it's still just copying.
Entering the contest has a certain cost (materials, time, research, etc.), and there's a certain risk (that you're machine will fail, someone else will do better, etc.).
At the same time, there may be other uses for the materials, time, and research, which have lower risk, or require less material, time, or research in relation to the payout.
Basically, there's an "expected benefit" from entering the contest, and an expected benefit from choosing the next best alternative. The expected benefit can be summarized as x*y, where y is the payout, and x is a multiplier that's calculated from the risk involved. If x1*y1>x2*y2, and x1*y1 is greater than the cost you pay, you select option 1, otherwise you spend your time and material working on something else. By doubling y1, they're effectively doubling the expected benefit. So rational people who would've spent their materials and time working on other stuff will now spend their time and material on entries to the grand challenge.
Slashdot Mirror
If you had bothered to read the post you responded to, you'd realize that not only did the GP not mention Windows, he's in fact making a point very similar to yours.
MSN search, MSN messenger, maps.msn.com, hotmail, encarta online, ...
Have you even looked for free services from Microsoft?
So in the future, will google.com redirect to msn search, or use it silently on the back end?
I'm not too worried about it. Once businesses realize how pointless it is for them to have blogs, their pay is going to decrease a lot.
I agree that it is a bit disconcerting, though.
OMFG. So many things wrong with your post, I'm not even sure whether you're being serious.
You do realize that you're apparently arguing in favor of Firefox , and then claiming that a single browser should have a monopoly. Wait a second... I seem to remember a particular browser already having a near monopoly. Forget Firefox! Maybe we should all go use that other one. Then, since it'd have no competition, it could be the de facto standard!
Next on the list: Opera is at least, probably more, standards compliant than Firefox. Oops.
Third, just to be picky, Firefox isn't avaliable for all platforms. How many cell phones run Firefox? How many run Opera?
Fourth, your idiotic attitude is what puts a lot of people off of Firefox. I stopped using Firefox as my primary browser not only because it's inferior to Opera, but also because 99% of the people who recommend it are mindless zealots. Listening to them, you would think Firefox is the best thing since sliced bread (which they'd probably claim Firefox had first). Is Firefox nice? Yeah, it's not too bad. Is using it the orgasmic experience the zealots make it out as? No, not really.
To use a lame joke: 1998 called, they want their version of Linux back.
Suse 9.3 does everything you mentioned except DVDs. You need to buy software for that, just like under Windows. It even recognized my wireless card. I have no reason to believe it's different under any other recently released major distro.
People who say Linux is too hard for regular people to install have never seen regular people use a computer. The idea of regular people installing anything makes me shudder.
Why? If you beat them, it's an accomplishment, and if you lose, nobody cares because it's mostly expected. (no offense)
If your chapter had only shitty community colleges and schools known for their poor computer science skills, if you won, nobody would care because it was expected. And losing would be embaressing.
My salary? Try dividing $56000 by two. Then subtracting some.
I can't complain too much, it's enough for rent, car payment, insurance, and food where I live, barely. And they don't complain too much that I frequently show up an hour late. (I stay late everyday, so I make up the time)
But considering the lowest numbers I've seen mentioned so far are about $14K higher than me, maybe it's time to seriously start looking for another job. I hate waking up early, but for that much money, I can manage.
No, what would be worse is naming all the variables and functions things like "plus", "times", "leftParen", "greaterThan", "rightBracket"...:
...
if (leftParen >= (plus + lessThan(minus) + lessThan * plus )) {
But are most of "us" excited about Google? I usually don't even read Google articles anymore. This one is a little different, because it's actually news.
But there's GMail, their IPO, Google Maps, Google Earth, the chat thing, and this. Aren't those the big "OMFG!!!11!" things Google has done lately? At most, that should be 5 or 6 stories. But there are single days where Google gets more articles than that.
From all the attention they're getting, you'd think they invented all that stuff. They didn't even make all of it better.
Did the Slashdot crew buy a lot of Google stock or something?
Not enough people understand that.
I hate how people get all pissed off and offended by "controversial" studies like this. If the study was done correctly, then there's really nothing you can do except shutup and live with it or do your own study that proves it wrong.
If the study was done correctly, then getting offended by the results is like getting offended when somebody says "The sky is blue." You just look like an idiot, no matter what gender you are.
Thanks, I should know better than to post while drunk.
Way to go. You've managed to say the stupidest thing I've heard in days.
You're "argument", if it can be called that, could just as well be used to argue for black people moving back to Africa (bye bye karma :), everyone in the U.S. believing in God, and any other majority totalling trumping the minority. And guess what? It'd still be a stupid argument in any of those cases.
It has nothing to do with the majority of people. The majority of people will never step foot into a physics laboratory. But most schools still have one. Strange, huh?
It also has nothing to do with being cool. If there was ever a time when the library was the cool place to hang out, I haven't heard of it.
Just because you, and some people you know, don't find libraries useful, doesn't mean universities and colleges should get rid of them for everyone. There's still a large number of people, even if they're a minority) who prefer reading books to reading online. I'm thinking about going to graduate school, and not having a traditional library would rule out a school immediately, no questions asks.
I was initially inclined to agree with you, but then realized that it's really not too bad. There are several examples in physics where two people discover the same thing, but the one who published first got the credit. This is a little different, but similar.
The only way I see this as a problem is if it overrides prior art. In which case, I agree, it's a really bad idea.
Crap, I just ran out of mod points.
That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.
Not only that, but one of the big benefits of console systems is that it usually simplifies things. On the computer, I have to check a game's memory, CPU, and video card requirements before I can buy it. For the PS2, I just have to look in the PS2 section.
Granted, it's not rocket science, but if they're going to radically change the hardware, maybe they should just release a new system.
And I can't say I envy the MS tech support people. "But it said XBOX 360", "Oh, sorry sir, that game is for XBOX 360 service pack 2" "Oh. Well can I have my money back?" "Oh, haha... yea, about that... um no." Click.
Subect says it all.
If I cared how many people downloaded Firefox, I would visit their website. It's not like it hasn't been posted here a million times or anything.
And it's been well known for years that the better programmer is almost always a better value than the sub-par programmer.
Why the hell is this even on slashdot? Steve McConnell has pointed this out this very fact in Rapid Development, possibly even Code Complete, and there's more evidence in the references for Rapid Development. Hell, I think this might even be hinted at in The Mythical Man Month, and that's over 25 years old.
Shit, and those are just the popular books that point it out.
Bullshit. Visiting a website is absolutely nothing like entering someone's house. If you had said entering someone's house is like accessing your hard drive or personal network without your permission, you'd have a point.
But the entire internet is based partly on the fact that if you put up a website, any idiot and their mom can look at it, link to it, etc. In fact, that used to be one of the big selling points of personal homepages and websites.
If you have something you don't want the general population or certain members of it to see then don't put it on your personal home page, or require some kind of validated login. I'm sorry, but that's what the internet is for.
How the hell did you get modded up? Are people really that clueless?
Actually, if you would've taken 30 seconds to actually load the link in IE, you would see that it does, in fact, work.
If you remember when Google Maps came out, you might also remember people being surprised the directions showed up in IE, because they also used PNG transparency.
But, of course, I'm sure you're super L337 and using Linux and couldn't load the link in IE, so why do you even care?
And by portable of course you mean that it runs on any Linux.
I really don't think most of the people who claim OSS is written portably have actually tried compiling anything non-trivial on non-Linux platforms. If you're lucky the only Linux/Unix dependancy is the build tools.
This always confuses me: the unobtrusive text ads on Google are good, but the unobtrusive text ads in Opera are bad?
Also, yes, I think Omniweb did have tabs before Opera.
Firefox hasn't innovated anything yet.
Innovating is coming up with something new based on something else. Firefox copied almost everything it's popular for from Opera, then zipped past it in userbase, and claimed Opera's innovations for its own. No matter what the fanboys try to tell you, it's still just copying.
Basic economics.
Entering the contest has a certain cost (materials, time, research, etc.), and there's a certain risk (that you're machine will fail, someone else will do better, etc.).
At the same time, there may be other uses for the materials, time, and research, which have lower risk, or require less material, time, or research in relation to the payout.
Basically, there's an "expected benefit" from entering the contest, and an expected benefit from choosing the next best alternative. The expected benefit can be summarized as x*y, where y is the payout, and x is a multiplier that's calculated from the risk involved. If x1*y1>x2*y2, and x1*y1 is greater than the cost you pay, you select option 1, otherwise you spend your time and material working on something else. By doubling y1, they're effectively doubling the expected benefit. So rational people who would've spent their materials and time working on other stuff will now spend their time and material on entries to the grand challenge.